Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T13:14:25.883Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ectomycorrhizal fungi in mineral soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

A. Rosling  and
N. Rosenstock
A. Rosling*
Affiliation:
Department of Forest Mycology and Pathology, SLU, Box 7026, 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
N. Rosenstock
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, UC Berkeley, 321 Koshland Hall, Berkeley Ca, 94720, USA
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ectomycorrhizal fungi are mutualistic symbionts of many forest trees and play a major role in nutrient uptake. They form diverse communities in boreal forest soils but functional differences within this group of fungi remain largely unknown. We study ectomycorrhzal fungi in mineral soil to determine how abiotic preferences influence their spatial distribution in stratified soil profiles. This is achieved by correlative field studies of species distribution and soil characteristics at a spatial resolution relevant to soil heterogeneity and mycelial size. Field sampling strategies are being evaluated to establish a protocol for simultaneous small-sample analysis of ectomycorrhizal community and soil chemical variables. Species-specific substrate preferences are examined by studies of regulation of enzymatic and biogeochemical activity in response to relevant organic and inorganic sources of phosphorus. Studies of four species in the genus Piloderma have demonstrated that different strategies to obtain phosphorus are reflected by their spatial distribution in a podzol soil profile.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 72 , Issue 1 , February 2008 , pp. 127 - 130
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahonen-Jonnarth, U., van Hees, P.A.W., Lundstrom, U.S. and Finlay, R.D. (2000) Organic acids produced by mycorrhizal Pinus sylvestri. exposed to elevated aluminium and heavy metal concentrations. New Phytologist, 146, 557–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bending, G.D. and Read, DJ. (1995) The structure and function of the vegetative mycelium of ectomycorrhizal plants. V. Foraging behaviour and transloca-tion of nutrients from exploited litter. New Phytologist, 130, 401–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cosgrove, DJ. (1967) Metabolism of organic phosphates in soil. In: Soil Biochemistry. (:McLauren, A.C. and Peterson, G.H., editors). Marcel Dekker, New York, USA.Google Scholar
Frossard, E., Brossard, M., Hedley, MJ. and Metherell, A. (1995) Reactions controlling the cycling of P in soils. Pp.107–138 in: Phosphorus in the Global Environmen. (H. Tiessen, editor). John Wiley and Sons Ltd, New York.Google Scholar
Griffiths, R.P., Baham, J.E and Caldwell, B.A. (1994) Soil solution chemistry of ectomycorrhizal mats in forest soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 26, 331–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grogan, P., Baar, J. and Bruns, T.D. (2000) Below-ground ectomycorrhizal community structure in a recently burned bishop pine forest. Journal of Ecology, 88, 1051–1062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Häussling, M. and Marschner, H. (1989) Organic and inorganic soil phosphates and acid phosphatase activity in the rhizosphere of 80-year-old Norway spruce [Picea abies (L.) Karst] trees. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 8, 128–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmström, S.J.M., Norström, S., Lundström, U. and Rosling, A. (2008) Functional diversity in the genus Piloderma, liking vertical distribution in soil to the production of LMWOA and Siderophores. In prep. Google Scholar
Koide, R.T., Xu, B., Sharda, J., Lekberg, Y. and Ostiguy, N. (2005) Evidence of species interactions within an ectomycorrhizal fungal community. New Phytologist, 165, 305–316.Google ScholarPubMed
Lilleskov, E.A., Fahey, T.J., Horton, T.R. and Lovett, G.M. (2002) Belowground ectomycorrhizal fungal community change over a nitrogen deposition gradient in Alaska. Ecology, 83, 104–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nygren, C.M.R. and Rosling, A. (2008) Phosphorus use by ectomycorrhizal fungi: spatial phosphomonoes-terase activity and growth on different phosphor sources. Fungal Ecology, (submitted).Google Scholar
Perez-Moreno, J. and Read, DJ. (2000) Mobilization and transfer of nutrients from litter to tree seedlings via the vegetative mycelium of ectomycorrhizal plants. New Phytologist, 145, 301–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, A.E. (1994) Soil microorganisms and phosphorus availability. Pp. 50–62 in: Soil Biota Management in Sustainable Farming System. (Pankhurst, C.E., Doulse, B.M. Gupta, V.V.S.R. and Grace, P.R. editors). CSIRO, Australia.Google Scholar
Rosling, A., Landeweert, R., Lindahl, B.D., Larsson, K.-H., Kuyper, T.W., Taylor, A.F.S. and Finlay, R.D. (2003) Vertical distribution of ectomycorrhizal fungal taxa in a podzol soil profile. New Phytologist, 159, 775–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosling, A., Suttle, K.B., Johansson, E., van Hees, P.A.W. and Banfield, J.F. (2007) Phosphorus availability affects soil fungal dissolution of apatite. Geobiology, 5, 265–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tedersoo, L., Koljalg, U., Hallenberg, N., Larsson, K.-H. (2003) Fine scale distribution of ectomycorrhizal fungi and roots across substrate layers including coarse woody debris in a mixed forest. New Phytologist, 159, 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Hees, P.A.W., Lundstrom, U.S. and Giesler, R. (2000) Low molecular weight organic acids and their Al-complexes in soil solution — composition, distribution and seasonal variation in three podzo-lized soils. Geoderma, 94, 173–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Hees, P.A.W., Rosling, A., Essén, S., Godbold, D.L., Jones, D.L. and Finlay, R. (2005) Oxalate and ferricrocin exudation by the extrametrical mycelium of ectomycorrhizal fungi in symbiosis wit. Pinus sylvestris. New Phytologist, 169, 367–378.Google Scholar