Divergence in Diversity and Composition of Root-Associated Fungi Between Greenhouse and Field Studies in a Semiarid Grassland
- 431 Downloads
Investigations of plant-soil feedbacks (PSF) and plant-microbe interactions often rely exclusively on greenhouse experiments, yet we have little understanding of how, and when, results can be extrapolated to explain phenomena in nature. A systematic comparison of microbial communities using the same host species across study environments can inform the generalizability of such experiments. We used Illumina MiSeq sequencing to characterize the root-associated fungi of two foundation grasses from a greenhouse PSF experiment, a field PSF experiment, field monoculture stands, and naturally occurring resident plants in the field. A core community consisting < 10% of total fungal OTU richness but > 50% of total sequence abundance occurred in plants from all study types, demonstrating the ability of field and greenhouse experiments to capture the dominant component of natural communities. Fungal communities were plant species-specific across the study types, with the core community showing stronger host specificity than peripheral taxa. Roots from the greenhouse and field PSF experiments had lower among sample variability in community composition and higher diversity than those from naturally occurring, or planted monoculture plants from the field. Core and total fungal composition differed substantially across study types, and dissimilarity between fungal communities did not predict plant-soil feedbacks measured in experiments. These results suggest that rhizobiome assembly mechanisms in nature differ from the dynamics of short-term, inoculation studies. Our results validate the efficacy of common PSF experiment designs to test soil inoculum effects, and highlight the challenges of scaling the underlying microbial mechanisms of plant responses from whole-community inoculation experiments to natural ecosystems.
KeywordsRhizobiome Semiarid grassland Plant-soil feedback Mycobiome Mycorrhiza Community composition
Our greatest thanks to Christopher Reazin for the assistance in the laboratory and with bioinformatics, and to Scott Collins for LTER directorship and for designing the field monocultures. We also thank Stephanie Kivlin, Robert Sinsbaugh, and the Natvig lab for comments on an early draft of this manuscript, the Sevilleta LTER field crew members for years of data collection, and the USFWS staff at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge for support.
This work was funded by a NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant to Chung (NSF-1601210), NSF DEB 1456955 to Rudgers, and the Sevilleta LTER awards (NSF-1748133, 1440478).
- 2.van der Putten WH, Bardgett RD, Bever JD, Bezemer TM, Casper BB, Fukami T, Kardol P, Klironomos JN, Kulmatiski A, Schweitzer JA, Suding KN, van de Voorde TFJ, Wardle DA (2013) Plant–soil feedbacks: the past, the present and future challenges. J Ecol 101:265–276. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12054 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Sýkorová Z, Ineichen K, Wiemken A, Redecker D (2007) The cultivation bias: different communities of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi detected in roots from the field, from bait plants transplanted to the field, and from a greenhouse trap experiment. Mycorrhiza 18:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00572-007-0147-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Phillips WS (2012) Drivers of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal community composition in roots: hosts, neighbors, and environment. Oregon State University. https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/c821gn69j. Accessed 13 March 2017
- 29.Ihrmark K, Bödeker ITM, Cruz-Martinez K, Friberg H, Kubartova A, Schenck J, Strid Y, Stenlid J, Brandström-Durling M, Clemmensen KE, Lindahl BD (2012) New primers to amplify the fungal ITS2 region – evaluation by 454-sequencing of artificial and natural communities. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 82:666–677. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2012.01437.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.White TJ, Bruns TD, Lee S, Taylor JW (1990) Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ (eds) PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications. Academic Press, Inc., New York, pp 315–322Google Scholar
- 31.Lindahl BD, Nilsson RH, Tedersoo L, Abarenkov K, Carlsen T, Kjøller R, Kõljalg U, Pennanen T, Rosendahl S, Stenlid J, Kauserud H (2013) Fungal community analysis by high-throughput sequencing of amplified markers – a user’s guide. New Phytol 199:288–299. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12243 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Schloss PD, Westcott SL, Ryabin T, Hall JR, Hartmann M, Hollister EB, Lesniewski RA, Oakley BB, Parks DH, Robinson CJ, Sahl JW, Stres B, Thallinger GG, van Horn DJ, Weber CF (2009) Introducing mothur: open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:7537–7541. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01541-09 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.Kõljalg U, Nilsson RH, Abarenkov K, Tedersoo L, Taylor AFS, Bahram M, Bates ST, Bruns TD, Bengtsson-Palme J, Callaghan TM, Douglas B, Drenkhan T, Eberhardt U, Dueñas M, Grebenc T, Griffith GW, Hartmann M, Kirk PM, Kohout P, Larsson E, Lindahl BD, Lücking R, Martín MP, Matheny PB, Nguyen NH, Niskanen T, Oja J, Peay KG, Peintner U, Peterson M, Põldmaa K, Saag L, Saar I, Schüßler A, Scott JA, Senés C, Smith ME, Suija A, Taylor DL, Telleria MT, Weiß M, Larsson K-H. 2013. Towards a unified paradigm for sequence-based identification of Fungi. Mol Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12481
- 40.Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2009) Primer version 6.1.10 user manual and tutorial. Primer-E, AucklandGoogle Scholar
- 41.R Core Team (2018) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
- 42.Fitzpatrick CR, Copeland J, Wang PW et al (2018) Assembly and ecological function of the root microbiome across angiosperm plant species. Proc Natl Acad Sci:201717617. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717617115
- 43.Aime MC, Phillips-Mora W (2005) The causal agents of witches’ broom and frosty pod rot of cacao (chocolate, Theobroma cacao) form a new lineage of Marasmiaceae. Mycologia 97:1012–1022Google Scholar
- 53.Husband R, Herre EA, Young JPW (2002) Temporal variation in the arbuscular mycorrhizal communities colonising seedlings in a tropical forest. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 42:131–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2002.tb01002.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 54.Johnson NC, Rowland DL, Corkidi L, Egerton-Warburton LM, Allen EB (2003) Nitrogen enrichment alters mycorrhizal allocation at five Mesic to semiarid grasslands. Ecology 84:1895–1908. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[1895:NEAMAA]2.0.CO;2Google Scholar
- 63.Porras-Alfaro A, Bayman P (2011) Hidden Fungi, emergent properties: endophytes and microbiomes. Annu Rev Phytopathol 49:291–315. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-phyto-080508-081831 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 64.Prober SM, Leff JW, Bates ST, Borer ET, Firn J, Harpole WS, Lind EM, Seabloom EW, Adler PB, Bakker JD, Cleland EE, DeCrappeo NM, DeLorenze E, Hagenah N, Hautier Y, Hofmockel KS, Kirkman KP, Knops JMH, la Pierre KJ, MacDougall AS, McCulley RL, Mitchell CE, Risch AC, Schuetz M, Stevens CJ, Williams RJ, Fierer N (2015) Plant diversity predicts beta but not alpha diversity of soil microbes across grasslands worldwide. Ecol Lett 18:85–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12381 CrossRefGoogle Scholar