Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Soil compaction reversed the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on soil hydraulic properties
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Soil compaction reversed the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on soil hydraulic properties
Do you wish to request the book?
Soil compaction reversed the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on soil hydraulic properties
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Soil compaction reversed the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on soil hydraulic properties
2024
Overview
Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) typically provide a wide range of nutritional benefits to their host plants, and their role in plant water uptake, although still controversial, is often cited as one of the hallmarks of this symbiosis. Less attention has been dedicated to other effects relating to water dynamics that the presence of AMF in soils may have. Evidence that AMF can affect soil hydraulic properties is only beginning to emerge. In one of our recent experiments with dwarf tomato plants, we serendipitously found that the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus (Rhizophagus irregularis ‘PH5’) can slightly but significantly reduce water holding capacity (WHC) of the substrate (a sand–zeolite–soil mixture). This was further investigated in a subsequent experiment, but there we found exactly the opposite effect as mycorrhizal substrate retained more water than did the non-mycorrhizal substrate. Because the same substrate was used and other conditions were mostly comparable in the two experiments, we explain the contrasting results by different substrate compaction, most likely caused by different pot shapes. It seems that in compacted substrates, AMF may have no effect upon or even decrease the substrates’ WHC. On the other hand, the AMF hyphae interweaving the pores of less compacted substrates may increase the capillary movement of water throughout such substrates and cause slightly more water to remain in the pores after the free water has drained. We believe that this phenomenon is worthy of mycorrhizologists’ attention and merits further investigation as to the role of AMF in soil hydraulic properties.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
