2020
DOI: 10.1111/nph.16920
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Limiting similarity shapes the functional and phylogenetic structure of root neighborhoods in a subtropical forest

Abstract: Environmental filtering and limiting similarity mechanisms can simultaneously structure community assemblages. However, how they shape the functional and phylogenetic structure of root neighborhoods remains unclear, hindering the understanding of belowground community assembly processes and diversity maintenance. In a 50-ha plot in a subtropical forest, China, we randomly sampled > 2700 root clusters from 625 soil samples. Focusing on 10 root functional traits measured on 76 woody species, we examined the func… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

4
49
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
4
49
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Plant origin had a much smaller effect on the composition of fungal communities, though two invasive plants developed distinct assemblages of fungi than other plants in the greenhouse experiment. In addition, we detected no differences in richness and alpha diversity of associated fungi between native and invasive plants on average, in agreement with other studies (Koyama et al, 2019; Luo et al, 2021). In particular, we found no differences in the numbers and relative abundances of general and family/species‐specific pathogens or mutualists associated with these native versus invasive plants in the field and the greenhouse experiment (in particular, part of these OTUs in both field survey and greenhouse experiment were from the same 59 genera), suggesting that native soil fungi might have developed new co‐evolutionary relationships with these invasive plants.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Plant origin had a much smaller effect on the composition of fungal communities, though two invasive plants developed distinct assemblages of fungi than other plants in the greenhouse experiment. In addition, we detected no differences in richness and alpha diversity of associated fungi between native and invasive plants on average, in agreement with other studies (Koyama et al, 2019; Luo et al, 2021). In particular, we found no differences in the numbers and relative abundances of general and family/species‐specific pathogens or mutualists associated with these native versus invasive plants in the field and the greenhouse experiment (in particular, part of these OTUs in both field survey and greenhouse experiment were from the same 59 genera), suggesting that native soil fungi might have developed new co‐evolutionary relationships with these invasive plants.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…However, such a pattern was absent for some functional guilds or at some latitudes and even reversed at 30.5°N for the overall and saprotrophic fungi, suggesting that some unexplored factors might have masked or even reversed such phylogenetic patterns in plant–soil fungi associations. In the field, a plant's rhizosphere microbiome could be affected by neighbouring plants, their effects could vary among functional guilds (Broz et al, 2007), and the roots of a plant were more likely to adjoin the roots of distant‐ versus closely related plants in the field, as predicted by the limiting similarity hypothesis (Luo et al, 2021). This might explain the observed departures in plant‐soil associations in this study and a meta‐analysis (Mehrabi & Tuck, 2015) of the expected phylogenetic conservatism.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Moreover, rather than being strongly constrained by abiotic conditions, root traits seem over‐dispersed along soil gradients. Instead, belowground acquisition strategies seem to be driven by limiting similarity processes (Luo et al 2022021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%