Mixed cropping regimes promote the soil fungal community under zero tillage
- 74 Downloads
Fungi of yield soils represent a significant portion of the microbial biomass and reflect sensitivity to changes in the ecosystem. Our hypothesis was that crops included in cropping regimes under the zero tillage system modify the structure of the soil fungi community. Conventional and molecular techniques provide complementary information for the analysis of diversity of fungal species and successful information to accept our hypothesis. The composition of the fungal community varied according to different crops included in the cropping regimes. However, we detected other factors as sources of variation among them, season and sampling depth. The mixed cropping regimes including perennial pastures and one crop per year promote fungal diversity and species with potential benefit to soil and crop. The winter season and 0–5 cm depth gave the largest evenness and fungal diversity. Trichoderma aureoviride and Rhizopus stolonifer could be used for monitoring changes in soil under zero tillage.
KeywordsSoil Cropping regime Diversity Fungi DGGE
We thank Prof. M. Oyarzabal for English assistance. This work was supported by funding from the PIP -CONICET 2014-2016 COD: 112-20130100280 and by the Individual Postdoctoral scholarship of CONICET.
LB Silvestro designed and performed the experiments, analysed and interpreted the data, and wrote the manuscript. F Biganzoli analysed and interpreted the data and wrote the manuscript. Stenglein SA, H Forjan and L Manso supplied material and wrote the manuscript. MV Moreno designed the experiments, interpreted the data and wrote the manuscript. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
- Cabello M, Aon M, Velázquez S (2003) Diversity, structure and evolution of fungal communities in soils under different agricultural management practices. Bol Soc Argent Bot 38:225–232Google Scholar
- Carmichael JW, Bryce Kendrick W, Conners IL, Sigler L (1980) Genera of Hyphomycetes. The University of Alberta, Edmonton, AlbertaGoogle Scholar
- Derpsch R, Friedrich T, Kassam A, Li Hongwen L (2010) Current status of adoption of no-till farming in the world and some of its main benefits. Int J Agric Biol Eng 3:1–26Google Scholar
- Domsch KH, Gams W, Anderson TH (1980) Compendium of soil Fungi, vol 1. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Dufrené MY, Legendre P (1997) Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical. Approach Ecol Monogr 67:345–366Google Scholar
- Ellis MB (1971) Dematiaceous, Hyphomycetes edn. Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew, Surrey, EnglandGoogle Scholar
- Granzow S, Kaiser K, Wemheuer B, Pfeiffer B, Daniel R, Vidal S, Wemheuer F (2017) The Effects of cropping regimes on fungal and bacterial communities of wheat and faba bean in a greenhouse pot experiment differ between plant species and compartment. Front Microbiol 902:1–22Google Scholar
- Kubicek CH, Harman GE (2002) Trichoderma & Gliocladium. Volume 1. Basic biology, taxonomy and genetics. Taylor & Francis, Washinton, DCGoogle Scholar
- Lenth RV (2013) lsmeans: Least-squares means. R package version 1.10-2. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lsmeans.
- Magurran AE, McGill BJ (2011) Biological diversity. Frontiers in measurement and assessment. Oxford University, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Mamgain A, Roychowdhury R, Tah J (2013) Alternaria pathogenicity and its strategic controls. Res J Biol 1:2–9Google Scholar
- McCune B, Meffors MJ (1999) Multivariate analysis of ecologial data. version 4.0. MjM Software Design, Gleneden BeachGoogle Scholar
- Meriles JM, Vargas Gil S, Conforto C, Figoni G, Lovera E, March GJ, Guzmán CA (2009) Soil microbial communities under different soybean cropping systems: characterization of microbial population dynamics, soil microbial activity, microbial biomass, and fatty acid profiles. Soil Tillage Res 103:271–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D (2013) The R development core team. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3, 1–108Google Scholar
- Raper KB, Fennel D (1965) The genus Aspergillus. The Williams & Wilkins company, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- Raper T, Thom Ch (1968) A manual of the Penicillia. Hafner Publishing Company, New York and LondonGoogle Scholar
- Rohlf FI (1998) Ntsys-pc. Numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system, version 2.0. Applied biostatistics. Exeter Software, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Sahni N, Phutela UG (2013) Effect of thermophilic fungus Humicola fuscoatra MTCC 1409 on paddy straw digestibility and biogas production. Microbiology 2:357–359Google Scholar
- Samson RA, Frisvad JC (2004) Penicillium subgenus Penicillium: new taxonomic schemes and mycotoxins and other extrolites. Studies in Mycology, vol 49. Ceentraal Bureau Voor Schimmelcultures, Utrecht, The Netherlands, pp 1–251Google Scholar
- Silvestro LB, Biganzoli F, Forjan H, Albanesi A, Arambarri AM, Manso L, Moreno MV (2017) Mollisol: Biological Characterization under Zero Tillage with Different Crops Sequences. J Agr Sci Tech 19:245–257Google Scholar
- Smith E, Leeflang P, Glandorf B, van Elsas JD, Wernars K (1999) Analysis of fungal diversity in the wheat rhizosphere by sequencing of cloned PCR-amplified genes encoding 18S rRNA and temperature gradient gel electrophoresis. Appl Environ. Microb 65:2614–2621Google Scholar
- Sneath PH, Sokal RR (1973) Numerical taxonomy. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
- Soil Survey Staff (SSS) ((2014) Keys to soil taxonomy, vol 12th edn. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- USDA (2006) The U.S. Department of Agriculture: Keys to soil taxonomy, 10th edn. EEUUGoogle Scholar
- 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, New York, pp 315–322Google Scholar