| Literature DB >> 27102357 |
Wei Liu1,2, Yunlong Zhang1, Shanshan Jiang1, Yan Deng1, Peter Christie1, Philip J Murray3, Xiaolin Li1, Junling Zhang1.
Abstract
Understanding the diversity and community structure of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) is important for potentially opn>timizing their role in miningEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27102357 PMCID: PMC4840358 DOI: 10.1038/srep24902
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Percentage root colonization, spore density, and hyphal length density in different P treatments and at different growth stages.
| Growth stage | Treatment | Root length colonization (%RLC) | Arbuscular colonization (%AC) | Hyphal colonization (%HC) | Hyphal length density (m g−1) | Spore density (g−1 soil) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V6 | Control | 29.04 ± 2.53b | 8.24 ± 3.22cd | 12.65 ± 2.84bc | 1.23 ± 0.12bc | 7.21 ± 1.10ab |
| P25 | 16.40 ± 3.99bc | 0.86 ± 0.47d | 5.66 ± 2.17c | 1.77 ± 0.16a | 6.38 ± 0.41abc | |
| P100 | 11.10 ± 1.43c | 0.80 ± 0.52d | 3.06 ± 0.75c | 1.48 ± 0.09abc | 6.16 ± 0.98abc | |
| V13 | Control | 54.23 ± 7.49a | 20.44 ± 4.73ab | 32.92 ± 9.72a | 1.45 ± 0.16abc | 7.93 ± 1.22a |
| P25 | 46.85 ± 2.70a | 13.46 ± 1.80bc | 25.24 ± 1.47ab | 1.29 ± 0.25abc | 6.22 ± 0.77abc | |
| P100 | 42.59 ± 6.04a | 15.86 ± 3.77bc | 26.64 ± 6.49ab | 1.15 ± 0.07c | 7.28 ± 0.77ab | |
| R4 | Control | 43.56 ± 1.70a | 18.63 ± 1.73b | 22.93 ± 1.55ab | 1.32 ± 0.05abc | 5.78 ± 0.72abc |
| P25 | 53.56 ± 1.80a | 28.33 ± 2.13a | 29.10 ± 0.62a | 1.67 ± 0.22ab | 4.73 ± 0.45bc | |
| P100 | 23.95 ± 2.75bc | 8.60 ± 1.85cd | 12.47 ± 2.42bc | 1.29 ± 0.13abc | 3.86 ± 0.25c | |
| Analysis of variance | ||||||
| P fertilization level | ns | ns | ns | |||
| Growth stage | ns | |||||
| P fertilization level × Growth stage | ns | ns | ns | |||
Data are mean values ± SE (n = 4). Significant differences among P treatments and growth stage within each variable were tested using Duncan’s multiple range test (p < 0.05) and are indicated by different letters. Two-way ANOVA was used to represent the main and interactive effects of P treatments and growth stage on each mycorrhizal parameter. Control: zero fertilizer P; P25: low-P treatment; P100: high-P treatment. V6, V13 and R4 refer to 6-leaf collar, 13-leaf collar and kernel dough during maize growth period. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ns, not significant.
Figure 1Richness of fungal T-RFs in soil at different depths and maize roots of different growth stages in different P treatments.
Bars represent mean values ± SE (n = 4). Significant differences among treatments and soil depths were tested using Duncan’s multiple range test (p < 0.05) and are indicated by different lowercase or capital letters.
Figure 2Canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) of the AM fungal community composition in the soil in response to vectors of significant soil chemical properties.
CK: zero P application (control); P25: 25 kg P ha−1; P100: 100 kg P ha−1. Solid circles represent 0–20 cm, solid squares represent 20–40 cm, and solid diamonds represent 40–60 cm soil depth, respectively. The first and second axes explain 34.2 and 7.0% of the variance. The Monte Carlo test of significance of the first canonical axis and all canonical axes are p = 0.002 (F = 6.238) and p = 0.002 (F = 2.372), respectively.
Figure 3Principal component analysis (PCA) of the AM fungal community composition in the maize root in response to different growth stages.
CK: zero P application (control); P25: 25 kg P ha−1; P100: 100 kg P ha−1. Solid circles represent the V6 stage, solid squares represent V13 stage, and solid diamonds represent the R4 stage. The first and second axes explain 31.1 and 23.0% of the variance.