Search for: All records

Summary Dispersal is a key process driving local‐scale community assembly and global‐scale biogeography of plant symbiotic arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungal communities. A trait‐based approach could improve predictions regarding how AM fungal aerial dispersal varies by species.We conducted month‐long collections of aerial AM fungi for 12 consecutive months in an urban mesic environment at heights of 20 m. We measured morphological functional traits of collected spores and assessed aerial AM fungal community structure both morphologically and with high‐throughput sequencing.Large numbers of AM fungal spores were present in the air over the course of 1 yr, and these spores exhibited traits that facilitate aerial dispersal. Measured aerial spores were smaller than average for Glomeromycotinan fungi. Trait‐based predictions indicate that nearly one third of described species from diverse genera demonstrate the potential for aerial dispersal. Diversity of aerial AM fungi was relatively high (20 spore species and 17 virtual taxa), and both spore abundance and community structure shifted temporally.The prevalence of aerial dispersal in AM fungi is perhaps greater than previously indicated, and a hypothesized model of AM fungal aerial dispersal mechanisms is presented. Anthropogenic soil impacts may liberate AM fungal propagules initiating the dispersal of ruderal species. 

Abstract Understanding the importance of biotic interactions in driving the distribution and abundance of species is a central goal of plant ecology. Early vascular plants likely colonized land occupied by biocrusts — photoautotrophic, surface‐dwelling soil communities comprised of cyanobacteria, bryophytes, lichens and fungi — suggesting biotic interactions between biocrusts and plants have been at play for some 2,000 million years. Today, biocrusts coexist with plants in dryland ecosystems worldwide, and have been shown to both facilitate or inhibit plant species performance depending on ecological context. Yet, the factors that drive the direction and magnitude of these effects remain largely unknown.We conducted a meta‐analysis of plant responses to biocrusts using a global dataset encompassing 1,004 studies from six continents.Meta‐analysis revealed there is no simple positive or negative effect of biocrusts on plants. Rather, plant responses differ by biocrust composition and plant species traits and vary across plant ontogeny. Moss‐dominated biocrusts facilitated, while lichen‐dominated biocrusts inhibited overall plant performance. Plant responses also varied among plant functional groups: C₄grasses received greater benefits from biocrusts compared to C₃grasses, and plants without N‐fixing symbionts responded more positively to biocrusts than plants with N‐fixing symbionts. Biocrusts decreased germination but facilitated growth of non‐native plant species.Synthesis. Results suggest that interspecific variation in plant responses to biocrusts, contingent on biocrust type, plant traits, and ontogeny can have strong impacts on plant species performance. These findings have important implications for understanding biocrust contributions to plant productivity and community assembly processes in ecosystems worldwide. 

Summary A recent study by Sugiura and coworkers reported the non‐symbiotic growth and spore production of an arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungus,Rhizophagus irregularis, when the fungus received an external supply of certain fatty acids, myristates (C:14). This discovery follows the insight that AM fungi receive fatty acids from their hosts when in symbiosis. If this result holds up and can be repeated under nonsterile conditions and with a broader range of fungi, it has numerous consequences for our understanding of AM fungal ecology, from the level of the fungus, at the plant community level, and to functional consequences in ecosystems. In addition, myristate may open up several avenues from a more applied perspective, including improved fungal culture and supplementation of AM fungi or inoculum in the field. We here map these potential opportunities, and additionally offer thoughts on potential risks of this potentially new technology. Lastly, we discuss the specific research challenges that need to be overcome to come to an understanding of the potential role of myristate in AM ecology. 

When running a lab we do not think about calamities, since they are rare events for which we cannot plan while we are busy with the day-to-day management and intellectual challenges of a research lab. No lab team can be prepared for something like a pandemic such as COVID-19, which has led to shuttered labs around the globe. But many other types of crises can also arise that labs may have to weather during their lifetime. What can researchers do to make a lab more resilient in the face of such exterior forces? What systems or behaviors could we adjust in ‘normal’ times that promote lab success, and increase the chances that the lab will stay on its trajectory? We offer 10 rules, based on our current experiences as a lab group adapting to crisis. 

Drylands encompass over 40% of terrestrial ecosystems and face significant anthropogenic degradation causing a loss of ecosystem integrity, services, and deterioration of social‐ecological systems. To combat this degradation, some dryland restoration efforts have focused on the use of biological soil crusts (biocrusts): complex communities of cyanobacteria, algae, lichens, bryophytes, and other organisms living in association with the top millimeters of soil. Biocrusts are common in many ecosystems and especially drylands. They perform a suite of ecosystem functions: stabilizing soil surfaces to prevent erosion, contributing carbon through photosynthesis, fixing nitrogen, and mediating the hydrological cycle in drylands. Biocrusts have emerged as a potential tool in restoration; developing methods to implement effective biocrust restoration has the potential to return many ecosystem functions and services. Although culture‐based approaches have allowed researchers to learn about the biology, physiology, and cultivation of biocrusts, transferring this knowledge to field implementation has been more challenging. A large amount of research has amassed to improve our understanding of biocrust restoration, leaving us at an opportune time to learn from one another and to join approaches for maximum efficacy. The articles in this special issue improve the state of our current knowledge in biocrust restoration, highlighting efforts to effectively restore biocrusts through a variety of different ecosystems, across scales and utilizing a variety of lab and field methods. This collective work provides a useful resource for the scientific community as well as land managers. 

Biological soil crusts (biocrusts) and arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi are communities of soil organisms often targeted to assist in the achievement of multiple ecological restoration goals. In drylands, benefits conferred from biocrust and AM fungal inoculation, such as improved native plant establishment and soil stabilization, have primarily been studied separately. However, comparisons between these two types of soil inoculants and investigations into potential synergies between them, particularly at the plant community scale, are needed to inform on‐the‐ground management practices in drylands. We conducted two full‐factorial experiments—one in greenhouse mesocosms and one in field plots—to test the effects of AM fungal inoculation, biocrust inoculation, and their interaction on multiple measures of dryland restoration success. Biocrust inoculation promoted soil stabilization and plant drought tolerance, but had mixed effects on native plant diversity (positive in greenhouse, neutral in field) and productivity (negative in greenhouse, neutral in field). In greenhouse mesocosms, biocrust inoculation reduced plant biomass, which was antagonistic to % root length colonized by AM fungi. Inoculation with native or commercial AM fungi did not influence plant establishment, drought tolerance, or soil stabilization in either study, and few synergistic effects of simultaneous inoculation of AM fungi and biocrusts were observed. These results suggest that, depending on the condition of existing soil communities, inoculation with AM fungi may not be necessary to promote dryland restoration goals, while inoculation with salvaged biocrust inoculation may be beneficial in some contexts.