| Literature DB >> 29897676 |
Cédric Le Guillou1, Nicolas Chemidlin Prévost-Bouré2, Battle Karimi1, Nouraya Akkal-Corfini3, Samuel Dequiedt1,4, Virginie Nowak1, Sébastien Terrat1,5, Safya Menasseri-Aubry3,6,7, Valérie Viaud3, Pierre-Alain Maron1, Lionel Ranjard1.
Abstract
Soil microorganisms are essential to agroecosystem functioning and services. Yet, we still lack information on which farming practices can effectively shape the soil microbial communities. The aim of this study was to identify the farming practices, which are most effective at positively or negatively modifying bacterial and fungal diversity while considering the soil environmental variation at a landscape scale. A long-term research study catchment (12 km2 ) representative of intensive mixed farming (livestock and crop) in Western Europe was investigated using a regular grid for soil sampling (n = 186). Farming systems on this landscape scale were described in terms of crop rotation, use of fertilizer, soil tillage, pesticides treatments, and liming. Molecular microbial biomass was estimated by soil DNA recovery. Bacterial and fungal communities were analyzed by 16S and 18S rRNA gene pyrosequencing. Microbial biomass was significantly stimulated by the presence of pasture during the crop rotation since temporary and permanent pastures, as compared to annual crops, increased the soil microbial biomass by +23% and +93% respectively. While soil properties (mainly pH) explained much of the variation in bacterial diversity, soil tillage seemed to be the most influential among the farming practices. A 2.4% increase in bacterial richness was observed along our gradient of soil tillage intensity. In contrast, farming practices were the predominant drivers of fungal diversity, which was mainly determined by the presence of pastures during the crop rotation. Compared to annual crops, temporary and permanent pastures increased soil fungal richness by +10% and +14.5%, respectively. Altogether, our landscape-scale investigation allows the identification of farming practices that can effectively shape the soil microbial abundance and diversity, with the goal to improve agricultural soil management and soil ecological integrity.Entities:
Keywords: agricultural practices; bacteria; farmers; fungi; sustainable landuse
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29897676 PMCID: PMC6460278 DOI: 10.1002/mbo3.676
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microbiologyopen ISSN: 2045-8827 Impact factor: 3.139
Figure 1Maps of the Naizin landscape indicating (a) the locations of the sampling points, (b) the variations of soil types, (c) the variations of land uses
Description of the farm management practices determined through the survey
| Farm management | Description | Selected variables | Unit | [min; max] | CV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crop rotation | Rotation length and crop type | Crops diversity | Number | [1; 8] | 39.7 |
| Residues input | Ton of C/year/hectare | [0; 6.31] | 37.3 | ||
| Pasture frequency | Number/year | [0; 1] | 113.1 | ||
| Legume presence | Yes; no | na | na | ||
| Fertilization | Type. quantity and frequency | Organic fertilization | Ton of C/year/hectare | [0; 2.84] | 76.2 |
| Tillage | Depth and frequency | Ploughing | Number/year | [0; 1.61] | 51.4 |
| CaO input | Quantity and frequency | Liming | kg of CaO/year/hectare | [0; 699.58] | 111.7 |
| Pesticide | Number of herbicide. fungicide and insecticide treatments | Pesticides | Number/year | [0; 4.47] | 61.3 |
Note. The eight selected variables for subsequent variance partitioning statistical analysis were chosen for representing the main farming practices and based on the exclusion of collinear variables. Maximum representativeness and homogeneous values distribution across the 186 samples. (na = nonapplicable. CV = coefficient of variation).
Mean values of the effects of the different farming practices on the soil microbial biomass and bacterial and fungal diversity indexes
| Crop types | Organic fertilization | Crop residues input | Tillage | Pesticides | Legume presence in rotation | Liming | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Annual crops | Temporary pasture | Permanent pasture |
| Low | High |
| Low | High |
| Low | High |
| Low | High |
| Yes | No |
| Low | High |
| |
| Microbial biomass | 48.8 a | 60.2 b | 94.2 b |
| 63.1 | 54.7 | ns | 63.0 | 56.1 | ns | 67.8 b | 49.1 a |
| 69.1 b | 49.1 a |
| 64.6 | 57.8 | ns | 58.7 | 59.6 | ns |
| Bacterial richness | 762 | 765 | 736 | ns | 762 | 758 | ns | 762 | 757 | ns | 752 a | 770 b |
| 755 | 765 | ns | 758 | 761 | ns | 751 a | 768 b |
|
| Bacterial evenness | 0.868 b | 0.867 ab | 0.856 a |
| 0.866 | 0.866 | ns | 0.866 | 0.866 | ns | 0.863 a | 0.869 b |
| 0.864 | 0.868 | ns | 0.865 | 0.866 | ns | 0.864 | 0.867 | ns |
| Fungal richness | 449 a | 494 b | 514 b |
| 477 | 474 | ns | 472 | 478 | ns | 486 | 464 | ns | 486 | 466 | ns | 476 | 476 | ns | 488 | 464 | ns |
| Fungal evenness | 0.649 a | 0.674 b | 0.685 b |
| 0.663 | 0.664 | ns | 0.661 | 0.665 | ns | 0.675 b | 0.651 a |
| 0.672 b | 0.655 a |
| 0.667 | 0.663 | ns | 0.671 b | 0.657 a |
|
Note. Values with different letters differ significantly. Significance level is indicated as follows: *p < 0.05. **p < 0.01. ***p < 0.001. ns, nonsignificant.
Variance explained (%) of the determined microbial biomass and bacterial and fungal diversity indexes across the agricultural landscape
| Microbial biomass | Bacterial richness | Bacterial evenness | Fungal richness | Fungal evenness | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Explained variance (%) | Relation | Explained variance (%) | Relation | Explained variance (%) | Relation | Explained variance (%) | Relation | Explained variance (%) | Relation | |
| Physicochemical | ||||||||||
|
| 4.1% | – | ||||||||
| Clay | 2.5% | – | ||||||||
| Hydromorphia | 1.7% | + | 2.6% | + | ||||||
| pH water | 1.5% | + | 17.1% | + | 14% | + | ||||
| SOC | 15.4% | + | ||||||||
| Soil available | 2.0% | – | ||||||||
| Soil bulk density | 3% | – | 3.1% | – | 4.5% | + | ||||
|
| 3.2% | + | 2.1% | – | ||||||
| Farm management practices | ||||||||||
| Crop residues input | ||||||||||
| Legume presence in the rotation | 1.9% | – | ||||||||
| Pasture frequency | 1.9% | + | 9.5% | + | 18.5% | + | ||||
| Organic fertilization | ||||||||||
| Pesticides | ||||||||||
| Soil tillage | 2.3% | + | 5.6% | + | ||||||
Note. Missing values indicate that the variable was not retained in the model. Significance level is indicated as follows: *p < 0.05. **p < 0.01. ***p < 0.001. ns = nonsignificant.
Summary statistics of physicochemical and microbial soil characteristics across the investigated agricultural landscape (n = 186)
| Mean (SD) | Median | [min; max] | CV | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil bulk density (g·m3) | 1.1 (0.2) | 1.1 | [0.5; 1.5] | 14.0 |
| Clay (%) | 17.6 (2.5) | 17.2 | [13.5; 35.6] | 14.3 |
| Silt (%) | 65.1 (4.8) | 65.9 | [50.9; 74.4] | 7.3 |
| Sand (%) | 17.5 (4.2) | 16.7 | [7.7; 30.4] | 24.2 |
| Organic carbon (g/kg) | 27.6 (8) | 26.3 | [14.6; 72.3] | 28.9 |
| Total nitrogen (g/kg) | 2.4 (0.7) | 2.3 | [1.4; 6.2] | 28.1 |
|
| 11.2 (0.7) | 11.2 | [9.7; 12.7] | 6.1 |
| pH water | 6.0 (0.4) | 6.0 | [4.6; 7.4] | 7.5 |
| Available | 0.6 (0.3) | 0.6 | [0.02; 1.9] | 50.8 |
| Total | 0.3 (0.07) | 0.3 | [0.1; 0.6] | 25.2 |
| Cu EDTA (mg/kg) | 4.9 (2.7) | 4.4 | [1.1; 14.3] | 54.2 |
| Fe (%) | 0.5 (0.1) | 0.5 | [0.1; 1.3] | 24.9 |
| Al (%) | 0.3 (0.08) | 0.3 | [0.1; 0.6] | 27.1 |
| Si (%) | 0.05 (0.01) | 0.04 | [0.01; 0.1] | 25.4 |
| Microbial biomass (μg DNA/g) | 59.2 (34.5) | 52.6 | [11.8; 251.7] | 58.3 |
| Bacterial richness | 760 (56) | 763 | [573; 884] | 7.0 |
| Bacterial evenness | 0.87 (0.01) | 0.87 | [0.802; 0.894] | 1.3 |
| Fungal richness | 476 (93) | 461 | [235; 742] | 20.0 |
| Fungal evenness | 0.66 (0.04) | 0.67 | [0.551; 0.749] | 5.8 |
Figure 2Mapping of microbial descriptors across the studied agricultural landscape. (a–c) Maps of microbial molecular biomass (μg/g soil), bacterial richness (number of OTUs) and fungal richness (number of OTUs). (d–f) Variograms and parameters of kriging models for the three microbial descriptors
Figure 3Variance partitioning of the molecular microbial biomass, and bacterial and fungal diversity variables as a function of soil physicochemical and farming practice factors (and their interactions). The amount of explained variance corresponds to the adjusted r 2 values of the contextual groups using partial redundancy analysis. The significance level of the contribution of the sets of variables is indicated as follows: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ns = nonsignificant