Plant and Soil

, Volume 418, Issue 1–2, pp 493–505 | Cite as

Soil pH and mineral nutrients strongly influence truffles and other ectomycorrhizal fungi associated with commercial pecans (Carya illinoinensis)

Regular Article

Abstract

Background and aims

Pecan truffles (Tuber lyonii) have high commercial value and the potential to be produced in a dual-cropping system with pecan. However, little is known about the linkages among ectomycorrhizal (ECM) fungal diversity, community structure, and environmental factors in pecan orchard ecosystems. Our aim is to investigate how soil pH and other edaphic factors influence the richness and composition of ECM fungi.

Methods

We characterized the soil factors and ECM fungal community associated with pecan and adjacent native trees with 454 pyrosequencing at a regional scale, and tested whether the effects of pH and soil factors altered the ECM fungal communities.

Results

Overall ECM fungal diversity associated with pecan trees was high and about a third of all taxa were shared with native trees adjacent to orchards. The community structure was correlated significantly with soil variables including K, Ca, Mg, Mn, P, Zn and soil pH, but not organic matter. Soil pH was positively correlated with species diversity in the /tuber-helvella, /galactinia, /pachyphloeus-amylascus, and /pisolithus-scleroderma lineages.

Conclusions

pH and soil factors play a key role in regulating the ECM fungal communities in pecan orchards. The frequency and abundance of the pecan truffle and related species is positively and significantly correlated with higher soil pH.

Keywords

Carya illinoinensis Tuber lyonii Ectomycorrhizal fungi Fungal community Juglandaceae Soil pH 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the many pecan farmers who graciously allowed us to sample on their properties. This work was financially supported by a USDA Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) grant (OS13-082, to MES) and a UF Institute for Food and Agricultural Sciences Early Career Seed Funding grant (to MES) with additional support from University of Florida. ZG is partially supported by the NSFC (No. 31461143031). GB is grateful to MSU and AgBioResearch for research support.

Author contributions

MS, GB, and ZG designed the research; MS, ZG and TB collected the samples; ZW gathered experimental data and carried out data analyses; ZG and MS drafted the manuscript; MS, GB, TB and ZG edited and improved the manuscript.

Supplementary material

11104_2017_3312_Fig7_ESM.jpg (518 kb)
Fig. S1

The frequency of different fungal lineages detected from 95 trees in this study. Individual OTUs are color coded for whether they were detected only on pecan trees (light grey, n = 76), only on native trees (dark grey, Quercus and Carya) adjacent to pecan orchards (n = 19), or whether they were found on both pecans and native trees (black). (JPEG 518 kb)

11104_2017_3312_MOESM1_ESM.eps (1.3 mb)
High resolution image (EPS 1315 kb)
11104_2017_3312_Fig8_ESM.jpg (2.6 mb)
Fig. S2

Species (OTU) accumulation curves of ECM fungi associated with pecan trees (A) and adjacent native trees (B). In plate A, the curve was calculated using the analytical species-accumulation method for the 25 pecan orchards root samples, each orchard contained three randomly sampled pecan trees. (JPEG 2658 kb)

11104_2017_3312_MOESM2_ESM.eps (1.1 mb)
High resolution image (EPS 1106 kb)
11104_2017_3312_Fig9_ESM.jpg (2.9 mb)
Fig. S3

Partitioning of lineages richness of the total ECM fungal community (A) and OTU abundance of Pezizales (B) into pH, Minerals (P + K + Ca + Mg + Mn + Zn), and organic matter (OM) components in pecan orchards. Values in the fractions represent adjusted R2 coefficients of the independent or shared effects. The total effect (including the independent and shared effects) of each explanatory component is shown in parentheses. (JPEG 3004 kb)

11104_2017_3312_MOESM3_ESM.eps (618 kb)
High resolution image (EPS 618 kb)
11104_2017_3312_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (168 kb)
Table S1 Locality information and the abiotic factors of the samples from these sites (PDF 167 kb)
11104_2017_3312_MOESM5_ESM.pdf (121 kb)
Table S2 454 primers used in this study (PDF 120 kb)
11104_2017_3312_MOESM6_ESM.pdf (3.9 mb)
Table S3 The full OTU table matrix (PDF 3946 kb)
11104_2017_3312_MOESM7_ESM.pdf (10 kb)
Table S4 Comparison of soil factors between sites with truffles (Tuber spp.) detected and plots without truffles detected. (PDF 9 kb)
11104_2017_3312_MOESM8_ESM.pdf (204 kb)
Table S5 Molecular identification of ectomycorrhizal fungi based on ITS1 sequences. (PDF 204 kb)

References

  1. Abarenkov K, Nilsson RH, Larsson KH, Alexander IJ, Eberhardt U, Erland S, Høiland K, Kjøller R, Larsson E, Pennanen T (2010) The UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi – recent updates and future perspectives. New Phytol 186:281–285Google Scholar
  2. Amend AS, Seifert KA, Bruns TD (2010) Quantifying microbial communities with 454 pyrosequencing: does read abundance count? Mol Ecol 19:5555–5565. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04898.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakker M, Garbaye J, Nys C (2000) Effect of liming on the ectomycorrhizal status of oak. For Ecol Manag 126:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belfiori B, Riccioni C, Tempesta S, Pasqualetti M, Paolocci F (2012) Comparison of root-associated communities of natural and cultivated Tuber melanosporum truffle grounds. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 81:547–561. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2012.01379.x
  5. Bengtsson-Palme J, Ryberg M, Hartmann M, Branco S, Wang Z, Godhe A, Wit P, Sánchez-García M, Ebersberger I, Sousa F (2013) Improved software detection and extraction of ITS1 and ITS2 from ribosomal ITS sequences of fungi and other eukaryotes for analysis of environmental sequencing data. Methods Ecol Evol 4:914–919Google Scholar
  6. Benucci GM, Bonito G, Falini LB, Bencivenga M (2012) Mycorrhization of pecan trees (Carya illinoinensis) with commercial truffle species: Tuber aestivum Vittad. and Tuber borchii Vittad. Mycorrhiza 22:383–392. doi: 10.1007/s00572-011-0413-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bonito G, Brenneman T, Vilgalys R (2011) Ectomycorrhizal fungal diversity in orchards of cultivated pecan (Carya illinoinensis; Juglandaceae). Mycorrhiza 21:601–612. doi: 10.1007/s00572-011-0368-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonito G, Smith ME, Brenneman T, Vilgalys R (2012) Assessing ectomycorrhizal fungal spore banks of truffle producing soils with pecan seedling trap-plants. Plant Soil 356:357–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bonito G, Reynolds H, Robeson MS, Nelson J, Hodkinson BP, Tuskan G, Schadt CW, Vilgalys R (2014) Plant host and soil origin influence fungal and bacterial assemblages in the roots of woody plants. Mol Ecol 23:3356–3370CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, Fierer N, Pena AG, Goodrich JK, Gordon JI (2010) QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7:335–336CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Dennis J (1985) Effect of pH and temperature on in vitro growth of ectomycorrhizal fungi. Pacific Forestry Centre. Canadian Forestry Service Information Report BC-XGoogle Scholar
  12. Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, Quince C, Knight R (2011) UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27:2194–2200CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Fox MD, Tackaberry LE, Drouin P, Bergeron Y, Bradley R, Massicotte HB, Chen HYH (2013) Microbial community structure of soils under four productivity classes of aspen forests in northern British Columbia. Écoscience 20:264–275. doi: 10.2980/20-3-3611 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gao C, Shi NN, Liu YX, Peay KG, Zheng Y, Ding Q, Mi XC, Ma KP, Wubet T, Buscot F et al (2013) Host plant genus-level diversity is the best predictor of ectomycorrhizal fungal diversity in a Chinese subtropical forest. Mol Ecol 22:3403–3414CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Garcia MO, Smith JE, Luoma DL, Jones MD (2016) Ectomycorrhizal communities of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine in the south-central Oregon pumice zone. Mycorrhiza 26:275–286CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gardea AA, Martínez-Téllez MA, Yahia EM (2011) Pecan (Carya illinoiensis (Wangenh.) K. Koch.). In: Yahia EM (ed) Postharvest biology and technology of tropical and subtropical fruits. Woodhead Publishing Ltd, Cambridge pp 143–165, 166e.Google Scholar
  17. Gryndler M, Šmilauer P, Šťovíček V, Nováková K, Hršelová H, Jansa J (2017) Truffle biogeography—a case study revealing ecological niche separation of different Tuber species. Ecol Evol 00:1–14. doi: 10.1002/ece3.3017 Google Scholar
  18. Hall IR, Brown GT, Zambonelli A (2008) Taming the truffle: the history, Lore, and Science of the ultimate mushroom. JSTORGoogle Scholar
  19. Hanlin RT, Wu M, Brenneman TB (1989) The occurrence of Tuber texense in Georgia. Mycotaxon 34:387–394Google Scholar
  20. Hardin G (1960) The competitive exclusion principle. Science 131:1292–1297CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Heimsch C (1958) The first recorded truffle from Texas. Mycologia 50:657–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hill MO (1973) Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54:427–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Horton BM, Glen M, Davidson NJ, Ratkowsky D, Close DC, Wardlaw TJ, Mohammed C (2013) Temperate eucalypt forest decline is linked to altered ectomycorrhizal communities mediated by soil chemistry. For Ecol Manag 302:329–337. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.04.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Iotti M, Lancellotti E, Hall I, Zambonelli A (2010) The ectomycorrhizal community in natural Tuber borchii grounds. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 72:250–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Jumpponen A, Jones KL (2010) Massively parallel 454 sequencing indicates hyperdiverse fungal communities in temperate Quercus macrocarpa phyllosphere. New Phytol 184:438–448. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02990.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kjøller R, Clemmensen KE (2009) Belowground ectomycorrhizal fungal communities respond to liming in three southern Swedish coniferous forest stands. For Ecol Manag 257:2217–2225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kluber LA, Carrino-Kyker SR, Coyle KP, DeForest JL, Hewins CR, Shaw AN, Smemo KA, Burke DJ (2012) Mycorrhizal response to experimental pH and P manipulation in acidic hardwood forests. PLoS One 7:e48946CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Kõljalg U, Nilsson RH, Abarenkov K, Tedersoo L, Taylor AF, Bahram M, Bates ST, Bruns TD, Bengtsson-Palme J, Callaghan TM (2013) Towards a unified paradigm for sequence-based identification of fungi. Mol Ecol 22:5271–5277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Lim S, Berbee ML (2013) Phylogenetic structure of ectomycorrhizal fungal communities of western hemlock changes with forest age and stand type. Mycorrhiza 23:473–486. doi: 10.1007/s00572-013-0488-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Marzolo G (2015) Pecans. 2017 Ag Marketing Resource Center, Iowa State University. http://www.agmrc.org/commodities-products/nuts/pecans/. Accessed 12 June 2017
  31. Peay KG, Kennedy PG, Davies SJ, Tan S, Bruns TD (2010) Potential link between plant and fungal distributions in a dipterocarp rainforest: community and phylogenetic structure of tropical ectomycorrhizal fungi across a plant and soil ecotone. New Phytol 185:529–542CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Peintner U, Iotti M, Klotz P, Bonuso E, Zambonelli A (2007) Soil fungal communities in a Castanea sativa (chestnut) forest producing large quantities of Boletus edulis sensu lato (porcini): where is the mycelium of porcini? Environ Microbiol 9:880–889CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Petersen PM (1985) The ecology of Danish soil inhabiting Pezizales with emphasis on edaphic conditions. Opera Botanica 77:1–38Google Scholar
  34. Pickles BJ, Gorzelak MA, Green DS, Egger KN, Massicotte HB (2015) Host and habitat filtering in seedling root-associated fungal communities: taxonomic and functional diversity are altered in ‘novel’ soils. Mycorrhiza 25:517–531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Ponce RA, Ágreda T, Águeda B, Aldea J, Martínez-Peña F, Modrego MP (2014) Soil physical properties influence “black truffle” fructification in plantations. Mycorrhiza 24:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. R Core Team (2015) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.r-project.org.
  37. Simpson EH (1949) Measurement of diversity. Nature 163:688–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Smith ME, Douhan GW, Rizzo DM (2007a) Ectomycorrhizal community structure in a xeric Quercus woodland based on rDNA sequence analysis of sporocarps and pooled roots. New Phytol 174:847–863CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Smith ME, Douhan GW, Rizzo DM (2007b) Intra-specific and intra-sporocarp ITS variation of ectomycorrhizal fungi as assessed by rDNA sequencing of sporocarps and pooled ectomycorrhizal roots from a Quercus woodland. Mycorrhiza 18:15–22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Sparks D (1976) Soil pH and the pecan. 67th annual report of the northern nut growers association, p 93–99Google Scholar
  41. Taylor DL, Walters WA, Lennon NJ, Bochicchio J, Krohn A, Caporaso JG, Pennanen T (2016) Accurate estimation of fungal diversity and abundance through improved lineage-specific primers optimized for Illumina amplicon sequencing. Appl Environ Microbiol 82:7217–7226CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Tedersoo L, Smith ME (2013) Lineages of ectomycorrhizal fungi revisited: foraging strategies and novel lineages revealed by sequences from belowground. Fungal Biol Rev 27:83–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tedersoo L, Hansen K, Perry BA, Kjoller R (2006) Molecular and morphological diversity of pezizalean ectomycorrhiza. New Phytol 170:581–596. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01678.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Tedersoo L, May TW, Smith ME (2010) Ectomycorrhizal lifestyle in fungi: global diversity, distribution, and evolution of phylogenetic lineages. Mycorrhiza 20:217–263CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Tedersoo L, Bahram M, Põlme S, Kõljalg U, Yorou NS, Wijesundera R, Ruiz LV, Vasco-Palacios AM, Thu PQ, Suija A (2014) Global diversity and geography of soil fungi. Science 346:1256688CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Trappe J, Jumpponen AM, Cazares E (1996) Nats truffle and truffle-like fungi 5: Tuber lyonii (=T. texense), with a key to the spiny-spored Tuber species groups. Mycotaxon 60:365–372Google Scholar
  47. Trudell SA, Edmonds RL (2004) Macrofungus communities correlate with moisture and nitrogen abundance in two old-growth conifer forests, Olympic National Park, Washington, USA. Can J Bot 82:781–800. doi: 10.1139/b04-057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Woodroof N (1933) Pecan mycorrhizae. Ga Exp Sta Bull 178:1–26Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory for Plant Diversity and Biogeography of East AsiaKunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of SciencesKunmingChina
  2. 2.Department of Plant PathologyUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  3. 3.Department of Plant PathologyUniversity of GeorgiaTiftonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Plant, Soil, and Microbial SciencesMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations