Advertisement

Mycological Progress

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 959–964 | Cite as

Comparing fungal richness and community composition in coarse woody debris in Central European beech forests under three types of management

  • Witoon Purahong
  • Tiemo Kahl
  • Michael Schloter
  • Jürgen Bauhus
  • François Buscot
  • Dirk Krüger
Short Communication

Abstract

Managing forests by selection cutting is a promising silvicultural technique for maintaining forest biodiversity. Despite the importance of fungi in decomposition and nutrient cycling in forest ecosystems, no study to date has investigated the effects of selection cutting on fungal communities, especially using a culture-independent molecular technique to assess more than just the species that are fruiting at the time of sampling. Based on operational taxonomic units (OTUs) found in coarse woody debris, we compared the richness and community composition of wood-inhabiting fungi from selection cutting, age-class, and unmanaged European beech-dominated forests. We found that fungal OTU richness in selection cutting and unmanaged forests was not significantly different (P > 0.05), but it was higher, in both cases, than that in the age-class forest (P = 0.0002). Fungal community composition was not significantly different among the three forest types (P > 0.05). Abundances of common, wood-inhabiting fungal OTUs in different forest types were significantly correlated: the highest and lowest correlations were found between unmanaged forests and selection cutting (ρ = 0.52, P < 0.0001, n = 94), and between unmanaged and age-class forests (ρ = 0.30, P = 0.0080, n = 79), respectively.

Keywords

Fungal diversity Silviculture Forest management F-ARISA Culture-independent molecular method 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Our work was funded in part by contributing projects to the DFG Priority Program 1374 on “Infrastructure-Biodiversity-Exploratories” (KR 3587/1-1, KR 3587/3-2, BA 2821/9-2). We thank the managers of the three exploratories, Swen Renner, Sonja Gockel, Kerstin Wiesner, and Martin Gorke, for their work in maintaining the plot and project infrastructure; Simone Pfeiffer and Christiane Fischer for providing support through the central office; Michael Owonibi for managing the central data base; and Markus Fischer, Eduard Linsenmair, Dominik Hessenmöller, Jens Nieschulze, Daniel Prati, Ingo Schöning, Ernst-Detlef Schulze, Wolfgang W. Weisser and the late Elisabeth Kalko for their role in setting up the Biodiversity Exploratories project. We thank Björn Hoppe for F-ARISA setup; and Peter Otto, Renate Rudloff, Tobias Arnstadt, Kristin Baber, Kezia Goldmann and Beatrix Schnabel for their valuable field and/or laboratory assistance.

References

  1. Baldrian P, Kolařík M, Štursová M et al (2012) Active and total microbial communities in forest soil are largely different and highly stratified during decomposition. ISME J 6:248–258PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brunet J, Fritz Ö, Richnau G (2010) Biodiversity in European beech forests—a review with recommendations for sustainable forest management. Ecol Bull 53:77–94Google Scholar
  3. Echeverría C, Newton AC, Lara A, Rey-Benayas JM, Coomes D (2007) Impacts of forest fragmentation on species composition and forest structure in the temperate landscape of southern Chile. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16:426–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fischer M, Bossdorf O, Gockel S et al (2010) Implementing large-scale and long-term functional biodiversity research: the Biodiversity Exploratories. Basic Appl Ecol 11:473–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fukasawa Y, Tateno O, Hagiwara Y, Hirose D, Osono T (2012) Fungal succession and decomposition of beech cupule litter. Ecol Res 27(4):735–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gardes M, Bruns TD (1993) ITS primers with enhanced specificity for basidiomycetes—application for the identification of mycorrhizae and rusts. Mol Ecol 2:113–118PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gleeson DB, Clipson N, Melville K, Gadd GM, McDermott FP (2005) Characterization of fungal community structure on a weathered pegmatitic granite. Microb Ecol 50:360–368PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gossner MM, Lachat T, Brunet J, Isacsson G, Bouget C, Brustel H, Brandl R, Weisser WW, Müller J (2013) Current near-to-nature forest management effects on functional trait composition of saproxylic beetles in beech forests. Conserv Biol 27:605–614PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Green JL, Holmes AJ, Westoby M, Oliver I, Briscoe D, Dangerfield M, Gillings M, Beattie AJ (2004) Spatial scaling of microbial eukaryote diversity. Nature 432:747–750PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Paleontol Electron 4Google Scholar
  11. Heilmann-Clausen J, Christensen M (2003) Fungal diversity on decaying beech logs—implications for sustainable forestry. Biodivers Conserv 12:953–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heilmann-Clausen J, Christensen M (2004) Does size matter? On the importance of various dead wood fractions for fungal diversity in Danish beech forests. For Ecol Manag 201:105–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hessenmöller D, Nieschulze J, Seele C, von Lüpke N, Schulze ED (2011) Identification of forest management types from ground-based and remotely sensed variables and the effects of forest management on forest structure and composition. Forstarchiv 82:171–183Google Scholar
  14. Jones SE, Shade A, McMahon KD, Kent AD (2007) Comparison of primer sets for use in automated ribosomal internal spacer analysis of aquatic bacterial communities: an ecological perspective. Appl Environ Microbiol 73:659–662PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Josefsson T, Olsson J, Östlund L (2010) Linking forest history and conservation efforts: effects of logging on forest structure and diversity of wood-inhabiting fungi. Biol Conserv 143:1803–1811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kahl T, Mund M, Bauhus J, Schulze ED (2012) Dissolved organic carbon from European beech logs: patterns of input to and retention by surface soil. Ecoscience 19:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Küffer N, Gillet F, Senn-Irlet B, Job D, Aragno M (2008) Ecological determinants of fungal diversity on dead wood in European forests. Fungal Divers 30:83–95Google Scholar
  18. Légaré JP, Hébert C, Ruel JC (2011) Alternative silvicultural practices in irregular boreal forests: response of beetle assemblages. Silva Fenn 45:937–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Luyssaert S, Hessenmöller D, von Lupke N, Kaiser S, Schulze ED (2011) Quantifying land use and disturbance intensity in forestry, based on the self-thinning relationship. Ecol Appl 21:3272–3284Google Scholar
  20. Ma S, Concilio A, Oakley B, North M, Chen J (2010) Spatial variability in microclimate in a mixed-conifer forest before and after thinning and burning treatments. For Ecol Manag 259:904–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Manter DK, Vivanco JM (2007) Use of the ITS primers, ITS1f and ITS4, to characterize fungal abundance and diversity in mixed-template samples by qPCR and length heterogeneity analysis. J Microbiol Methods 71:7–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Müller J, Engel H, Blaschke M (2007) Assemblages of wood-inhabiting fungi related to silvicultural management intensity in beech forests in southern Germany. Eur J Forest Res 126:513–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Müller-Using S, Bartsch N (2009) Decay dynamic of coarse and fine woody debris of a beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) forest in Central Germany. Eur J Forest Res 128:287–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Naether A, Foesel BU, Naegele V et al (2012) Environmental factors affect acidobacterial communities below the subgroup level in grassland and forest soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 78:7398–7406PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Osono T, Tateno O, Masuya H (2013) Diversity and ubiquity of xylariaceous endophytes in live and dead leaves of temperate forest trees. Mycoscience 54:54–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pardini R, Marquez de Souza S, Braga-Neto R, Metzger JP (2005) The role of forest structure, fragments size and corridors in maintaining small mammal abundance and diversity in an Atlantic forest landscape. Biol Conserv 124:253–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Purahong W, Hyde KD (2011) Effects of fungal endophytes on grass and non-grass litter decomposition rates. Fungal Divers 47:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Purahong W, Krüger D (2012) A better understanding of functional roles of fungi in the decomposition process: using precursor rRNA containing ITS regions as a marker for the active fungal community. Ann For Sci 69:659–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Purahong W, Hoppe B, Kahl T, Schloter M, Schulze E-D, Bauhus J, Buscot F, Krüger D (2013) Changes within a single land-use category alter microbial diversity and community structure: molecular evidence from wood-inhabiting fungi in forest ecosystems, unpublishedGoogle Scholar
  30. Ramette A (2009) Quantitative community fingerprinting methods for estimating the abundance of operational taxonomic units in natural microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:2495–2505PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ranjard L, Poly F, Lata JC, Mougel C, Thioulouse J, Nazaret S (2001) Characterization of bacterial and fungal soil communities by automated ribosomal intergenic spacer analysis fingerprints: biological and methodological variability. Appl Environ Microbiol 67:4479–4487PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ren-hui Q, Han C, Li-xin Z (2006) Effects of selection cutting on the forest structure and species diversity of evergreen broad-leaved forest in northern Fujian, southern China. For Stud China 8:16–20Google Scholar
  33. Thakuira D, Schmidt O, Finan D, Egan D, Doohan FM (2010) Gut wall bacteria of earthworms: a natural selection process. ISME J 4:357–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Torras O, Saura S (2008) Effects of silvicultural treatments on forest biodiversity indicators in the Mediterranean. For Ecol Manag 255:3322–3330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Watkinson SC, Bebber D, Darrah P, Fricker M, Tlalka M, Boddy L (2006) The role of wood decay fungi in the carbon and nitrogen dynamics of the forest floor. In: Gadd GM (ed) Fungi in biogeochemical cycles. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 151–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Weig A, Peršoh D, Werner S, Betzlbacher A, Rambold G (2013) Diagnostic assessment of mycodiversity in environmental samples by fungal ITS1 rDNA length polymorphism. Mycol Prog. doi: 10.1007/s11557-012-0883-1 Google Scholar
  37. White TJ, Bruns TD, Lee S, Taylor J (1990) Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal DNA genes for phylogenies. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ (eds) PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 315–322Google Scholar

Copyright information

© German Mycological Society and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Witoon Purahong
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tiemo Kahl
    • 3
  • Michael Schloter
    • 4
  • Jürgen Bauhus
    • 3
  • François Buscot
    • 1
    • 5
    • 6
  • Dirk Krüger
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Soil EcologyUFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental ResearchHalle (Saale)Germany
  2. 2.Technical University of Munich, Chair for Soil ScienceOberschleissheimGermany
  3. 3.Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources, Chair of SilvicultureUniversity of FreiburgFreiburg i. Brsg.Germany
  4. 4.Research Unit for Environmental GenomicsHelmholtz Zentrum MünchenOberschleissheimGermany
  5. 5.Institute of BiologyUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  6. 6.German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv), Halle-Jena-LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations