| Literature DB >> 25546333 |
Ximei Zhang1, Albert Barberán2, Xunzhi Zhu3, Guangming Zhang4, Xingguo Han5.
Abstract
Many investigations across natural and artificial plant diversity gradients have reported that both soil physicochemical factors and plant community composition affect soil microbial communities. To test the effect of plant diversity loss on soil bacterial communities, we conducted a five-year plant functional group removal experiment in a steppe ecosystem in Inner Mongolia (China). We found that the number and composition type of plant functional groups had no effect on bacterial diversity and community composition, or on the relative abundance of major taxa. In contrast, bacterial community patterns were significantly structured by soil water content differences among plots. Our results support researches that suggest that water availability is the key factor structuring soil bacterial communities in this semi-arid ecosystem.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25546333 PMCID: PMC4278768 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115798
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Plant functional groups and their properties.
| Plant functional groups | Species number of this PFG | Representative species | Leaf δ13C value (‰) | C:N (atomic ratio) | Root/shoot ratio | Aboveground biomass (g.m-2) |
| Perennial rhizome | 1 |
| −26.13 | 28.99 | 4.0 | 102.10 |
| Perennial bunchgrass | 7 |
| −22.40 | 33.53 | 2.8 | 139.88 |
| Perennial forbs | >20 |
| −26.81 | 22.89 | 3.1 | 40.43 |
Leaf δ13C values are related to plant water use efficiency.
Experiment design and soil physicochemical characteristics under different plant functional groups (PFG) treatments.
| Treatments | PFG number | PB | PR | PF | TC (g/kg) | TN (g/kg) | NH4 +-N (mg/kg) | NO3 −-N (mg/kg) | Water (%) | pH |
| 1 (control) | 3 | + | + | + | 17.11±1.48 | 1.82±0.19 | 16.32±2.96 | 1.55±0.45 | 4.49±0.52 | 7.19±0.11 |
| 2 | 2 | + | + | − | 17.61±1.48 | 1.90±0.15 | 16.05±3.88 | 1.54±0.25 | 4.77±0.51 | 7.18±0.11 |
| 3 | 2 | + | − | + | 22.44±1.33 | 2.28±0.16 | 10.55±1.40 | 1.66±0.15 | 4.68±0.0.30 | 7.21±0.12 |
| 4 | 2 | − | + | + | 19.46±1.32 | 1.71±0.30 | 11.26±1.58 | 1.07±0.19 | 4.29±0.60 | 7.22±0.08 |
| 5 | 1 | + | − | − | 19.07±1.47 | 1.99±0.14 | 15.64±3.25 | 2.02±0.59 | 4.17±0.60 | 7.19±0.09 |
| 6 | 1 | − | + | − | 17.38±2.24 | 1.91±0.22 | 17.87±4.17 | 1.42±0.09 | 4.44±0.75 | 7.20±0.10 |
| 7 | 1 | − | − | + | 20.52±0.66 | 2.20±0.08 | 12.90±2.05 | 3.96±1.01 | 4.77±0.54 | 7.23±0.10 |
| 8 | 0 | − | − | − | 19.38±1.85 | 2.07±0.19 | 9.87±1.53 | 5.73±1.66 | 4.16±0.35 | 7.19±0.11 |
| Effect of PFG number (ANOVA) |
| 0.313 | 1.122 | 0.653 | 15.145 | 0.331 | 0.0023 | |||
|
| 0.579 | 0.296 | 0.424 | <0.001 | 0.568 | 0.962 |
“−” and “+” represents the corresponding PFG as being absent (removed) or present (not removed), respectively. The values represent mean ±se.
Figure 1Effect of plant functional groups (PFG) on soil bacterial communities.
(A) Relationship between soil bacterial OTU number and PFG number. (B) Relationship between soil bacterial OTU number and PFG combinations. (C) Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination plot of the soil bacterial communities with PFG number as point size (Stress = 0.17).
Effect of plant functional group (PFG) number and PFG combinations on different alpha diversity indices of soil bacterial community.
| PFG composition | |||||||||
| Diversity indexes | PFG number | PB | PR | PF | PB | PB | PR | PB | |
| 97%-OTU number |
| 0.027 | 1.862 | 1.159 | 0.343 | 0.591 | 0.983 | 3.394 | 1.554 |
|
| 0.871 | 0.182 | 0.290 | 0.562 | 0.448 | 0.329 | 0.075 | 0.222 | |
| 97%-Chao1 |
| 0.933 | 0.403 | 0.362 | 2.631 | 1.323 | 0.416 | 0.758 | 0.242 |
|
| 0.340 | 0.530 | 0.552 | 0.115 | 0.259 | 0.524 | 0.391 | 0.626 | |
| 97%-Shannon |
| 0.011 | 0.960 | 0.581 | 0.159 | 0.296 | 2.004 | 1.435 | 1.614 |
|
| 0.918 | 0.334 | 0.451 | 0.692 | 0.590 | 0.167 | 0.240 | 0.213 | |
| 97%-Simpson |
| 0.030 | 0.330 | 0.000 | 0.082 | 0.082 | 1.320 | 0.000 | 0.742 |
|
| 0.863 | 0.570 | 1.000 | 0.776 | 0.776 | 0.259 | 1.000 | 0.395 | |
| 95%-OTU number |
| 0.001 | 2.679 | 0.984 | 0.477 | 0.467 | 0.956 | 5.799 | 2.368 |
|
| 0.981 | 0.111 | 0.329 | 0.495 | 0.499 | 0.335 | 0.022 | 0.134 | |
| 95%-Chao1 |
| 0.954 | 1.041 | 0.702 | 2.154 | 0.205 | 0.125 | 0.851 | 0.004 |
|
| 0.335 | 0.315 | 0.408 | 0.152 | 0.654 | 0.726 | 0.363 | 0.952 | |
| 95%-Shannon |
| 0.086 | 0.775 | 0.904 | 0.210 | 0.279 | 1.886 | 2.084 | 2.977 |
|
| 0.771 | 0.385 | 0.349 | 0.650 | 0.601 | 0.179 | 0.159 | 0.094 | |
| 95%-Simpson |
| 0.081 | 0.230 | 0.452 | 0.452 | 0.009 | 2.074 | 0.083 | 0.747 |
|
| 0.777 | 0.634 | 0.506 | 0.506 | 0.924 | 0.160 | 0.775 | 0.394 | |
| 90%-OTU number |
| 0.047 | 3.169 | 0.298 | 0.644 | 1.042 | 1.161 | 8.086 | 3.807 |
|
| 0.829 | 0.085 | 0.589 | 0.428 | 0.315 | 0.289 | 0.008 | 0.060 | |
| 90%-Chao1 |
| 0.800 | 1.506 | 0.007 | 0.162 | 0.206 | 2.679 | 1.785 | 0.149 |
|
| 0.377 | 0.229 | 0.932 | 0.690 | 0.653 | 0.111 | 0.191 | 0.702 | |
| 90%-Shannon |
| 0.018 | 2.472 | 0.226 | 0.707 | 0.483 | 1.638 | 2.707 | 6.739 |
|
| 0.895 | 0.126 | 0.638 | 0.407 | 0.492 | 0.210 | 0.110 | 0.014 | |
| 90%-Simpson |
| 0.273 | 1.384 | 0.195 | 0.022 | 0.022 | 0.541 | 0.086 | 2.162 |
|
| 0.605 | 0.248 | 0.662 | 0.884 | 0.884 | 0.468 | 0.771 | 0.151 | |
| Phylogenetic diversity |
| 0.012 | 0.091 | 0.194 | 0.099 | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.063 | 0.001 |
|
| 0.913 | 0.765 | 0.662 | 0.755 | 0.965 | 0.988 | 0.804 | 0.972 |
*refer to the significant response (P<0.05).
Effect of plant functional group (PFG) number and PFG combinations on bacterial community similarity.
| PFG combinations | |||||||||
| Indices | PFG number | PB | PR | PF | PB*PR | PB*PF | PR*PF | PB*PR*PF | |
| 97%-OTU Bray-Curtis distance |
| 0.019 | 0.016 | 0.019 | 0.015 | 0.017 | 0.017 | 0.017 | 0.027 |
|
| 0.733 | 0.975 | 0.793 | 0.998 | 0.917 | 0.937 | 0.934 | 0.354 | |
| 95%-OTU Bray-Curtis distance |
| 0.021 | 0.018 | 0.020 | 0.014 | 0.018 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.028 |
|
| 0.593 | 0.871 | 0.686 | 0.999 | 0.866 | 0.954 | 0.952 | 0.349 | |
| 90%-OTU Bray-Curtis distance |
| 0.021 | 0.018 | 0.021 | 0.015 | 0.017 | 0.017 | 0.019 | 0.022 |
|
| 0.595 | 0.821 | 0.645 | 0.973 | 0.883 | 0.906 | 0.736 | 0.612 | |
| Weighted Unifrac distance |
| 0.023 | 0.015 | 0.013 | 0.026 | 0.016 | 0.019 | 0.040 | 0.021 |
|
| 0.475 | 0.819 | 0.872 | 0.428 | 0.764 | 0.639 | 0.166 | 0.564 |
Effects of plant functional group (PFG) number and PFG combinations on the relative abundance of soil bacterial taxa.
| Taxa | PFG number | PFG combination | ||||||||||||||
| PB | PR | PF | PB*PR | PB*PF | PR*PF | PB*PR*PF | ||||||||||
| P | PFDR
| P | PFDR | P | PFDR | P | PFDR | P | PFDR | P | PFDR | P | PFDR | P | PFDR | |
|
| 0.671 | 0.893 | 0.756 | 0.856 | 0.968 | 0.968 | 0.721 | 0.876 | 0.513 | 0.943 | 0.113 | 0.685 | 0.763 | 0.827 | 0.979 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.754 | 0.893 | 0.790 | 0.856 | 0.651 | 0.935 | 0.219 | 0.651 | 0.415 | 0.943 | 0.361 | 0.685 | 0.894 | 0.894 | 0.808 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.097 | 0.632 | 0.256 | 0.810 | 0.188 | 0.790 | 0.742 | 0.876 | 0.280 | 0.909 | 0.440 | 0.716 | 0.449 | 0.729 | 0.626 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.710 | 0.893 | 0.990 | 0.990 | 0.952 | 0.968 | 0.433 | 0.703 | 0.192 | 0.832 | 0.136 | 0.685 |
| 0.050 | 0.433 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.756 | 0.893 | 0.312 | 0.810 | 0.540 | 0.935 |
| 0.434 | 0.598 | 0.943 | 0.369 | 0.685 | 0.102 | 0.316 | 0.450 | 0.979 |
|
|
| 0.486 | 0.131 | 0.810 | 0.243 | 0.790 | 0.250 | 0.651 |
| 0.382 | 0.562 | 0.808 |
| 0.298 | 0.467 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.977 | 0.977 | 0.650 | 0.856 | 0.696 | 0.935 | 0.375 | 0.703 | 0.606 | 0.943 | 0.673 | 0.808 | 0.628 | 0.742 | 0.839 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.935 | 0.977 | 0.692 | 0.856 | 0.719 | 0.935 | 0.857 | 0.876 | 0.059 | 0.382 | 0.334 | 0.685 | 0.137 | 0.316 | 0.943 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.633 | 0.893 | 0.790 | 0.856 | 0.434 | 0.935 | 0.193 | 0.651 | 0.968 | 0.968 | 0.711 | 0.808 | 0.593 | 0.742 | 0.383 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.293 | 0.893 | 0.756 | 0.856 | 0.549 | 0.935 | 0.148 | 0.651 | 0.798 | 0.943 | 0.746 | 0.808 | 0.259 | 0.481 | 0.896 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.585 | 0.893 | 0.202 | 0.810 | 0.837 | 0.968 | 0.876 | 0.876 | 0.779 | 0.943 | 0.362 | 0.685 | 0.146 | 0.316 | 0.837 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.370 | 0.893 | 0.279 | 0.810 | 0.173 | 0.790 | 0.382 | 0.703 | 0.958 | 0.968 | 0.936 | 0.936 | 0.069 | 0.301 | 0.268 | 0.979 |
|
| 0.321 | 0.893 | 0.609 | 0.856 | 0.058 | 0.756 | 0.758 | 0.876 | 0.758 | 0.943 | 0.188 | 0.685 | 0.609 | 0.742 | 0.264 | 0.979 |
PFDR refer to corrected P-values using the False Discovery Rate (FDR) method [29].
Figure 2Effect of water content on soil bacterial communities.
(A) Relationship between soil bacterial OTU number and water content. (B) Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination plot of the soil bacterial communities with water content as point size (Stress = 0.17). (C) Relationship between the first axis of the NMDS ordination and water content.