| Literature DB >> 30345177 |
Luigimaria Borruso1, Camilla Wellstein1, Alessia Bani1, Sara Casagrande Bacchiocchi1, Ania Margoni1, Rita Tonin1, Stefan Zerbe1, Lorenzo Brusetti1.
Abstract
We studied the relationship between plant functional foliar traits and the endophytic bacterial communities associated in trees, taking the example of sessile oak (Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl). Forty-five samples with replicates of eight leaves per sample were collected in spring, summer and autumn. Bacterial community diversity was analyzed via Automated Ribosomal Intergenic Spacer Analysis (ARISA). The leaf traits specific leaf area, level of herbivory, stomatal number, stomatal length, carbon and nitrogen concentration were measured for the leaves of each sample. For statistical analysis, linear mixed effect models, the Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) and Non-Parametric Multivariate Analysis of Variance (NPMANOVA) were applied. Herbivory, nitrogen and carbon concentration were significantly different in autumn compared to spring and summer (p value < 0.05), while stomatal length was differentiated between spring and the other two seasons (p value < 0.01). The seasonal differentiation of the bacterial community structure was explained by the first and second axes (29.7% and 25.3%, respectively) in the CCA. The bacterial community structure significantly correlated with herbivory, nitrogen concentration and stomatal length. We conclude that herbivory, nitrogen content, and size of stomatal aperture at the leaf level are important for endophyte colonization in oaks growth in alpine forest environments.Entities:
Keywords: Bacteria; Biological interaction; Forest; Leaf traits; Phyllosphere; Seasonality
Year: 2018 PMID: 30345177 PMCID: PMC6188006 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.5769
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Differences of foliar traits (N, nitrogen; C, carbon; C:N, carbon/nitrogen ratio; SLA, specific leaf area; SL, stomatal length; STNR, stomatal number per reference area; HERB, level of herbivory) among three seasons (spring, summer, autumn).
Significant differences according to linear mixed effect models followed by post-hoc test are indicated by different lower case letters. Graphics without letters were not significant. Detailed results of linear mixed effect models are given in Table 3.
Results of linear mixed effect models for each trait (N, leaf nitrogen content; C, leaf carbon content; C:N, C:N ratio; SLA, specific leaf area; SL, stomatal length; STNR, stomatal number; HERB, herbivory level).
Each single trait was analyzed as response variable, season as fixed variable and branches nested in the respective trees as random variable. The basic level (intercept) corresponds to the spring season.
| Trait | Fixed effect | Value | Std.error | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 2.04 | 0.07 | 28 | 30.67 | 0.00 | |
| Summer | −0.07 | 0.09 | 28 | −0.85 | 0.41 | |
| Autumn | −0.57 | 0.09 | 28 | −6.51 | 0.00 | |
| log(C) | (Intercept) | 3.86 | 0.00 | 28 | 882.56 | 0.00 |
| Summer | −0.01 | 0.00 | 28 | −1.68 | 0.10 | |
| Autumn | −0.02 | 0.00 | 28 | −4.90 | 0.00 | |
| log(C:N) | (Intercept) | 3.16 | 0.05 | 28 | 69.09 | 0.00 |
| Summer | 0.03 | 0.06 | 28 | 0.54 | 0.59 | |
| Autumn | 0.33 | 0.06 | 28 | 5.82 | 0.00 | |
| SLA | (Intercept) | 13.98 | 0.99 | 28 | 14.05 | 0.00 |
| Summer | −0.84 | 1.26 | 28 | −0.66 | 0.51 | |
| Autumn | 0.97 | 1.26 | 28 | 0.77 | 0.45 | |
| SL | (Intercept) | 25.69 | 0.58 | 28 | 44.00 | 0.00 |
| Summer | −1.66 | 0.31 | 28 | −5.44 | 0.00 | |
| Autumn | −1.49 | 0.31 | 28 | −4.87 | 0.00 | |
| STNR | (Intercept) | 55.48 | 3.87 | 28 | 14.35 | 0.00 |
| Summer | 2.37 | 1.72 | 28 | 1.38 | 0.18 | |
| Autumn | 0.81 | 1.72 | 28 | 0.47 | 0.64 | |
| log(HERB) | (Intercept) | 2.08 | 0.13 | 28 | 16.29 | 0.00 |
| Summer | 0.39 | 0.17 | 28 | 2.30 | 0.03 | |
| Autumn | 0.88 | 0.17 | 28 | 5.16 | 0.00 |
P value results from Non-Parametric MANOVA (NPMANOVA) with Bonferroni corrected p value among endophytic bacterial communities across the three seasons (Bray-Curtis dissimilarity).
| Spring | 0.0804 | 0.0009 |
| Summer | / | 0.2484 |
OTU biomarkers characterizing each single season on the basis of the Linear Discriminant Analysis effect size.
| OTU | Season | LDA-score | |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTU620 | Autumn | 3.22 | 0.033 |
| OTU660 | Autumn | 3.51 | 0.016 |
| OTU713 | Autumn | 3.26 | 0.043 |
| OTU833 | Autumn | 2.93 | 0.043 |
| OTU582 | Autumn | 4.05 | 0.000 |
| OTU600 | Autumn | 3.24 | 0.035 |
| OTU1160 | Autumn | 2.83 | 0.039 |
| OTU640 | Autumn | 3.09 | 0.034 |
| OTU850 | Autumn | 3.06 | 0.035 |
| OTU222 | Spring | 4.38 | 0.000 |
| OTU454 | Spring | 4.00 | 0.000 |
| OTU671 | Spring | 3.07 | 0.043 |
| OTU530 | Spring | 3.15 | 0.004 |
| OTU286 | Spring | 3.18 | 0.007 |
| OTU361 | Spring | 3.90 | 0.000 |
| OTU213 | Spring | 2.95 | 0.014 |
| OTU547 | Spring | 3.65 | 0.043 |
| OTU238 | Spring | 3.68 | 0.050 |
| OTU383 | Spring | 3.23 | 0.043 |
| OTU474 | Spring | 3.68 | 0.043 |
| OTU654 | Spring | 4.36 | 0.004 |
| OTU519 | Spring | 3.79 | 0.024 |
| OTU350 | Summer | 3.08 | 0.008 |
| OTU575 | Summer | 3.27 | 0.042 |
| OTU573 | Summer | 3.54 | 0.030 |
| OTU316 | Summer | 2.98 | 0.014 |
| OTU842 | Summer | 2.67 | 0.043 |
| OTU598 | Summer | 3.13 | 0.015 |
| OTU662 | Summer | 3.16 | 0.030 |
| OTU666 | Summer | 2.87 | 0.014 |
| OTU529 | Summer | 3.17 | 0.004 |
| OTU995 | Summer | 2.91 | 0.014 |
| OTU727 | Summer | 2.79 | 0.043 |
| OTU1119 | Summer | 2.70 | 0.014 |
| OTU564 | Summer | 2.79 | 0.043 |
| OTU634 | Summer | 2.82 | 0.043 |
Figure 2CCA analysis of endophytic communities across the three seasons.
CCA analysis of endophytic communities across a temporal sequence (spring, blue dots; summer, green dots; autumn, red dots) and plant foliar traits. CCA was calculated with the following plant foliar traits: HERB, level of herbivory; STNR, number of stomata; SLA, specific leaf area; SL, length of stomata; N, leaf nitrogen content; C, leaf carbon content.