Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul 18;17(7):e0269751.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269751. eCollection 2022.

Potential tradeoffs between effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi inoculation, soil organic matter content and fertilizer application in raspberry production

Affiliations

Potential tradeoffs between effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi inoculation, soil organic matter content and fertilizer application in raspberry production

Ke Chen et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Ecological intensification has been proposed as an alternative paradigm for intensive agriculture to boost yield sustainably through utilizing ecosystem services. A prerequisite to achieving this is to understand the relations between multiple ecosystem services and production, while taking growth conditions such as nutrient availability into consideration. Here, we conducted a pot-field experiment to study the interactive effects of soil organic matter (SOM) content and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) inoculation on the production of raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) under four levels of fertilizer application. Raspberry flower number, fruit number and yield only significantly increased with fertilizer inputs but were not impacted by SOM content or AMF inoculation. Fruit set and single berry weight were influenced by both SOM content and AMF inoculation, in complex three-way interactions with fertilizer application. Fruit set of AMF inoculated plants increased with fertilizer inputs in low SOM soils, but decreased with fertilizer inputs under high SOM soils, with the highest fruit set occurring at no fertilizer inputs. In low SOM soils, the relation between single berry weight and fertilizer application was more pronounced in inoculated plants than in non-inoculated plants, while in high SOM soils the relative benefits of AMF inoculation on single berry weight decreased with increasing fertilizer inputs. We attribute the lack of effects of AMF inoculation and SOM content on flower number, fruit number and yield mainly to potential tradeoffs between the experimental variables that all influence resource uptake by plant root systems. Our results suggest that potentially beneficial effects of AMF and SOM can be offset by each other, probably driven by the dynamic relations between AMF and the host plants. The findings reveal fundamental implications for managing AMF inoculation and SOM management simultaneously in real-world agricultural systems.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Effects of fertilizer application rates on flower number (a), fruit number (b) and yield (c) per plant. Graphs show conditional partial regression plots based on the minimum adequate models. Shadings show the 95% confidence interval, and points represent partial residuals.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Interactive effects of AMF inoculation, SOM and fertilizer application rates on fruit set per plant.
Graphs show conditional partial regression plots based on the minimum adequate model; shadings show the 95% confidence interval, and points represent partial residuals.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Interactive effects of AMF inoculation, SOM and fertilizer application rates on average single berry weight (g) per plant.
Graphs show conditional partial regression plots based on the minimum adequate model; shadings show the 95% confidence interval, and points represent partial residuals.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S. Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature. 2002;418(6898):671–7. doi: 10.1038/nature01014 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR, Haddad L, Lawrence D, Muir JF, et al.. Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. science. 2010;327(5967):812–8. doi: 10.1126/science.1185383 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cassman KG, Grassini P, van Wart J. Crop yield potential, yield trends, and global food security in a changing climate. Handbook of climate change and agroecosystems Imperial College Press, London. 2010:37–51.
    1. Grassini P, Eskridge KM, Cassman KG. Distinguishing between yield advances and yield plateaus in historical crop production trends. Nature communications. 2013;4(1):1–11. doi: 10.1038/ncomms3918 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lebuhn G, Droege S, Connor EF, Gemmill‐Herren B, Potts SG, Minckley RL, et al.. Detecting insect pollinator declines on regional and global scales. Conservation Biology. 2013;27(1):113–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01962.x - DOI - PubMed

Publication types