| Literature DB >> 34140935 |
Miquel Llimós1, Guillem Segarra2, Marc Sancho-Adamson2, M Isabel Trillas2, Joan Romanyà1.
Abstract
Plant communities and fertilization may have an impact on class="Species">soil microbiome. Most commercialEntities:
Keywords: DNA high-throughput sequencing; MicroRespTM; N2-fixing; arbuscular mycorrhizal; compost; microbiome; soil fertility
Year: 2021 PMID: 34140935 PMCID: PMC8203829 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.653027
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Experimental layout.
| Plant+ | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Plant− | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
Relative abundances (%) and standard errors of the most abundant bacterial phyla in the three soils (SU, unamended soil; SC1, soil amended with compost 1; SC2, soil amended with compost 2), with (plant+) or without (plant−) olive sapling plant.
| Proteobacteria | 65.6 ± 7.3 | 55.6 ± 1.2 | 61.7 ± 5.1 | 61.8 ± 1.8 | 65.0 ± 9.1 | 59.9 ± 0.7 | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. |
| Actinobacteria | 11.2 ± 3.0 | 15.0 ± 1.2 | 12.6 ± 5.4 | 10.1 ± 0.9 | 8.3 ± 2.2 | 10.7 ± 0.8 | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. |
| Firmicutes | 3.6 ± 1.2 | 5.4 ± 0.1 | 5.2 ± 0.6 | 7.2 ± 1.1 | 7.0 ± 1.9 | 8.4 ± 0.3 | n.s. | 0.043 | n.s. |
| Bacteroidetes | 2.9 ± 0.6 | 3.9 ± 0.6 | 5.5 ± 0.5 | 5.7 ± 0.5 | 3.7 ± 1.2 | 5.3 ± 0.5 | n.s. | 0.043 | n.s. |
| Chloroflexi | 2.4 ± 0.8 | 3.3 ± 0.2 | 6.7 ± 1.3 | 5.0 ± 0.7 | 3.8 ± 1.1 | 2.8 ± 0.3 | n.s. | 0.008 | n.s. |
| Gemmatimodetes | 3.9 ± 0.9 | 4.1 ± 0.1 | 1.9 ± 0.2 | 2.7 ± 0.2 | 3.4 ± 1.0 | 3.3 ± 0.2 | n.s. | 0.024 | n.s. |
| Planctomycetes | 2.0 ± 0.5 | 3.5 ± 0.1 | 1.4 ± 0.2 | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 1.9 ± 0.5 | 2.4 ± 0.2 | 0.024 | 0.021 | n.s. |
| Acidobacteria | 2.2 ± 0.5 | 3.4 ± 0.2 | 1.5 ± 0.2 | 2.4 ± 0.2 | 1.9 ± 0.4 | 2.9 ± 0.7 | 0.005 | n.s. | n.s. |
| Thaumarcheota | 1.6 ± 0.6 | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 0.5 ± 0.1 | 0.5 ± 0.0 | 1.7 ± 0.5 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | n.s. | 0.007 | n.s. |
| Others | 3.8 ± 0.6 | 4.7 ± 0.3 | 3.4 ± 0.3 | 2.9 ± 0.3 | 3.4 ± 1.0 | 3.3 ± 0.2 | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. |
Relative abundances (%) and standard errors of the most abundant bacterial phyla in the three soils (SU, unamended soil; SC1, soil amended with compost 1; SC2, soil amended with compost 2), with (MF+) or without (MF−) mineral fertilization.
| Proteobacteria | 55.6 ± 1.2 | 51.6 ± 2.8 | 61.8 ± 1.8 | 53.9 ± 1.2 | 60.0 ± 0.7 | 50.4 ± 3.7 | 0.002 | n.s. | n.s. |
| Actinobacteria | 15.0 ± 1.2 | 19.0 ± 3.0 | 10.1 ± 1.0 | 14.4 ± 0.8 | 10.7 ± 0.8 | 17.2 ± 1.1 | 0.001 | 0.022 | n.s. |
| Firmicutes | 5.4 ± 0.1 | 8.8 ± 0.8 | 7.2 ± 1.1 | 8.5 ± 0.6 | 8.4 ± 0.3 | 11.8 ± 1.5 | 0.002 | 0.009 | n.s. |
| Bacteroidetes | 3.9 ± 0.6 | 2.8 ± 0.2 | 5.7 ± 0.5 | 4.2 ± 0.2 | 5.3 ± 0.5 | 4.4 ± 0.1 | 0.005 | 0.002 | n.s. |
| Chloroflexi | 3.3 ± 0.2 | 3.5 ± 0.4 | 5.0 ± 0.7 | 5.3 ± 0.4 | 2.8 ± 0.3 | 4.3 ± 0.4 | n.s. | 0.002 | n.s. |
| Gemmatimodetes | 4.1 ± 0.1 | 3.6 ± 0.5 | 2.7 ± 0.2 | 3.6 ± 0.4 | 3.3 ± 0.2 | 2.9 ± 0.1 | n.s. | 0.042 | n.s. |
| Planctomycetes | 3.5 ± 0.1 | 3.1 ± 0.1 | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 2.8 ± 0.4 | 2.4 ± 0.2 | 2.3 ± 0.2 | n.s. | < 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Acidobacteria | 3.4 ± 0.2 | 2.8 ± 0.2 | 2.4 ± 0.2 | 2.9 ± 0.2 | 2.9 ± 0.7 | 1.9 ± 0.1 | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. |
| Thaumarcheota | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 1.5 ± 0.0 | 0.5 ± 0.0 | 1.1 ± 0.2 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 0.003 | 0.003 | n.s. |
| Others | 4.7 ± 0.3 | 3.4 ± 0.4 | 3.0 ± 0.3 | 3.5 ± 0.6 | 3.3 ± 0.2 | 3.5 ± 0.3 | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. |
FIGURE 1Percentages of the relative abundance of dominant fungal and bacteria phyla in the two original composts (C1, C2) prior to soil application. Asterisks in the legend indicate differences in the relative abundance for each phylum between the two composts.
Relative abundances (%) and standard errors of the most abundant fungal phyla in the three soils (SU, unamended soil; SC1, soil amended with compost 1; SC2, soil amended with compost 2), with (plant+) or without (plant−) olive sapling plant.
| S | P*S | ||||||||
| Ascomycota | 69.8 ± 5.4 | 54.8 ± 2.9 | 39.1 ± 3.9 | 42.7 ± 1.7 | 83.9 ± 6.3 | 50.5 ± 7.7 | 0.006 | < 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Basidiomycota | 11.5 ± 3.0 | 20.2 ± 3.4 | 41.3 ± 4.4 | 31.0 ± 4.4 | 12.1 ± 5.5 | 33.3 ± 9.6 | n.s. | 0.008 | 0.039 |
| Chytridiomycota | 10.7 ± 4.9 | 3.1 ± 0.7 | 17.6 ± 7.5 | 20.4 ± 5.4 | 1.0 ± 0.2 | 7.5 ± 3.6 | n.s. | 0.006 | n.s. |
| Glomeromycota | 1.9 ± 0.6 | 9.1 ± 1.9 | 1.5 ± 0.2 | 3.6 ± 0.5 | 1.0 ± 0.4 | 2.8 ± 0.5 | < 0.001 | 0.003 | 0.05 |
| Others | 6.1 ± 0.5 | 12.8 ± 4.8 | 0.6 ± 0.1 | 2.3 ± 0.9 | 2.0 ± 0.6 | 6.0 ± 1.8 | 0.014 | 0.001 | n.s. |
Relative abundances (%) and standard errors of the most abundant fungal phyla in the three soils (SU, unamended soil; SC1, soil amended with compost 1; SC2, soil amended with compost 2), with (MF+) or without (MF−) mineral fertilization.
| Ascomycota | 54.8 ± 2.9 | 51.3 ± 4.2 | 42.7 ± 1.7 | 56.5 ± 11.5 | 50.5 ± 7.7 | 69.3 ± 10.6 | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. |
| Basidiomycota | 20.2 ± 3.4 | 25.4 ± 8.4 | 31.0 ± 4.4 | 29.7 ± 10.2 | 33.3 ± 9.6 | 22.6 ± 11.5 | n.s. | n.s. | n.s. |
| Chytridiomycota | 3.1 ± 0.7 | 6.3 ± 0.7 | 20.4 ± 5.4 | 10.0 ± 2.0 | 7.5 ± 3.6 | 5.2 ± 2.9 | n.s. | 0.009 | n.s. |
| Glomeromycota | 9.1 ± 1.9 | 8.3 ± 3.8 | 3.6 ± 0.5 | 2.6 ± 0.7 | 2.8 ± 0.5 | 1.1 ± 0.1 | n.s. | 0.001 | n.s. |
| Others | 12.8 ± 4.8 | 8.8 ± 2.2 | 2.3 ± 0.9 | 1.9 ± 0.4 | 6.0 ± 1.8 | 1.8 ± 0.4 | n.s. | 0.002 | n.s. |
FIGURE 2Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of bacterial and fungal operational taxonomic units (OTUs) in the three different used soils (S, SC1, SC2) combined with the effects of the presence of plant and the effects of used soils (S, SC1, SC2) combined with mineral fertilization in the presence of plants.
FIGURE 3Richness and Shannon index for the identified operational taxonomic units (OTUs) of bacteria in the different soils (S, SC1, SC2) with (plant+) and without plant and in minerally fertilized (MF+) and unfertilized (MF−) soils (S, SC1, SC2). Data on the original composts (C1 and C2) are also shown. Data represent the means and standard errors of three replicates for each sample. Significant factors of ANOVA are indicated. P, plant effect; S, soil effect; MF, mineral fertilization; S*MF, interaction of soils and mineral fertilization. Asterisk indicates significant differences between the composts.
FIGURE 4Richness and Shannon index for the identified operational taxonomic units (OTUs) of fungi in the different soils (S, SC1, SC2) with (plant+) and without plant and in minerally fertilized (MF+) and unfertilized (MF−) soils (S, SC1, SC2). Data on the original composts (C1 and C2) are also shown. Data represent the means and standard errors of three replicates for each sample. Significant factors of ANOVA are indicated. P, plant effect; S, soil effect; MF, mineral fertilization; S*MF, interaction of soils and mineral fertilization. Asterisk indicates significant differences between the composts.
FIGURE 5Mean substrate-induced respiration (SIR) rates in response to the addition of 15 C substrates to soils from different treatments. The effects of the different soils (S, SC1, SC2) with (plant+) and without plant (plant-) are shown in the left column (plant–soil effect), while the effects of soils (S, SC1, SC2) and mineral fertilization (MF+, MF−) are shown on the right (mineral fertilization–soil effect). Asterisks in the main plot indicate significance of the plant effects within each soil. The lower table indicates ANOVA significances with an asterisk for factors and interaction in each experiment. P refers to the plant effect, S to the soil effect (S), and P*S to the interaction between plant and soil. Error bars indicate standard error of the mean (n = 3).
FIGURE 6Heatmap of Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) between the most abundant bacterial phyla (plant–soil effect) and the SIR results of the different carbon sources. Heatmap colors represent the Pearson correlations ranges, from red (negative correlation), passing through white (no correlation) to green (positive correlation). Significant results are indicated by an asterisk.
FIGURE 7Heatmap of Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) between the most abundant fungal phyla (plant–soil effect) and the SIR results of the different carbon sources. Heatmap colors represent the Pearson correlations ranges, from red (negative correlation), passing through white (no correlation) to green (positive correlation). Significant results are indicated by an asterisk.
FIGURE 8Heatmap of Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) between the most abundant fungal phyla (mineral fertilization–soil effect) and the SIR results of the different carbon sources. Heatmap colors represent the Pearson correlations ranges, from red (negative correlation), passing through white (no correlation) to green (positive correlation). Significant results are indicated by an asterisk.
FIGURE 9Heatmap of Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) between the most abundant bacterial phyla (mineral fertilization–soil effect) and the SIR results of the different carbon sources. Heatmap colors represent the Pearson correlations ranges, from red (negative correlation), passing through white (no correlation) to green (positive correlation). Significant results are indicated by an asterisk.
Number of genera from the 100 most abundant genera of bacteria affected by soil type (compost addition), mineral fertilization, and presence of plant (olive saplings).
| No N2 fixing | 26 | 7 | 23 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 2 | 14 |
| N2 fixing | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 |
| No N2 fixing | 13 | 5 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| N2 fixing | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| No N2 fixing | 4 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| No N2 fixing | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| No N2 fixing | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | |||
| No N2 fixing | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| No N2 fixing | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||||
| Total | 57 | 22 | 46 | 21 | 11 | 12 | 36 | 5 | 33 |
Number of genera form the 100 most abundant genera of fungi affected by soil type (compost addition), mineral fertilization, and presence of plant (olive saplings).
| Patotroph | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Patotroph–saprotroph | 1 | 0 | |||||||
| Pathotroph–saprotroph–symbiotroph | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Pathotroph–symbiotroph | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Saprotroph | 17 | 2 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 7 | 5 | 5 |
| Saprotroph–symbiotroph | 1 | 1 | |||||||
| Symbiotroph | 2 | 0 | |||||||
| Unclassified | 13 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 3 | |||
| Pathotroph | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Pathotroph–saprotroph | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| Pathotroph–saprotroph–symbiotroph | 2 | 0 | |||||||
| Saprotroph | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Symbiotroph | 4 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | |||
| Unclassified | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Pathotroph | 1 | 1 | |||||||
| Pathotroph–saprotroph | 1 | 0 | |||||||
| Unclassified | 1 | 1 | |||||||
| Symbiotroph | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| Pathotroph–saprotroph | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
| Saprotroph | 1 | 0 | |||||||
| Saprotroph–symbiotroph | 1 | 0 | |||||||
| Symbiotroph | 1 | 0 | |||||||
| Total | 62 | 6 | 25 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 27 | 16 | 20 |