| Literature DB >> 32728175 |
Lili Tang1,2,3, Ye Xia4, Chao Fan1,2,5, Jinming Kou1,2, Fengzhi Wu1,2, Wenhui Li6,7, Kai Pan8,9.
Abstract
Straw return is an effective strategy to alleviate soil-borne diseases. Though watermelon Fusarium wilt is a severe soil-borne disease, the effect of wheat straw on the disease remains unclear. Thus, we investigated the effects of wheat straw on soil bacterial and fungal communities by adding wheat straw to consecutive watermelon soil in the greenhouse condition. The microbiome changes were further investigated using network analysis based on 16S rDNA and internal transcribed spacer deep sequencing. Wheat straw addition increased the fungal community diversity, whereas the bacterial diversity was not affected. Compared to the control group, the relative abundance of some bacteria, including Actinobacteria, Chloroflexi, and Saccharibacteria, was increased with wheat straw addition. For fungi, the relative abundance of Fusarium was decreased with wheat straw addition. Microbial network analysis demonstrated that the fungal community has a more complex connection than the bacterial community. In addition, redundancy analysis indicated that the Fusarium genera were significantly related to the disease index. Taken together, the addition of wheat straw might affect the microbial community through increasing the relative abundance of phylum Actinobacteria, decreasing the relative abundance of Fusarium, and increasing the fungal network complexity to enhance the defense of watermelon against Fusarium wilt disease.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32728175 PMCID: PMC7391731 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-69623-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Major bacterial (a) and fungal phylum (b) relative abundance in the soil with (T1 and T2) and without (CK1 and CK2) wheat straw addition. Bacterial phyla with > 1% and fungal phyla with > 0.1% average relative abundances. Others included bacterial phyla below 1% relative abundance and unidentified bacterial and fungal phyla. According to the Student's t-test (n = 9), * and ** represented P < 0.05 and P < 0.01 between soil with (T1 and T2) and without (CK1 and CK2) wheat straw addition, respectively.
Figure 2LDA histogram scores for bacterial genera with different abundance for the flowering stage (a) and fruiting stage (b) in the watermelon monoculture system.
Figure 3LDA histogram scores for fungal genera with different abundance for the flowering stage (a) and fruiting stage (b) in the watermelon monoculture system.
Figure 4Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) according to the Euclidean distance plot of bacterial (a) and fungal (b) microbiota in the flowering stage (CK1 and T1) and fruiting stage (CK2 and T2).
Figure 5Plots of redundancy analysis (RDA) ordination displaying the interactions between the top 10 bacterial (a) and fungal genera (b) and soil environmental variables. AP denotes available phosphorus; pH denotes the solar pH; EC denotes electrolyte conductivity; the disease index (DI) denotes healthy plants as “0”and Fusarium wilt plants as “1”. CK1 represents the soil without wheat straw addition at the watermelon flowering stage while T1 represents the soil with wheat straw addition at the watermelon flowering stage; CK2 represents the soil without wheat straw addition at the watermelon fruiting stage and T2 represents the soil with wheat straw addition at the watermelon fruiting stage.
Figure 6Network plots of fungal community at the order level from soil without (CK1) (a) and with (T1) (b) wheat straw addition at the watermelon flowering stage. The size of the node corresponds to the relative abundance of the OTUs. The node colors show various phylogenetic associations. Node (edge) connection lines represent co-occurrence with positive (blue) and negative (red) correlations.
Major topological properties of the empirical phylogenetic Molecular Ecological Networks (pMENs) of fungal communities for soil with (T1 and T2) and without (CK1 and CK2) wheat straw addition and their associated random pMENs.
| Empirical networks | Random networksd | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil traits | NO. of original OTUsa | Similarity threshold (St) | Network size (n)b | R2 of Power law | Avg connect (avg K) | Avg path length (GD)c | Avg clustering coefficient (avg CC) | Modularity (no. of modules) | Avg path distance (GD) | Avg cluster coefficient (avg CC) | Modularity (M) | |
| Flowering stage | CK1 | 300 | 0.89 | 166 | 0.719 | 8.928 | 2.920 | 0.155 | 0.279 (18) | 2.700 ± 0.034 | 0.179 ± 0.011 | 0.236 ± 0.006 |
| T1 | 300 | 0.86 | 180 | 0.645 | 11.511 | 2.999 | 0.278 | 0.300 (12) | 2.536 ± 0.030 | 0.235 ± 0.014 | 0.198 ± 0.005 | |
| Fruiting stage | CK2 | 300 | 0.87 | 181 | 0.714 | 8.166 | 3.186 | 0.264 | 0.409 (15) | 2.778 ± 0.029 | 0.137 ± 0.013 | 0.266 ± 0.005 |
| T2 | 300 | 0.88 | 202 | 0.636 | 12.545 | 2.727 | 0.214 | 0.261 (14) | 2.496 ± 0.026 | 0.253 ± 0.010 | 0.186 ± 0.004 | |
aThe number of OTUs that were originally used for network construction using the random matrix theory (RMT)-based approach.
bThe number of OTUs (i.e., nodes) in the network.
cGD geodesic distance.
dThe random networks were generated by rewiring all of the links of a pMEN with the identical numbers of nodes and links to the corresponding empirical pMEN.
Figure 7Relative abundance of nodes at the order level in modules inside the fungal network created from the flowering stage (a) and fruiting stage (b). Venn diagrams display the amount of shared and unshared network nodes in the soil sample with and without wheat straw addition.