Advertisement

Mycorrhiza

, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp 317–326 | Cite as

Mycorrhizal networks affect ectomycorrhizal fungal community similarity between conspecific trees and seedlings

  • Marcus A. Bingham
  • Suzanne W. Simard
Original Paper

Abstract

Ectomycorrhizal (EM) networks (MN) are thought to be an important mode of EM fungal colonization of coniferous seedlings. How MNs affect EM communities on seedlings, and how this varies with biotic and abiotic factors, is integral to understanding their importance in seedling establishment. We examined EM fungal community similarity between mature trees and conspecific interior Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca) seedlings in two experiments where seed and nursery-grown seedlings originating from different locations were planted at various distances from trees along a climatic gradient. At harvest, trees shared 60% of their fungal taxa in common with outplanted seedlings and 77% with germinants, indicating potential for seedlings to join the network of residual trees. In both experiments, community similarity between trees and seedlings increased with drought. However, community similarity was lower among nursery seedlings growing at 2.5 m from trees when they were able to form an MN, suggesting MNs reduced seedling EM fungal richness. For field germinants, MNs resulted in lower community similarity in the driest climates. Distance from trees affected community similarity of nursery seedlings to trees, but there was no interaction of provenance with MNs in their effect on similarity in either nursery seedlings or field germinants as hypothesized. We conclude that MNs of trees influence EM colonization patterns of seedlings, and the strength of these effects increases with climatic drought.

Keywords

Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca (interior Douglas-fir) Mycorrhizal network Climate change Provenance Plant community dynamics Ecophysiology 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Robert Guy, Melanie Jones, and Sally Aitken for invaluable help in the design and implementation of the field and laboratory methods. This research was funded by an NSERC Discovery Grant and a Forest Innovation Investment-Forest Science Program grant to S. Simard.

References

  1. Agerer R (ed) (1987–1993) Colour atlas of ectomycorrhizae. Einhorn-Verlag Eduard Dietenberger, Schwäbisch GmiindGoogle Scholar
  2. Agerer R (2001) Exploration types of ectomycorrhizae. Mycorrhiza 11:107–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bingham MA (2011) The role of ectomycorrhizal networks in plant-to-plant facilitation across climatic moisture gradients. Dissertation, University of British Columbia, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  4. Bingham MA, Simard SW (2011) Do mycorrhizal network benefits to survival and growth of interior Douglas-fir seedlings increase with soil moisture stress? Ecol Evol (in press)Google Scholar
  5. Booth MG, Hoeksema JD (2010) Ectomycorrhizal networks counteract competitive effects of canopy trees on seedling survival. Ecology 91:2294–2302PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Callaway RM, Brooker RW, Choler P, Kikvldze Z, Lortie CJ, Michalet R, Paolini L, Pugnaire FI, Newingham B, Aschehoug ET, Armas C, Kikodze D, Cook BJ (2002) Positive interactions among alpine plants increase with stress. Nature (London) 417:844–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dickie IA, Koide RT, Steiner KC (2002) Influences of established trees on mycorrhizas, nutrition, and growth of Quercus rubra seedlings. Ecol Monogr 72:505–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dickie IA, Schnitzer SA, Reich PB, Hobbie SE (2005) Spatially disjunct effects of co-occurring competition and facilitation. Ecol Lett 8:1191–1200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eissenstat DM, Volder A (2005) The efficiency of nutrient acquisition over the life of a root. In: BassiriRad H (ed) Nutrient acquisition by plants: an ecological perspective, vol 181, Ecological studies. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 185–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Greenlee JT, Callaway RM (1996) Abiotic stress and the relative importance of interference and facilitation in montane bunchgrass communities in western Montana. Am Nat 148:386–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goodman DM, Durall DM, Trofymow JA, Berch SM (1996) Concise descriptions of North American ectomycorrhizae. Mycologue Publications, SidneyGoogle Scholar
  12. Hamann A, Wang TL (2005) Models of climatic normals for genecology and climate change studies in British Columbia. Agric For Meteorol 128:211–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hoeksema JD (2010) Ongoing coevolution in mycorrhizal interactions. New Phytol 187:286–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ingleby K, Mason PA, Last FT, Fleming LV (1990) Identification of ectomycorrhizas. ITE research publication no. 5. HMSO, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson D, Leake JR, Read DJ (2001) Novel in-growth core system enables functional studies of grassland mycorrhizal mycelial networks. New Phytol 152:555–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liancourt P, Callaway RM, Michalet R (2005) Stress tolerance and competitive-response ability determine the outcome of biotic interactions. Ecology 86:1611–1618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lloyd D, Angove K, Hope G, Thompson C (1990) A guide to site identification and interpretation for the Kamloops Forest Region BC Ministry of Forests, Victoria Land Manag Handb 23Google Scholar
  18. McGuire KL (2007) Common MNs may maintain monodominance in a tropical rain forest. Ecology 88:567–574PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Milliken GA, Johnson DE (2002) Analysis of messy data, vol III, Analysis of covariance. Chapman and Hall, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  20. Rehfeldt GE (1989) Ecological adaptations in Douglas-Fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca): a synthesis. For Ecol Manag 28:203–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Spittlehouse DL (2008) Climate change, impacts, and adaptation scenarios: climate change and forest and range management in British Columbia. Technical Report 045. B.C. Min. For. Range, Res. Br., Victoria. Available at http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Tr/Tr045.htm
  22. Steel RGD, Torrie JH (1980) Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Teste FP, Karst J, Jones MD, Simard SW, Durall DM (2006) Methods to control ectomycorrhizal colonization: effectiveness of chemical and physical barriers. Mycorrhiza 17:51–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Teste FP, Simard SW (2008) MNs and distance from mature trees alter patterns of competition and facilitation in dry Douglas-fir forests. Oecologia 158:193–203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Teste FP, Simard SW, Durall DM (2009) Role of mycorrhizal networks and tree proximity in ectomycorrhizal colonization of planted seedlings. Fungal Ecol 2:21–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Teste FP, Simard SW, Durall DM, Guy RD, Berch SM (2010) Net C transfer between Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca seedlings in the field is influenced by soil disturbance. J Ecol 98:429–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Twieg BD, Durall DM, Simard SW (2007) Ectomycorrhizal fungal succession in mixed temperate forests. New Phytol 176:437–447PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Twieg BD, Durall DM, Simard SW, Jones MD (2009) Influence of soil nutrients on ectomycorrhizal communities in a chronosequence of mixed temperate forests. Mycorrhiza 19(5):305–316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vose RS, Schmoyer RL, Steurer PM, Peterson TC, Heim R, Karl TR, Eischeid J (1992) The global historical climatology network: long-term monthly temperature, precipitation, sea level pressure, and station pressure data. ORNL/CDIAC-53, NDP-041. C Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, p 325Google Scholar
  30. Wang T, Hamann A, Spittlehouse D, Aitken SN (2006) Development of scale-free climate data for western Canada for use in resource management. Int J Climatol 26(3):383–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Forest SciencesUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations