Affiliations 

  • 1 ETH Zurich, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Zurich, Switzerland. [email protected]
  • 2 Department of Biological Sciences, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, USA
  • 3 Department of Biology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
  • 4 Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA
  • 5 Forest Global Earth Observatory, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panama City, Panama
  • 6 Department of Biology, Middlebury College, Middlebury, VT, USA
  • 7 Center for Conservation and Sustainability, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park, Washington, DC, USA
  • 8 Geography & Environmental Systems, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD, USA
  • 9 Biology Department, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Canada
  • 10 Herbier National du Gabon, Institut de Pharmacopée et de Médecine Traditionelle, Libreville, Gabon
  • 11 Department of Biology, Temple Ambler Field Station, Temple University, Ambler, PA, USA
  • 12 Conservation Ecology Center, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park, Washington, DC, USA
  • 13 National Biobank of Thailand, National Science and Technology Development Agency, Khlong Nueng, Pathum Thani, Thailand
  • 14 School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
  • 15 Taiwan Forestry Research Institute, Taipei City, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
  • 16 State Key Laboratory of Biocontrol, School of Ecology/School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • 17 Department of Life Science, Tunghai University, Taichung City, Taiwan, ROC
  • 18 School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • 19 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA
  • 20 Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, USDA Forest Service, Hilo, HI, USA
  • 21 Department of Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
  • 22 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
  • 23 Department of Science and Technology, Uva Wellassa University, Badulla, Sri Lanka
  • 24 Gabon Biodiversity Program, Center for Conservation and Sustainability, Smithsonian National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute, Gamba, Gabon
  • 25 University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1910 East-West Rd., Honolulu, HI, USA
  • 26 Environmental Studies Department, University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
  • 27 Department of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
  • 28 Department of Forest Ecology, Silva Tarouca Research Institute, Průhonice, Czech Republic
  • 29 Department of Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Green Bay, WI, USA
  • 30 Environmental Change Institute, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  • 31 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
  • 32 Department of Biology, University of Hawaii, Hilo, HI, USA
  • 33 School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
  • 34 Department of Forest Management, W. A. Franke College of Forestry and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA
  • 35 The Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA
  • 36 Department of Biology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA
  • 37 Forest Global Earth Observatory, Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, NJ, USA
  • 38 Programa Ciencias de la Biodiversidad, Instituto de Investigacion de Recursos Biologicos Alexander von Humboldt, Bogota, Colombia
  • 39 Biology Centre, Institute of Entomology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Budějovice, Czech Republic
  • 40 Estación Experimental de Zonas Áridas, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Almería, Spain
  • 41 Harvard Forest, Harvard University, Petersham, MA, USA
  • 42 Forest Ecology Group, Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, NJ, USA
  • 43 The Royal Society SEARRP (UK/Malaysia), Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia
  • 44 School of Biological Sciences and Center for Plant Science Innovation, University of Nebraska - Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
  • 45 Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, National Dong Hwa University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, ROC
  • 46 School of the Environment, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA
  • 47 UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Bailrigg, UK
  • 48 Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
  • 49 Tiantong National Forest Ecosystem Observation and Research Station, School of Ecological and Environmental Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China
  • 50 U.S. Forest Service, Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Hilo, HI, USA
  • 51 Department of Plant & Microbial Biology, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, USA
  • 52 Botanical Garden Division, Taiwan Forestry Research Institute, Taipei City, Taiwan, ROC
  • 53 Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico
  • 54 ETH Zurich, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Zurich, Switzerland
Commun Biol, 2023 Oct 19;6(1):1066.
PMID: 37857800 DOI: 10.1038/s42003-023-05410-z

Abstract

One mechanism proposed to explain high species diversity in tropical systems is strong negative conspecific density dependence (CDD), which reduces recruitment of juveniles in proximity to conspecific adult plants. Although evidence shows that plant-specific soil pathogens can drive negative CDD, trees also form key mutualisms with mycorrhizal fungi, which may counteract these effects. Across 43 large-scale forest plots worldwide, we tested whether ectomycorrhizal tree species exhibit weaker negative CDD than arbuscular mycorrhizal tree species. We further tested for conmycorrhizal density dependence (CMDD) to test for benefit from shared mutualists. We found that the strength of CDD varies systematically with mycorrhizal type, with ectomycorrhizal tree species exhibiting higher sapling densities with increasing adult densities than arbuscular mycorrhizal tree species. Moreover, we found evidence of positive CMDD for tree species of both mycorrhizal types. Collectively, these findings indicate that mycorrhizal interactions likely play a foundational role in global forest diversity patterns and structure.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.