Limits...
Dissecting Solidago canadensis – soil feedback in its real invasion

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

The importance of plant–soil feedback (PSF) has long been recognized, but the current knowledge on PSF patterns and the related mechanisms mainly stems from laboratory experiments. We aimed at addressing PSF effects on community performance and their determinants using an invasive forb Solidago canadensis. To do so, we surveyed 81 pairs of invaded versus uninvaded plots, collected soil samples from these pairwise plots, and performed an experiment with microcosm plant communities. The magnitudes of conditioning soil abiotic properties and soil biotic properties by S. canadensis were similar, but the direction was opposite; altered abiotic and biotic properties influenced the production of subsequent S. canadensis communities and its abundance similarly. These processes shaped neutral S. canadensis–soil feedback effects at the community level. Additionally, the relative dominance of S. canadensis increased with its ability of competitive suppression in the absence and presence of S. canadensis–soil feedbacks, and S. canadensis‐induced decreases in native plant species did not alter soil properties directly. These findings provide a basis for understanding PSF effects and the related mechanisms in the field conditions and also highlight the importance of considering PSFs holistically.

No MeSH data available.


Total biomass of microcosm Solidago communities (also termed as mixtures: plant communities consisting of Solidago and three Chinese natives) (a) and relative abundance of Solidago in mixtures (b) grown in uninvaded and invaded soils. Data are means ± 1 SE (n = 81). Abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect in two soils indicate how Solidago‐induced changes in soil abiotic properties, soil biotic properties, and soil abiotic and biotic properties influence the Solidago community production and the relative abundance of Solidago in mixtures. See Section 2 for more details on determining abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect
© Copyright Policy - creativeCommonsBy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5383496&req=5

ece32743-fig-0002: Total biomass of microcosm Solidago communities (also termed as mixtures: plant communities consisting of Solidago and three Chinese natives) (a) and relative abundance of Solidago in mixtures (b) grown in uninvaded and invaded soils. Data are means ± 1 SE (n = 81). Abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect in two soils indicate how Solidago‐induced changes in soil abiotic properties, soil biotic properties, and soil abiotic and biotic properties influence the Solidago community production and the relative abundance of Solidago in mixtures. See Section 2 for more details on determining abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect

Mentions: Soil nutrients and microbes were variable depending on sampling locations (Tables S2 and S3). In terms of the total biomass of Solidago communities consisting of Solidago and three Chinese natives, the abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect were similar between invaded soils and uninvaded soils (Table 1: all p > .05; Figure 2a). Accordingly, Solidago–soil feedbacks had no influences on its subsequent community production. The relative abundance of Solidago was smaller in invaded soils than in uninvaded soils when soil abiotic properties were present only, and the opposite was the case when soil biotic properties were present only (Table 1: both p < .05; Figure 2b). The relative abundance of Solidago was similar between invaded regular soils and uninvaded regular soils (Table 1: p = .994; Figure 2b), suggesting that soil abiotic effects and soil biotic effects could offset each other.


Dissecting Solidago canadensis – soil feedback in its real invasion
Total biomass of microcosm Solidago communities (also termed as mixtures: plant communities consisting of Solidago and three Chinese natives) (a) and relative abundance of Solidago in mixtures (b) grown in uninvaded and invaded soils. Data are means ± 1 SE (n = 81). Abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect in two soils indicate how Solidago‐induced changes in soil abiotic properties, soil biotic properties, and soil abiotic and biotic properties influence the Solidago community production and the relative abundance of Solidago in mixtures. See Section 2 for more details on determining abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect
© Copyright Policy - creativeCommonsBy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5383496&req=5

ece32743-fig-0002: Total biomass of microcosm Solidago communities (also termed as mixtures: plant communities consisting of Solidago and three Chinese natives) (a) and relative abundance of Solidago in mixtures (b) grown in uninvaded and invaded soils. Data are means ± 1 SE (n = 81). Abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect in two soils indicate how Solidago‐induced changes in soil abiotic properties, soil biotic properties, and soil abiotic and biotic properties influence the Solidago community production and the relative abundance of Solidago in mixtures. See Section 2 for more details on determining abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect
Mentions: Soil nutrients and microbes were variable depending on sampling locations (Tables S2 and S3). In terms of the total biomass of Solidago communities consisting of Solidago and three Chinese natives, the abiotic effect, biotic effect, and total effect were similar between invaded soils and uninvaded soils (Table 1: all p > .05; Figure 2a). Accordingly, Solidago–soil feedbacks had no influences on its subsequent community production. The relative abundance of Solidago was smaller in invaded soils than in uninvaded soils when soil abiotic properties were present only, and the opposite was the case when soil biotic properties were present only (Table 1: both p < .05; Figure 2b). The relative abundance of Solidago was similar between invaded regular soils and uninvaded regular soils (Table 1: p = .994; Figure 2b), suggesting that soil abiotic effects and soil biotic effects could offset each other.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

The importance of plant&ndash;soil feedback (PSF) has long been recognized, but the current knowledge on PSF patterns and the related mechanisms mainly stems from laboratory experiments. We aimed at addressing PSF effects on community performance and their determinants using an invasive forb Solidago canadensis. To do so, we surveyed 81 pairs of invaded versus uninvaded plots, collected soil samples from these pairwise plots, and performed an experiment with microcosm plant communities. The magnitudes of conditioning soil abiotic properties and soil biotic properties by S.&nbsp;canadensis were similar, but the direction was opposite; altered abiotic and biotic properties influenced the production of subsequent S.&nbsp;canadensis communities and its abundance similarly. These processes shaped neutral S.&nbsp;canadensis&ndash;soil feedback effects at the community level. Additionally, the relative dominance of S.&nbsp;canadensis increased with its ability of competitive suppression in the absence and presence of S.&nbsp;canadensis&ndash;soil feedbacks, and S.&nbsp;canadensis&#8208;induced decreases in native plant species did not alter soil properties directly. These findings provide a basis for understanding PSF effects and the related mechanisms in the field conditions and also highlight the importance of considering PSFs holistically.

No MeSH data available.