CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 37Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFire effects on ecosystemsSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fire-severity effects on plant–fungal interactions after a novel tundra wildfire disturbance: implications for arctic shrub and tree migration

Open access
Hewitt, Rebecca E., Hollingsworth, Teresa N., Stuart Chapin III, F., Lee Taylor, D.·2016·BMC Ecology
DOI 10.1186/s12898-016-0075-yPMC PMC4865011
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Vegetation change in high latitude tundra ecosystems is expected to accelerate due to increased wildfire activity. High-severity fires increase the availability of mineral soil seedbeds, which facilitates recruitment, yet fire also alters soil microbial composition, which could significantly impact seedling establishment. RESULTS: We investigated the effects of fire severity on soil biota and associated effects on plant performance for two plant species predicted to expand into Arctic tundra. We inoculated seedlings in a growth chamber experiment with soils collected from the largest tundra fire recorded in the Arctic and used molecular tools to characterize root-associated fungal communities. Seedling biomass was significantly related to the composition of fungal inoculum. Biomass decreased as fire severity increased and the proportion of pathogenic fungi increased. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that effects of fire severity on soil biota reduces seedling performance and thus we hypothesize that in certain ecological contexts fire-severity effects on plant-fungal interactions may dampen the expected increases in tree and shrub establishment after tundra fire.

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 · 10.1186/s12898-016-0075-y

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Map of soil collection sites that represent a fire-severity gradient within the Anaktuvuk river fire burn scar: low severity = sites 27 and 51; moderate severity = sites 20, 32, and ARF-B; high severity = sites 13, 37, and 60A
Fig. 1 Map of soil collection sites that represent a fire-severity gradient within the Anaktuvuk river fire burn scar: low severity = sites 27 and 51; moderate severity = sites 20, 32, and ARF-B; high severity = sites 13, 37, and 60ACC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Inoculation reduces log-transformed seedling biomass (±1 SE) for both spruce and alder seedlings. Asterisk indicates significant differences (P < 0.01) between mean log-transformed biomass of seedlings inoculated and seedlings that received the sterile inoculum
Fig. 2 Inoculation reduces log-transformed seedling biomass (±1 SE) for both spruce and alder seedlings. Asterisk indicates significant differences (P < 0.01) between mean log-transformed biomass of seedlings inoculated and seedlings that received the sterile inoculumCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Effects of fire severity on log-transformed seedling biomass; a treatment means for spruce and alder biomass (±1 SE) decline with increasing fire severity; b alder biomass declines with increasing fire severity for seedlings grown with inoculum from mineral and organic soil horizons; c spruce biomass declines with increasing fire severity for seedlings grown with inoculum from the mineral soil horizon
Fig. 3 Effects of fire severity on log-transformed seedling biomass; a treatment means for spruce and alder biomass (±1 SE) decline with increasing fire severity; b alder biomass declines with increasing fire severity for seedlings grown with inoculum from mineral and organic soil horizons; c spruce biomass declines with increasing fire severity for seedlings grown with inoculum from the mineral soil horizonCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 Proportion of identified ribotypes that are pathogenic vs. non-pathogenic fungi across the fire-severity gradient
Fig. 4 Proportion of identified ribotypes that are pathogenic vs. non-pathogenic fungi across the fire-severity gradientCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 Conceptual model of fire-severity effects on vegetation change in the Arctic can be assessed through a factors influencing seedling growth and b the net outcome of substrate and microbial community factors on seedling establishment in non-shrubby tundra. a The thickness of the arrows indicates strength of the causal pathway. Grey text indicates alternative mechanisms influencing seedling biomass after fire, whereas black text indicates the causal pathway investigated and supported in this study. b Substrate effects refer to the positive effect of burn severity on exposure of high-quality, mineral-soil seedbeds
Fig. 5 Conceptual model of fire-severity effects on vegetation change in the Arctic can be assessed through a factors influencing seedling growth and b the net outcome of substrate and microbial community factors on seedling establishment in non-shrubby tundra. a The thickness of the arrows indicates strength of the causal pathway. Grey text indicates alternative mechanisms influencing seedling biomass after fire, whereas black text indicates the causal pathway investigated and supported in this study. b Substrate effects refer to the positive effect of burn severity on exposure of high-quality, mineral-soil seedbedsCC BY · PubMed Central

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

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 59

  1. Harsch MA, Hulme PE, McGlone MS, Duncan RP. Are treelines advancing? A global meta-analysis of treeline response to climate warming. Ecol Lett. 2009;12(10):1040–9. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Rupp TS, Chapin FS, Starfield AM. Response of subarctic vegetation to transient climatic change on the Seward Peninsula in north–west Alaska. Glob Change Biol. 2000;6(5):541–55. · DOI
  3. Hinzman LD, Bettez ND, Bolton WR, Chapin FS, Dyurgerov MB, Fastie CL, Griffith B, Hollister RD, Hope A, Huntington HP, et al. Evidence and implications of recent climate change in northern Alaska and other arctic regions. Clim Change. 2005;72(3):251–98. · DOI
  4. Harsch MA, Bader MY. Treeline form—a potential key to understanding treeline dynamics. Global Ecol Biogeogr. 2011;20(4):582–96. · DOI
  5. Myers-Smith IH, Forbes BC, Wilmking M, Hallinger M, Lantz T, Blok D, Tape KD, Macias-Fauria M, Sass-Klaassen U, Levesque E, et al. Shrub expansion in tundra ecosystems: dynamics, impacts and research priorities. Environ Res Lett. 2011;6(4):045509. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/045509 . · DOI · Paper page
  6. Klironomos JN. Feedback with soil biota contributes to plant rarity and invasiveness in communities. Nature. 2002;417(6884):67–70. · DOI
  7. Horton TR, Bruns TD, Parker VT. Ectomycorrhizal fungi associated with Arctostaphylos contribute to Pseudotsuga menziesii establishment. Can J Bot. 1999;77(1):93–102.
  8. Nunez MA, Horton TR, Simberloff D. Lack of belowground mutualisms hinders Pinaceae invasions. Ecology. 2009;90(9):2352–9. · DOI
  9. Booth MG. Mycorrhizal networks mediate overstorey-understorey competition in a temperate forest. Ecol Lett. 2004;7(7):538–46. · DOI
  10. Horton TR, van der Heijden MGA. The role of symbioses in seedling establishment and survival. In: Leck MA, Parker VT, Simpson RL, editors. Seedling ecology and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008. p. 189–213. · DOI
  11. Smith SE, Read DJ. Mycorrhizal Symbiosis. 3rd ed. New York: Academic Press; 2008.
  12. Newsham KK. A meta-analysis of plant responses to dark septate root endophytes. New Phytol. 2011;190(3):783–93. · DOI
  13. Mandyam K, Jumpponen A. Seeking the elusive function of the root-colonising dark septate endophytic fungi. Stud Mycol. 2005;53:173–89. · DOI
  14. Mandyam KG, Jumpponen A. Mutualism-parasitism paradigm synthesized from results of root-endophyte models. Front Microbiol. 2014;5:776. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00776 . · DOI
  15. Janzen DH. Herbivores and the number of tree species in tropical forests. Am Nat. 1970;104:501–28. · DOI
  16. Connell JH. On the role of natural enemies in preventing competitive exclusion in some marine animals and in rain forest trees. In: Den Boer PJ, Gradwell GR, editors. Dynamics of population: proceedings of the advanced study institute on dynamics of numbers of populations. Wageningen: Center for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation; 1971. p. 298–312.
  17. Mangan SA, Schnitzer SA, Herre EA, Mack KML, Valencia MC, Sanchez EI, Bever JD. Negative plant-soil feedback predicts tree-species relative abundance in a tropical forest. Nature. 2010;466(7307):752–5. · DOI
  18. Johnstone JF, Chapin FS, Hollingsworth TN, Mack MC, Romanovsky V, Turetsky M. Fire, climate change, and forest resilience in interior Alaska. Can J For Res-Rev Can Rech For. 2010;40(7):1302–12. · DOI
  19. Lantz TC, Gergel SE, Henry GHR. Response of green alder (Alnus viridis subsp fruticosa) patch dynamics and plant community composition to fire and regional temperature in north-western Canada. J Biogeogr. 2010;37(8):1597–610. · DOI
  20. Racine C, Jandt R, Meyers C, Dennis J. Tundra fire and vegetation change along a hillslope on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska, USA. Arct Antarct Alp Res. 2004;36(1):1–10. · DOI
  21. Higuera PE, Brubaker LB, Anderson PM, Brown TA, Kennedy AT, Hu FS. Frequent fires in ancient shrub tundra: implications of paleorecords for arctic environmental change. PLoS One. 2008;3(3):e0001744. · DOI
  22. Hu FS, Higuera PE, Walsh JE, Chapman WL, Duffy PA, Brubaker LB, Chipman ML. Tundra burning in Alaska: linkages to climatic change and sea ice retreat. J Geophys Res Biogeosci 2010;115(G04002, doi: 10.1029/2009JG001270 .):G04002. · DOI
  23. Landhausser SM, Wein RW. Postfire vegetation recovery and tree establishment at the arctic treeline: climate-change-vegetation-response hypotheses. J Ecol. 1993;81(4):665–72. · DOI
  24. Neary DG, Klopatek CC, DeBano LF, Ffolliott PF. Fire effects on belowground sustainability: a review and synthesis. For Ecol Manage. 1999;122(1–2):51–71. · DOI · Paper page
  25. Timling I, Walker DA, Nusbaum C, Lennon NJ, Taylor DL. Rich and cold: diversity, distribution and drivers of fungal communities in patterned-ground ecosystems of the North American Arctic. Mol Ecol. 2014;23(13):3258–72. · DOI
  26. Timling I, Dahlberg A, Walker DA, Gardes M, Charcosset JY, Welker JM, Taylor DL. Distribution and drivers of ectomycorrhizal fungal communities across the North American Arctic. Ecosphere 2012;3(11). (3:art111). http://dx.doi.org/110.1890/ES1812-00217.00211 . · DOI
  27. Timling I, Taylor DL. Peeking through a frosty window: molecular insights into the ecology of Arctic soil fungi. Fungal Ecol. 2012;5(4):419–29. · DOI
  28. Smith JE, McKay D, Brenner G, McIver J, Spatafora JW. Early impacts of forest restoration treatments on the ectomycorrhizal fungal community and fine root biomass in a mixed conifer forest. J Appl Ecol. 2005;42(3):526–35. · DOI
  29. Treseder K, Mack M, Cross A. Relationships among fires, fungi and soil dynamics in Alaskan boreal forests. Ecol Appl. 2004;14:1826–38. · DOI
  30. Taylor DL, Bruns TD. Community structure of ectomycorrhizal fungi in a Pinus muricata forest: minimal overlap between the mature forest and resistant propagule communities. Mol Ecol. 1999;8:1837–50. · DOI
  31. Parker TJ, Clancy KM, Mathiasen RL. Interactions among fire, insects and pathogens in coniferous forests of the interior western United States and Canada. Agric For Entomol. 2006;8(3):167–89. · DOI
  32. Johnstone JF, Hollingsworth TN, Chapin FS, Mack MC. Changes in fire regime break the legacy lock on successional trajectories in Alaskan boreal forest. Glob Chang Biol. 2010;16(4):1281–95. · DOI
  33. Hewitt RE, Bent E, Hollingsworth TN, Chapin FS, Taylor DL. Resilience of Arctic Mycorrhizal fungal communities after wildfire facilitated by resprouting shrubs. Ecoscience. 2013;20(3):296–310. · DOI
  34. Lloyd AH, Fastie CL, Eisen H. Fire and substrate interact to control the northern range limit of black spruce (Picea mariana) in Alaska. Can J For Res Rev Can Rech For. 2007;37(12):2480–93. · DOI
  35. Hollingsworth T, Walker M, Chapin F III, Parsons A. Scale-dependent environmental controls over species composition in Alaskan black spruce communities. Can J For Res. 2006;36:1781–96. · DOI
  36. Molina R, Massicotte H, Trappe JM. Specificity phenomena in mycorrhizal symbioses: community-ecological consequences and practical implications. In: Allen MF, editor. Mycorrhizal functioning: an integrative plant-fungal process. New York: Chapman and Hall; 1992. p. 357–423.
  37. Mack MC, Bret-Harte MS, Hollingsworth TN, Jandt RR, Schuur EAG, Shaver GR, Verbyla DL. Carbon loss from an unprecedented Arctic tundra wildfire. Nature. 2011;475(7357):489–92. · DOI
  38. Viereck LA, Dyrness CT, Batten AR, Wenzlick KJ. The Alaska vegetation classification. In: General technical report PNW-GTR-286. Portland: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station; 1992. p. 278. · DOI
  39. Hewitt RE. Fire-severity effects on plant–fungal interactions: implications for Alaskan treeline dynamics in a warming climate. Ph.D. thesis. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Fairbanks; 2014.
  40. Hewitt RE, Chapin III FS, Hobbie SE, Hollingsworth TN, Taylor DL. Ectomycorrhizal shrub and seedling interactions facilitate tree establishment after wildfire at Alaska arctic treeline. (in review).
  41. Bent E, Taylor DL. Direct amplification of DNA from fresh and preserved ectomycorrhizal root tips. J Microbiol Methods. 2010;80(2):206–8. · DOI
  42. Bent E, Kiekel P, Brenton R, Taylor DL. Root-associated ectomycorrhizal fungi shared by various boreal forest seedlings naturally regenerating after a fire in interior Alaska and correlation of different fungi with host growth responses. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011;77(10):3351–9. · DOI
  43. Hewitt R. Fire-severity effects on plant-fungal interactions after a novel tundra wildfire disturbance: implications for arctic shrub and tree migration. Bonanza Creek LTER. Long Term Ecological Research Network. 2016. doi: 10.6073/pasta/a131c0d6707b6aa746dfe0265141ad43 . · DOI
  44. Taylor DL, Houston S. A bioinformatics pipeline for sequence-based analyses of fungal biodiversity. In: Xu J-R, Bluhm BH, editors. Fungal genomics, vol. 722. New York: Humana Press; 2011. p. 141–55. · DOI
  45. Kruskal JB. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a numerical method. Psychometrika. 1964;29:115–29. · DOI
  46. McCune B, Grace JB. Analysis of ecological communities. 2nd ed. Gleneden Beach: MjM Software Design; 2001.
  47. Berry KJ, Kvamme KL, Mielke PW. Improvements in the permutation test for the spatial-analysis of the distribution of artifacts into classes. Am Antiq. 1983;48(3):547–53. · DOI
  48. Aylor DE. Spread of plant disease on a continental scale: role of aerial dispersal of pathogens. Ecology. 2003;84(8):1989–97. · DOI
  49. Peay KG, Schubert MG, Nguyen NH, Bruns TD. Measuring ectomycorrhizal fungal dispersal: macroecological patterns driven by microscopic propagules. Mol Ecol. 2012;21(16):4122–36. · DOI
  50. Blumenthal D, Mitchell CE, Pysek P, Jarosik V. Synergy between pathogen release and resource availability in plant invasion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106(19):7899–904. · DOI
  51. Newsham KK, Upson R, Read DJ. Mycorrhizas and dark septate root endophytes in polar regions. Fungal Ecol. 2009;2(1):10–20. · DOI
  52. Tellenbach C, Sieber TN. Do colonization by dark septate endophytes and elevated temperature affect pathogenicity of oomycetes? FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2012;82(1):157–68. · DOI
  53. Kasischke ES, French NH, Harrell P, Christensen NL, Ustin SL, Barry D. Monitoring of wildfires in boreal forests using large area AVHRR NDVI composite image data. Remote Sens Environ. 1993;45(1):61–71. · DOI
  54. Wein RW, Bliss LC. Changes in Arctic Eriophorum tussock communities following fire. Ecology. 1973;54:845–52. · DOI
  55. Castellano MA, Trappe JM, Molina R. Inoculation of container-grown Douglas-fir seedlings with basidiospores of Rhizopogon vinicolor and R. colossus: effects of fertility and spore application rate. Can J For Res. 1985;15(1):10–3. · DOI
  56. Ishida TA, Nara K, Tanaka M, Kinoshita A, Hogetsu T. Germination and infectivity of ectomycorrhizal fungal spores in relation to their ecological traits during primary succession. New Phytol. 2008;180(2):491–500. · DOI
  57. Zackrisson O, Nilsson MC, Wardle DA. Key ecological function of charcoal from wildfire in the boreal forest. Oikos. 1996;77(1):10–9. · DOI
  58. Johnstone JF, Chapin FS. Effects of soil burn severity on post-fire tree recruitment in boreal forest. Ecosystems. 2006;9:14–31. · DOI
  59. Chapin FS, Sturm M, Serreze MC, McFadden JP, Key JR, Lloyd AH, McGuire AD, Rupp TS, Lynch AH, Schimel JP, et al. Role of land-surface changes in Arctic summer warming. Science. 2005;310(5748):657–60. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Fire as a fundamental ecological process: Research advances and frontiers

    McLauchlan, K. K., Higuera, P. E., Miesel, J., Rogers, B. M., Schweitzer, J., Shuman, J. K., Tepley, A. J., Varner, J. M., Veblen, T. T., Adalsteinsson, S. A., et al. (2020) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13403 · Cited by 729

    “…that influence vegetation recovery (Brando, Oliveria-Santos, Rocha, Cury, & Coe, 2016; Johnstone, Hollingsworth, Chapin, & Mack, 2010), the structure of invertebrate and microbial communities (Hewitt et al., 2016) and availability of nutrients (Karam, Weisberg, Scheller, Johnson, & Miller, 2013).”
    Self-citation

Metadata

Authors
Hewitt, R. E., Hollingsworth, T. N., Stuart Chapin III, F., & Lee Taylor, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Alaska Fairbanks (US)
  • US Forest Service (US)
Corresponding author
Hewitt, Rebecca E.
ORCID
Venue
BMC Ecology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2016-05-11
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
25-25
ISSN
1472-6785 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s12898-016-0075-y
PMC
PMC4865011
OpenAlex
W2348186826
Cited by
37
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BMC Ecology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Alaska EPSCoR (EPS-0701898)
  • NSF Graduate Research Fellowship (DGE-0639280 and 1242789)
  • Center for Global Change
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Keywords
fire severity, plant-fungal interactions, tree migration, soil microbial communities, root-associated fungi, fungal pathogens, seedling establishment, fungal inoculum
MeSH terms
Arctic Regions, Fungi, Plants, Trees, Plant Physiological Phenomena, Tundra

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