Summary 1.Although anthropogenic edges are an important consequence of timber harvesting, edges due to natural disturbances or landscape heterogeneity are also common. Forest edges have been well studied in temperate and tropical forests, but less so in less productive, disturbance-adapted boreal forests. 2. We synthesized data on forest vegetation at edges of boreal forests and compared edge influence among edge types (fire, cut, lake/wetland; old vs. young), forest types (broadleaf vs. coniferous) and geographic regions. Our objectives were to quantify vegetation responses at edges of all types and to compare the strength and extent of edge influence among different types of edges and forests. 3. Research was conducted using the same general sampling design in Alberta, Ontario and Quebec in Canada, and in Sweden and Finland. We conducted a meta-analysis for a variety of response variables including forest structure, deadwood abundance, regeneration, understorey abundance and diversity, and non-vascular plant cover. We also determined the magnitude and distance of edge influence (DEI) using randomization tests. 4. Some edge responses (lower tree basal area, tree canopy and bryophyte cover; more logs; higher regeneration) were significant overall across studies. Edge influence on ground vegetation in boreal forests was generally weak, not very extensive (DEI usually < 20 m) and decreased with time. We found more extensive edge influence at natural edges, at younger edges and in broadleaf forests. The comparison among regions revealed weaker edge influence in Fennoscandian forests. 5. Synthesis. Edges created by forest harvesting do not appear to have as strong, extensive or persistent influence on vegetation in boreal as in tropical or temperate forested ecosystems. We attribute this apparent resistance to shorter canopy heights, inherent heterogeneity in boreal forests and their adaptation to frequent natural disturbance. Nevertheless, notable differences between forest structure responses to natural (fire) and anthropogenic (cut) edges raise concerns about biodiversity implications of extensive creation of anthropogenic edges. By highlighting universal responses to edge influence in boreal forests that are significant irrespective of edge or forest type, and those which vary by edge type, we provide a context for the conservation of boreal forests.
Plants are colonized by diverse assemblages of fungal endophytes that have potential as biocontrol agents for a variety of crops, including grapevine. Although the diversity of symbionts can be very high in wild plants, the fungal endophytes of wild Vitis plants have not yet been investigated. We surveyed the fungal endophytes of 6 wild populations of Vitis riparia, as well as a cold-tolerant, hybrid grapevine in 5 vineyards (1 certified organic), using 454 pyrosequencing. We detected between 43 and 235 operational taxonomic units per sample, with the highest richness and diversity in the wild, the lowest in conventional vineyards, and intermediate levels in the organic vineyard. Wild plants supported a range of taxa not seen in the conventional vineyards, and vineyards were dominated by relatively few taxa. We also isolated fungi from the wild plants and tested them for their ability to inhibit pathogens of grapevine. Several wild isolates (e.g., Ramularia spp.) were strongly inhibitory to grapevine pathogens. We show that wild Vitis supports a distinct and highly diverse community of fungal endophytes and may represent a rich repository of potential vineyard biocontrol agents.
Fungal endophytes are ubiquitous in healthy root tissue, but little is known about their ecosystem functions, including their ability to utilize organic nutrient sources such as proteins. Root-associated fungi may secrete proteases to access the carbon and mineral nutrients within proteins in the soil or in the cells of their plant host. We compared the protein utilization patterns of multiple isolates of the root endophytes Phialocephala fortinii s.l., Meliniomyces variabilis and Umbelopsis isabellina with those of two ectomycorrhizal (ECM) fungi, Hebeloma incarnatulum and Laccaria bicolor, and the wood-decay fungus Irpex lacteus at pH values of 2-9 on liquid BSA media. We also assessed protease activity using a fluorescently labeled casein assay and gelatin zymography and characterized proteases using specific protease inhibitors. I. lacteus and U. isabellina utilized protein efficiently, while the ECM fungi exhibited poor protein utilization. ECM fungi secreted metallo-proteases and had pH optima above 4, while other fungi produced aspartic proteases with lower pH optima. The ascomycetous root endophytes M. variabilis and P. fortinii exhibited intermediate levels of protein utilization and M. variabilis exhibited a very low pH optimum. Comparing proteolytic profiles between fungal root endophytes and fungi with well defined ecological roles provides insight into the ecology of these cryptic root associates.
This chapter describes a method for the production and characterization of fungal acid proteases. Protease production is induced by growth on BSA media over a pH gradient and protein levels are monitored over time with the Bradford assay. Once protein is depleted, the media is purified and proteases are characterized by gelatin zymography using acrylamide and buffers at near-neutral pH. Maintaining pH levels below those found in traditional zymographic systems avoids the potential loss of activity that may occur in aspartic proteases under alkaline conditions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.