4.8 Article

Not just browsing: an animal that grazes phyllosphere microbes facilitates community heterogeneity

期刊

ISME JOURNAL
卷 11, 期 8, 页码 1788-1798

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/ismej.2017.52

关键词

-

资金

  1. US Army [W9126G-11-2-0066]
  2. Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawaii through the Pacific International Center for High Technology Research
  3. State of Hawaii, DLNR, Special Funds
  4. NSF [1255972]
  5. [PRJNA357010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although grazers have long been recognized as top-down architects of plant communities, animal roles in determining microbial community composition have seldom been examined, particularly in aboveground systems. To determine the extent to which an animal can shape microbial communities, we conducted a controlled mesocosm study in situ to see if introducing mycophageous tree snails changed phyllosphere fungal community composition relative to matched control mesocosms. Fungal community composition and change was determined by Illumina sequencing of DNA collected from leaf surfaces before snails were introduced, daily for 3 days and weekly for 6 weeks thereafter. Scanning electron microscopy was used to confirm that grazing had occurred, and we recorded 3.5 times more cover of fungal hyphae in control mesocosms compared with those containing snails. Snails do not appear to vector novel microbes and despite grazing, a significant proportion of the initial leaf phyllosphere persisted in the mesocosms. Within-mesocosm diversities of fungi were similar regardless of whether or not snails were added. The greatest differences between the snail-treated and control mesocosms was that grazed mesocosms showed greater infiltration of microbes that were not sampled when the experiment commenced and that the variance in fungal community composition (beta diversity) was greater between leaves in snail-treated mesocosms indicating increased community heterogeneity and ecosystem fragmentation.

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

4.8
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