Population Ecology

, Volume 56, Issue 2, pp 301–310

Detection of the horizontal spatial structure of soil fungal communities in a natural forest

  • Kohmei Kadowaki
  • Hirotoshi Sato
  • Satoshi Yamamoto
  • Akifumi S. Tanabe
  • Amane Hidaka
  • Hirokazu Toju
Original article

Abstract

Soil microbes are considered to be a key determinant of the aboveground plant community. They are not distributed uniformly in the environment, and their activity, abundance, and ecosystem functioning could vary across localities, characterized by high β-diversity. Investigating factors that contribute to high β-diversity can help infer the possible mechanisms of microbial community assembly, and predict the scale and extent of impacts that soil microbes have on the plant community. Because soil systems consist of multiple horizons (i.e., vertical stratification) associated with different soil properties, complete understanding of high β-diversity requires consideration of both horizontal and vertical spatial structures of soil microbial communities. We studied the community composition of soil fungi from the O- and A-horizons in a Castanopsis-dominated temperate forest, and compared horizontal spatial autocorrelation in species composition between the two soil horizons (O- versus A-horizons). Pyrosequencing analysis yielded 67,129 sequencing reads, summed across all the 48 forest soil samples. Clustering analysis resulted in 597 molecular operational taxonomic units (OTUs), 68 % of which were identified as fungi, represented by four phyla. The Mantel test revealed that the O-horizon communities are spatially clustered, and the observed high β-diversity was driven not only by changes in OTUs present, but also by high turnover in identities of OTUs in soil samples. Furthermore, Mantel correlogram analysis showed that the O-horizon communities resembled each other in composition within the range of 50 m, whereas the A-horizon communities lacked such horizontal autocorrelation. These differences in the scale patchiness could arise from two processes: (1) that environmental conditions could show higher heterogeneity in finer scale at the A-horizon than at the O-horizon; and/or (2) dispersal could be more frequent at the O-horizon than the A-horizon. The present study suggests that either environmental filtering (i.e., the niche-based process) or dispersal limitation (i.e., neutral process) could characterize the observed patterns of spatial clustering in the soil fungal community.

Keywords

454 pyrosequencing Claident Dispersal Ectomycorrhiza ITS DNA sequence Spatial autocorrelation 

Supplementary material

10144_2013_424_MOESM1_ESM.docx (256 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 256 kb)

References

  1. Abarenkov K, Nilsson RH, Larsson H-K, Alexander IJ, Eberhardt U, Erland S, Høiland K, Kjøller R, Larsson E, Pennanen T, Sen R, Taylor AFS, Tedersoo L, Ursing BM, Vrålstad T, Liimatainen K, Peintner U, Kõljalg U (2010) The UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi—recent updates and future perspectives. New Phytol 186:281–285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson IC, Cairney JWG (2004) Diversity and ecology of soil fungal communities: increased understanding through the application of molecular techniques. Environ Microbiol 6:769–779PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Auguspurger CK, Kelly CK (1984) Pathogen mortality of tropical tree seedlings: experimental studies of the effects of dispersal distance, seedling density, and light conditions. Oecologia 61:211–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bardgett RD (2005) The biology of soil. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bissett A, Brown MV, Siciliano SD, Thrall P (2013) Microbial community responses to anthropogenically induced environmental change: towards a systems approach. Ecol Lett 16:128–139PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borcard D, Legendre P (2012) Is the Mantel correlogram powerful enough to be useful in ecological analysis? A simulation study. Ecology 93:1473–1481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Camacho C, Coulouris G, Avagyan V, Ma N, Papadopoulos J, Bealer K, Madden TL (2009) BLAST+: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinform 10:421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chase JM, Kraft NJB, Smith KG, Vellend M, Inouye BD (2011) Using null models to disentangle variation in community dissimilarity from variation in α-diversity. Ecosphere 2:2–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dickie IA, Xu B, Koide RT (2002) Vertical niche differentiation of ectomycorrhizal hyphae in soil as shown by T-RFLP analysis. New Phytol 156:527–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, Quince C, Knight R (2011) UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinform 27:2194–2200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ettema CH, Wardle DA (2002) Spatial soil ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 17:177–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Franklin RB, Mills AL (2003) Multi-scale variation in spatial heterogeneity for microbial community structure in an eastern Virginia agricultural field. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 44:335–346PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hamady M, Walker JJ, Harris JK, Gold NJ, Knight R (2008) Error-correcting barcoded primers for pyrosequencing hundreds of samples in multiplex. Nat Methods 5:235–237PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hibbett DS, Ohman A, Glotzer D, Nuhn M, Kirk P, Nilsson RH (2011) Progress in molecular and morphological taxon discovery in Fungi and options for formal classification of environmental sequences. Fungal Biol Rev 25:38–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huson DH, Auch AF, Qi J, Schuster SC (2007) MEGAN analysis of metagenomic data. Genome Res 17:377–386PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Izzo A, Agbowo J, Bruns TD (2005) Detection of plot-level changes in ectomycorrhizal communities across years in an old-growth mixed-conifer forest. New Phytol 166:619–630PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klironomos JN, Rillig MC, Allen MF (1999) Designing belowground field experiments with the help of semi-variance and power analyses. Appl Soil Ecol 12:227–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kunin V, Engelbrektson A, Ochman H, Hugenholtz P (2010) Wrinkles in the rare biosphere: pyrosequencing errors can lead to artificial inflation of diversity estimates. Environ Microbiol 12:118–123PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Legendre P, Legendre LFJ (1998) Numerical ecology. Elsevier Science, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  20. Lilleskov EA, Bruns TD, Horton TR, Taylor DL, Grogan P (2004) Detection of forest stand-level spatial structure in ectomycorrhizal fungal communities. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 49:319–332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lussenhop J, Wicklow DT (1984) Changes in spatial distribution of fungal propagules associated with invertebrate activity in soil. Soil Biol Biochem 16:601–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mangan SA, Schnitzer SA, Herre EA, Mack KML, Valencia MC, Sanchez EI, Bever JD (2010) Negative plant-soil feedback predicts tree-species relative abundance in a tropical forest. Nature 466:752–755PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Martiny JBH, Eisen JA, Penn K, Allison SD, Clair Horner-Devine M (2011) Drivers of bacterial β-diversity depend on spatial scale. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 108:7850–7854Google Scholar
  24. McGuire KL (2007) Common ectomycorrhizal networks may maintain monodominance in a tropical rain forest. Ecology 88:567–574PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McGuire KL, Allison SD, Fierer N, Treseder KK (2013) Ectomycorrhizal-dominated boreal and tropical forests have distinct fungal communities, but analogous spatial patterns across soil horizons. PLoS ONE 8:e68278PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nara K (2006) Ectomycorrhizal networks and seedling establishment during early primary succession. New Phytol 169:169–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nilsson RH, Tedersoo L, Lindahl BD, Kjøller R, Carlsen T, Quince C, Abarenkov K, Pennanen T, Stenlid J, Bruns T, Larsson K-H, Kõljalg U, Kauserud H (2011) Towards standardization of the description and publication of next-generation sequencing datasets of fungal communities. New Phytol 191:314–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. O’Donnell AG, Young IM, Rushton SP, Shirley MD, Crawford JW (2007) Visualization, modelling and prediction in soil microbiology. Nature Rev Microbiol 5:689–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Oksanen J, Blanchet GF, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PB, O’Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H (2012) Vegan: community ecology package. R package version 2.0–9. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan
  30. Peay KG, Garbelotto M, Bruns TD (2010) Evidence of dispersal limitation in soil microorganisms: isolation reduces species richness on mycorrhizal tree islands. Ecology 91:3631–3640PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Peay KG, Schubert MG, Nguyen NH, Bruns TD (2012) Measuring ectomycorrhizal fungal dispersal: macroecological patterns driven by microscopic propagules. Mol Ecol 21:4122–4136PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. R Development Core Team (2012) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  33. Ranjard L, Dequiedt S, Chemidlin Prevost-Boure N, Thioulouse J, Saby NPA, Lelievre M, Maron PA, Morin FER, Bispo A, Jolivet C, Arrouays D, Lemanceau P (2013) Turnover of soil bacterial diversity driven by wide-scale environmental heterogeneity. Nature Comm 4:1434Google Scholar
  34. Robinson CH, Szaro TM, Izzo AD, Anderson IC, Parkin PI, Bruns TD (2009) Spatial distribution of fungal communities in a coastal grassland soil. Soil Biol Biochem 41:414–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rosling A, Landeweert R, Lindahl BD, Larsson K-H, Kuyper TW, Taylor AFS, Finlay RD (2003) Vertical distribution of ectomycorrhizal fungal taxa in a podzol soil profile. New Phytol 159:775–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Saetre P, Bååth E (2000) Spatial variation and patterns of soil microbial community structure in a mixed spruce–birch stand. Soil Biol Biochem 32:909–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sato H, Murakami N (2008) Reproductive isolation among cryptic species in the ectomycorrhizal genus Strobilomyces: population-level CAPS marker-based genetic analysis. Mol Phylo Evol 48:326–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sommer DD, Delcher AL, Salzberg SL, Pop M (2007) Minimus: a fast, lightweight genome assembler. BMC Bioinform 8:64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tanabe AS (2012) Assams v0.1.2012.05.24. http://www.fifthdimension.jp/
  40. Tanabe AS, Toju H (2013) Two new computational methods for universal DNA barcoding: a benchmark using barcode sequences of bacteria, archaea, animals, fungi, and land plants. PLoS ONE 8:e76910PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Toju H, Tanabe AS, Yamamoto S, Sato H (2012) High-coverage ITS primers for the DNA-based identification of ascomycetes and basidiomycetes in environmental samples. PLoS ONE 7:e40863PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Toju H, Yamamoto S, Sato H, Tanabe AS, Gilbert GS, Kadowaki K (2013) Community composition of root-associated fungi in a Quercus-dominated temperate forest: “co-dominance” of mycorrhizal and root-endophytic fungi. Ecol Evol 3:1281–1293PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. van der Heijden MGA, Bakker R, Verwaal J, Scheublin TR, Rutten M, van Logtestijn R, Staehelin C (2006) Symbiotic bacteria as a determinant of plant community structure and plant productivity in dune grassland. FEMS Micro Ecol 56:178–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. van der Heijden MGA, Bardgett R, van Straalen NM (2008) The unseen majority: soil microbes as drivers of plant diversity and productivity in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecol Lett 11:296–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vilgalys R, Gonzalez D (1990) Ribosomal DNA restriction fragment length polymorphisms in Rhizoctonia solani. Phytopathol 80:151–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Walker TS, Baisi HP, Grotewold E, Vivanco JM (2003) Root exudation and rhizosphere biology. Plant Physiol 132:44–51PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Weber CF, Vilgalys R, Kuske CR (2013) Changes in fungal community composition in response to elevated atmospheric CO2 and nitrogen fertilization varies with soil horizon. Front Microbiol 4:78PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Population Ecology and Springer Japan 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kohmei Kadowaki
    • 1
  • Hirotoshi Sato
    • 1
  • Satoshi Yamamoto
    • 1
  • Akifumi S. Tanabe
    • 2
  • Amane Hidaka
    • 3
  • Hirokazu Toju
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Human and Environmental StudiesKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  2. 2.National Research Institute of Fisheries ScienceFisheries Research AgencyYokohamaJapan
  3. 3.Tomakomai Experimental ForestHokkaido UniversitySapporoJapan

Personalised recommendations