Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorShelby, N.en
dc.contributor.authorDuncan, Richard P.en
dc.contributor.authorvan der Putten, W. H.en
dc.contributor.authorMcGinn, K. J.en
dc.contributor.authorWeser, Carolinen
dc.contributor.authorHulme, Philip E.en
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-13T20:55:23Z
dc.date.available2016-08-17en
dc.date.issued2016-09en
dc.date.submitted2016-05-13en
dc.identifier.citationShelby et al. (2016). Plant mutualisms with rhizosphere microbiota in introduced versus native ranges. Journal of Ecology, 104(5), 1259-1270. doi 10.1111/1365-2745.12609en
dc.identifier.issn0022-0477en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10182/7485
dc.description.abstract© 2016 The Authors. Journal of Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. The performance of introduced plants can be limited by the availability of soil mutualists outside their native range, but how interactions with mutualists differ between ranges is largely unknown. If mutualists are absent, incompatible or parasitic, plants may compensate by investing more in root biomass, adapting to be more selective or by maximizing the benefits associated with the mutualists available. We tested these hypotheses using seven non-agricultural species of Trifolium naturalized in New Zealand (NZ). We grew seeds from two native (Spain, UK) and one introduced (NZ) provenance of each species in glasshouse pots inoculated with rhizosphere microbiota collected from conspecifics in each region. We compared how plant biomass, degree of colonization by rhizobia and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), and the growth benefit associated with each mutualist differed between provenances (native and introduced populations) when grown with soil microbiota from each region. We also tested whether the growth benefit of colonization by mutualists was correlated with the extent to which alien plants were distributed in the introduced range. Rhizobia colonization was generally lower among introduced relative to native provenances. In NZ soils, 9% of all plants lacked rhizobia and 16% hosted parasitic nodules, whereas in native-range soils, there was no evidence of parasitism and all but one plant hosted rhizobia. Growth rates as a factor of rhizobia colonization were always highest when plants were grown in soil from their home range. Colonization by AMF was similar for all provenances in all soils but for four out of seven species grown in NZ soils, the level of AMF colonization was negatively correlated with growth rate. In general, introduced provenances did not compensate for lower growth rates or lower mutualist associations by decreasing shoot–root ratios. Synthesis. Despite differences between introduced and native provenances in their associations with soil mutualists and substantial evidence of parasitism in the introduced range, neither level of colonization by mutualists nor the growth benefit associated with colonization was correlated with the extent of species’ distributions in the introduced range, suggesting mutualist associations are not predictive of invasion success for these species.en
dc.format.extent1259-1270en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Societyen
dc.relationThe original publication is available from - John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society - https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12609 - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2745.12609/abstract;jsessionid=861B7CD0F46818ACD1388B298F64B5EE.f02t01en
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12609en
dc.rights© 2016 The Authors. Journal of Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
dc.subjectalienen
dc.subjectarbuscular mycorrhizal fungien
dc.subjectinvasiveen
dc.subjectnon-nativeen
dc.subjectparasitismen
dc.subjectplant-soil (below-ground) interactionsen
dc.subjectrhizobiaen
dc.subjectroot fungal symbionten
dc.subjectEcologyen
dc.titlePlant mutualisms with rhizosphere microbiota in introduced versus native rangesen
dc.typeJournal Article
lu.contributor.unitLincoln Universityen
lu.contributor.unitBio-Protection Research Centreen
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1365-2745.12609en
dc.subject.anzsrc0503 Soil Sciencesen
dc.subject.anzsrc060703 Plant Developmental and Reproductive Biologyen
dc.subject.anzsrc060705 Plant Physiologyen
dc.subject.anzsrc0605 Microbiologyen
dc.subject.anzsrc060504 Microbial Ecologyen
dc.subject.anzsrc060505 Mycologyen
dc.subject.anzsrc0602 Ecologyen
dc.subject.anzsrc05 Environmental Sciencesen
dc.subject.anzsrc06 Biological Sciencesen
dc.subject.anzsrc07 Agricultural and Veterinary Sciencesen
dc.relation.isPartOfJournal of Ecologyen
pubs.issue5en
pubs.notesVolume 104 - SPECIAL FEATURE: DIGGING DEEPER – HOW SOIL BIOTA DRIVE AND RESPOND TO PLANT INVASIONSen
pubs.organisational-group/LU
pubs.organisational-group/LU/BPRC
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Research Management Office
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Research Management Office/PE20
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Research Management Office/QE18
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden
pubs.publisher-urlhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2745.12609/abstract;jsessionid=861B7CD0F46818ACD1388B298F64B5EE.f02t01en
pubs.volume104en
dc.identifier.eissn1365-2745en
dc.rights.licenceAttributionen
lu.identifier.orcid0000-0001-5712-0474


Files in this item

Default Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Creative Commons Attribution
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Creative Commons Attribution