Relatedness is a poor predictor of negative plant–soil feedbacks

Mehrabi, Zia; Tuck, Sean L.

doi:10.1111/nph.13238

Cited by 50 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is contrary to recent studies reporting little to no effect of phylogenetic distance on PSF (Mehrabi and Tuck 2015, Fitzpatrick et al 2017. Firstly, we show that the degree of phylogenetic distance between focal and conditioning species can be important in determining PSF.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic trait conservatism predicts patterns of plant‐soil feedback

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic trait conservatism predicts patterns of plant‐soil feedback

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3A). Previous studies testing for this pattern showed contrasting results (Liu et al 2012, Mehrabi and Tuck 2015, M€ unzbergov a and Surinov a 2015, Fitzpatrick et al 2017). It is plausible that both increased pathogen sharing between close relatives, and increased mutualist sharing between distant relatives, causes a phylogenetic signal in plant-soil feedback.…”

Section: Stronger Negative Feedbacks In Soil Of Closely Related Plantmentioning

confidence: 88%

Plant soil feedback strength in relation to large‐scale plant rarity and phylogenetic relatedness

Kempel¹,

Rindisbacher²,

Fischer³

et al. 2018

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding why some species are rare while others are common remains a central and fascinating question in ecology. Recently, interactions with soil organisms have been shown to affect local abundances of plant species within communities, however, it is not known whether they might also drive patterns of rarity at large scales. Further, little is known about the specificity of soil-feedback effects, and whether closely related plants share more soil pathogens than more distantly related plants. In a multi-species soil-feedback experiment (using 19 species) we tested whether regionally and locally rare species differed in their response to soil biota. Regional rarity was measured using range size or IUCN status and local rarity by typical abundance within an area. All species were grown on soils trained by a variety of regionally and locally rare and common species, which also varied in their degree of relatedness to the target. We found that, in general, regionally rare species suffered more than twice as much from soil biota than regionally common species. Soil cultured by regionally rare species also had a more negative effect on subsequent plant growth, suggesting they may have also accumulated more pathogens. Local rarity did not predict feedback strength. Further, soil trained by closely related plants had a more negative effect on growth than soil trained by distant relatives, which indicates a phylogenetic signal in the host range of soil biota. We conclude that soil biota may well contribute to plant rarity at large spatial scales, which offers a novel explanation for plant rarity and commonness. Moreover, our results show that phylogenetic relatedness between plants was a good predictor of the likelihood that two plant species interacted negatively via soil biota, which might mean that soil pathogens could prevent the coexistence of closely related plants and could drive patterns of phylogenetic overdispersion. Our results suggest that soil pathogens could restrict the ability of rare species to shift their ranges and might need to be considered by conservation biologists seeking to protect populations of rare plants.

show abstract

“…The relationship between the relatedness of plant species and the strength of plant–soil feedback is controversially debated in the literature. A meta‐analysis which was based on results of plant–soil feedback experiments that were performed in the last 20 years could not explain the strength and direction of feedback by phylogeny (Mehrabi & Tuck, 2015). In line with this, a recent study showed that plants did not perform better when growing in soil being trained by a more distinctly related species compared to soil from a closely related species (Mehrabi, Bell, & Lewis, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The strength of negative plant–soil feedback increases from the intraspecific to the interspecific and the functional group level

Bukowski

Schittko

Petermann

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the processes that may play a key role in plant species coexistence and ecosystem functioning is plant–soil feedback, the effect of plants on associated soil communities and the resulting feedback on plant performance. Plant–soil feedback at the interspecific level (comparing growth on own soil with growth on soil from different species) has been studied extensively, while plant–soil feedback at the intraspecific level (comparing growth on own soil with growth on soil from different accessions within a species) has only recently gained attention. Very few studies have investigated the direction and strength of feedback among different taxonomic levels, and initial results have been inconclusive, discussing phylogeny, and morphology as possible determinants. To test our hypotheses that the strength of negative feedback on plant performance increases with increasing taxonomic level and that this relationship is explained by morphological similarities, we conducted a greenhouse experiment using species assigned to three taxonomic levels (intraspecific, interspecific, and functional group level). We measured certain fitness‐related aboveground traits and used them along literature‐derived traits to determine the influence of morphological similarities on the strength and direction of the feedback. We found that the average strength of negative feedback increased from the intraspecific over the interspecific to the functional group level. However, individual accessions and species differed in the direction and strength of the feedback. None of our results could be explained by morphological dissimilarities or individual traits. Synthesis. Our results indicate that negative plant–soil feedback is stronger if the involved plants belong to more distantly related species. We conclude that the taxonomic level is an important factor in the maintenance of plant coexistence with plant–soil feedback as a potential stabilizing mechanism and should be addressed explicitly in coexistence research, while the traits considered here seem to play a minor role.

show abstract

Relatedness is a poor predictor of negative plant–soil feedbacks

Cited by 50 publications

References 43 publications

Phylogenetic trait conservatism predicts patterns of plant‐soil feedback

Phylogenetic trait conservatism predicts patterns of plant‐soil feedback

Plant soil feedback strength in relation to large‐scale plant rarity and phylogenetic relatedness

The strength of negative plant–soil feedback increases from the intraspecific to the interspecific and the functional group level

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About