Advertisement

Biology and Fertility of Soils

, Volume 41, Issue 6, pp 439–446 | Cite as

Diversity of the ectomycorrhiza community at a uranium mining heap

  • S. Staudenrausch
  • M. Kaldorf
  • C. Renker
  • P. Luis
  • F. BuscotEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Ectomycorrhiza (EM) community structure was analyzed at one bare heap site (BHS), one heap site with organic cover (HS-OH) and one reference site (RS) in the former uranium mining area near Ronneburg (Thuringia, Germany). Twenty-three EM morphotypes were distinguished, and 14 of them were additionally characterized by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequence analysis. Colonization of birch by the different morphotypes was quantified, and the EM diversity at the different sites was investigated. Compared to RS, total EM colonization was reduced by 6% (P=0.851) at HS-OH and by 58% (P<0.001) at BHS. Likewise, EM diversity was reduced by 16% (P=0.229) at HS-OH and 52% (P<0.001) at BHS. The Sørensen similarity between EM samples from RS was nearly independent from the sampling date, whereas at HS-OH and especially BHS, the Sørensen similarity decreased with increasing time between the samplings. All EM fungal species dominating at the two heap sites were also present at RS. Thus, fungi with high tolerance against uranium and other stress factors at the heap sites (e.g. heavy metals, nutrient limitation, drought) were selected among all EM fungi of the area. Highly adapted fungi with a distribution restricted to the contaminated soils were not detected.

Keywords

Betula pendula Ectomycorrhiza ITS analysis Morphotyping Uranium mining 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was kindly supported by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Geschäftszeichen Nr. Bu 941/5-1). The authors would like to thank Dr. J. Wiegand for the soil analyses and Dr. G. Walther for the identification of fruit bodies.

Supplementary material

374_2005_849_ESM_supp.pdf (280 kb)
(PDF 271 KB)

References

  1. Agerer R (1991) Characterization of ectomycorrhiza. In: Norris JR, Read DJ, Varma AK (eds) Methods in microbiology, vol 23. Academic Press, London, pp 25–73Google Scholar
  2. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schäffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ (1997) Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 25:3389–3402PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Buscot F, Munch JC, Charcosset JY, Gardes M, Nehls U, Hampp R (2000) Recent advances in exploring physiology and biodiversity of ectomycorrhizas highlight the functioning of these symbioses in ecosystems. FEMS Microbiol Rev 24:601–614Google Scholar
  4. Colpaert JV, van Assche JA (1993) The effects of cadmium on ectomycorrhizal Pinus sylvestris L. New Phytol 123:325–333Google Scholar
  5. Colpaert JV, Vandenkoornhuyse P, Adriaensen K, Vangronsveld J (2000) Genetic variation and heavy metal tolerance in the ectomycorrhizal basidiomycete Suillus luteus. New Phytol 147:367–379Google Scholar
  6. Colpaert JV, Muller LAH, Lambaerts M, Adriaensen K, Vangronsveld J (2004) Evolutionary adaptation to Zn toxicity in populations of Suilloid fungi. New Phytol 162:549–559Google Scholar
  7. Doyle JJ, Doyle JL (1990) Isolation of plant DNA from fresh tissue. Focus 12:13–15Google Scholar
  8. Ebbs SD, Brady DJ, Kochian LV (1998) Role of uranium speciation in the uptake and translocation of uranium by plants. J Exp Bot 49:1183–1190Google Scholar
  9. Fiedler HJ, Rösler HJ (1993) Spurenelemente in der Umwelt. 2nd edn. Gustav Fischer Verlag, JenaGoogle Scholar
  10. Gibson G (2002) Microarrays in ecology and evolution: a preview. Mol Ecol 11:17–24Google Scholar
  11. Gildon A, Tinker PB (1983) Interactions of vesicular–arbuscular mycorrhizal infection and heavy metals in plants. I. The effect of heavy metals on the development of vesicular–arbuscular mycorrhizas. New Phytol 95:247–261Google Scholar
  12. Hambeck L, Meyer J, Thie FW, Wille F (1996) Cleaning up Wismut’s waste dumps. Atw Int Z Kernenerg 41:103–107Google Scholar
  13. Hartley J, Cairney JWG, Meharg AA (1997) Do ectomycorrhizal fungi exhibit adaptive tolerance to potentially toxic metals in the environment? Plant Soil 189:303–319Google Scholar
  14. Hildebrandt U, Kaldorf M, Bothe H (1999) The zinc violet and its colonization by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. J Plant Physiol 154:709–717Google Scholar
  15. Horton TR, Bruns TD (2001) The molecular revolution in ectomycorrhizal ecology: peeking into the black-box. Mol Ecol 10:1855–1871CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Jentschke G, Godbold DL (2000) Metal toxicity and ectomycorrhizas. Physiol Plant 109:107–116Google Scholar
  17. Kaldorf M, Kuhn AJ, Schröder WH, Hildebrandt U, Bothe H (1999) Selective element deposits in maize colonized by a heavy metal tolerance conferring arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus. J Plant Physiol 154:718–728Google Scholar
  18. Kaldorf M, Fladung M, Muhs H-J, Buscot F (2002) Mycorrhizal colonization of transgenic aspen in a field trial. Planta 214:653–660Google Scholar
  19. Kaldorf M, Renker C, Fladung M, Buscot F (2004) Characterization and spatial distribution of ectomycorrhizas colonizing aspen clones released in an experimental field. Mycorrhiza 14:295–306Google Scholar
  20. Kårén O, Nylund J-E (1997) Effects of ammonium sulphate on the community structure and biomass of ectomycorrhizal fungi in a Norway spruce stand in southwestern Sweden. Can J Bot 75:1628–1642Google Scholar
  21. Lange G, Freyhoff G (1991) Geologie und Bergbau in der Uranlagerstätte Ronneburg/Thüringen. Erzmet 44:264–269Google Scholar
  22. Pritsch K, Boyle H, Munch JC, Buscot F (1997) Characterization and identification of black alder ectomycorrhizas by PCR/RFLP analyses of the rDNA internal transcribed spacer (ITS). New Phytol 137:357–369Google Scholar
  23. Rufyikiri G, Thiry Y, Wang L, Delvaux B, Declerck S (2002) Uranium uptake and translocation by the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus, Glomus intraradices, under root-organ culture conditions. New Phytol 156:275–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sänger H, Jetschke G (2004) Are assembly rules apparent in the regeneration of a former uranium mining site? In: Temperton VM, Hobbs RJ, Nuttle T, Halle S (eds) Assembly rules and restoration ecology. Bridging the gap between theory and practice. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 305–324Google Scholar
  25. Schippers A, Hallmann R, Wentzien S, Sand W (1995) Microbial diversity in uranium mine waste heaps. Appl Environ Microbiol 61:2930–2935Google Scholar
  26. Schmid S, Wiegand J (1998) The influence of traffic vibrations on the radon potential. Health Phys 74:231–236Google Scholar
  27. Shannon CE, Weaver W (1949) The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, UrbanaGoogle Scholar
  28. Smith SE, Read DJ (1997) Mycorrhizal symbiosis. 2nd edn. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. Sørensen T (1948) A method establishing groups of equal amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species content and its application to analyses of the vegetation on Danish commons. K Dan Vidensk Selsk Biol Skr 5:1–34Google Scholar
  30. Turnau K, Ryszka P, Gianinazzi-Pearson V, van Tuinen D (2001) Identification of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in soils and roots of plants colonizing zinc wastes in southern Poland. Mycorrhiza 10:169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Turnau K, Mleczko P, Blaudez D, Chalot M, Botton B (2002) Heavy metal binding properties of Pinus sylvestris mycorrhizas from industrial wastes. Acta Soc Bot Pol 71:253–261Google Scholar
  32. White TJ, Bruns T, Lee S, Taylor J (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, San Diego, CA, pp 315–322Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Staudenrausch
    • 1
    • 2
  • M. Kaldorf
    • 1
    • 3
  • C. Renker
    • 1
    • 3
  • P. Luis
    • 1
    • 3
  • F. Buscot
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Environmental Sciences, Institute of EcologyUniversity of JenaJenaGermany
  2. 2.Center for Development Research (ZEF)University of BonnBonnGermany
  3. 3.Department of Terrestrial Ecology, Institute of Biology IUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations