CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 124Plant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lineage overwhelms environmental conditions in determining rhizosphere bacterial community structure in a cosmopolitan invasive plant

Open access
Bowen, Jennifer L., Kearns, Patrick J., Byrnes, Jarrett E. K., Wigginton, Sara, Allen, Warwick J., Greenwood, Michael, Tran, Khang, Yu, Jennifer, Cronin, James T., Meyerson, Laura A.·2017·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-017-00626-0PMC PMC5585233
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Plant–microbe interactions play crucial roles in species invasions but are rarely investigated at the intraspecific level. Here, we study these interactions in three lineages of a globally distributed plant, Phragmites australis. We use field surveys and a common garden experiment to analyze bacterial communities in the rhizosphere of P. australis stands from native, introduced, and Gulf lineages to determine lineage-specific controls on rhizosphere bacteria. We show that within-lineage bacterial communities are similar, but are distinct among lineages, which is consistent with our results in a complementary common garden experiment. Introduced P. australis rhizosphere bacterial communities have lower abundances of pathways involved in antimicrobial biosynthesis and degradation, suggesting a lower exposure to enemy attack than native and Gulf lineages. However, lineage and not rhizosphere bacterial communities dictate individual plant growth in the common garden experiment. We conclude that lineage is crucial for determination of both rhizosphere bacterial communities and plant fitness.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-017-00626-0

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 63

  1. Burke, D. J., Hamerlynck, E. P. & Hahn, D. Interactions between the salt marsh grass Spartina patens, arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, and sediment bacteria during the growing season. Soil Biol. Biochem. 35, 501–511 (2003). · DOI
  2. Bever, J. D., Platt, T. G. & Morton, E. R. Microbial population and community dynamics on plant roots and their feedbacks on plant communities. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 66, 265–283 (2012). · DOI
  3. Brucker, R. M. & Bordenstein, S. R. The roles of host evolutionary relationships (Genus: Nasonia) and development in structuring microbial communities. Evolution 66, 349–362 (2012). · DOI
  4. Davenport, E. R. Elucidating the role of the host genome in shaping microbiome composition. Gut Microbes 7, 178–184 (2016). · DOI
  5. Horton, M. W. et al. Genome-wide association study of Arabidopsis thaliana leaf microbial community. Nat. Comm. 5, 5320 (2014). · DOI
  6. Peiffer, J. A. et al. Diversity and heritability of the maize rhizosphere microbiome under field conditions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 6548–6553 (2013). · DOI
  7. Micallef, S. A., Shiaris, M. P. & Colón-Carmona, A. Influence of Arabidopsis thaliana accessions on rhizobacterial communities and natural variation in root exudates. J. Exp. Bot. 60, 1729–1742 (2009). · DOI
  8. Mahoney, A. K., Yin, C. & Hulbert, S. H. Community structure, species variation, and functional characterization of rhizosphere-associated bacteria of different winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars. Front. Plant Sci. 8, 132 (2017). · DOI
  9. Aira, M., Gómez-Brandón, M., Lazcano, C., Bååth, E. & Domínguez, J. Plant genotype strongly modifies the structure and growth of maize rhizosphere microbial communities. Soil. Biol. Biochem. 42, 2276–2281 (2010). · DOI
  10. Bouffaud, M.-L. et al. Is diversification history of maize influencing selection of soil bacteria by roots? Mol. Ecol. 21, 195–206 (2012). · DOI
  11. Edwards, J. et al. Structure, variation, and assembly of the root-associated microbiomes of rice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E911–E920 (2015). · DOI
  12. Shakya, M. et al. A multifactor analysis of fungal and bacterial community structure in the root microbiome of mature Populus deltoids trees. PLoS ONE 8, e76382 (2013). · DOI
  13. Busby, P. E. et al. Research priorities for harnessing plant microbiomes in sustainable agriculture. PLoS Biol. 15, e2001793 (2017). · DOI
  14. Reinhart, K. O. & Callaway, R. M. Soil biota and invasive plants. New. Phytol. 170, 445–457 (2006). · DOI
  15. Blossey, B. & Notzold, R. Evolution of increased competitive ability in invasive nonindigenous plants: a hypothesis. J. Ecol. 83, 887–899 (1995). · DOI
  16. Hulme, P. E. et al. Bias and error in understanding plant invasion impacts. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28, 212–218 (2013). · DOI
  17. Meyerson, L. A., Cronin, J. T. & Pyšek, P. Phragmites australis as a model organism for studying plant invasions. Biol. Invasions 9, 2421–2431 (2016). · DOI
  18. Lambertini, C. et al. Tracing the origin of Gulf Coast Phragmites (Poaceae): a story of long-distance dispersal and hybridization. Am. J. Bot. 99, 538–551 (2012). · DOI
  19. Saltonstall, K. Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into North America. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 2445–2449 (2002). · DOI
  20. Hauber, D. P., White, D. A., Powers, S. P. & DeFrancesch, F. R. Isozyme variation and correspondence with unusual infrared reflectance pattern in Phragmites australis (Poaceae). Plant Syst. Evol. 178, 1–9 (1991). · DOI
  21. Pellgrin, D. & Hauber, D. P. Isozyme variation among populations of the clonal species Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steudel. Aquat. Bot. 63, 241–259 (1999). · DOI
  22. Saltonstall, K. A rapid method for identifying the origin of North American Phragmites populations using RFLP analysis. Wetlands 23, 1043–1047 (2003). · DOI
  23. Saltonstall, K. & Hauber, D. Notes on Phragmites australis (Poaceae: Arundinoideae) in North America. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 1, 385–388 (2007).
  24. Hauber, D. P., Saltonstall, K., White, D. A. & Hood, C. S. Genetic variation in the common reed Phragmites australis in the Mississippi River Delta marshes: evidence for multiple introductions. Estuar. Coasts 34, 851–862 (2011). · DOI
  25. Colin, R. & Eguiarte, L. E. Phylogeographic analyses and genetic structure illustrate the complex evolutionary history of Phragmites australis in Mexico. Am. J. Bot. 103, 876–887 (2016). · DOI
  26. Meyerson, L. A., Lambert, A. M. & Saltonstall, K. A tale of three lineages: expansion of common reed (Phragmites australis) in the US Southwest and Gulf Coast. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 3, 515–520 (2010). · DOI
  27. Ma, B., Lv, X., Warren, A. & Gong, J. Shifts in diversity and community structure of endophytic bacteria and archaea across root, stem and leaf tissues in the common reed, Phragmites australis, along a salinity gradient in a marine tidal wetland of northern China. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 104, 759–768 (2013). · DOI
  28. Borruso, L., Bacci, G., Mengoni, A., DePhilippis, R. & Brusetti, L. Rhizosphere effect and salinity competing to shape microbial communities in Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex-Steud. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 359, 193–200 (2014). · DOI
  29. Shipley, B. Confirmatory path analysis in a generalized multilevel context. Ecology 90, 363–368 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  30. Grace, J. B. et al. Guidelines for a graph-theoretic implementation of structural equation modeling. Ecosphere 3, 1–44 (2012). · DOI
  31. Lefcheck, L. piecewiseSEM: Piecewise structural equation modeling in R for ecology, evolution, and systematics. Methods Ecol. Evol. 573, 573–579 (2015).
  32. Allen, W. J., Meyerson L. A., Flick, A. J. & Cronin J. T. Indirect effects of plant-soil feedbacks on competition between native and invasive wetland plants. Preprint at http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/07/07/160523 (2017).
  33. Hansen, R. Shasta ground sloth food habits, Ramparts Cave, Arizona. Paleobiology. 4, 302–319 (1978). · DOI
  34. Orson, R. A. A paleoecological assessment of Phragmites australis in New England tidal marshes: changes in plant community structure during the last few millennia. Biol. Invasions 1, 149–158 (1999). · DOI
  35. Nelson, E. B. & Karp, M. Soil pathogen communities associated with native and non-native Phragmites australis, populations in freshwater wetlands. Ecol. Evol. 3, 5254–5267 (2013). · DOI
  36. Yarwood, S. A., Baldwin, A. H., Mateu, M. G. & Buyer, J. S. Archaeal rhizosphere communitites differ between the native and invasive lineages of the wetland plant Phragmites australis (common reed) in a Chesapeake Bay subestuary. Biol. Invasions 18, 2717–2728 (2016). · DOI
  37. Klironomos, J. N. Feedback with soil biota contributes to plant rarity and invasiveness in communities. Nature 417, 67–70 (2002). · DOI
  38. Maron, J. L., Luo, W., Callaway, R. M. & Pal, R. W. Do exotic plants lose resistance to pathogenic soil biota from their native range? A test with Solidago gigantea. Oecologia 179, 447–454 (2015). · DOI
  39. Kulmatiski, A., Beard, K. H., Stevens, J. R. & Cobbold, S. M. Plant-soil feedbacks: a meta-analytical review. Ecol. Lett. 11, 980–992 (2008). · DOI
  40. Maron, J. L. et al. Staged invasions across disparate grasslands: effects of seed provenance, consumers and disturbance on productivity and species richness. Ecol. Lett. 17, 499–507 (2014). · DOI
  41. Elton, C. S. The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants (University of Chicago Press, 1958). · DOI
  42. Keane, R. M. & Crawley, M. J. Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 164–170 (2002). · DOI
  43. Martiny, J. B. et al. Microbial biogeography: putting microorganisms on the map. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 4, 102–112 (2006). · DOI
  44. Pejchar, L. & Mooney, H. A. Invasive species, ecosystem services, and human well-being. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 497–504 (2009). · DOI
  45. Kearns, P. J. et al. Nutrient enrichment induces high rates of dormancy and decreases diversity of active bacterial taxa in salt marshes. Nat. Commun. 7, 12881 (2016). · DOI
  46. Cronin, J. T., Bhattarai, G. P., Allen, W. J. & Meyerson, L. A. Biogeography of a plant invasion: plant–herbivore interactions. Ecology 96, 1115–1127 (2015). · DOI
  47. Doane, T. A. & Horwath, W. R. Spectrophotometric determination of nitrate with a single reagent. Anal. Lett. 36, 2713–2722 (2003). · DOI
  48. Weatherburn, M. W. Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia. Anal. Chem. 39, 971–974 (1967). · DOI · Paper page
  49. Mettel, C., Kim, Y., Shrestha, P. M. & Liesack, W. Extraction of mRNA from soil. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 76, 5995–6000 (2010). · DOI
  50. Caporaso, J. G. et al. Global patterns of 16S rRNA diversity at a depth of millions of seuqences per sample. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 4516–4522 (2011). · DOI
  51. Caporaso, J. G. et al. Ultra-high-throughput microbial community analysis on the Illumina HiSeq and MiSeq platforms. ISME J. 6, 1621–1624 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  52. Bokulich, N. A. et al. Quality-filtering vastly improves diversity estimates from Illumina amplicon sequencing. Nat. Meth. 10, 57–59 (2013). · DOI
  53. Caporaso, J. G. et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat. Meth. 7, 335–336 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  54. Edgar, R. C. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26, 2460–2461 (2010). · DOI
  55. DeSantis, T. Z. et al. Greengenes, a chimera-checked 16S rRNA gene database and workbench compatible with ARB. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72, 5069–5072 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  56. Haas, B. J. et al. Chimeric 16S rRNA sequence formation and detection in Sanger and 454-pyrosequenced PCR amplicons. Genome Res. 21, 494–504 (2011). · DOI
  57. Anderson, M. J. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecol. 26, 32–46 (2001).
  58. Blankenberg, D. et al. Galaxy: a web-based genome analysis tool for experimentalists. Curr. Prot. Mol. Biol. 89:19.10 19.10.1–19.10.21 (2010). · DOI
  59. Giardine, B. et al. Galaxy: a platform for interactive large-scale genome analysis. Genome Res. 15, 1451–1455 (2005). · DOI
  60. Goecks, J. et al. Galaxy: a comprehensive approach for supporting accessible, reproducible, and transparent computational research in the life sciences. Genome Biol. 11, R86 (2010). · DOI
  61. Abubucker, S. et al. Metabolic reconstruction for metagenomic data and its application to the human microbiome. PLoS Comput. Biol. 8, e1002358 (2012). · DOI
  62. Pinheiro, J. C. & Bates, D. M. Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS (Springer, 2000). · DOI · Paper page
  63. Lenth, R. V. Least-squares means: the R package Lsmeans. J. Stat. Softw. 69, 1–33 (2016). · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bowen, J. L., Kearns, P. J., Byrnes, J. E. K., Wigginton, S., Allen, W. J., Greenwood, M., Tran, K., Yu, J., Cronin, J. T., & Meyerson, L. A.
Affiliations
  • Northeastern University (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Boston (US)
  • University of Rhode Island (US)
  • Louisiana State University (US)
Corresponding author
Bowen, Jennifer L.
ORCID
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-09-05
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
433-433
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41467-017-00626-0
PMC
PMC5585233
OpenAlex
W2752264965
Cited by
124
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 9
FWCI
11.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
  • Journal of Media Literacy Education (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Lincoln University Research Archive (Lincoln University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1050084, 1501775, 1350491, 1049914)
  • University of Massachusetts Boston
  • MIT Sea Grant, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
Phragmites australis, rhizosphere bacterial community, plant lineages, invasive plants, plant-microbe interactions, host-associated microbiome, plant fitness, common garden experiment
MeSH terms
Bacteria, Environment, Poaceae, Models, Biological, Phylogeny, Rhizosphere, Introduced Species, Microbiota

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review