Additive and interactive effects of functionally dissimilar soil organisms on a grassland plant community

Ladygina, Natalia; Henry, Frédéric; Kant, Merijn R.; Koller, Robert; Reidinger, Stefan; Rodríguez, Alia; Saj, Stéphane; Sonnemann, Ilja; Witt, Christina; Wurst, Susanne

doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2010.08.027

Cited by 24 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Earthworms and AMF were found to have mainly independent effects on plant community productivity , but this may change with the successional stage of the plant community (Mammitzsch et al, 2012). These results and a previous study on the effect of diverse soil organisms on a plant community (Ladygina et al, 2010) suggest that direct interactions between functionally dissimilar soil organisms exist, but are usually not strong enough to change their individual impacts on ecosystem functions such as primary productivity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 42%

“…Plant species diversity was reported to interact with soil biota and to influence multiple trophic levels and alter ecosystem functions, such as community productivity and plant resistance toward herbivores and plant invaders (van der Heijden et al, 1998;Ladygina et al, 2010;Scherber et al, 2010;Eisenhauer et al, 2012). Yet intraspecific plant diversity has only recently received increasing attention.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Independent role of belowground organisms and plant cultivar diversity in legume-grass communities

Guo

Petermann

Schittko

et al. 2015

Applied Soil Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 42%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Independent role of belowground organisms and plant cultivar diversity in legume-grass communities

Guo

Petermann

Schittko

et al. 2015

Applied Soil Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Plant biomass, assessed as a whole or partitioned into root and shoot biomass, was not significantly affected by soil biodiversity. Our analysis included studies that manipulated diversity of mycorrhizal fungi (Baxter and Dighton, 2001), microarthropods (Liiri et al, 2002), meso-and macrofaunal decomposers (Eisenhauer and Schädler, 2011), or more complex foodwebs consisting of multiple groups of different body sizes (Sulvaka et al, 2001;Laakso and Setälä, 1999;Ladygina et al, 2010;Eisenhauer et al, 2010;Eisenhauer and Schädler, 2011). The lack of a response of plant biomass production to soil biodiversity results from the contradicting results generated across a number of studies, and indicates that soil biodiversity does not unequivocally promote plant production (reviewed in van der Heijden et al, 2008).…”

Section: Biodiversity Impacts On C Poolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, effects of functional or trophic groups of organisms may have opposing effects on the C cycling pools and process rates. For example, Ladygina et al (2010) showed that arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and decomposer (enchytraeids and collembola) canceled each other out in affecting plant community biomass.…”

Section: Soil Biodiversity Impacts On Soil C Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other studies have manipulated the diversity across groups of soil organisms that differ in body size (i.e., microbes, and micro-, meso-, or M.-A. de Graaff et al: A meta-analysis of soil biodiversity impacts on the carbon cycle 259 macrofauna) or, alternatively, have manipulated diversity of trophic or functional groups (Hedlund and Ohrn, 2000;Ladygina et al, 2010). Although different taxa within soil microbial Hanson et al, 2008;Orwin et al, 2006) or faunal (Bignell and Eggleton, 2000;Milcu et al, 2008;Heemsbergen et al, 2004) groups can have unique impacts on the C cycle, functional redundancy among taxa would be expected to be reduced when a more complex food web of organisms is manipulated (e.g., across different size classes or feeding guilds) (Setälä, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A meta-analysis of soil biodiversity impacts on the carbon cycle

Graaff

Adkins

Kardol

et al. 2015

SOIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Loss of biodiversity impacts ecosystem functions, such as carbon (C) cycling. Soils are the largest terrestrial C reservoir, containing more C globally than the biotic and atmospheric pools together. As such, soil C cycling, and the processes controlling it, has the potential to affect atmospheric CO 2 concentrations and subsequent climate change. Despite the growing evidence of links between plant diversity and soil C cycling, there is a dearth of information on whether similar relationships exist between soil biodiversity and C cycling. This knowledge gap occurs even though there has been increased recognition that soil communities display high levels of both taxonomic and functional diversity and are key drivers of fluxes of C between the atmosphere and terrestrial ecosystems. Here, we used meta-analysis and regression analysis to quantitatively assess how soil biodiversity affects soil C cycling pools and processes (i.e., soil C respiration, litter decomposition, and plant biomass). We compared the response of process variables to changes in diversity both within and across groups of soil organisms that differed in body size, a grouping that typically correlates with ecological function. When studies that manipulated both within-and across-body size group diversity were included in the meta-analysis, loss of diversity significantly reduced soil C respiration (−27.5 %) and plant tissue decomposition (−18 %) but did not affect above-or belowground plant biomass. The loss of within-group diversity significantly reduced soil C respiration, while loss of across-group diversity did not. Decomposition was negatively affected both by loss of within-group and across-group diversity. Furthermore, loss of microbial diversity strongly reduced soil C respiration (−41 %). In contrast, plant tissue decomposition was negatively affected by loss of soil faunal diversity but was unaffected by loss of microbial diversity. Taken together, our findings show that loss of soil biodiversity strongly impacts on soil C cycling processes, and highlight the importance of diversity across groups of organisms (e.g., primary consumers and secondary decomposers) for maintaining full functionality of C cycle processes. However, our understanding of the complex relationships between soil biodiversity and C cycling processes is currently limited by the sheer number of methodological concerns associated with these studies, which can greatly overestimate or underestimate the impact of soil biodiversity on soil C cycling, challenging extrapolation to natural field settings. Future studies should attempt to further elucidate the relative importance of taxonomic diversity (species numbers) versus functional diversity.

show abstract

Induced plant defences in biological control of arthropod pests: a double‐edged sword

Pappas

Broekgaarden

Broufas

et al. 2017

Pest Management Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological control is an important ecosystem service delivered by natural enemies. Together with breeding for plant defence, it constitutes one of the most promising alternatives to pesticides for controlling herbivores in sustainable crop production. Especially induced plant defences may be promising targets in plant breeding for resistance against arthropod pests. Because they are activated upon herbivore damage, costs are only incurred when defence is needed. Moreover, they can be more specific than constitutive defences. Nevertheless, inducible defence traits that are harming plant pest organisms may interfere with biological control agents, such as predators and parasitoids. Despite the vast fundamental knowledge on plant defence mechanisms and their effects on natural enemies, our understanding of the feasibility of combining biological control with induced plant defence in practice is relatively poor. In this review, we focus on arthropod pest control and present the most important features of biological control with natural enemies and of induced plant defence. Furthermore, we show potential synergies and conflicts among them and, finally, identify gaps and list opportunities for their combined use in crop protection. We suggest that breeders should focus on inducible resistance traits that are compatible with the natural enemies of arthropod pests, specifically traits that help communities of natural enemies to build up. © 2017 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

show abstract

Additive and interactive effects of functionally dissimilar soil organisms on a grassland plant community

Cited by 24 publications

References 68 publications

Independent role of belowground organisms and plant cultivar diversity in legume-grass communities

Independent role of belowground organisms and plant cultivar diversity in legume-grass communities

A meta-analysis of soil biodiversity impacts on the carbon cycle

Induced plant defences in biological control of arthropod pests: a double‐edged sword

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About