PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 14, 2024New Phytologist5 citationsOpen Access

Temperate trees locally engineer decomposition and litter‐bound microbiomes through differential litter deposits and species‐specific soil conditioning

View Full Paper
CYCaylon F. YatesWKWilliam L. KingSRSarah C. Richards

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Summary Leaf decomposition varies widely across temperate forests, shaped by factors like litter quality, climate, soil properties, and decomposers, but forest heterogeneity may mask local tree influences on decomposition and litter‐associated microbiomes. We used a 24‐yr‐old common garden forest to quantify local soil conditioning impacts on decomposition and litter microbiology. We introduced leaf litter bags from 10 tree species (5 arbuscular mycorrhizal; 5 ectomycorrhizal) to soil plots conditioned by all 10 species in a full‐factorial design. After 6 months, we assessed litter mass loss, C/N content, and bacterial and fungal composition. We hypothesized that (1) decomposition and litter‐associated microbiome composition would be primarily shaped by the mycorrhizal type of litter‐producing trees , but (2) modified significantly by underlying soil, based on mycorrhizal type of the conditioning trees . Decomposition and, to a lesser extent, litter‐associated microbiome composition, were primarily influenced by the mycorrhizal type of litter‐producing trees. Interestingly, however, underlying soils had a significant secondary influence, driven mainly by tree species, not mycorrhizal type. This secondary influence was strongest under trees from the Pinaceae. Temperate trees can locally influence underlying soil to alter decomposition and litter‐associated microbiology. Understanding the strength of this effect will help predict biogeochemical responses to forest compositional change.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Yates et al. (2024) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e64b29b6db6435875db896https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.19900
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1ITS primers with enhanced specificity for basidiomycetes ‐ application to the identification of mycorrhizae and rusts1993 · 10,527 citations
  2. 2Soil carbon mineralisation responses to alterations of microbial diversity and soil structure2013 · 59 citations
  3. 3Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Tree Communities Have Greater Soil Fungal Diversity and Relative Abundances of Saprotrophs and Pathogens than Ectomycorrhizal Tree Communities2021 · 64 citations
  4. 4Litter species richness and composition effects on fungal richness and community structure in decomposing foliar and root litter2018 · 101 citations
  5. 5Litter and root traits control soil microbial composition and enzyme activities in 28 common subtropical tree species2022 · 46 citations