| Literature DB >> 25875835 |
Katja Felsmann1, Mathias Baudis2, Katharina Gimbel3, Zachary E Kayler1, Ruth Ellerbrock1, Helge Bruelheide2, Helge Bruehlheide, Johannes Bruckhoff1, Erik Welk2, Heike Puhlmann4, Markus Weiler3, Arthur Gessler5, Andreas Ulrich1.
Abstract
Soil microbial communities play an important role in forest ecosystem functioning, but how climate change will affect the community composition and consequently bacterial functions is poorly understood. We assessed the effects of reduced precipitation with the aim of simulating realistic future drought conditions for one growing season on the bacterial community and its relation to soil properties and forest management. We manipulated precipitation in beech and conifer forest plots managed at different levels of intensity in three different regions across Germany. The precipitation reduction decreased soil water content across the growing season by between 2 to 8% depending on plot and region. T-RFLP analysis and pyrosequencing of the 16S rRNA gene were used to study the total soil bacterial community and its active members after six months of precipitation reduction. The effect of reduced precipitation on the total bacterial community structure was negligible while significant effects could be observed for the active bacteria. However, the effect was secondary to the stronger influence of specific soil characteristics across the three regions and management selection of overstorey tree species and their respective understorey vegetation. The impact of reduced precipitation differed between the studied plots; however, we could not determine the particular parameters being able to modify the response of the active bacterial community among plots. We conclude that the moderate drought induced by the precipitation manipulation treatment started to affect the active but not the total bacterial community, which points to an adequate resistance of the soil microbial system over one growing season.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25875835 PMCID: PMC4397059 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122539
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
General plot information and characteristics of the understorey plant community.
| Plot ID | Exploratory | Main tree | Management type | Position | Soil type | LAIsp | Species richness | H’ | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| longitude | latitude | control | roof | control | roof | control | roof | ||||||
| Sbu | Schorfheide | beech | unmanaged | 1.384.500 | 5.305.127 | Cambisol | no veg. | no veg. | no veg. | no veg. | no veg. | no veg. | |
| Sbm | Schorfheide | beech | managed | 1.389.123 | 5.288.526 | Cambisol | 0.63 ± 0.18 | 0.88 ± 0.20 | 8 | 7 | 0.98 ± 0.32 | 0.85 ± 0.45 | |
| Scm | Schorfheide | pine (conifer) | intensively managed | 1.386.399 | 5.307.658 | Cambisol | 0.62 ± 0.10 | 0.44 ± 0.13 | 5 | 3 | 0.87 ±0.23 | 0.76 ± 0.24 | |
| Hbu | Hainich | beech | unmanaged | 1.045.518 | 5.110.069 | Luvisol | 0.40 ± 0.08 | 0.24 ± 0.09 | 3 | 3 | 0.63 ± 0.24 | 0.61 ± 0.12 | |
| Hbm | Hainich | beech | managed | 1.037.834 | 5.117.893 | Stagnosol | 0.37 ± 0.04 | 0.42 ± 0.04 | 6 | 8 | 1.04 ± 0.33 | 1.46 ± 0.22 | |
| Hcm | Hainich | spruce (conifer) | intensively managed | 1.031.074 | 5.127.165 | Luvisol | 0.92 ± 0.15 | 0.53 ± 0.09 | 5 | 5 | 0.96 ± 0.16 | 0.88 ± 0.22 | |
| Abu | Schwäbische Alb | beech | unmanaged | 938.238 | 4.838.259 | Cambisol | 0.75 ± 0.21 | 0.44 ± 0.24 | 5 | 4 | 1.13 ±0.23 | 0.83 ±0.26 | |
| Abm | Schwäbische Alb | beech | managed | 935.661 | 4.838.366 | Leptosol | 0.97 ± 0.05 | 0.71 ± 0.06 | 9 | 8 | 1.53 ±0.22 | 1.47 ± 0.19 | |
| Acm | Schwäbische Alb | spruce (conifer) | intensively managed | 939.868 | 4.837.891 | Cambisol | 1.74 ± 0.41 | 1.63 ± 0.50 | 9 | 8 | 1.18 ± 0.20 | 1.42 ± 0.19 | |
Plot and understorey properties were obtained from the control and precipitation manipulated subplots for the different exploratories and management types.
Species richness = total number of species found on the quadratic area of 2.45 m2, LAIsp = leaf area index and H’ = Shannon’s diversity index; mean values and standard deviation of means are provided (n = 4). Plot Sbu had no understorey vegetation.
a S = Schorfheide-Chorin; H = Hainich-Dün; A = Schwäbische Alb; bu = beech, unmanaged; bm = beech, managed; cm = conifer, intensively managed;
b According to WRB [49].
Fig 1Ratio of the absolute soil water content between reduced precipitation and control subplots.
The absolute water content in the upper 20 cm of the soil was estimated using the forest-hydrological model LWF- Brook90 for all three exploratories (S = Schorfheide; H = Hainich; A = Schwäbische Alb).
Fig 2NMS ordination plots of the bacterial community structure obtained from reduced precipitation (R) and control (C) subplots.
Soil samples were taken from nine plots of the three exploratories in September 2012. The community structure of the metabolically active (b, c) and the total (a) bacteria were analysed by T-RFLP (a, b) and tag-pyrosequencing (c). Statistically significant correlations (p < 0.05) of soil characteristics (Corg: soil organic carbon; Nt: total nitrogen) and understorey parameters (richness: species richness and H’: Shannon’s diversity index of the understorey plant community) were indicated by arrows. For plot ID see Table 1.
Significance test (MRPP) of the effect of reduced precipitation on the bacterial community structure.
| Plot ID | Management type | Total bacteria(DNA-based T-RFLP) | Active bacteria(RNA-based T-RFLP) | Active bacteria (RNA-based pyrosequencing) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sbu | unmanaged | 0.26 | 0.21 | 0.41 |
| Sbm | managed | - | 0.33 | 0.34 |
| Scm | intensively managed | - | - | 0.32 |
| Hbu | unmanaged | - | 0.19 | 0.17 |
| Hbm | managed | - | 0.22 | 0.28 |
| Hcm | intensively managed | - | - | 0.26 |
| Abu | unmanaged | - | 0.22 | 0.32 |
| Abm | managed | - | - | 0.18 |
| Acm | intensively managed | 0.30 | 0.37 | 0.36 |
a Pairwise comparison of the control and precipitation manipulated subplots. For plot ID see Table 1;
* p < 0.05,
** p < 0.01
Coverage and diversity of OTUs for each of the subplots as identified by RNA-based pyrosequencing.
| Plot ID | Management type | Treatment | OTU richness | Coverage | H | Inverse Simpson index (1/D) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sbu | unmanaged | Control | 905 | 0.87 | 5.9 | 96.2 |
| Roof | 1024 | 0.85 | 6.13 | 124.9 | ||
| Sbm | managed | Control | 1288 | 0.79 | 6.47 | 145.8 |
| Roof | 1293 | 0.8 | 6.52 | 155.1 | ||
| Scm | intensively managed | Control | 856 | 0.88 | 5.82 | 102.6 |
| Roof | 779 | 0.9 | 5.7 | 97.4 | ||
| Hbu | unmanaged | Control | 1448 | 0.77 | 6.73 | 154.2 |
| Roof | 1382 | 0.78 | 6.6 | 146.1 | ||
| Hbm | managed | Control | 1238 | 0.8 | 6.21 | 71.5 |
| Roof | 1235 | 0.8 | 6.28 | 85.6 | ||
| Hcm | intensively managed | Control | 910 | 0.87 | 5.86 | 90.4 |
| Roof | 1092 | 0.84 | 6.16 | 112.8 | ||
| Abu | unmanaged | Control | 1523 | 0.76 | 6.88 | 238.5 |
| Roof | 1554 | 0.75 | 6.91 | 262.8 | ||
| Abm | managed | Control | 1485 | 0.77 | 6.89 | 300.5 |
| Roof | 1520 | 0.77 | 6.92 | 283.8 | ||
| Acm | intensively managed | Control | 1117 | 0.84 | 6.23 | 127.2 |
| Roof | 1317 | 0.8 | 6.7 | 226.1 |
Mean values of the four replicates are provided. The data are based on an OTU distance of 0.03. OTU richness = number of OTUs; H: non-parametric estimate of the classical Shannon’s diversity index.
a For plot ID see Table 1.
Fig 3Distribution of bacterial phyla across the different plots and treatments.
The main phylum (Proteobacteria) is subdivided in classes. For plot ID see Table 1, left bar—control, right bar—reduced precipitation subplot.
Fig 4Differences in the number of phylotypes at the genus level.
The bacterial community was compared between the reduced precipitation (R) and the control (C) subplots of conifer intensive (left) and beech unmanaged (right) plots. (a—Schorfheide, b—Hainich, c—Schwäbische Alb). For plot ID see Table 1.
Fig 5Phylotypes with abundance shifts between the reduced precipitation and the control subplots.
Shown groups had a relative abundance of more than 1% of the bacterial community and increased or decreased by more than 50% due to reduced precipitation. For plot ID see Table 1.