Soil Fungal Community Composition Correlates with Site-Specific Abiotic Factors, Tree Community Structure, and Forest Age in Regenerating Tropical Rainforests.
Costa Rica
ITS
Pacific wet forest
biodiversity
forest communities
impact of disturbance
succession dynamics
tropical ecology
Journal
Biology
ISSN: 2079-7737
Titre abrégé: Biology (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101587988
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 Oct 2021
31 Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
30
09
2021
revised:
27
10
2021
accepted:
29
10
2021
entrez:
27
11
2021
pubmed:
28
11
2021
medline:
28
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Successional dynamics of plants and animals during tropical forest regeneration have been thoroughly studied, while fungal compositional dynamics during tropical forest succession remain unknown, despite the crucial roles of fungi in ecological processes. We combined tree data and soil fungal DNA metabarcoding data to compare richness and community composition along secondary forest succession in Costa Rica and assessed the potential roles of abiotic factors influencing them. We found a strong coupling of tree and soil fungal community structure in wet tropical primary and regenerating secondary forests. Forest age, edaphic variables, and regional differences in climatic conditions all had significant effects on tree and fungal richness and community composition in all functional groups. Furthermore, we observed larger site-to-site compositional differences and greater influence of edaphic and climatic factors in secondary than in primary forests. The results suggest greater environmental heterogeneity and greater stochasticity in community assembly in the early stages of secondary forest succession and a certain convergence on a set of taxa with a competitive advantage in the more persisting environmental conditions in old-growth forests. Our work provides unprecedented insights into the successional dynamics of fungal communities during secondary tropical forest succession.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34827113
pii: biology10111120
doi: 10.3390/biology10111120
pmc: PMC8614695
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : Naturalis Biodiversity Center
ID : Naturalis Research Initiative grant
Références
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2012 Dec;82(3):666-77
pubmed: 22738186
New Phytol. 2010 Jul;187(2):494-507
pubmed: 20487310
Trends Ecol Evol. 1996 Mar;11(3):119-24
pubmed: 21237778
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 10;10(6):e0126748
pubmed: 26061884
Sci Rep. 2018 Feb 28;8(1):3819
pubmed: 29491428
ISME J. 2014 Jul;8(7):1548-50
pubmed: 24451208
Microb Ecol. 2012 May;63(4):804-12
pubmed: 22080256
Science. 2010 Jul 16;329(5989):330-2
pubmed: 20576853
Ecol Lett. 2014 Sep;17(9):1158-67
pubmed: 24986005
Ecol Appl. 2016 Sep;26(6):1881-1895
pubmed: 27755697
PeerJ. 2016 Oct 18;4:e2584
pubmed: 27781170
Oecologia. 2002 Jan;130(1):1-14
pubmed: 28547014
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Jun 30;112(26):8013-8
pubmed: 26080411
Science. 2014 Nov 28;346(6213):1256688
pubmed: 25430773
Ecology. 2009 Dec;90(12):3566-74
pubmed: 20120823
Mol Ecol. 2013 Nov;22(21):5271-7
pubmed: 24112409
New Phytol. 2007;176(2):437-447
pubmed: 17888121
Mol Ecol. 2014 May;23(10):2452-72
pubmed: 24762095
Ecol Lett. 2010 Oct;13(10):1262-9
pubmed: 20718845
ISME J. 2013 Sep;7(9):1852-61
pubmed: 23598789
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2014 Oct;90(1):313-25
pubmed: 25056806
New Phytol. 2010 Oct;188(1):223-41
pubmed: 20561207
Science. 1978 Mar 24;199(4335):1302-10
pubmed: 17840770
Nature. 2014 Nov 27;515(7528):505-11
pubmed: 25428498
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2007 Feb 28;362(1478):273-89
pubmed: 17255036
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2016 Jan;92(1):
pubmed: 26622067
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Nov 20;104(47):18555-60
pubmed: 18003934
Ecol Lett. 2006 May;9(5):569-74
pubmed: 16643302