| Literature DB >> 26441904 |
Luiz A Domeignoz-Horta1, Aymé Spor1, David Bru1, Marie-Christine Breuil1, Florian Bizouard1, Joël Léonard2, Laurent Philippot1.
Abstract
Agriculture is the main source of terrestrial emissions of N2O, a potent greenhouse gas and the main cause of ozone layer depletion. The reduction of N2O into N2 by microorganisms carrying the nitrous oxide reductase gene (nosZ) is the only biological process known to eliminate this greenhouse gas. Recent studies showed that a previously unknown clade of N2O-reducers was related to the capacity of the soil to act as an N2O sink, opening the way for new strategies to mitigate emissions. Here, we investigated whether the agricultural practices could differently influence the two N2O reducer clades with consequences for denitrification end-products. The abundance of N2O-reducers and producers was quantified by real-time PCR, and the diversity of both nosZ clades was determined by 454 pyrosequencing. Potential N2O production and potential denitrification activity were used to calculate the denitrification gaseous end-product ratio. Overall, the results showed limited differences between management practices but there were significant differences between cropping systems in both the abundance and structure of the nosZII community, as well as in the [rN2O/r(N2O+N2)] ratio. More limited differences were observed in the nosZI community, suggesting that the newly identified nosZII clade is more sensitive than nosZI to environmental changes. Potential denitrification activity and potential N2O production were explained mainly by the soil properties while the diversity of the nosZII clade on its own explained 26% of the denitrification end-product ratio, which highlights the importance of understanding the ecology of this newly identified clade of N2O reducers for mitigation strategies.Entities:
Keywords: agricultural practices; agroecology; diversity; greenhouse gas; nitrogen cycling; nitrous oxide; nosZ
Year: 2015 PMID: 26441904 PMCID: PMC4585238 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00971
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Figure 1Potential N. Means ± sem per treatments within each experimental block are given. BE and ORE represent the respective cropping systems. Significant differences between treatments are indicated with different letters (anova followed by Tukey HSD test, P < 0.05).
Figure 2NMDS ordinations of . (A) Variation in nosZI community structure. (B) Variation in nosZII community structure. Red curves represent the final denitrification product [rN2O/r(N2O/N2)]. Significant explanatory variables are represented as blue vectors (P < 0.05), Ca (calcium g kg−1 dw soil), q.nosZII and q.nirK correspond to the quantification by qPCR of nitrous oxide reductase community (clade II) and copper nitrite reductase community, respectively (copy number g−1 dw soil); sand and water content are expressed in percentage. The lengths of the arrows are proportional to the strength of the correlation. Stress values are indicated at the bottom right of each panel.
Figure 3Variation partitioning of denitrification activities. (A) Variance in denitrification activities was partitionned into nosZ diversity (D), soil physicochemical properties (S), denitrifiers abundance (A) and by combinations of predictors. Geometric areas are proportional to the respective percentages of explained variation. The edges of the triangle depict the variation explained by each factor alone. Percentages of variation explained by interactions of two or all factors are indicated on the sides and in the middle of the triangles, respectively. (B) Variance partitioning of potential N2O emissions. (C) Variance partitioning of potential denitrification activity (PDA). (D) Variance partitioning of final denitrification product [r(N2O/r(N2O+N2)]. The variables used for each variation partitioning are indicated in the Table S2.
Description of treatments and soil physicochemical properties.
| ML | BE | Miscanthus ( | Late harvest | 120 | 21.7c ± 0.9 | 7.2ab ± 0.5 | 20.2 ± 3.6 | 74.0 ± 3.3 | 5.6 ± 0.4 | 11.5 ± 1.0 | 1.0 ± 6.10−2 | 19.9 ± 1.9 | 1.3 ± 0.6 | 11.1 ± 2.9 |
| ME | BE | Miscanthus ( | Early harvest | 120 | 23.0bc ± 0.1 | 7.4ab ± 0.6 | 20.9 ± 1.7 | 73.5 ± 2.4 | 6.0 ± 1.3 | 10.9 ± 0.6 | 1.0 ± 4.10−2 | 18.9 ± 1.0 | 2.3 ± 2.6 | 11.6 ± 1.0 |
| SL | BE | Switchgrass ( | Late harvest | 120 | 23.3ab ± 1.1 | 7.4ab ± 0.5 | 21.9 ± 2.4 | 72.3 ± 1.3 | 5.7 ± 1.1 | 11.8 ± 0.8 | 1.1 ± 6.10−2 | 20.5 ± 1.3 | 1.3 ± 0.6 | 12.3 ± 1.1 |
| SE | BE | Switchgrass ( | Late harvest | 120 | 24.7abc ± 0.6 | 6.8b ± 0.1 | 20.1 ± 3.3 | 73.8 ± 2.8 | 6.0 ± 0.5 | 12.0 ± 0.4 | 1.1 ± 5.10−2 | 20.7 ± 0.8 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 10.8 ± 1.8 |
| T1 | ORE | Peas, rapeseed, wheat, barley, corn, wheat | Conventional tillage, straw addition, high N input, non-legume intercrop | 100 | 25.1ab ± 0.9 | 7.9a ± 0.2 | 21.1 ± 4.0 | 74.1 ± 3.4 | 4.5 ± 0.5 | 10.7 ± 0.8 | 1.0 ± 4.10−2 | 18.5 ± 1.4 | 3.0 ± 2.9 | 12.3 ± 1.7 |
| T2 | ORE | Peas, rapeseed, wheat, barley, corn, wheat | Reduced tillage, straw addition, high N input, non-legume intercrop | 100 | 24.8ab ± 0.5 | 7.9a ± 0.3 | 17.7 ± 0.5 | 77.0 ± 0.06 | 4.9 ± 0.4 | 10.8 ± 0.2 | 1.0 ± 1.10−2 | 18.6 ± 0.5 | 3.7 ± 2.8 | 10.5 ± 0.5 |
| T3 | ORE | Peas, rapeseed, wheat, barley, corn, wheat | Reduced tillage, straw removal, high N input, non-legume intercrop | 100 | 24.4ab ± 1.0 | 7.9a ± 0.2 | 20.5 ± 2.8 | 74.4 ± 3.2 | 4.7 ± 0.7 | 11.4 ± 0.7 | 1.1 ± 6.10−2 | 19.7 ± 1.3 | 4.0 ± 5.8 | 12.1 ± 1.5 |
| T4 | ORE | Peas, rapeseed, wheat, barley, corn, wheat | Conventional tillage, straw addition, low N input, non-legume intercrop | 40 | 25.2a ± 1.1 | 8.0a ± 0.2 | 19.8 ± 3.3 | 75.1 ± 3.3 | 4.8 ± 0.2 | 10.7 ± 0.4 | 1.0 ± 5.10−2 | 18.6 ± 0.8 | 3.3 ± 2.8 | 11.7 ± 1.9 |
| T5 | ORE | Peas, rapeseed, wheat, barley, corn, wheat | Conventional tillage, straw addition, low N input, legume intercrop | 40 | 25.0ab ± 0.4 | 8.1a ± 0.1 | 17.8 ± 1.6 | 77.1 ± 1.2 | 4.8 ± 0.5 | 10.7 ± 0.3 | 1.0 ± 5.10−2 | 18.4 ± 0.6 | 3.4 ± 1.7 | 10.4 ± 1.0 |
Means and 95% confidence interval of soil physicochemical properties are given per treatment within each experimental block. Significant differences between treatments are indicated with different letters: “a”, “b”, and “c” (anova followed by Tukey HSD test, P < 0.05).
.