Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Mycorrhizaarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Mycorrhiza
Article . 2014 . Peer-reviewed
License: Springer TDM
Data sources: Crossref
Mycorrhiza
Article . 2016
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Frost hardiness of mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal Scots pine under two fertilization treatments

Authors: Korhonen, Anna; Lehto, Tarja; Repo, Tapani;

Frost hardiness of mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal Scots pine under two fertilization treatments

Abstract

Survival and functioning of mycorrhizal associations at low temperatures are not known well. In an earlier study, ectomycorrhizas did not affect the frost hardiness of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) roots, but here we studied whether differential nutrient availability would change the result and additionally, alter frost hardiness aboveground. The aim in this experiment was to compare the frost hardiness of roots and needles of mycorrhizal (Hebeloma sp.) and non-mycorrhizal Scots pine seedlings raised using two fertilization treatments and two cold-hardening regimes. The fertilization treatments were low (LF) and high (HF) application of a complete nutrient solution. Three hundred mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal seedlings were cultivated in growth chambers in four blocks for 16 weeks. For the first 9 weeks, the seedlings grew in long-day and high-temperature (LDHT) with low fertilization and then they were raised for 3 weeks in LDHT with either low or high fertilization. After this, half of the plants in each treatment combination remained in LDHT, and half were transferred to short-day and low-temperature (SDLT) conditions to cold acclimatize. The frost hardiness of the roots and needles was assessed using controlled freezing tests followed by electrolyte leakage tests (REL). Mycorrhizal roots were slightly more frost hardy than non-mycorrhizal roots, but only in the growing-season conditions (LDHT) in low-nutrient treatment. In LDHT and LF, the frost hardiness of the non-mycorrhizal roots was about -9 °C, and that of the non-mycorrhizal HF roots and the mycorrhizal roots in both fertilization levels was about -11 °C. However, no difference was found in the roots within the SDLT regime, and in needles, there was no difference between mycorrhizal and fertilization treatments. The frost hardiness of needles increased by SDLT treatment, being -8.5 and -14.1 °C in LDHT and SDLT, respectively. The dry mass of roots, stems, and needles was lower in LF than in HF and lower in SDLT than in LDHT. Mycorrhizal treatment did not affect the dry mass or its allocation. Although the mycorrhizal roots were slightly more frost hardy in the growing-season conditions, this is not likely to have significance in the field.

Country
Finland
Keywords

roots, 570, mänty, ravinteet, 510, frost hardening, kylmänkestävyys, nutrients, Mycorrhizae, ectomycorrhizae, Freezing, Muut aihealueet, Biomass, relative electrolyte leakage (REL), juuri, Pinus sylvestris, Cold Temperature, ektomykorritsa, Nutritive Value

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    7
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
7
Average
Average
Average