Article

Diversity of nitrogen fixation strategies in Mediterranean legumes

  • Nature Plants 1, Article number: 15064 (2015)
  • doi:10.1038/nplants.2015.64
  • Download Citation
Received:
Accepted:
Published online:

Abstract

Symbiotic N2 fixation (SNF) brings nitrogen into ecosystems, fuelling much of the world's agriculture1 and sustaining carbon storage2,3. However, it can also cause nitrogen saturation, exacerbating eutrophication and greenhouse warming4,​5,​6,​7. The balance of these effects depends on the degree to which N2-fixing plants adjust how much N2 they fix based on their needs (their SNF ‘strategies’)5,6. Genetic, biochemical and physiological details of SNF are well known for certain economically important species8,9, but the diversity of N2-fixing plants10 and bacteria11 is enormous, and little is known about most N2-fixing symbioses in natural ecosystems12. Here, we show that co-occurring, closely related herbs exhibit diverse SNF strategies. In response to a nitrogen supply gradient, four species fixed less N2 than they needed (over-regulation), two fixed what they needed (facultative) and two did not downregulate SNF (obligate). No species downregulated but fixed more N2 than it needed (under-regulation or incomplete downregulation), but some species under-regulated or incompletely downregulated structural allocation to SNF. In fact, most species maintained nodules (the root structures that house symbionts) when they did not fix N2, suggesting decoupling of SNF activity and structure. Simulations showed that over-regulation of SNF activity is more adaptive than under-regulation or incomplete downregulation, and that different strategies have wildly different effects on ecosystem-level nitrogen cycling.

  • Subscribe to Nature Plants for full access:

    $62

    Subscribe

Additional access options:

Already a subscriber?  Log in  now or  Register  for online access.

References

  1. 1.

    et al. Transformation of the nitrogen cycle. Recent trends, questions, and potential solutions. Science 320, 889–892 (2008).

  2. 2.

    , , , & Nitrogen cycling and feedbacks in a global dynamic land model. Global Biogeochem. Cy. 24, GB1001 (2010).

  3. 3.

    et al. Key role of symbiotic dinitrogen fixation in tropical forest secondary succession. Nature 224, 224–227 (2013).

  4. 4.

    , & in The Biology and Management of Red Alder (eds Hibbs, D., DeBell, D. & Tarrant, R.) 57–72 (Oregon State Univ. Press, 1994).

  5. 5.

    , & Facultative versus obligate nitrogen fixation strategies and their ecosystem consequences. Am. Nat. 174, 465–477 (2009).

  6. 6.

    , , & The nitrogen paradox in tropical forest ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40, 613–635 (2009).

  7. 7.

    , , & Nitrogen export from forested watersheds in the Oregon coast range: the role of N2-fixing red alder. Ecosystems 6, 773–785 (2003).

  8. 8.

    The regulation of symbiotic N2 fixation: a conceptual model of N feedback from the ecosystem to the gene expression level. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 1, 92–120 (1998).

  9. 9.

    & Genetic regulation of biological nitrogen fixation. Nature Rev. Microbiol. 2, 621–631 (2004).

  10. 10.

    , , & Occurrence of nodulation in the Leguminosae. New Phyt. 111, 607–619 (1989).

  11. 11.

    et al. Legume-nodulating betaproteobacteria: diversity, host range, and future prospects. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 24, 1276–1288 (2011).

  12. 12.

    , , & Biological nitrogen fixation: rates, patterns, and ecological controls in terrestrial ecosystems. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 368, 20130119 (2013).

  13. 13.

    , & Facultative nitrogen fixation by canopy legumes in a lowland tropical forest. Oecologia 165, 511–520 (2011).

  14. 14.

    et al. Spatially robust estimates of biological nitrogen (N) fixation imply substantial human alteration of the tropical N cycle. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 8101–8106 (2014).

  15. 15.

    Evolved strategies of nitrogen acquisition by plants. Am. Nat. 118, 607–637 (1981).

  16. 16.

    , & Microbial phylotype composition and diversity predicts plant productivity and plant-soil feedbacks. Ecol. Lett. 16, 167–174 (2013).

  17. 17.

    Invasive legumes fix N2 at high rates in riparian areas of an N-saturated, agricultural catchment. J. Ecol. 99, 515–523 (2011).

  18. 18.

    , & Nitrogen fixation strategies can explain the latitudinal shift in nitrogen-fixing tree abundance. Ecology 95, 2236–2245 (2014).

  19. 19.

    The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11, 233–260 (1980).

  20. 20.

    , , , , & Luxury consumption of soil nutrients: a possible competitive strategy in above-ground and below-ground biomass allocation and root morphology for slow-growing arctic vegetation? J. Ecol. 91, 664–676 (2003).

  21. 21.

    , & From North to South: a latitudinal look at legume nodulation processes. S. Afr. J. Bot. 89, 31–41 (2013).

  22. 22.

    & Ecosystem constraints to symbiotic nitrogen fixers: a simple model and its implications. Biogeochemistry 46, 179–202 (1999).

  23. 23.

    et al. Resource optimization and symbiotic nitrogen fixation. Ecosystems 4, 369–388 (2001).

  24. 24.

    , & Evolutionary tradeoffs can select against nitrogen fixation and thereby maintain nitrogen limitation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 1573–1578 (2008).

  25. 25.

    & Sanctions, cooperation, and the stability of plant-rhizosphere mutualisms. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 39, 215–236 (2008).

  26. 26.

    , , & Sanctions and mutualism stability: why do rhizobia fix nitrogen? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 685–694 (2002).

  27. 27.

    , & Evolutionary dynamics of nitrogen fixation in the legume-rhizobia symbiosis. PLoS ONE 9, e93670 (2014).

  28. 28.

    et al. An experimental and modeling exploration of the host-sanction hypothesis in legume-rhizobia mutualism. J. Theor. Biol. 259, 423–433 (2009).

  29. 29.

    , & Partner choice in Medicago trunculata-Sinorhizobium symbiosis. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 277, 1947–1951 (2010).

  30. 30.

    & Negotiation, sanctions, and context dependency in the legume-rhizobium mutualism. Am. Nat. 178, 1–14 (2011).

  31. 31.

    & Competition for nodulation in legumes. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 40, 131–157 (1986).

  32. 32.

    Plant Physiology Laboratory Manual (Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1974).

  33. 33.

    , , , & Stable isotopes in plant ecology. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33, 507–559 (2002).

  34. 34.

    & N2-fixation in field settings: estimations based on natural 15N abundance. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 13, 699–756 (1986).

  35. 35.

    et al. Nitrogen fixation in legumes and actinorhizal plants in natural ecosystems: values obtained using 15N natural abundance. Plant Ecol. Divers. 4, 131–140 (2011).

  36. 36.

    & Uncertainty in source partitioning using stable isotopes. Oecologia 127, 171–179 (2001).

  37. 37.

    Model Based Inference in the Life Sciences (Springer, 2008).

  38. 38.

    Ecological Models and Data in R (Princeton Univ. Press, 2008).

  39. 39.

    R Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2013).

  40. 40.

    & R Core Team bbmle: Tools for General Maximum Likelihood Estimation (2014);

  41. 41.

    & Ecosystem succession and nutrient retention: a hypothesis. BioScience 25, 376–381 (1975).

  42. 42.

    , & Patterns of nutrient loss from unpolluted, old-growth temperate forests: evaluation of biogeochemical theory. Ecology 76, 493–509 (1995).

  43. 43.

    , & Nutrient losses over four million years of tropical forest development. Ecology 84, 2231–2255 (2003).

Download references

Acknowledgements

J. Rosene-Mirvis, J. Eastling, A. Martinez, A. Marquez, M. Rosenfield, D. Hardwick and S. Buchholz helped with greenhouse work, and G. Maltais-Landry, K. Epps and N. Lincoln helped with growing medium analysis. S. Perakis, S. Batterman and P. Vitousek commented on the manuscript. P. Vitousek also provided advice and support throughout the project. Funding for the project came from the Carbon Mitigation Initiative, with funding from BP and Ford, as well as Stanford University, Columbia University and Chapman University.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027, USA

    • Duncan N. L. Menge
  2. Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA

    • Amelia A. Wolf
  3. Schmid College of Science and Technology, Chapman University, Orange, California 92866, USA

    • Jennifer L. Funk

Authors

  1. Search for Duncan N. L. Menge in:

  2. Search for Amelia A. Wolf in:

  3. Search for Jennifer L. Funk in:

Contributions

D.N.L.M., A.A.W. and J.L.F. designed the study, performed experiments and gathered data. D.N.L.M. developed and ran models, analysed data and was primary writer. A.A.W. and J.L.F. contributed to writing.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Duncan N. L. Menge.

Supplementary information