2019
DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2019.00168
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Role of Plant Litter in Driving Plant-Soil Feedbacks

Abstract: Most studies focusing on plant-soil feedbacks (PSFs) have considered direct interactions between plants, abiotic conditions (e. g., soil nutrients) and rhizosphere communities (e.g., pathogens, mutualists). However, few studies have addressed the role of indirect interactions mediated by plant litter inputs. This is problematic because it has left a major gap in our understanding of PSFs in natural ecosystems, where plant litter is a key component of feedback effects. Here, we propose a new conceptual framewor… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
81
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 101 publications
(86 citation statements)
references
References 113 publications
3
81
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The bacterial abundance (as expressed by bacterial 16S rRNA gene copy number) was not significantly affected by sampling distance but tended to be highest at a distance of 35 cm from Anthyllis at RH and 35 cm from Macrochloa at AB (Supplementary Figure S4A). These findings do not fully support our hypothesis of an overall effect of sampling distance driven by canopy coverage and plant litter input (Goberna et al, 2007;Fierer, 2017;Tecon and Or, 2017;Veen et al, 2019). Nevertheless, a minor effect of plants on the soil prokaryotic community was found and further studies might reveal larger differences between plant species when considering the rhizosphere.…”
Section: Microaggregation and Microaggregate Stability As Explained Bcontrasting
confidence: 83%
“…The bacterial abundance (as expressed by bacterial 16S rRNA gene copy number) was not significantly affected by sampling distance but tended to be highest at a distance of 35 cm from Anthyllis at RH and 35 cm from Macrochloa at AB (Supplementary Figure S4A). These findings do not fully support our hypothesis of an overall effect of sampling distance driven by canopy coverage and plant litter input (Goberna et al, 2007;Fierer, 2017;Tecon and Or, 2017;Veen et al, 2019). Nevertheless, a minor effect of plants on the soil prokaryotic community was found and further studies might reveal larger differences between plant species when considering the rhizosphere.…”
Section: Microaggregation and Microaggregate Stability As Explained Bcontrasting
confidence: 83%
“…Over time, the improved soil conditions increase net primary productivity (NPP) and overall ecosystem functioning of the gardening or landscaping habitats [11]. As reported for natural ecosystems, the pedogenic and floral components of the system tend to strengthen each other through a web of positive feedbacks [7,21], generating the formation of "fertility islands" [22], in which pedogenesis and vegetation productivity continuously foster each other (Figure 3). Such a mechanism can be clearly demonstrated for spontaneously established vegetation, which acts as a trap for aeolian or alluvially transported plant litter (Figure 4).…”
Section: Benefits Of On-site Use Of Plant Litter and Yard Waste As Mulchmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Plant debris in minimum‐tillage and no‐tillage systems may enhance slow‐release of infochemicals. Plant debris can affect the next crop by modifying the soil microbiome community and activity, by increasing soil fertility, or by acting as an infochemical source (Veen et al, 2019; Wang, Wu, et al, 2020).…”
Section: Wireless Communication: Signal Input‐transfer‐output Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%