Abstract
AbstractCropping practices have a great potential to improve soil quality through changes in soil biota. Yet the effects of these soil‐improving cropping systems on soil fungal communities are not well known. Here, we analysed soil fungal communities using standardized measurements in 12 long‐term experiments and 20 agricultural treatments across Europe. We were interested in whether the same practices (i.e., tillage, fertilization, organic amendments and cover crops) applied across different sites have predictable and repeatable effects on soil fungal communities and guilds. The fungal communities were very variable across sites located in different soil types and climatic regions. The arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) were the fungal guild with most unique species in individual sites, whereas plant pathogenic fungi were most shared between the sites. The fungal communities responded to the cropping practices differently in different sites and only fertilization showed a consistent effect on AMF and plant pathogenic fungi, whereas the responses to tillage, cover crops and organic amendments were site, soil and crop‐species specific. We further show that the crop yield is negatively affected by cropping practices aimed at improving soil health. Yet, we show that these practices have the potential to change the fungal communities and that change in plant pathogenic fungi and in AMF is linked to the yield. We further link the soil fungal community and guilds to soil abiotic characteristics and reveal that especially Mn, K, Mg and pH affect the composition of fungi across sites. In summary, we show that fungal communities vary considerably between sites and that there are no clear directional responses in fungi or fungal guilds across sites to soil‐improving cropping systems, but that the responses vary based on soil abiotic conditions, crop type and climatic conditions.Highlights Soil fungi were analysed using standardized measurements in 12 long‐term experiments and 20 agricultural treatments Fungal communities responded to the cropping practices differently at different sites Only reduced fertilization showed a consistent effect on AMF and plant pathogenic fungi, whereas the responses to tillage, cover crops and organic amendments were site specific. Fungal community structure varied significantly between sites, crops and climate conditions; therefore, more cross‐site studies are needed in order to manage beneficial soil fungi in agricultural systems.
Highlights
Soil fungi are responsible for many ecosystem functions, such as nutrient and carbon cycling, biological control and soil aggregate stability (Frąc et al, Frąc, Hannula, Belka, & Jędryczka, 2018)
We further link the soil fungal community and guilds to soil abiotic characteristics and reveal that especially Mn, K, Mg and pH affect the composition of fungi across sites
We further investigated whether the same fungi are shared and affected by the agricultural sites and if we could find operational taxonomic units (OTUs) responding consistently to the agricultural practice; they could be considered potentially as biological indicator OTUs
Summary
Soil fungi are responsible for many ecosystem functions, such as nutrient and carbon cycling, biological control and soil aggregate stability (Frąc et al, Frąc, Hannula, Belka, & Jędryczka, 2018). They are often found to be less abundant in agricultural systems compared to natural systems (Hannula et al, 2017; Hannula, De Boer, & Van Veen, 2012); in agricultural soils they play important roles as mutualists (Lekberg & Koide, 2005; Verbruggen, van der Heijden, Rillig, & Kiers, 2013), decomposers (Clocchiatti, Hannula, van den Berg, Korthals, & de Boer, 2020) and biocontrol agents (Vinale et al, 2008). It has been suggested that the soil fungal community composition at both global and regional scales is mainly driven by abiotic factors such as soil C:N ratio
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
