4.5 Article

Characterizing fine-root traits by species phylogeny and microbial symbiosis in 11 co-existing woody species

期刊

OECOLOGIA
卷 191, 期 4, 页码 983-993

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00442-019-04546-2

关键词

Mycorrhiza; Root anatomy; Economic spectrum; Root morphology; Taxonomy

类别

资金

  1. Fujiwara Natural History Foundation [15K18719, 18K14488]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding the differences in fine-root traits among different species is essential to gain a detailed understanding of resource conservation and acquisition strategies of plants. We aimed to explore whether certain root traits are consistent among subsets of species and characterize species together into meaningful community groups. We selected 11 woody species from different microbial symbiotic groups (ectomycorrhiza, arbuscular mycorrhiza, and rhizobia) and phylogenetic groups (broad-leaved angiosperms and coniferous gymnosperms) from the cool temperate forests of Nagano, Japan. We measured root architectural (branching intensity), morphological (root tissue density and specific root length), chemical (N and K concentrations), and anatomical (total stele and total cortex) traits. Significant differences were observed in all root traits, although many species did not differ from one another. Branching intensity was found to be the greatest variation in the measured root traits across the 11 woody species. The results of a principal component analysis of root traits showed a distinct separation between angiosperms and gymnosperms. We identified clusters of species based on their multidimensional root traits that were consistent with the different phylogenetic microbial association groups. Gymnosperm roots may be more resource conservative, while angiosperm roots may be more acquisitive for water and nutrients. We consider that the advances in root traits combination will make a breakthrough in our ability to differentiate the community groups rather than individual root trait.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据