The intensity of intraspecific plant-soil feedbacks in alien Impatiens species depends on the environment

Florianová, Anna; Münzbergová, Zuzana

doi:10.1016/j.ppees.2018.04.004

Cited by 18 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is important to note that only 9% of these studies were conducted in the field, suggesting that we have little inference for the strength or direction that environmental variation will demonstrate when interacting with PSF to affect plant growth. The few interactive effects shown here both support and contradict studies showing that PSF can differ between greenhouse and field experiments in different environments (Putten et al, 2016;Schittko et al, 2016;Florianová and Münzbergová, 2018;Heinze and Joshi, 2018;Kivlin et al, 2018) demonstrating how little is understood about the function of PSF in nature (Forero et al, 2019).…”

Section: Experiments Location and Soil Conditioning Source Affect The supporting

confidence: 53%

“…Yet most PSF experiments are rarely conducted under the environmental conditions where large-scale ecological and evolutionary mechanisms occur, that is, in the field. Various findings indicate differences in PSF between greenhouse and field experiments (Putten et al, 2016;Schittko et al, 2016;Florianová and Münzbergová, 2018;Heinze and Joshi, 2018;Kivlin et al, 2018;Forero et al, 2019) which suggest that inferences from greenhouse studies may not accurately represent how PSF functions on the landscape (Kulmatiski and Kardol, 2008;Putten et al, 2013Putten et al, , 2016Smith-Ramesh and Reynolds, 2017;Crawford et al, 2019;De Long et al, 2019). While greenhouse experiments have the advantage of maintaining control over non-focal variables and are crucial for confirming and falsifying mechanisms, recent field based PSF research has demonstrated that thoughtful field study designs can generate tractable and interesting results (Long et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predicting Plant-Soil Feedback in the Field: Meta-Analysis Reveals That Competition and Environmental Stress Differentially Influence PSF

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Past research on plant-soil feedbacks (PSF), largely undertaken in highly controlled greenhouse conditions, has established that plant species differentially alter abiotic and biotic soil conditions that in turn affect growth of other conspecific and heterospecific individuals in that soil. Yet, whether feedbacks under controlled greenhouse conditions reflect feedbacks in natural environments where plants are exposed to a range of abiotic and biotic pressures is still unresolved. To address how environmental context affects PSF, we conducted a meta-analysis of previously published studies that examined plant growth responses to multiple forms of competition, stress, and disturbance across various PSF methodology. We asked the following questions: (1) Can competition, stress, and disturbance alter the direction and/or strength of PSF? (2) Do particular types of competition, stress, or disturbance affect the direction and/or strength of PSF more than others? and (3) Do methods of conducting PSF research (i.e., greenhouse vs. field experiments and whether the source of soil inoculum conditioning is from the field vs. greenhouse) affect plant growth responses to PSF or competition, stress, and disturbance, or their interactions? We discovered four patterns that may be predictive of what future PSF studies conducted under more realistic conditions might reveal. First, relatively little is known about how PSF responds to environmental stress and disturbance compared to plant-plant competition. Second, specific types of competition enhanced negative effects of soil microbes on plant growth, and specific environmental stressors enhanced positive effects of soil microbes on plant growth. Third, whether PSF experiments are conducted in the field or greenhouse can change plant growth responses. And, fourth, how the soil conditioning phase is conducted can change plant growth responses. With more detail than previously shown, these results confirm that environmental context writ large can change plant growth responses in PSF Beals et al. PSF Differs With Competition, Stress experiments. These data should aid theory and predictions for conservation and restoration applications by showing the relative importance of competition, stress, and disturbance in PSF studies over time. Lastly, these data demonstrate how variation in experimental methods can alter interpretation and conclusions of PSF studies.

show abstract

Section: Experiments Location and Soil Conditioning Source Affect The supporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting Plant-Soil Feedback in the Field: Meta-Analysis Reveals That Competition and Environmental Stress Differentially Influence PSF

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the first, McGinn et al (2018) assessed soils from the native and nonnative range of 11 Trifolium species naturalized in New Zealand, and found a significant effect for soil enemy release, but this was independent of residence time or geographic extent. In the other one, Florianová and Münzbergová (2018) assessed the effect of within‐species soil conditioning on four Impatiens species alien to Europe, one of which was invasive, and the other three naturalized but not invasive. All species showed positive plant–soil feedbacks in conditioned nonnative soils, although positive feedbacks were variable, and dependent on specific environmental conditions for each species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The evidence for the importance of plant–soil feedbacks for invasive success is mounting (Callaway and Lucero 2020), but comparisons of invasive vs. naturalized exotic species, and in particular congeners, are very scarce (but see Florianová and Münzbergová 2018, McGinn et al 2018). We aim to fill that gap by assessing the role of plant–soil feedbacks on biomass production of three congeneric Centaurea species with different invasive success in a full factorial common garden reciprocal transplant experiment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil origin corresponds with variation in growth of an invasive Centaurea, but not of non‐invasive congeners

Montesinos

Callaway

2020

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why only a small proportion of exotic species become invasive is an unresolved question. Escape from the negative effects of soil biota in the native range can be important for the success of many invasives, but comparative effects of soil biota on less successful exotic species are poorly understood. Studies of other mechanisms suggest that such comparisons might be fruitful. Seeds of three closely related Centaurea species with overlapping distributions in both their native range of Spain and their nonnative range of California were grown to maturity in pots to obtain an F1 generation of full sibling seeds with reduced maternal effects. Full sibling F1 seeds from both ranges were subsequently grown in pots with inoculations of soil from either the native or nonnative ranges in a fully orthogonal factorial design. We then compared plant biomass among species, regions, and soil sources. Our results indicate that escape from soil pathogens may unleash the highly invasive Centaurea solstitialis, which was suppressed by native Spanish soils but not by soils from California. In contrast, the two noninvasive Centaurea species grew the same on all soils. These results add unprecedented phylogenetically controlled insight into why some species invade and others do not.

show abstract

“…Slovak State Nature Protection agency and the European Union categorize this species as a non-native species. Different studies focus on its distribution and ecology as invasive species [3,4,5,6,7,8]. I. parviflora undoubtedly has an environmental influence on native biodiversity through changes in community structure, nutrient cycles, trophic levels, hydrology, and competition act as an invasive species [6,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential Phytotoxic Effect of Essential Oil of Non-Native Species Impatiens parviflora DC.

Jurová

Matoušková

Wajs-Bonikowska

et al. 2019

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impatiens parviflora is non-native invasive plant species occupying large areas all over the Europe and threatens native communities by altering their species composition and reducing native biodiversity. The factor responsible for its spreading could be explained by releasing biochemical to the environment. On the other hands, high demand on secondary metabolites as potential source of new ecofriendly biocides could be beneficial. The analysis of I. parviflora essential oil (EO) led us to identify more than 60 volatiles. The main compound was hexahydrofarnesyl acetone, other dominant components were phytol, carvacrol, germacra-4(15),5,10(14)-trien-1-α-ol, and pentacosane. The potential phytotoxic effect of I. parviflora EO collected in two vegetation periods (summer and autumn) was evaluated on seed germination and root elongation of three dicot species (Raphanus sativus, Lepidum sativum, and Lactuca sativa) and on one monocot species (Triticum aestivum). The seed germination of only one dicot species, L. sativa, was affected by both EOs. In contrast, seed germination of monocot species T. aestivum was influenced only by the highest doses of EOs isolated from I. parviflora in autumn. The root elongation of tested plant species was less influenced by I. parviflora EOs. L. sativum showed sensitivity to one dose of EOs hydrodistilled in summer, while the monocot species was influenced by both EOs samples in highest doses. Our findings revealed that I. parviflora contained phenolics that were phytotoxic to the germination of some plant species, mainly at higher EOs doses, while root elongation of tested plants was not suppressed by essential oils.

show abstract

The intensity of intraspecific plant-soil feedbacks in alien Impatiens species depends on the environment

Cited by 18 publications

References 80 publications

Predicting Plant-Soil Feedback in the Field: Meta-Analysis Reveals That Competition and Environmental Stress Differentially Influence PSF

Predicting Plant-Soil Feedback in the Field: Meta-Analysis Reveals That Competition and Environmental Stress Differentially Influence PSF

Soil origin corresponds with variation in growth of an invasive Centaurea, but not of non‐invasive congeners

Potential Phytotoxic Effect of Essential Oil of Non-Native Species Impatiens parviflora DC.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About