Abstract:The interaction between P fertilization of citrus and the mycorrhizal fungus Glomus fasciculatus was examined in a greenhouse study. A low fertility loamy sand (4.6 ppm P) was provided with all necessary soil nutrients except P. This soil received superphosphate [Ca(H2PO4)2 · H2O] at rates of 0, 6, 28, 56, 278, and 556 ppm of P. Seven replicate mycorrhizal and nonmycorrhizal Brazilian sour orange and Troyer citrange seedlings were grown at each P fertility level. After 5 months, mycorrhizal sour orange which r… Show more
“…Increasing levels of soluble P fertiliser generally depress mycorrhizal infection levels in plant roots (Baylis 1967;Mosse 1973;Menge et al 1978), butthe experimental results discussed in this paper confirm earlier reports that mycorrhizal infection levels are usually unaffected by high levels of rock phosphate (Daft & Nicholson 1966;Powell 1977;Powell & Daniel 1978a) even when this fertiliser is effectively stimulating plant growth.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Growth responses to mycorrhizal inoculation should be compared with the growth responses possible from using phosphorus fertiliser alone (Abbott & Robson 19n;Hall 1978;Menge et al 1978). Powel1 (1980) showed that white clover in pot experiments responded to mycorrhizal inoculation in two highly P-retentive soils at superphosphate rates up to 1770 kg.ha -(.…”
Mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal clover plants were grown in a sterilised phosphorus-deficient soil, and fertilised with either pelleted Christmas Island 'C' grade phosphate rock or with powdered or pelleted Chatham Rise phosphate rock at eight rates ranging from 0 to 2.8 g fertiliser per pot. In a second experiment, ryegrass plants were fertilised with pelleted Chatham Rise rock phosphate. Mycorrhizal inoculation greatly increased shoot growth and phosphorus uptake compared to that of non-mycorrhizal plants at fertiliser rates up to 1.4 g per pot. The recovery of phosphorus fertiliser from soil was generally low with maximum values of 11.3% and 17.2% in soil fertilised with pelleted Christmas Island and Chatham Rise rock phosphates and a maximum of 48.0% in soil fertilised with powdered Chatham Rise rock phosphate.
“…Increasing levels of soluble P fertiliser generally depress mycorrhizal infection levels in plant roots (Baylis 1967;Mosse 1973;Menge et al 1978), butthe experimental results discussed in this paper confirm earlier reports that mycorrhizal infection levels are usually unaffected by high levels of rock phosphate (Daft & Nicholson 1966;Powell 1977;Powell & Daniel 1978a) even when this fertiliser is effectively stimulating plant growth.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Growth responses to mycorrhizal inoculation should be compared with the growth responses possible from using phosphorus fertiliser alone (Abbott & Robson 19n;Hall 1978;Menge et al 1978). Powel1 (1980) showed that white clover in pot experiments responded to mycorrhizal inoculation in two highly P-retentive soils at superphosphate rates up to 1770 kg.ha -(.…”
Mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal clover plants were grown in a sterilised phosphorus-deficient soil, and fertilised with either pelleted Christmas Island 'C' grade phosphate rock or with powdered or pelleted Chatham Rise phosphate rock at eight rates ranging from 0 to 2.8 g fertiliser per pot. In a second experiment, ryegrass plants were fertilised with pelleted Chatham Rise rock phosphate. Mycorrhizal inoculation greatly increased shoot growth and phosphorus uptake compared to that of non-mycorrhizal plants at fertiliser rates up to 1.4 g per pot. The recovery of phosphorus fertiliser from soil was generally low with maximum values of 11.3% and 17.2% in soil fertilised with pelleted Christmas Island and Chatham Rise rock phosphates and a maximum of 48.0% in soil fertilised with powdered Chatham Rise rock phosphate.
“…These findings indicate that an increase in the available soil phosphorus due to the application of phosphorus fertilizers lowers the density of AM fungi spores in the soil. There have been many reports that the more phosphorus fertilizer applied, the lower the spore density (Menge et al, 1978;Isobe et al, 1993;Kahiluoto et al, 2001). In other words, to increase the density of AM fungi spores in soil, it is important to avoid excessive application of phosphorus fertilizers.…”
“…In addition, it is now clear that phosphorus is also important in the control of VA mycorrhizal infection of root systems (Mosse, 1972(Mosse, , 1973Sanders, 1975;Menge et al, 1977). However, the mechanism of phosphorus control of mycorrhizal symbiosis needs to be determined.…”
SUMMARYThe mechanism responsible for inhibition of the establishment of mycorrhizal associations in Sorghum vulgare Pers. (herbaceous monocot) and Citrus aurantium L. (woody dicot) under high levels of soil phosphorus (P) was studied. Plants were grown on low fertility loamy sand (4.5 ppm P), receiving superphosphate [Ca (H2PO4)2H2O] at 0, 6, 28, 56, 228 and 556 ppm P along with all the other necessary nutrients. The percentage P content of root tissue was correlated with the amount of P added to the soil. Root exudation, measured in terms of the net leakage of soluble amino acids and reducing sugars from the roots within a 17-h period, was significantly higher under low P levels (0, 6 and 28 ppm P) than under high P levels (56, 228 and 556 ppm P). The amount of exudation was correlated with a Pinduced decrease in phospholipid levels and associated changes in permeability properties of root membranes, rather than with changes in the root content of sugars and amino nitrogen. The hypothesis is proposed that phosphorus inhibition of mycorrhizal symbiosis is associated with a membrane-mediated decrease in root exudation.
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.