Phylogenetic trait conservatism predicts patterns of plant‐soil feedback

Abstract

Plant-soil feedbacks (PSFs) are important drivers of plant community structure and diversity, with species varying in the way they both condition soils and respond to them. While plant phylogenetic relationships alone can predict this variation in some instances, trait conservatism across phylogenies may provide more reliable predictions. Using integrated common garden and glasshouse inoculation experiments including 13 Eucalyptus species across two subgenera, we specifically investigated soil microbial conditioning and root chemical traits as underlying drivers of phylogenetic differences in PSF. We found that eucalypt species responded variably to soils conditioned by closely related species, depending on their phylogenetic lineage, which was further related to root terpene concentrations and the presence/absence of specific fungal taxa in conditioned soils. Overall, these findings show that trait conservatism in root chemical traits and the subsequent conditioning of soil microbial communities can explain whether or not plants show phylogenetic patterns in PSF.

Feedbacks link ecosystem ecology and evolution across spatial and temporal scales: Empirical evidence and future directions

“…The historical ecosystem pool can change through time due to gradual effects of past species interactions related to FB1 and FB2 , as the ecosystem pool and the historical ecosystem pool covary (Van Nuland et al, ; Vitousek, ). The eco‐evo feedback at this scale can be thought of as historical contingency because contemporary interactions are contingent on the ecosystem‐wide effects of prior interactions that vary geographically (Van Nuland et al, ; Senior et al, ). First, the interactions that constitute FB1 (Figure ) are not restricted to populations of different species but can also occur among individuals within a population (e.g.…”

“…On this spectrum, the majority of eco-evolutionary interactions are likely the product of diffuse (co-)evolution, and this heterogeneity in Nuland et al, 2017Nuland et al, , 2016Senior et al, 2018). First, the interactions that constitute FB1 (Figure 1) are not restricted to populations of different species but can also occur among individuals within a population (e.g.…”

A decade of restoring a temperate woodland: Lessons learned and future directions

“…2021a this issue), but may also have flow‐on effects to the dependent below‐ (Senior et al . 2018) and above‐ (Gosney et al . 2021) ground biodiversity, and even ecosystem process.…”

“…To deploy this seeding technology, further studies need to explore approaches that will maximise establishment success (Shackleford et al . 2021). This could include developing a better understanding of the regeneration niche requirements for native shrubs and grasses, building on the work by Bailey et al .…”

Phylogenetic signals and predictability in plant–soil feedbacks

“…1c,e). As with directional trends, there is evidence from empirical studies for divergent phylogenetic signals in feedback outcomes (Diez et al ., 2010; Anacker et al ., 2014; Fitzpatrick et al ., 2016; Senior et al ., 2018). A divergent phylogenetic signal is consistent with our understanding of plant–soil feedbacks, because it implies that both pathogens and mutualists can drive plant responses to soil biota.…”