| Literature DB >> 31273222 |
Agnieszka Sendek1,2,3,4, Canan Karakoç5,6, Cameron Wagg7,8, Jara Domínguez-Begines5,9, Gabriela Martucci do Couto5,10, Marcel G A van der Heijden11,12, Ali Ahmad Naz13, Alfred Lochner5,10, Antonis Chatzinotas5,6, Stefan Klotz5,14, Lorena Gómez-Aparicio9, Nico Eisenhauer5,10.
Abstract
Droughts associated with climate change alter ecosystem functions, especially in systems characterized by low biodiversity, such as agricultural fields. Management strategies aimed at buffering climate change effects include the enhancement of intraspecific crop diversity as well as the diversity of beneficial interactions with soil biota, such as arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF). However, little is known about reciprocal relations of crop and AMF diversity under drought conditions. To explore the interactive effects of plant genotype richness and AMF richness on plant yield under ambient and drought conditions, we established fully crossed diversity gradients in experimental microcosms. We expected highest crop yield and drought tolerance at both high barley and AMF diversity. While barley richness and AMF richness altered the performance of both barley and AMF, they did not mitigate detrimental drought effects on the plant and AMF. Root biomass increased with mycorrhiza colonization rate at high AMF richness and low barley richness. AMF performance increased under higher richness of both barley and AMF. Our findings indicate that antagonistic interactions between barley and AMF may occur under drought conditions, particularly so at higher AMF richness. These results suggest that unexpected alterations of plant-soil biotic interactions could occur under climate change.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31273222 PMCID: PMC6609766 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-45702-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Graphical representation of the main hypothesis. Panel (a) shows expected effects of barley richness and AMF richness on barley biomass and seed yield in ambient conditions. Panel (b) shows expected effects of barley richness and AMF richness on the barley biomass and seed yield in drought conditions.
Design of the experimental setup, representing the number of microcosms assigned to each combination of richness level of barley genotypes (X, Y, and Z) and AMF species (A, B, and C).
| AMF richness | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | AB | AC | BC | ABC | ||
| Barley richness |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |
|
| 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | |
Blocks of the same richness level included always nine microcosms and are indicated by numbers. The presented setup was replicated for drought and ambient treatments.
Test statistics of the linear models used to explore effects of drought and diversity treatments on barley performance.
| Explanatory variables | Seed mass | Shoot biomass | Root biomass | Shallowest root-layer | Intermediate root-layer | Deepest root layer | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D.f. | F | p | F | p | F | p | F | p | F | p | F | p | |
| Drought | 1 | 11.33 | 35.37 | < | 41.12 | < | 12.86 | 0.14 | 0.70 | 13.37 | |||
| Barley richness | 1 | 0.50 | 0.48 | 0.97 | 0.33 | 9.61 | 2.84 | 0.09 | 0.34 | 0.55 | 2.04 | 0.16 | |
| AMF richness | 1 | 1.90 | 0.17 | 4.25 | 4.04 | 2.83 | 0.09 | 2.62 | 0.10 | 8.89 | |||
| Colonization frequency | 1 | 0.02 | 0.90 | 0.33 | 0.56 | 10.59 | 0.81 | 0.37 | 1.76 | 0.18 | 3.68 | 0.06 | |
| Drought: barley richness | 1 | 0.34 | 0.56 | 2.70 | 0.10 | 3.24 | 0.07 | 1.12 | 0.29 | 0.21 | 0.64 | 0.69 | 0.41 |
| Drought: AMF richness | 1 | 0.00 | 0.95 | 0.04 | 0.84 | 0.87 | 0.35 | 2.69 | 0.10 | 0.49 | 0.48 | 1.69 | 0.20 |
| Drought: colonization frequency | 1 | 0.73 | 0.40 | 2.91 | 0.09 | 1.55 | 0.21 | 2.75 | 0.09 | 0.27 | 0.27 | 2.08 | 0.15 |
| Barley richness: AMF richness | 1 | 0.01 | 0.92 | 0.87 | 0.35 | 0.58 | 0.45 | 5.34 | 0.00 | 0.99 | 6.43 | ||
| Barley richness: colonization frequency | 1 | 1.00 | 0.32 | 2.78 | 0.10 | 5.85 | 1.38 | 0.24 | 0.82 | 0.36 | 0.42 | 0.52 | |
| AMF richness: colonization frequency | 1 | 0.23 | 0.63 | 0.09 | 0.76 | 7.88 | 6.87 | 14.10 | < | 0.05 | 0.83 | ||
| Drought: barley richness: AMF richness | 1 | 0.38 | 0.54 | 0.97 | 0.33 | 0.13 | 0.72 | 1.04 | 0.31 | 0.51 | 0.47 | 0.37 | 0.54 |
| Drought: barley richness: colonization frequency | 1 | 2.90 | 0.09 | 1.26 | 0.26 | 0.02 | 0.89 | 0.55 | 0.46 | 0.50 | 0.48 | 0.10 | 0.76 |
| Drought: AMF richness: colonization frequency | 1 | 2.59 | 0.11 | 4.53 | 0.04 | 0.84 | 0.00 | 0.97 | 0.57 | 0.45 | 0.32 | 0.57 | |
| Barley richness: AMF richness: colonization frequency | 1 | 0.93 | 0.34 | 0.62 | 0.43 | 1.95 | 0.16 | 2.50 | 0.11 | 0.89 | 0.34 | 1.14 | 0.29 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.0567 | 0.2353 | 0.3303 | 0.1656 | 0.0584 | 0.1548 | |||||||
| No. observations | 149 | 143 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | |||||||
The table shows degrees of freedom (D.f.), values of F statistic (F) and p values (p) for each main effect and interactions up to the 3rd order. Degrees of freedom (D.f.), values of F statistic (F) and p values (p) are presented for each main effect and interactions up to the 3rd order. Significant p values (p < 0.05) are highlighted in bold. Root layers (shallowest, intermediate, deepest) represent root biomass allocation to soil layers. Barley and AMF richness are treated as linear terms.
Figure 2Interactive effects of treatments on plant performance. Panels (a,b) show the effect of the drought treatments, AMF richness, and mycorrhiza colonization frequency on shoot biomass. Panel (c) shows the effect of mycorrhiza colonization frequency of roots and AMF richness on root biomass. Panel (d) shows the effect of mycorrhiza colonization frequency of roots and barley richness on root biomass. Lines represent fitted values with 95% confidence intervals.
Test statistics of the linear models used to explore effects of drought and diversity treatments on AMF performance.
| Explanatory variables | Arbuscule abundance | Vesicle abundance | Mycorrhiza frequency | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D.f. | F | p | F | p | F | p | |
| Drought | 1 | 27.23 | < | 17.81 | < | 25.09 | < |
| Barley richness | 1 | 34.05 | < | 7.84 | 7.99 | ||
| AMF richness | 1 | 20.42 | < | 34.72 | < | 8.86 | |
| Colonization frequency | 1 | 110.00 | < | 139.54 | < | X | X |
| Drought: barley richness | 1 | 0.23 | 0.63 | 1.06 | 0.30 | 0.28 | 0.60 |
| Drought: AMF richness | 1 | 0.10 | 0.75 | 0.99 | 0.32 | 0.95 | 0.33 |
| Drought: colonization frequency | 1 | 1.19 | 0.28 | 0.50 | 0.48 | X | X |
| Barley richness: AMF richness | 1 | 4.06 | 2.60 | 0.11 | 2.41 | 0.12 | |
| Barley richness: colonization frequency | 1 | 5.12 | 1.39 | 0.24 | X | X | |
| AMF richness: colonization frequency | 1 | 0.18 | 0.68 | 1.38 | 0.24 | X | X |
| Drought: barley richness: AMF richness | 1 | 3.18 | 0.08 | 5.97 | 0.00 | 0.97 | |
| Drought: barley richness: Colonization frequency | 1 | 1.94 | 0.17 | 0.66 | 0.42 | X | X |
| Drought: AMF richness: colonization frequency | 1 | 1.74 | 0.19 | 0.01 | 0.94 | X | X |
| Barley richness: AMF richness: colonization frequency | 1 | 1.68 | 0.20 | 4.56 | X | X | |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.5667 | 0.5664 | 0.1973 | ||||
| No. observations | 158 | 158 | 158 | ||||
The table shows degrees of freedom (D.f.), values of F statistic (F) and p values (p) for each main effect and interactions up to the 3rd order. Significant p values (p < 0.05) are highlighted in bold. Symbol X stands for the significance of the main effects and interactions which could not be calculated when mycorrhiza colonization frequency was used as the response variable. Barley and AMF richness are treated as linear terms.
Figure 3Interactive effects of treatments on AMF performance. Panels (a,b) show the effect of the drought treatments, barley richness, and AMF richness on vesicle abundance. Panel (c) shows the effect of barley richness and mycorrhiza colonization frequency of roots on arbuscule abundance. Panel (d) shows the effect of barley richness and AMF richness on arbuscule abundance. Lines represent fitted values with 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 4Direct and indirect (through changes of mycorrhiza colonization ‘f’) effects of drought, barley richness (Div_B), and AMF richness (Div_A) on measures of barley and AMF performance indicated by structural equation models. Panel (a) shows the initial model, while panels (b-d) show the most parsimonious models for seed mass, shoot biomass, root biomass, respectively. Values of χ2 and BIC as well as degrees of freedom (D.f.) and p values (p) related to the models are presented at the right bottom corner of each panel. Endogenous variables are displayed in squares, while exogenous variables are given in rounded squares. Standard errors (e1, e2) are given in circles next to their corresponding variables. Significant relationships are illustrated by arrows. Numbers on arrows represent standardized path coefficients, while their color indicates the direction of relationships (orange – positive, blue – negative).