| Literature DB >> 34907218 |
Klaus Birkhofer1, Andreas Fliessbach2, María Pilar Gavín-Centol3, Katarina Hedlund4, María Ingimarsdóttir4, Helene Bracht Jørgensen4, Katja Kozjek4, Svenja Meyer5, Marta Montserrat6, Sara Sánchez Moreno7, Jordi Moya Laraño3, Stefan Scheu5,8, Diego Serrano-Carnero6, Jaak Truu9, Dominika Kundel2,10,11.
Abstract
Soil biodiversity constitutes the biological pillars of ecosystem services provided by soils worldwide. Soil life is threatened by intense agricultural management and shifts in climatic conditions as two important global change drivers which are not often jointly studied under field conditions. We addressed the effects of experimental short-term drought over the wheat growing season on soil organisms and ecosystem functions under organic and conventional farming in a Swiss long term trial. Our results suggest that activity and community metrics are suitable indicators for drought stress while microbial communities primarily responded to agricultural practices. Importantly, we found a significant loss of multiple pairwise positive and negative relationships between soil biota and process-related variables in response to conventional farming, but not in response to experimental drought. These results suggest a considerable weakening of the contribution of soil biota to ecosystem functions under long-term conventional agriculture. Independent of the farming system, experimental and seasonal (ambient) drought conditions directly affected soil biota and activity. A higher soil water content during early and intermediate stages of the growing season and a high number of significant relationships between soil biota to ecosystem functions suggest that organic farming provides a buffer against drought effects.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34907218 PMCID: PMC8671559 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-03276-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Abundance- (#1–13), diversity- (Shannon index with exponential log base, #14–18) and process-related (#19–26) dependent variables in this study with unit, range, mean ± standard deviation (SD) and method.
| # | Variable | Unit | Range | Mean ± SD | Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) biomass | nmol/g soil | 3.0–30.0 | 8.6 ± 6.0 | Lipid extractions from soil |
| 2 | Bacterial biomass | nmol/g soil | 23.0–48.8 | 36.9 ± 7.6 | Lipid extractions from soil |
| 3 | Fungal biomass | nmol/g soil | 0.7–2.2 | 1.2 ± 0.3 | Lipid extractions from soil |
| 4 | Microbial nitrogen (N) | µgNmic/g dry soil | 22.4–91.8 | 61.5 ± 20.8 | Chloroform fumigation extraction |
| 5 | Microbial carbon (C) | µgCmic/g dry soil | 158–539 | 386.1 ± 110.7 | Chloroform fumigation extraction |
| 6 | Nematoda abundance | individuals/100 g dry soil | 267.9–5604.3 | 1191.3 ± 821.8 | Baermann funnel method |
| 7 | Collembola abundance | individuals per sample | 0–70,656 | 9692.4 ± 16,037.0 | Heat gradient extraction |
| 8 | Oribatida abundance | individuals per sample | 308–20,636 | 2338.8 ± 2666.0 | Heat gradient extraction |
| 9 | Chilopoda abundance | individuals per sample | 0–252 | 55.2 ± 54.4 | Heat gradient extraction |
| 10 | Diplopoda abundance | individuals per sample | 0–1176 | 85.6 ± 191.1 | Heat gradient extraction |
| 11 | Araneae activity density | individuals per sample | 1–29 | 11.3 ± 5.8 | Pitfall traps |
| 12 | Staphylinidae activity density | individuals per sample | 0–37 | 6.2 ± 7.3 | Pitfall traps |
| 13 | Arable weed cover | % cover | 0–90 | 15.6 ± 23.4 | Visual estimate |
| 14 | Bacterial diversity | Shannon index on OTU level | 6.7–6.9 | 6.8 ± 0.1 | 16S rRNA sequencing |
| 15 | Nematoda diversity | Shannon index on genus level | 1.3–2.4 | 1.9 ± 0.2 | Baermann funnel method |
| 16 | Soil mesofauna diversity | Shannon index on subclass/suborder level | 0.0–1.1 | 0.7 ± 0.3 | Heat gradient extraction |
| 17 | Soil macrofauna diversity | Shannon index on family/order level | 0.0–1.8 | 1.1 ± 0.4 | Heat gradient extraction |
| 18 | Araneae diversity | Shannon index on species level | 0.0–2.3 | 1.4 ± 0.6 | Pitfall traps |
| 19 | Microbial respiration | µgCO2 − C/gsoil h | 0.2–1.0 | 0.5 ± 0.2 | CO2 evolution |
| 20 | Soil feeding activity | Average % of baits consumed | 1.4–99.7 | 49.6 ± 30.7 | Bait-lamina |
| 21 | Litter decomposition | Organic C/organic N (g) | 54.1–128.8 | 80.2 ± 15.9 | Litterbags |
| 22 | Soil water content | % water content/g dry soil | 7.2–29.9 | 17.5 ± 6.1 | Gravimetric |
| 23 | Soil mineral N | µg ammonium and nitrate/g dry soil | 2.4–38.9 | 7.3 ± 7.1 | Cd reduction and modified Berthelot reaction |
| 24 | C content wheat aboveground biomass | % C/g dry plant | 0.8–3.4 | 2.0 ± 0.7 | C/N analyses |
| 25 | N content wheat aboveground biomass | % N/g dry plant | 42.0–45.9 | 43.8 ± 0.9 | C/N analyses |
| 26 | Total aboveground wheat biomass | dry mass (t/ha) | 2.1–22.4 | 10.1 ± 5.8 | Subsampling and weighting |
The total number of samples is N = 72, with the exception of variable 19 (N = 71) and variables 4, 5 and 21 (N = 70). For key references and detailed descriptions refer to the Suplementary information.
Results of the permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) of a resemblance matrix from Gower similarities between all pairs of 72 samples and the dependent variables 1–26 (Table 1).
| Source | df | SS | MS | Pseudo-F | P(perm) or P(MC)* | Unique perms | Sq.root components of variation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plot | 6 | 2039.5 | 339.9 | 3.94 | < 0.001 | 9903 | 5.31 |
| Time | 2 | 7951.9 | 3975.9 | 30.19 | < 0.001 | 9934 | 12.66 |
| Farming system (FS) | 1 | 5856.6 | 5856.6 | 17.23 | < 0.001* | 35* | 12.38 |
| Drought | 2 | 1084.6 | 542.3 | 4.97 | < 0.0001 | 9941 | 4.25 |
| Contrast | 1 | 949.8 | 949.8 | 8.25 | 0.001 | 9954 | 5.11 |
| Time × Drought | 4 | 611.5 | 152.9 | 1.77 | 0.020 | 9906 | 2.89 |
| Time × Contrast | 2 | 499.3 | 249.7 | 2.81 | < 0.001 | 9929 | 3.88 |
| Time × FS × Drought | 4 | 370.6 | 92.6 | 1.07 | 0.3925 | 9917 | 1.26 |
| Time × FS × Contrast | 2 | 207.9 | 103.9 | 1.17 | 0.3169 | 9948 | 1.68 |
| Pooled (1) | 14 | 1844.0 | 131.7 | 1.53 | 0.0179 | 9887 | 3.89 |
| Pooled (2) | 14 | 1528.1 | 109.2 | 1.27 | 0.1075 | 9866 | 2.76 |
| Plot × Contrast | 7 | 806.1 | 115.2 | 1.29 | 0.1065 | 9874 | 2.56 |
| Residuals | 24 | 2070.8 | 86.3 | 9.29 | |||
| Total | 71 | 23,358.0 |
Pooled Estimated components of variation: (Pooled (1): Plot (nested in FS) × Time and Time × FS; Pooled (2): Plot (nested in FS) × Drought and FS × Drought).
*P-value derived from Monte-Carlo simulations due to small number (< 100) of unique permutations.
Figure 1Effect size (Cohen’s d) for factors (a) “Farming System” and (b) drought “Contrast” (both controls vs. roof) on abundance- (●), diversity- (▲) and process-related (■) variables. The asterisk next to a variable name indicates a P-value < 0.05 that was derived from 5000 bootstrap samples.
Figure 2Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination (2-d stress = 0.18) of farming systems (Green symbols organic, Grey symbols conventional) sampled at three dates (●T1, ■T2, ▲T3) based on a resemblance matrix from Gower distances of 26 abundance-, diversity- and process-related variables (see Table 1); vectors for individual variables were superimposed for variables with multiple correlation coefficients of R > 0.25, the circle indicates the highest possible multiple correlation coefficient.
Figure 3Effect size (Cohen's d) comparing Control (C & RC) vs. Roof (R) treatments at specific sampling dates (T1–T3) depicted as a black dot on the right axes for (a) Nematoda abundance at T1, (b) Bacterial diversity at T2, (c) Oribatida abundance at T2 and (d) Microbial respiration at T3. The distribution of Cohen's d is plotted on the axis on the right based on a bootstrap sampling distribution; the 95% confidence intervals are indicated by the ends of the vertical error bars. Raw data from each plot is shown in Control (Blue circle) and Roof (Orange circle) samples on the left axes.
Figure 4Spearman correlation matrices between all abundance, diversity and process-related dependent variables in the (a) conventional (N = 34–36) and (b) organic (N = 35–36) farming system. Cell colours indicate Spearman R-values according to the provided scale. Cells with asterisks indicate significant relationships after adjusting the P-values for multiple testing with to the Benjamini–Hochberg method and a False Discovery Rate of 0.05 (*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001). Numbers of individual variables correspond to numbers in Table 1.
Figure 5Based on pairwise correlations, the 26 analysed variables clustered into nine major bundles (numbers on the right and horizontal lines). The shade plot is based on individually standardized values for each dependent variable in Table 1 in all 72 samples (horizontal blocks) sorted by the factor “Farming System” (CONMIN, conventional vs. BIODYN, organic) within the factor “Time” (T1 to T3). The dendrogram and vertical order of the 26 dependent variables is based on a Spearman correlation matrix between all variables and a cluster analysis by group averaging (resulting clusters are highlighted by blue shading).