Advertisement

Microbial Ecology

, Volume 75, Issue 4, pp 985–996 | Cite as

The Impacts of Soil Fertility and Salinity on Soil Nitrogen Dynamics Mediated by the Soil Microbial Community Beneath the Halophytic Shrub Tamarisk

  • Chikae Iwaoka
  • Shogo Imada
  • Takeshi Taniguchi
  • Sheng Du
  • Norikazu Yamanaka
  • Ryunosuke Tateno
Soil Microbiology

Abstract

Nitrogen (N) is one of the most common limiting nutrients for primary production in terrestrial ecosystems. Soil microbes transform organic N into inorganic N, which is available to plants, but soil microbe activity in drylands is sometimes critically suppressed by environmental factors, such as low soil substrate availability or high salinity. Tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) is a halophytic shrub species that is widely distributed in the drylands of China; it produces litter enriched in nutrients and salts that are thought to increase soil fertility and salinity under its crown. To elucidate the effects of tamarisks on the soil microbial community, and thus N dynamics, by creating “islands of fertility” and “islands of salinity,” we collected soil samples from under tamarisk crowns and adjacent barren areas at three habitats in the summer and fall. We analyzed soil physicochemical properties, inorganic N dynamics, and prokaryotic community abundance and composition. In soils sampled beneath tamarisks, the N mineralization rate was significantly higher, and the prokaryotic community structure was significantly different, from soils sampled in barren areas, irrespective of site and season. Tamarisks provided suitable nutrient conditions for one of the important decomposers in the area, Verrucomicrobia, by creating “islands of fertility,” but provided unsuitable salinity conditions for other important decomposers, Flavobacteria, Gammaproteobacteria, and Deltaproteobacteria, by mitigating salt accumulation. However, the quantity of these decomposers tended to be higher beneath tamarisks, because they were relatively unaffected by the small salinity gradient created by the tamarisks, which may explain the higher N mineralization rate beneath tamarisks.

Keywords

Dryland Inorganic nitrogen dynamics Plant-soil interactions Saline soil Soil prokaryote community structure 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We greatly thank the members of the Institute of Soil and Water Conservation of Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), the Arid Land Research Center (ALRC) of Tottori University, and the Field Science, Education and Research Center (FSERC) of Kyoto University, for cooperation and logistics in both field survey and laboratory analysis. We also greatly thank Dr. Kazuo Isobe for helpful comments.

Funding Information

This study was financially supported in part by JSPS-KAKENHI (Grant No. 15H05113), JSPS-NSFC Bilateral Joint Research Projects (Co-Principal Investigators: Norikazu Yamanaka and Du Sheng, NSFC Grant No. 41411140035, 41171419), Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Research Fellow (Grant No. 24-4309), and Fund of Joint Research Program of Arid Land Research Center, Tottori University.

Supplementary material

248_2017_1090_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (253 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 252 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Hawkes CV, Wren IF, Herman DJ, Firestone MK (2005) Plant invasion alters nitrogen cycling by modifying the soil nitrifying community. Ecol Lett 8:976–985.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00802.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fraterrigo JM, Balser TC, Turner MG (2006) Microbial community variation and its relationship with nitrogen mineralization in historically altered forests. Ecology 87:570–579.  https://doi.org/10.1890/05-0638 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Binkley D, Hart SC (1989) The components of nitrogen availability assessments in forest soils. Adv Soil Sci. 10:57–112.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8847-0_2 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Urakawa R, Ohte N, Shibata H, et al. (2016) Factors contributing to soil nitrogen mineralization and nitrification rates of forest soils in the Japanese archipelago. For Ecol Manag 361:382–396.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.11.033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Booth MS, Stark JM, Rastetter E (2005) Controls on nitrogen cycling in terrestrial ecosystems: a synthetic analysis of literature data. Ecol Monogr 75:139–157.  https://doi.org/10.1890/04-0988 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rietz DN, Haynes RJ (2003) Effects of irrigation-induced salinity and sodicity on soil microbial activity. Soil Biol Biochem 35:845–854.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(03)00125-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Austin AT, Yahdjian L, Stark JM, et al. (2004) Water pulses and biogeochemical cycles in arid and semiarid ecosystems. Oecologia 141:221–235.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-004-1519-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nicol GW, Leininger S, Schleper C, Prosser JI (2008) The influence of soil pH on the diversity, abundance and transcriptional activity of ammonia oxidizing archaea and bacteria. Environ Microbiol 10:2966–2978.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01701.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yao H, Gao Y, Nicol GW, et al. (2011) Links between ammonia oxidizer community structure, abundance, and nitrification potential in acidic soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 77:4618–4625.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00136-11 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yuan B, Li Z, Liu H, et al. (2007) Microbial biomass and activity in salt affected soils under arid conditions. Appl Soil Ecol 35:319–328.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2006.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xiong J, Liu Y, Lin X, et al. (2012) Geographic distance and pH drive bacterial distribution in alkaline lake sediments across Tibetan Plateau. Environ Microbiol 14:2457–2466.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2012.02799.x CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Barnard RL, Osborne CA, Firestone MK (2013) Responses of soil bacterial and fungal communities to extreme desiccation and rewetting. ISME J 7:2229–2241.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2013.104 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu W, Zhang Z, Wan S (2009) Predominant role of water in regulating soil and microbial respiration and their responses to climate change in a semiarid grassland. Glob Chang Biol 15:184–195.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01728.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hu Y, Xiang D, Veresoglou SD, et al. (2014) Soil organic carbon and soil structure are driving microbial abundance and community composition across the arid and semi-arid grasslands in northern China. Soil Biol Biochem 77:51–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.06.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pathak H, Rao DLN (1998) Carbon and nitrogen mineralization from added organic matter in saline and alkali soils. Soil Biol Biochem 30:695–702.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(97)00208-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang Q, Zak JC (1998) Effects of water and nitrogen amendment on soil microbial biomass and fine root production in a semi-arid environment in West Texas. Soil Biol Biochem 30:39–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(97)00089-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marcos MS, Bertiller MB, Cisneros HS, Olivera NL (2016) Nitrification and ammonia-oxidizing bacteria shift in response to soil moisture and plant litter quality in arid soils from the Patagonian Monte. Pedobiologia 59:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedobi.2015.11.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Min W, Guo H, Zhang W, et al. (2016) Irrigation water salinity and N fertilization: effects on ammonia oxidizer abundance, enzyme activity and cotton growth in a drip irrigated cotton field. J Integr Agric 15:1121–1131.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61158-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Boettcher SE, Kalisz PJ (1990) Single-tree influence on soil properties in the mountains of eastern Kentucky. Ecology 71:1365–1372.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1938273 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hinsinger P, Plassard C, Tang C, Jaillard B (2003) Origins of root-mediated pH changes in the rhizosphere and their responses to environmental constraints: a review. Plant Soil 248:43–59.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022371130939 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Haichar F el Z, Marol C, Berge O, et al. (2008) Plant host habitat and root exudates shape soil bacterial community structure. ISME J 2:1221–1230.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2008.80 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yates CJ, Norton DA, Hobbs RJ (2000) Grazing effects on plant cover, soil and microclimate in fragmented woodlands in south-western Australia: implications for restoration. Austral Ecol 25:36–47.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1442-9993.2000.01030.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Charley JL, West NE (1975) Plant-induced soil chemical patterns in some shrub-dominated semi-desert ecosystems of Utah. J Ecol 63:945–963.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2258613 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Garner W, Steinberger Y (1989) A proposed mechanism for the formation of Fertile Islands in the desert ecosystem. J Arid Environ 16:257–262Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bertness MD, Gough L, Shumway SW (1992) Salt tolerance and the distribution of fugitive salt marsh plants. Ecology 73:1842–1851.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1940035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yin C, Feng G, Zhang F, et al. (2010) Enrichment of soil fertility and salinity by tamarisk in saline soils on the northern edge of the Taklamakan Desert. Agric Water Manag 97:1978–1986.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.02.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Su Y, Wang X, Yang R, et al. (2012) Soil fertility, salinity and nematode diversity influenced by Tamarix ramosissima in different habitats in an arid desert oasis. Environ Manag 50:226–236.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-012-9872-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Decker JP (1961) Salt secretion by Tamarix pentandra Pall. For Sci 7:214–217Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Di Tomaso JM (1998) Impact, biology, and ecology of saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) in the southwestern United States. Weed Technol 12:326–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Imada S, Acharya K, Yamanaka N (2012) Short-term and diurnal patterns of salt secretion by Tamarix ramosissima and their relationships with climatic factors. J Arid Environ 83:62–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2012.03.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schade JD, Hobbie SE (2005) Spatial and temporal variation in islands of fertility in the Sonoran Desert. Biogeochemistry 73:541–553.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-004-1718-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jeffries TC, Seymour JR, Newton K, et al. (2012) Increases in the abundance of microbial genes encoding halotolerance and photosynthesis along a sediment salinity gradient. Biogeosciences 9:815–825.  https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-9-815-2012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yuan G, Zhang P, Shao M, et al. (2014) Energy and water exchanges over a riparian Tamarix spp. stand in the lower Tarim River basin under a hyper-arid climate. Agric For Meteorol 194:144–154.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.04.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yang X, Zhu Z, Jaekel D, et al. (2002) Late Quaternary palaeoenvironment change and landscape evolution along the Keriya River, Xinjiang, China: the relationship between high mountain glaciation and landscape evolution in foreland desert regions. Quat Int 97–98:155–166.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1040-6182(02)00061-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Glenn EP, Nagler PL (2005) Comparative ecophysiology of Tamarix ramosissima and native trees in western U.S. riparian zones. J Arid Environ 61:419–446.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2004.09.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cheng JM, Wan HE (2002) Vegetation construction and soil and water conservation in the Loess Plateau of ChinaGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Amann RI, Blinder BJ, Olson RJ, et al. (1990) Combination of 16S rRNA-targeted oligonucleotide probes with flow cytometry for analyzing mixed microbial populations. Appl Environ Microbiol 56:1919–1925PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Muyzer G, De Waal EC, Uitierlinden AG (1993) Profiling of complex microbial populations by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of polymerase chain reaction-amplified genes coding for 16S rRNA. Appl Environ Microbiol 59:695–700PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Großkopf R, Janssen PH, Liesack W (1998) Diversity and structure of the methanogenic community in anoxic rice paddy soil microcosms as examined by cultivation and direct 16S rRNA gene sequence retrieval. Appl Environ Microbiol 64:960–969PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Raskin L, Stromley JM, Rittmann BE, Stahl DA (1994) Group-specific 16S rRNA hybridization probes to describe natural communities of methanogens. Appl Environ Microbiol 60:1232–1240PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rotthauwe JH, Witzel KP, Liesack W (1997) The ammonia monooxygenase structural gene amoA as a functional marker: molecular fine-scale analysis of natural ammonia-oxidizing populations. Appl Environ Microbiol 63:4704–4712.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.NA PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tourna M, Freitag TE, Nicol GW, Prosser JI (2008) Growth, activity and temperature responses of ammonia-oxidizing archaea and bacteria in soil microcosms. Environ Microbiol 10:1357–1364.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2007.01563.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Fierer N, Jackson J (2005) Assessment of soil microbial community structure by use of taxon-specific quantitative PCR assays. Appl Environ Microbiol 71:4117.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.71.7.4117 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Okano Y, Hristova KR, Christian M, et al. (2004) Application of real-time PCR to study effects of ammonium on population size of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria in soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 70:1008–1016.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.70.2.1008 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Suzuki MT, Giovannoni SJ (1996) Bias caused by template annealing in the amplification of mixtures of 16S rRNA genes. Appl Environ Microbiol 62:2–8Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wang Y, Qian P (2009) Conservative fragments in bacterial 16S rRNA genes and primer design for 16S ribosomal DNA amplicons in metagenomic studies. PLoS One.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0007401
  47. 47.
    Edgar RC (2010) Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26:2460–2461.  https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btq461 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, et al. (2011) UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27:2194–2200.  https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btr381 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Cole JR, Chai B, Farris RJ, et al. (2005) The Ribosomal Database Project (RDP-II): sequences and tools for high-throughput rRNA analysis. Nucleic Acids Res 33:294–296.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gki038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, et al. (2011) QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7:335–336.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.f.303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Oksanen AJ, Blanchet FG, Friendly M, et al (2016) Package “vegan” (version 2.4-0). URL https://cran.r-project.org, https://github.com/vegandevs/vegan
  52. 52.
    Fox J, Nie Z, Byrnes J (2017) sem: structural equation models. R package version 3.1-9. URL https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=sem
  53. 53.
  54. 54.
    Bachar A, Soares MIM, Gillor O (2012) The effect of Resource Islands on abundance and diversity of bacteria in arid soils. Microb Ecol 63:694–700.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-011-9957-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Angel R, Conrad R, Dvorsky M, et al. (2016) The root-associated microbial community of the world’s highest growing vascular plants. Microb Ecol 72:394–406.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-016-0779-8 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Masson-Boivin C, Giraud E, Perret X, Batut J (2009) Establishing nitrogen-fixing symbiosis with legumes: how many rhizobium recipes? Trends Microbiol 17:458–466.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2009.07.004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Lydell C, Dowell L, Sikaroodi M, et al. (2004) A population survey of members of the phylum Bacteroidetes isolated from salt marsh sediments along the east coast of the United States. Microb Ecol 48:263–273.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-003-1068-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Cottrell MT, Kirchman DL (2000) Natural assemblages of marine proteobacteria and members of the Cytophaga-Flavobacter clustler consuming low- and high-molecular-weight dissolved organic matter. Appl Environ Microbiol 66:1692–1697.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.66.4.1692-1697.2000 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Cleveland CC, Nemergut DR, Schmidt SK, Townsend AR (2007) Increases in soil respiration following labile carbon additions linked to rapid shifts in soil microbial community composition. Biogeochemistry 82:229–240.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-006-9065-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Padmanabhan P, Padmanabhan S, DeRito C, et al. (2003) Respiration of 13 C-labeled substrates added to soil in the field and subsequent 16S rRNA gene analysis of 13 C-labeled soil DNA. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:1614–1622.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.69.3.1614 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Fierer N, Bradford MA, Jackson RB (2007) Toward an ecological classification of soil bacteria. Ecology 88:1354–1364.  https://doi.org/10.1890/05-1839 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Eilers KG, Lauber CL, Knight R, Fierer N (2010) Shifts in bacterial community structure associated with inputs of low molecular weight carbon compounds to soil. Soil Biol Biochem 42:896–903.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2010.02.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Sun B, Wang X, Wang F, et al. (2013) Assessing the relative effects of geographic location and soil type on microbial communities associated with straw decomposition. Appl Environ Microbiol 79:3327–3335.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00083-13 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Bastian F, Bouziri L, Nicolardot B, Ranjard L (2009) Impact of wheat straw decomposition on successional patterns of soil microbial community structure. Soil Biol Biochem 41:262–275.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.10.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Wymore AS, Liu CM, Hungate BA, et al. (2016) The influence of time and plant species on the composition of the decomposing bacterial community in a stream ecosystem. Microb Ecol 71:825–834.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-016-0735-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Stevenson BS, Eichorst SA, Wertz JT, et al. (2004) New strategies for cultivation and detection of previously uncultured microbes. Appl Environ Microbiol 70:4748–4755.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.70.8.4748 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Fierer N, Lauber CL, Ramirez KS, et al. (2012) Comparative metagenomic, phylogenetic and physiological analyses of soil microbial communities across nitrogen gradients. ISME J 6(5):1007–1017.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2011.159 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Cederlund H, Wessén E, Enwall K, et al. (2014) Soil carbon quality and nitrogen fertilization structure bacterial communities with predictable responses of major bacterial phyla. Appl Soil Ecol 84:62–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2014.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Zhalnina K, Dias R, de Quadros PD, et al. (2015) Soil pH determines microbial diversity and composition in the park grass experiment. Microb Ecol 69(2):395–406.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-014-0530-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Hobbie SE (2015) Plant species effects on nutrient cycling: revisiting litter feedbacks. Trends Ecol Evol 30:357–363.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2015.03.015 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    SJ H, Van Bruggen AHC, Grünwald NJ (1999) Dynamics of bacterial populations in relation to carbon availability in a residue-amended soil. Appl Soil Ecol 13(1):21–30.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1393(99)00015-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Xun W, Zhao J, Xue C, et al. (2016) Significant alteration of soil bacterial communities and organic carbon decomposition by different long-term fertilization management conditions of extremely low-productivity arable soil in South China. Environ Microbiol 18(6):1907–1917.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.13098 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Foti MJ, Sorokin DY, Zacharova EE, et al. (2008) Bacterial diversity and activity along a salinity gradient in soda lakes of the Kulunda Steppe (Altai, Russia). Extremophiles 12:133–145.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00792-007-0117-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Li K, Liu R, Zhang H, Yun J (2013) The diversity and abundance of bacteria and oxygenic phototrophs in saline biological desert crusts in Xinjiang, northwest China. Microb Ecol 66:40–48.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-012-0164-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Sorokin DY, Tourova TP, Henstra AM, et al. (2008) Sulfidogenesis under extremely haloalkaline conditions by Desulfonatronospira thiodismutans gen. nov., sp. nov., and Desulfonatronospira delicat sp. nov.—a novel lineage of Deltaproteobacteria from hypersaline soda lakes. Microbiology 154:1444–1453.  https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.2007/015628-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Ladenburger CG, Hild AL, Kazmer DJ, Munn LC (2006) Soil salinity patterns in Tamarix invasions in the Bighorn Basin, Wyoming, USA. J Arid Environ 65:111–128.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2005.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Tripathi BM, Kim M, Tateno R, et al. (2015) Soil pH and biome are both key determinants of soil archaeal community structure. Soil Biol Biochem 88:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.05.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of AgricultureKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  2. 2.Field Science Education and Research CenterKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  3. 3.Institute for Environmental SciencesAomoriJapan
  4. 4.Arid Land Research CenterTottori UniversityTottoriJapan
  5. 5.State Key Laboratory of Soil Erosion and Dryland Farming on Loess Plateau, Institute of Soil and Water ConservationChinese Academy of SciencesYanglingChina

Personalised recommendations