Impact of fresh root material and mature crop residues of oilseed rape (Brassica napus) on microbial communities associated with subsequent oilseed rape

Bennett, Amanda J.; Hilton, Sally; Bending, Gary D.; Chandler, David; Mills, Peter R.

doi:10.1007/s00374-014-0934-7

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even with a relatively low Good's coverage (0.62) for fungi, due to subsampling to 123 reads per sample, the analysis showed that the situation was quite different with the canola fungal core microbiome. In previous studies (Bennett et al, 2014 ; Tkacz et al, 2015 ; Gkarmiri et al, 2017 ), O. brassicae , a fungal parasite, was found to be the dominant and most active fungal species in the canola rhizosphere and root environments. Our results confirmed these findings; moreover, in our study, it was the only fungus forming the core microbiome of canola roots.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Canola Root–Associated Microbiomes in the Canadian Prairies

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Canola is one of the most economically important crops in Canada, and the root and rhizosphere microbiomes of a canola plant likely impact its growth and nutrient uptake. The aim of this study was to determine whether canola has a core root microbiome (i.e., set of microbes that are consistently selected in the root environment), and whether this is distinct from the core microbiomes of other crops that are commonly grown in the Canadian Prairies, pea, and wheat. We also assessed whether selected agronomic treatments can modify the canola microbiome, and whether this was associated to enhanced yield. We used a field experiment with a randomized complete block design, which was repeated at three locations across the canola-growing zone of Canada. Roots and rhizosphere soil were harvested at the flowering stage of canola. We separately isolated total extractable DNA from plant roots and from adjacent rhizosphere soil, and constructed MiSeq amplicon libraries for each of 60 samples, targeting bacterial, and archaeal 16S rRNA genes and the fungal ITS region. We determined that the microbiome of the roots and rhizosphere of canola was consistently different from those of wheat and pea. These microbiomes comprise several putative plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria, including Amycolatopsis sp., Serratia proteamaculans, Pedobacter sp., Arthrobacter sp., Stenotrophomonas sp., Fusarium merismoides, and Fusicolla sp., which correlated positively with canola yield. Crop species had a significant influence on bacterial and fungal assemblages, especially within the roots, while higher nutrient input or seeding density did not significantly alter the global composition of bacterial, fungal, or archaeal assemblages associated with canola roots. However, the relative abundance of Olpidium brassicae, a known pathogen of members of the Brassicaceae, was significantly reduced in the roots of canola planted at higher seeding density. Our results suggest that seeding density and plant nutrition management modified the abundance of other bacterial and fungal taxa forming the core microbiomes of canola that are expected to impact crop growth. This work helps us to understand the microbial assemblages associated with canola grown under common agronomic practices and indicates microorganisms that can potentially benefit or reduce the yield of canola.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Canola Root–Associated Microbiomes in the Canadian Prairies

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An increase in the frequency of oilseed rape ( Brassica napus ) in wheat-oilseed-based rotations is reported to significantly affect soil fungal communities (Hilton et al, 2013). Reduced diversity among soil fungal and rhizosphere bacterial communities associated with Brassica plants has also been observed (Bennett et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a rotational crop, however, the seed is harvested and the residue material is left on the soil surface, rather than incorporated. Therefore, any influence on soil microbial communities relies on GSLs, ITCs, or other compounds released through leaf washings (Walsh et al, 2014), root exudates (Marschner et al, 2001), or detached root material (Bennett et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil Microbial Biomass and Fungi Reduced With Canola Introduced Into Long-Term Monoculture Wheat Rotations

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With increasing canola ( Brassica napus L.) acreage in the Inland Pacific Northwest of the USA, we investigated the effect of this relatively new rotational crop on soil microbial communities and the performance of subsequent wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) crops. In a 6-year on-farm canola-wheat rotation study conducted near Davenport, WA, grain yields of spring wheat (SW) following winter canola (WC) were reduced an average of 17% compared to SW yields following winter wheat (WW). Using soil samples collected and analyzed every year from that study, the objective of this research was to determine the differences and similarities in the soil microbial communities associated with WC and WW, and if those differences were associated with SW yield response. Microbial biomass and community composition were determined using phospholipid fatty acid analysis (PLFA). The WC-associated microbial community contained significantly less fungi, mycorrhizae, and total microbial biomass than WW. Additionally, reduced fungal and mycorrhizal abundance in SW following WC suggests that the canola rotation effect can persist. A biocidal secondary metabolite of canola, isothiocyanate, may be a potential mechanism mediating the decline in soil microbial biomass. These results demonstrate the relationship between soil microbial community composition and crop productivity. Our data suggest that WC can have significant effects on soil microbial communities that ultimately drive microbially mediated soil processes.

show abstract

“…Whether brassicas in the cover crop are as effective as Brassica plant litter in suppressing fungal pathogens is not clear. While decomposing Brassica litter can dramatically decrease fungal diversity (Hollister et al 2013;Mazzola et al 2015), living brassicas may not be broadly anti-fungal as they are susceptible to specific fungal pathogens, e.g., Olpidium brassicae (Bennett et al 2014). Further, some diseaseprotective fungi, such as Trichoderma, have been shown to respond positively to both seed meal (Galletti et al 2008) and living Brassica plants ( Kirkegaard et al 2004).…”

Section: Brassicasmentioning

confidence: 99%