<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "journalpublishing.dtd">
<article xml:lang="EN" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Fungal Biol.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Fungal Biology</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Fungal Biol.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">2673-6128</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/ffunb.2021.741813</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Fungal Biology</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Original Research</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>The Effect of Surrounding Vegetation on the Mycorrhizal Fungal Communities of the Temperate Tree <italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> Jacq.</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name><surname>Boeraeve</surname> <given-names>Margaux</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c001"><sup>&#x0002A;</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1408467/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Leroux</surname> <given-names>Olivier</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/95296/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>De Lange</surname> <given-names>Ruben</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1478205/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Verbeken</surname> <given-names>Annemieke</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Jacquemyn</surname> <given-names>Hans</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/451266/overview"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1"><sup>1</sup><institution>Plant Conservation and Population Biology, Biology Department, KU Leuven</institution>, <addr-line>Leuven</addr-line>, <country>Belgium</country></aff>
<aff id="aff2"><sup>2</sup><institution>Department of Biology, Ghent University</institution>, <addr-line>Ghent</addr-line>, <country>Belgium</country></aff>
<aff id="aff3"><sup>3</sup><institution>Research Group Mycology, Department of Biology, Ghent University</institution>, <addr-line>Ghent</addr-line>, <country>Belgium</country></aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p>Edited by: Monica Calvo-Polanco, University of Salamanca, Spain</p></fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p>Reviewed by: Alfonso Navarro Rodenas, Universidad de Murcia, Spain; Sabine Dagmar Zimmermann, D&#x000E9;l&#x000E9;gation Languedoc Roussillon (CNRS), France</p></fn>
<corresp id="c001">&#x0002A;Correspondence: Margaux Boeraeve  <email>margaux.boeraeve&#x00040;gmail.com</email></corresp>
<fn fn-type="other" id="fn001"><p>This article was submitted to Fungi-Plant Interactions, a section of the journal Frontiers in Fungal Biology</p></fn></author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>25</day>
<month>10</month>
<year>2021</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2021</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>2</volume>
<elocation-id>741813</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>15</day>
<month>07</month>
<year>2021</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>29</day>
<month>09</month>
<year>2021</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#x000A9; 2021 Boeraeve, Leroux, De Lange, Verbeken and Jacquemyn.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2021</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Boeraeve, Leroux, De Lange, Verbeken and Jacquemyn</copyright-holder>
<license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.</p></license> </permissions>
<abstract><p>About 90% of all land plants form mycorrhiza to facilitate the acquisition of essential nutrients such as phosphorus, nitrogen, and sometimes carbon. Based on the morphology of the interaction and the identity of the interacting plants and fungi, four major mycorrhizal types have been distinguished: arbuscular mycorrhiza (AM), ectomycorrhizal (EcM), ericoid mycorrhiza, and orchid mycorrhiza. Although most plants are assumed to form only one type of mycorrhiza, some species simultaneously form associations with two mycorrhizal types within a single root system. However, the dual-mycorrhizal status of many species is under discussion and in some plant species the simultaneous association with two mycorrhizal types varies in space or time or depends on the ecological context. Here, we assessed the mycorrhizal communities associating with common hawthorn (<italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic>), a small tree that commonly associates with AM fungi, and investigated the potential factors that underlie variation in mycorrhizal community composition. Histological staining of <italic>C. monogyna</italic> roots showed the presence of a Hartig net and hyphal sheaths in and around the roots, demonstrating the capacity of <italic>C. monogyna</italic> to form EcM. Meta-barcoding of soil and root samples of <italic>C. monogyna</italic> collected in AM-dominated grassland vegetation and in mixed AM &#x0002B; EcM forest vegetation showed a much higher number of EcM sequences and OTUs in root and soil samples from mixed AM &#x0002B; EcM vegetation than in samples from pure AM vegetation. We conclude that <italic>C. monogyna</italic> is able to form both AM and EcM, but that the extent to which it does depends on the environmental context, i.e., the mycorrhizal type of the surrounding vegetation.</p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>dual-mycorrhizal</kwd>
<kwd>ectomycorrhizal</kwd>
<kwd>arbuscular mycorrhiza</kwd>
<kwd>WGA-FITC</kwd>
<kwd>metabarcoding</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<contract-sponsor id="cn001">Onderzoeksraad, KU Leuven<named-content content-type="fundref-id">10.13039/501100004497</named-content></contract-sponsor>
<counts>
<fig-count count="4"/>
<table-count count="0"/>
<equation-count count="0"/>
<ref-count count="56"/>
<page-count count="11"/>
<word-count count="8085"/>
</counts>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec sec-type="intro" id="s1">
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>With more than 90% of the land plants worldwide forming mycorrhiza, this is the ecologically most important mutualistic association between fungi and plants (Smith and Read, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">2008</xref>; van der Heijden et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">2015</xref>; Brundrett and Tedersoo, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">2018</xref>). In return for carbohydrates, the fungus increases nutrient and water uptake by the plant and can provide protection against pests and pathogens (Marx, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">1972</xref>; Smith and Read, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">2008</xref>; Cameron et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">2013</xref>). Depending on the morphology of the roots and the taxonomic plant and fungal groups involved, four main types of mycorrhiza can be distinguished: arbuscular mycorrhiza (AM), ectomycorrhizal (EcM), ericoid mycorrhiza and orchid mycorrhiza (van der Heijden et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">2015</xref>; Brundrett and Tedersoo, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">2018</xref>). Although most plants are assumed to form only one type of mycorrhiza (Soudzilovskaia et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">2020</xref>), some species are known to form associations with fungi of more than one mycorrhizal type (Teste et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>). These plants are referred to as dual-mycorrhizal plants and generally form AM and EcM (Teste et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>).</p>
<p>With 71% of all land plants consistently (and 7% inconsistently) associating with fungi of the phylum Glomeromycota, AM is the most widespread type of mycorrhiza (Brundrett and Tedersoo, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">2018</xref>). This mycorrhizal type can be further subdivided in two morphological types: the <italic>Arum</italic>-type, characterized by the presence of arbuscules and intercellular hyphae, and the <italic>Paris</italic>-type, characterized by the presence of intracellular hyphal coils (Dickson et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">2007</xref>). About 8,500 plant species are known to form associations with ectomycorrhizal fungi (EcMF), (Brundrett and Tedersoo, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">2018</xref>). While AM are formed by one monophyletic group of fungi, the EcM lifestyle independently evolved multiple times within the fungal kingdom and can be found in various groups within the Ascomycota and Basidiomycota (Martin et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">2016</xref>). In EcM, the fungus typically does not penetrate the plant cells but forms a dense, labyrinthine structure of hyphae between the epidermal and cortical plant root cells, called the Hartig net, and encloses the plant root with a hyphal sheath (Brundrett and Tedersoo, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">2018</xref>). AM and EcM do not only differ morphologically, but also in their capabilities to take up nutrients, e.g., the mobilization of <italic>N</italic> and <italic>P</italic> from organic substrates (Read and Perez-Moreno, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">2003</xref>).</p>
<p>Dual-mycorrhizal plants vary in the extent to which they are colonized by and depend on either of the two mycorrhizal types. In some species, both types can be found simultaneously within the same root system, while in others the presence of either type will depend on the life history stage of the host plant and local environmental factors such as soil conditions or the surrounding vegetation (Teste et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>). In their recently proposed classification of dual-mycorrhizal plants, Teste et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>) call the former context-free dual-mycorrhizal plants and the latter temporally dependent or spatially dependent dual-mycorrhizal plants. In temporally dependent dual-mycorrhizal plants, mycorrhizal type dominance varies between life history stages of a species, while in spatially dependent dual-mycorrhizal plants mycorrhizal type dominance varies between habitats or regions (Teste et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>). Due to the eco-physiological differences between the two mycorrhizal types, the type that will be most beneficial largely depends on local habitat characteristics (Read and Perez-Moreno, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">2003</xref>).</p>
<p>Surrounding vegetation is known to affect mycorrhizal community composition, by affecting local abiotic conditions, by providing the inoculum from which the roots are colonized or through competitive interactions between mycorrhizal types. Gr&#x000FC;nfeld et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2020</xref>), for example, showed that roots of AM forest herbs were more extensively colonized by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) in forest stands with a high cover of AM trees than in stands with a low cover of AM trees. McHugh and Gehring (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">2006</xref>) found that the presence of AM shrub negatively affected EcM colonization in <italic>Pinus edulis</italic>. How surrounding vegetation affects the interaction between EcMF and AMF within the same, dual-mycorrhizal plant species is however far less studied.</p>
<p>The major goal of this study was to gain a better understanding of how surrounding vegetation can affect the mycorrhizal communities of individual plants by testing the hypothesis that the mycorrhizal communities of the temperate tree <italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> Jacq. strongly differ depending on the surrounding vegetation. Species from the genera <italic>Alnus, Eucalyptus, Populus</italic> and <italic>Salix</italic> are widely accepted to be dual-mycorrhizal, but for many other plant species the mycorrhizal status is not clear and under discussion (Brundrett and Tedersoo, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">2020</xref>; Teste et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>). This is caused by differences in definitions for the various mycorrhizal types, incorrect assignments of a certain mycorrhizal type and errors accumulating in databases [see Brundrett and Tedersoo (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">2020</xref>) and Teste et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>) for more details]. One example of such a disputed plant species is <italic>C. monogyna</italic>, which is considered purely AM according to some sources (Brundrett and Tedersoo, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">2020</xref>; Soudzilovskaia et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">2020</xref>) and dual-mycorrhizal according to others (Trappe, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">1962</xref>; Harley and Harley, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">1987</xref>; Maremmani et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2003</xref>; Bueno et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">2017</xref>; Teste et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>). While its AM status is not under discussion, it is its EcM status that needs confirmation. More specifically, we assessed the dual-mycorrhizal nature of <italic>C. monogyna</italic> by microscopically examining roots for ectomycorrhizal diagnostic features (i.e., the presence of a Hartig net and hyphal sheath), and tested whether the mycorrhizal type of the surrounding vegetation (AM dominated grassland or mixed AM and EcM forest edge) affected the AMF and EcMF communities in the roots of <italic>C. monogyna</italic>.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="materials and methods" id="s2">
<title>Materials and Methods</title>
<sec>
<title>Study Species</title>
<p><italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> Jacq. is a thorny shrub or small tree from the Rosaceae family, that occurs in deciduous forests, thickets and hedges. It is a common species within the study area (i.e., northeastern Belgium) and is native to most of Europe, North Africa and West Asia (Christensen, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">1992</xref>). It is a broadleaved species that produces easily degradable litter and has some genus-specific associated saprotrophic fungi [e.g., <italic>Tubaria dispersa</italic> and <italic>Parasola crataegi</italic> (Szark&#x000E1;ndi et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">2017</xref>)]. It has a typical taproot system, with one well-developed taproot that grows vertically and several smaller lateral roots that grow horizontally (K&#x000E1;r&#x000E1;sz, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">2006</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Sampling</title>
<p>Root samples from twenty <italic>C. monogyna</italic> trees were taken in a paired sampling strategy across ten locations in central Belgium (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM1">Supplementary Figure 1</xref>). At each location two trees were selected, one in the forest edge, surrounded by vegetation of both the ectomycorrhizal (EcM) and arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) type and one in grassland, surrounded purely by vegetation of the AM type. Sampling took place in the forest edge to minimize differences in soil conditions and light exposure between the samples from mixed EcM &#x0002B; AM vegetation and pure AM vegetation. The dominant EcM tree species in the forest edge was <italic>Quercus robur</italic> at each sampling location, sometimes intermixed with <italic>Salix</italic> spp. or <italic>Corylus avellana</italic>. Root samples were taken by following a large lateral root from the base of the stem until the finest roots at three points around the stem. Only the finest roots were collected and transported to the lab, where they were carefully washed to remove soil particles. From these washed roots, 0.2 g was used for DNA extraction and the rest to determine root colonization levels. Additionally, five soil cores were taken with a soil auger around the base of each sampled tree and pooled into one composite soil sample.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Microscopic Analysis</title>
<p>To determine root colonization levels, root samples were cleared in 5% KOH at 65&#x000B0;C for 1.5 hours, washed with distilled water and subsequently stained in 0.05% Trypan blue at 65&#x000B0;C for 1.5 hours. Finally, they were transferred to lactoglycerol for destaining for 48 hours before they were microscopically examined. EcM root colonization levels were determined using the gridline intersections method under a dissecting microscope (Giovannetti and Mosse, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">1980</xref>). When EcM root tips were found, sections were made from a subset of these root tips to check for EcM structures (Hartig net, mantle). Microscopic examination for the presence of AM fungi was done according to the magnified intersections method, as described by McGonigle et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">1990</xref>). For each intersection the presence of arbuscules, vesicles, hyphal coils and aseptate hyphae was noted. Colonization levels of each of these structures were determined by dividing the number of intersections where these were found by the total number of intersections examined.</p>
<p>In one of the sampling locations, additional <italic>C. monogyna</italic> root samples were taken in the forest edge for more extensive root histology. Segments containing the root apex were fixed in 4% v/v paraformaldehyde in PEM buffer (50 mM piperazine-N,N&#x02032;-bis(2-ethanesulfonic acid), 5 mM MgSO<sub>4</sub> and 5 mM ethylene glycol tetraacetic acid, pH 6.9) for microscopic analysis, and the remaining segments were stored in 2&#x000D7; CTAB extraction buffer (2% w/v CTAB (Cetyl trimethylammonium bromide), 100 mM Tris-HCl, 1.4 M NaCl and 20 mM EDTA (Ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid) for molecular analysis. The samples were rinsed in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS: prepared from a 10&#x000D7; stock solution-&#x02212;80 g NaCl, 28.6 g Na<sub>2</sub>HPO<sub>4</sub>.12H<sub>2</sub>O and 2 g KH<sub>2</sub>PO<sub>4</sub> in 1 L demineralized H<sub>2</sub>O, pH 7.2), dehydrated in an increasing ethanol series (30, 50, 70, 85and 100% v/v), infiltrated with and embedded in LR White acrylate resin. Semi-thin (500 nm) sections were cut with a Leica Ultracut UC7 ultramicrotome equipped with a diamond histoknife (Diatome). Sections, collected on poly-L-lysine glass slides (Carl Roth), were stained with 1% w/v toluidine blue O and 1% w/v sodium tetraborate (Car Roth) and mounted in DPX (VWR).</p>
<p>A chitin-binding probe, wheat germ agglutinin (WGA) linked to fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC; Sigma Aldrich) was used to stain hyphal cell walls. To this end, semi-thin sections were first incubated in 1 M NaOH for 2 hours to unmask chitin binding sites and then in 3% w/v milk protein to block non-specific binding sites. After rinsing with three changes of PBS for 10 minutes each, sections were incubated with 1:10 dilution of WGA-FITC in PBS for 2 hours. Negative control sections were prepared by omitting the antibody. Cellulose (plant cell walls) and chitin (hyphal cell walls) were stained with a beta-glucan-specific dye Calcofluor White M2R fluorochrome (Fluorescent brightener 28, Sigma, 0.25 &#x003BC;g ml-1 in dH<sub>2</sub>O) for 5 min. Sections were washed in PBS three times before mounting in a glycerol-based anti-fade solution (Citifluor AF2, Citifluor Ltd., UK). Slides were observed with a Nikon Ni-U epifluorescence microscope equipped with filter cubes for Calcofluor White (excitation 365/15BP; dichroic mirror 400LP; emission 420LP) and FITC (excitation 480/20BP; dichroic mirror 505LP; emission 410LP) imaging. Images were recorded using a Nikon DS-Fi3 digital camera.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Molecular Analysis of Plant Root Identity</title>
<p>To confirm that the sampled roots belonged to <italic>C. monogyna</italic>, DNA was extracted from the root segments stored in 2&#x000D7; CTAB buffer using the DNeasy Plant mini kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer&#x00027;s instructions. Two regions were amplified: (1) the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) of nuclear ribosomal DNA using the primers ITS1 and ITS4 (White et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">1990</xref>), (2) the intergenic spacer trnH-psbA of the plastid DNA using the primers psbAF and trnHR (Sang et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">1997</xref>). Protocols for PCR amplification follow Le et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">2007</xref>). PCR products were sequenced using an automated ABI 3,730 XL capillary sequencer at Macrogen. Forward and reverse sequences were assembled into contigs and edited where needed with BioloMICS (BioAware SA NV). The resulting sequences were blasted against NCBI GenBank using BLASTN with standard parameters.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Metabarcoding</title>
<p>Root samples used in meta-barcoding were shredded before weighing 0.2 g for DNA extraction. DNA was extracted from these root samples and from 0.25 g of the soil samples using the Soil DNA Isolation Plus kit (Norgen Biotek Corp.) according to the manufacturer&#x00027;s instructions. From the DNA, two regions were amplified: the ITS2 rDNA region and part of the 18S SSU rDNA region. The first was amplified using the ITS86F and ITS4 primer pair, which mainly targets Dikarya fungi and is thus suitable to determine EcMF communities (Op De Beeck et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">2014</xref>). The second region was amplified using the AMV4.5NF and AMDGR primer pair, which specifically targets Glomeromycota and is thus suitable to determine AMF communities (Van Geel et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">2014</xref>). These primers were specifically modified to allow for metabarcoding on Illumina Miseq and consisted of the Illumina adaptor sequence, a unique index sequence, a 10 nucleotide pad sequence, a two nucleotide linker sequence and the gene-specific primer (Kozich et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">2013</xref>). Amplification through PCR was carried out in 25 &#x003BC;l reaction volumes, each consisting of 1 &#x003BC;l of template DNA, 0.5 &#x003BC;l of each of the primers (20 &#x003BC;M), 5 &#x003BC;l ALLin HiFi Buffer (1.25 mM dNTPS, 15 mM MgCL<sub>2</sub>), (HighQu, Kraichtal, Germany) and 0.25 &#x003BC;l ALLin HiFi DNA Polymerase (2 u/&#x003BC;l), (HighQU, Kraichtal, Germany). PCR reactions with the ITS86F and ITS4 primer pair started with 1 min at 95&#x000B0;C, followed by 35 cycles of 20 sec at 95&#x000B0;C, 30 sec at 52&#x000B0;C and 30 sec at 72&#x000B0;C and ended with 5 min final extension at 72&#x000B0;C. PCR reactions with the AMV4.5NF and AMDGR primer pair started with 1 min at 95&#x000B0;C, followed by 35 cycles of 15 sec at 95&#x000B0;C, 45 sec at 65&#x000B0;C and 60 sec at 72&#x000B0;C and ended with a 5 min final extension at 72&#x000B0;C. PCR products were purified using Agencourt AMPure XP beads (Beckman Coulter, Brea, CA) and equimolarly pooled in two libraries (one for each primer pair) after measuring the concentration on the Qubit 3.0 Fluorometer (Invitrogen, NY, USA). The size distribution and quality of the library was checked using gel electrophoresis and DNA of the right size was extracted from the gel using QIAquick gel extraction kit (Qiagen). Finally, the libraries were diluted to 2 nm and sent to Genomics Core Leuven for sequencing on Illumina Miseq 2 &#x000D7; 250.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Bioinformatics</title>
<p>For each of the two metabarcoding datasets, demultiplexed reads were merged, quality filtered and clustered into OTUs using USEARCH (Edgar, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">2010</xref>). First, forward and reverse reads were merged using the <italic>fastq_mergepairs</italic> command with a maximum of 10 mismatches and a minimum 80% id of alignment. From these merged pairs, sequences shorter than 200 bp and with more than 1.0 expected errors were filtered out using the <italic>fastq_filter</italic> command. Using the <italic>fastx_uniques</italic> command, unique sequences were recovered to use in 97% Operational Taxonomic Unit (OTU) clustering with the <italic>cluster_otus</italic> command. Finally, an OTU table was constructed with the <italic>otutab</italic> command. To minimize the number of erroneous sequences, which can be produced during PCR and sequencing (Alberdi et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">2018</xref>), an extra filtering step was performed for each sample in which we removed OTUs that were represented by &#x0003C;0.01% of the sequences in that sample. Reference sequences from the ITS2 dataset were compared against the UNITE database (K&#x000F5;ljalg et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">2013</xref>) and sequences that could not be attributed a taxonomy with certainty of 0.8 or higher were BLASTed against NCBI GenBank with the following criteria for a hit: sequence similarity at least 97% (for species-level identification) or 90% (for genus-level identification), alignment at least 95% and <italic>E</italic>-value &#x0003C;1<italic>e</italic> &#x02013; 50. To determine the ecological guild of all OTUs that could be identified at least at genus-level, FUNGuild was used (Nguyen et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">2016</xref>). All OTUs with an ectomycorrhizal lifestyle were retained in one OTU table for further analyses (hereafter referred to as the EcMF OTU table). Consensus sequences from OTUs of the 18S SSU dataset were BLASTed against the MaarjAM database (&#x000D6;pik et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">2010</xref>) with the following criteria for a hit: sequence similarity at least 97%, alignment at least 95% and <italic>E</italic>-value &#x0003C;1<italic>e</italic> &#x02013; 50. Sequences that did not return a hit were BLASTed against NCBI Genbank with the same criteria as for the ITS2 dataset. All OTUs belonging to the Glomeromycota were united in one OTU table for further analyses (hereafter referred to as the AMF OTU table). Raw sequencing data was submitted to the NCBI Sequence Read Archive and is available under Bioproject PRJNA672927.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Soil Analyses</title>
<p>From the soil samples, soil pH, moisture content, organic matter content, and ammonium, nitrate and phosphorus concentration were determined. Soil pH was measured with a pH probe in a 1:5 soil: deionized water mixture which was first shaken for 20 min. Moisture and organic matter content of the soil were determined through the weight loss of &#x000B1;10 g of soil after drying at 105&#x000B0;C for 12 hours and after combustion of organic material at 650&#x000B0;C for 2 hours. Soil ammonium and nitrate concentration were measured by shaking 5 g of soil in 25 ml of 1 M KCl for 30 min, centrifuging the solution for 5 min at 3,500 g and colometrically analyzing the supernatant on an Evolution 201 UV-visible spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, Madison, USA). Plant-available phosphorous was determined through the use of anion exchange resin membranes (BDH Chemicals Ltd. Poole England), which were first shaken in 0.5 M NaHCO<sub>3</sub> for 16 hours, then shaken for 16 hours in a solution of 3 g soil in 30 ml deionized water and finally rinsed and shaken in 0.5 M HCl for 16 hours. The phosphorus concentration of this HCl solution is then determined by measuring the Malachite Green reaction with the Evolution 201 UV-visible spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, Madison, USA).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Statistical Analyses</title>
<p>Differences in soil environmental factors (pH, moisture, organic matter, ammonium, nitrate and phosphorus) between the grassland and forest edge were tested using paired <italic>t</italic>-tests. Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLMM) were used to test for differences in the number of EcMF sequences, AMF sequences, EcMF OTUs and AMF OTUs between vegetation types (grassland or forest edge) and sample types (root or soil). Sampling site was added as a random factor and either a Poisson or negative binomial distribution was used in the GLMMs. To test for differences in root colonization levels by arbuscules, aseptate hyphae, vesicles and hyphal coils between vegetation types, GLMMs were used with a binomial distribution and sampling site as a random factor. Models were fitted using the lme4 package (Bates et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">2015</xref>). Redundancy analysis (RDA) was used to analyze patterns in community composition for samples with more than 100 sequences. The <italic>ordiR2step</italic> function from the <italic>vegan</italic> package (Oksanen et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">2019</xref>) was used in forward stepwise selection of the best model, starting from the full model which included vegetation type (grassland or forest edge), sample type (root or soil), soil environmental factors, and spatial structure [through the use of principal coordinate analysis of neighbor matrices (PCNM), calculated with the <italic>pcnm</italic> function from the <italic>vegan</italic> package (Oksanen et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">2019</xref>)]. Permutation tests with 999 permutations were used to test the significance of axes and terms of the final model. These analyses were performed twice, once with the AMF OTU table and once with the EcMF OTU table.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="results" id="s3">
<title>Results</title>
<sec>
<title>Microscopic Analysis</title>
<p><italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> roots were extensively colonized by AMF with hyphal colonization rates varying between 46 and 96%. Hyphal colonization rates were significantly lower (GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = &#x02212;2.239, <italic>p</italic> = 0.025) in root samples from the forest edge (65.67 &#x000B1; 16.61%) than in root samples from grassland (79.55 &#x000B1; 11.70%). Arbuscular mycorrhizal structures included arbuscules (12.60 &#x000B1; 10.34%, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure 1A</xref>), hyphal coils (18.62 &#x000B1; 8.90%, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure 1B</xref>) and vesicles (18.82 &#x000B1; 11.66%, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure 1C</xref>), showing the co-occurrence of the <italic>Paris</italic>-type and <italic>Arum</italic>-type AM. Root colonization by arbuscules tended to be lower (GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = &#x02212;1.774, <italic>p</italic> = 0.076) in root samples from the forest edge (11.11 &#x000B1; 8.94%) than from grassland (14.09 &#x000B1; 12.24%). There was no significant difference in colonization levels by hyphal coils or vesicles (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figures 1D&#x02013;G</xref>). Ectomycorrhizal structures were found in four of the 12 samples studied microscopically, which all came from the forest edge. Ectomycorrhizal colonization levels were low however, varying between 5.7 and 9.6%.</p>
<fig id="F1" position="float">
<label>Figure 1</label>
<caption><p>Arbuscular mycorrhizal structures found in the roots of <italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> included aseptate hyphae, arbuscules <bold>(A)</bold>, hyphal coils <bold>(B)</bold> and vesicles <bold>(C)</bold>. Hyphal colonization rates <bold>(D)</bold> were significantly higher (GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = &#x02212;2.239, <italic>p</italic> = 0.025) and arbuscular colonization rates <bold>(E)</bold> tended to be higher (GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = &#x02212;1.774, <italic>p</italic> = 0.076) in root samples from grassland than from the forest edge. No significant difference was found in root colonization levels by hyphal coils <bold>(F)</bold> and vesicles <bold>(G)</bold> between root samples from grassland and from forest edge. Scale bar: 50 &#x003BC;m.</p></caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="ffunb-02-741813-g0001.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>Additional, more extensive root histology of a transverse section through a <italic>Crataegus</italic> root tip showed a hyphal sheath that completely surrounded the mycorrhizal root as well as a Hartig net, an intercellular network of hyphae that penetrates through the peripheral root cortical cell layers (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">Figure 2</xref>). To provide stronger evidence for the presence of these fungal structures, sections were incubated with WGA-FITC, which stains chitin in fungal cell walls, allowing discrimination between fungal and plant cell walls. WGA-FITC labeling was restricted to the structures that were morphologically identified as the hyphal sheath and Hartig net (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">Figures 2B,E,F</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F2" position="float">
<label>Figure 2</label>
<caption><p>Stained and labeled transverse <italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> root sections. <bold>(A)</bold> Overview section stained with toluidine blue O. <bold>(B)</bold> Equivalent section labeled with WGA-FITC; cell walls of the hyphal sheath are clearly labeled. <bold>(C)</bold> Equivalent control section showing weak auto fluorescence of plant root cell walls. <bold>(D)</bold> Detail of section labeled with calcofluor white, which stains both hyphal and plant cell walls. <bold>(E)</bold> Equivalent section labeled with WGA-FITC, which clearly binds to the cell walls of the hyphal sheath and the Hartig net. <bold>(C)</bold> Overlay of image <bold>(D)</bold> and <bold>(E)</bold>. Hs: hyphal sheath; Rc: root cortex; Rv: root vascular cylinder; Hn: Hartig Net; Scale bars: <bold>(A-C)</bold>: 100 &#x003BC;m; <bold>(D-F)</bold>: 40 &#x003BC;m.</p></caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="ffunb-02-741813-g0002.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>Sequencing of the root segment originating from the same root sample used in microscopic analysis confirmed that the sampled roots belonged to <italic>C. monogyna</italic> (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM1">Supplementary Table 1</xref>). For the ITS sequence, the first hit corresponded with <italic>C. monogyna</italic>, with an <italic>E</italic>-value of 0.0 and a sequence similarity percentage of 99.84%. The second and third hit had the same sequence similarity percentage, but corresponded to <italic>C. heldreichii</italic>, a closely related species that does not naturally occur in the study area. For the intergenic spacer trnH-psbA sequence, the BLAST result showed a sequence similarity percentage of 100% and low <italic>E</italic>-values corresponding with <italic>C. monogyna</italic>. Combining the BLAST results from both molecular markers confirmed that the root tip used for the microscopic study unambiguously belonged to <italic>C. monogyna</italic>. The combination of the molecular and aforementioned morpho-chemical experiments therefore suggests that <italic>C. monogyna</italic> roots can engage in ectomycorrhizal associations.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Soil Conditions</title>
<p>No significant differences in soil conditions were found between soil samples collected in grassland vegetation and samples from the forest edge (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM1">Supplementary Table 2</xref>). Grassland and forest edge soils had on average respectively a pH of 6.51 and 6.14, 15.8 and 15.9% moisture content, 12.2 and 12.8% soil organic matter content, 36.1 and 33.1 mg plant-available <italic>P</italic> per kg soil, 15.6 and 7.5 mg <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1"><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>NO</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:math></inline-formula> per kg soil and 2.8 and 1.4 mg <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2"><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>NH</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>4</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x0002B;</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:math></inline-formula> per kg soil.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Ectomycorrhizal Fungal Communities</title>
<p>After quality filtering and clustering of the ITS2 database, 879 036 sequences were assigned to 2,530 OTUs. Of those OTUs, 385 were assigned a taxonomy at genus-or species-level with a minimum certainty of 0.8 with the UNITE database. Additionally, 1,040 OTUs were assigned a taxonomy at genus-or species-level via NCBI Genbank, while the other 1,105 OTUs could not be reliably assigned to a genus. According to FUNGuild, 170 OTUs (122 631 sequences) had an ectomycorrhizal lifestyle, which were used in further analyses. These OTUs belonged to 33 genera, of which <italic>Tomentella</italic> (31 OTUs)<italic>, Inocybe</italic> (21 OTUs)<italic>, Russula</italic> (20 OTUs)<italic>, Cortinarius</italic> (16 OTUs) and <italic>Hymenogaster</italic> (11 OTUs) were the most OTU rich. Overall, most EcMF sequences belonged to the genus <italic>Russula</italic> (20.0% of the sequences), followed by <italic>Tomentella</italic> (13.2%), <italic>Clavulina</italic> (12.8%), <italic>Inocybe</italic> (11.5%) and <italic>Melanogaster</italic> (8.2%), (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">Figure 3A</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F3" position="float">
<label>Figure 3</label>
<caption><p>Ectomycorrhizal community composition and OTU diversity in the roots of <italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> collected in grassland and forest edge vegetation as determined through metabarcoding with the ITS86F and ITS4 primer pair. <bold>(A)</bold> Relative number of sequences of EcMF genera. <bold>(B)</bold> The number of EcMF sequences was significantly higher in the mixed AM &#x0002B; EcM vegetation of the forest edge than in AM-dominated grassland vegetation and in soil samples compared to root samples. <bold>(C)</bold> The number of EcMF OTUs was significantly higher in samples from the forest edge compared to grassland and in soil samples compared to root samples.</p></caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="ffunb-02-741813-g0003.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>The number of EcMF sequences differed significantly between samples from grassland and forest edge (GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = 4.636; <italic>p</italic> &#x0003C; 0.001) and between root and soil samples (GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = 2.192, <italic>p</italic> = 0.028). Samples from the forest edge had more EcMF sequences than samples from grassland (respectively 5,933 &#x000B1; 5,743 sequences and 199 &#x000B1; 712 sequences). Soil samples contained on average 4,340 &#x000B1; 6,013 sequences, while root samples contained 1,792 &#x000B1; 3,350 sequences (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">Figure 3B</xref>). Similarly, EcMF OTU richness was significantly higher in samples from the forest edge than in samples from grassland (respectively 18 &#x000B1; 14 OTUs and 3 &#x000B1; 5 OTUs; GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = 12.9, <italic>p</italic> &#x0003C; 0.001) and in soil samples than in root samples (respectively 14 &#x000B1; 16 OTUs and 7 &#x000B1; 8 OTUs; GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = 6.4, <italic>p</italic> &#x0003C; 0.001), (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">Figure 3C</xref>). Sample type, however, had no significant effect on community composition. The best model explaining variation in EcMF community composition included soil pH, spatial variability (in the form of the first eigenvector of the principal coordinate analysis of neighbor matrices or PCNM) and soil moisture content (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM1">Supplementary Table 2A</xref>). Comparison of EcMF community composition between samples from forest edge and grassland was not possible due to too few samples from grassland with sufficient EcMF sequences.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungal Communities</title>
<p>After quality filtering and clustering of the 18S SSU database, 427 099 sequences belonging to 1,127 OTUs remained. Of these, 60 466 sequences belonging to 83 OTUs could reliably be attributed to the Glomeromycota and were put together in the AMF OTU table. AMF communities were dominated by the genus <italic>Glomus</italic> (54 OTUs and 87.6% of the sequences), while the other genera <italic>Claroideoglomus</italic> (18 OTUs and 8.5% of the sequences)<italic>, Paraglomus</italic> (2 OTUs and 1.9% of the sequences)<italic>, Scutellospora</italic> (2 OTUs and 0.8% of the sequences)<italic>, Diversispora</italic> (2 OTUs and 0.8% of the sequences) and <italic>Acaulospora</italic> (5 OTUs and 0.4% of the sequences) were much less abundant (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">Figure 4A</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F4" position="float">
<label>Figure 4</label>
<caption><p>Arbuscular mycorrhizal community composition and OTU diversity in the roots of <italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> collected in grassland and forest edge vegetation as determined through metabarcoding with the AMV4.5NF and AMDGR primer pair. <bold>(A)</bold> Relative number of sequences of AMF genera. <bold>(B)</bold> The number of AMF sequences did not differ between the mixed AM &#x0002B; EcM vegetation of the forest edge and the AM-dominated grassland vegetation or between soil and root samples. <bold>(C)</bold> AMF OTU richness was lower in samples from the forest edge compared to samples from grassland and in root samples compared to soil samples.</p></caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="ffunb-02-741813-g0004.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>No significant difference in the number of AMF sequences was found between samples from grassland and from forest edge (GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = &#x02212;1.70, <italic>p</italic> = 0.09) or between root and soil samples (GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = 0.21, <italic>p</italic> = 0.83), (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">Figure 4B</xref>). AMF OTU richness was, however, lower in samples from the forest edge compared to samples from grassland (respectively 10 &#x000B1; 6 OTUs and 14 &#x000B1; 8 OTUs; GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = &#x02212;2.97, <italic>p</italic> = 0.003) and in root samples compared to soil samples (respectively 10 &#x000B1; 5 OTUs and 14 &#x000B1; 8 OTUs; GLMM: <italic>z</italic> = 3.69, <italic>p</italic> &#x0003C; 0.001), (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">Figure 4C</xref>). AMF community composition did not differ between soil and root samples or between samples from forest edge and from grassland. The best RDA model explaining variation in AMF community composition included soil pH and phosphorus (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM1">Supplementary Table 2B</xref>).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="discussion" id="s4">
<title>Discussion</title>
<sec>
<title>Is <italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> a Dual-Mycorrhizal Plant?</title>
<p>The presence of a Hartig net and hyphal sheath in and around the roots of <italic>C. monogyna</italic> indicates that this species is capable of forming ectomycorrhizal (EcM). Some saprotrophic fungi have been found to show affinity for roots and to form mantle-like structures (Smith et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">2017</xref>), but metabarcoding of the root-associated fungal communities demonstrated the presence of typical EcMF taxa in <italic>C. monogyna</italic> roots.</p>
<p>However, root colonization levels were low and EcM structures were only found in samples from the mixed AM &#x0002B; EcM vegetation, suggesting that <italic>C. monogyna</italic> is not able to independently support EcM fungi. Whether <italic>C. monogyna</italic> can be considered a dual-mycorrhizal species consequently depends on the definition of an EcM plant: whether it is a species capable of forming EcM structures or a species capable of supporting EcMF (Teste et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>). These results also raise the question whether other species of the genus <italic>Crataegus</italic> are able to form ectomycorrhizal. Although closely related species often share mycorrhizal types or nutritional strategies, this is less often the case in this type of flexible mycorrhizal associations where the mycorrhizal type depends on environmental circumstances (Gerz et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">2018</xref>). Simply attributing the same mycorrhizal status to all other <italic>Crataegus</italic> species will thus probably result in misclassification errors (Bueno et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">2019</xref>). On the other hand, it is likely that <italic>Crataegus</italic> species that are more typically found in forests, such as <italic>C. laevigata</italic> or <italic>C. mollis</italic>, also form ectomycorrhizal and it would thus be interesting to search for EcM structures in these species.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Variation in Mycorrhizal Type Dominance Is Dependent on Vegetation Type</title>
<p>Surrounding vegetation is known to affect mycorrhizal root colonization and mycorrhizal community composition, both in AMF (Hausmann and Hawkes, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">2009</xref>; Gr&#x000FC;nfeld et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2020</xref>) and EcMF (Dickie et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">2004</xref>; Hubert and Gehring, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">2008</xref>). This effect is mostly attributed to the increased availability of inoculum with increasing presence of plants of a certain mycorrhizal type and to host preferences of mycorrhizal fungi (Ishida et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">2007</xref>). Here, we found a much lower number of EcMF sequences and OTUs in the soil of grasslands, indicating a much lower EcMF inoculum availability. In contrast, higher OTU diversity and sequence numbers were found in samples collected along forest edges. EcM structures were also only found in root samples collected in the forest edge. AMF OTU richness, hyphal and arbuscular root colonization, on the other hand, were higher in samples from grassland than from the forest edge. These results indicate that the mycorrhizal type of the surrounding vegetation can have a pronounced effect on the presence of a mycorrhizal type. This has already been observed in tree seedlings, especially after disturbances. For example, Dickie et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">2001</xref>) showed that <italic>Quercus rubra</italic> seedlings planted near <italic>Acer</italic> (AM) stumps in a logged forest stand had higher AMF root colonization rates than seedlings planted near <italic>Quercus</italic> stumps, which had the highest EcMF colonization rate. In another study, AMF were more frequently encountered on <italic>Pinus muricata</italic> seedlings that established in AM-dominated scrub than in EcM-dominated forest after wildfire (Horton et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">1998</xref>). Colonization of these seedlings by EcMF took longer, but once these fungi had colonized the roots, they were more diverse in the EcM-dominated forest than in the AM-dominated scrub where EcMF inoculum availability was much lower.</p>
<p><italic>C. monogyna</italic> roots were extensively colonized by AMF, forming both the <italic>Arum</italic>-type and the <italic>Paris</italic>-type. Both morphological types have been found in the Rosaceae family before but not simultaneously in the same species (Dickson et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">2007</xref>). But the co-occurrence of the two types is known occur in other plant species (Kubota et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">2005</xref>; Salom&#x000F3;n et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">2014</xref>). While the presence of AM in <italic>C. monogyna</italic> roots is standard, the low colonization rates by EcM structures suggest it is optional. To what extent <italic>C. monogyna</italic> and its mycorrhizal partners benefit from the dual colonization remains unknown. Flexibility in mycorrhizal associations has been found to correlate with niche breadth (Gerz et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">2018</xref>). It is possible that optional association with EcMF increases the niche <italic>C. monogyna</italic> can occupy, e.g., through increased flexibility throughout ecosystem development. <italic>C. monogyna</italic> can facilitate the natural succession from grassland to forest by increasing seedling survival of late-successional, shade-tolerant tree species (G&#x000F3;mez-Aparicio et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">2004</xref>). It is also possible that associating with EcMF increases the flexibility of <italic>C. monogyna</italic> to cope with changes in soil properties (e.g., soil temperature, litter type), soil microbial communities and/or surrounding vegetation during forest succession (Teste et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">2020</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Effects of Local Soil Conditions?</title>
<p>Although the dominant mycorrhizal type is known to affect soil conditions (Tedersoo and Bahram, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2019</xref>), no significant difference in soil conditions was found between samples collected from AM dominated grassland and from mixed AM &#x0002B; EcM forest edge. This result indicates that the observed differences in EcM presence can be attributed to differences in inoculum availability and are not the result of differences in soil pH or nutrient availability as a cause. Both EcMF and AMF communities were affected by local soil conditions (respectively soil pH and moisture and soil pH and plant-available phosphorus). This is in line with other studies that have shown that abiotic conditions are important in structuring mycorrhizal communities (Boeraeve et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">2018</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">2019</xref>; van der Linde et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">2018</xref>; Van Geel et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">2018</xref>).</p>
<p>Our results further showed that EcMF and AMF community composition did not significantly differ between soil and root samples, suggesting that <italic>C. monogyna</italic> associates with a random selection of whatever is present in the soil surrounding its root system. Although EcM plants generally associate with a broad range of EcMF, most EcMF show at least some host specificity toward or preference for a particular host plant and EcM plants thus often differ in their EcMF communities, even when growing together (Bruns et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">2002</xref>; Ishida et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">2007</xref>; Lang et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">2011</xref>). In contrast, AMF are considered to have a low host specificity, but some studies have found moderate host selectivity in both grasslands and forests (&#x000D6;pik et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">2009</xref>; Sepp et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">2019</xref>). The fact that no differences in mycorrhizal community compositions were found between root and soil samples could be an indication that EcMF colonization of <italic>C. monogyna</italic> roots is due to opportunistic behavior of the tree, the EcMF or both.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="conclusions" id="s5">
<title>Conclusion</title>
<p>Overall, we conclude that <italic>C. monogyna</italic> is a tree species that is capable of forming associations with fungi that form ectomycorrhizal and arbuscular mycorrhiza. While the species consistently associated with AM, its association with EcM depended on the surrounding vegetation and EcM colonization of the roots is rather low, suggesting <italic>C. monogyna</italic> is not capable of independently supporting EcMF. Whether it can be considered a dual-mycorrhizal plant species thus depends on how an EcM plant is defined: based on morphology (the presence of EcM structures) or functionality (the mutualistic association with EcMF). Further research is needed to determine whether other species of genus <italic>Crataegus</italic> have the same properties and whether <italic>C. monogyna</italic> and/or its mycorrhizal partners experience benefits from dual colonization of the roots.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="data-availability" id="s6">
<title>Data Availability Statement</title>
<p>The datasets presented in this study can be found in online repositories. The names of the repository/repositories and accession number(s) can be found below: <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/</ext-link>, <ext-link ext-link-type="DDBJ/EMBL/GenBank" xlink:href="PRJNA672927">PRJNA672927</ext-link>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s7">
<title>Author Contributions</title>
<p>All authors participated in the conception, and design of the study. MB performed the sampling, soil chemical analyses, bioinformatics, statistical analyses, and wrote the first draft of manuscript. MB, OL, and RD performed the microscopic analyses. All authors contributed to previous versions of the manuscript.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="funding-information" id="s8">
<title>Funding</title>
<p>The research was funded by the KU Leuven (CELSA/19/015).</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="COI-statement" id="conf1">
<title>Conflict of Interest</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="disclaimer" id="s9">
<title>Publisher&#x00027;s Note</title>
<p>All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.</p>
</sec> </body>
<back>
<ack><p>We would like to thank Jan Ruymen and Kevin Lambeets for delivering the required permissions to sample, for helping to select sampling sites, Nathan Schoutteten, Pieter Asselman, Gerrit Peeters for their help with DNA extraction, and amplification. Two reviewers provided useful comments on a previous draft.</p>
</ack><sec sec-type="supplementary-material" id="s10">
<title>Supplementary Material</title>
<p>The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffunb.2021.741813/full#supplementary-material">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffunb.2021.741813/full#supplementary-material</ext-link></p>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Data_Sheet_1.PDF" id="SM1" mimetype="application/pdf" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"/>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="B1">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Alberdi</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Aizpurua</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gilbert</surname> <given-names>M. T. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bohmann</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Scrutinizing key steps for reliable metabarcoding of environmental samples</article-title>. <source>Methods Ecol. Evol.</source> <volume>9</volume>, <fpage>134</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>147</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/2041-210X.12849</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bates</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>M&#x000E4;chler</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bolker</surname> <given-names>B. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Walker</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4</article-title>. <source>J. Stat. Softw.</source> <volume>67</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>48</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18637/jss.v067.i01</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Boeraeve</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Honnay</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jacquemyn</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Effects of host species, environmental filtering and forest age on community assembly of ectomycorrhizal fungi in fragmented forests</article-title>. <source>Fungal Ecol.</source> <volume>36</volume>, <fpage>89</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>98</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.funeco.2018.08.003</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Boeraeve</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Honnay</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jacquemyn</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Local abiotic conditions are more important than landscape context for structuring arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal communities in the roots of a forest herb</article-title>. <source>Oecologia</source> <volume>190</volume>, <fpage>149</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>157</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00442-019-04406-z</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31079274</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B5">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Brundrett</surname> <given-names>M. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tedersoo</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Evolutionary history of mycorrhizal symbioses and global host plant diversity</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>220</volume>, <fpage>1108</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1115</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/nph.14976</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29355963</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B6">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Brundrett</surname> <given-names>M. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tedersoo</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Resolving the mycorrhizal status of important northern hemisphere trees</article-title>. <source>Plant Soil.</source> <volume>454</volume>, <fpage>3</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>34</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11104-020-04627-9</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bruns</surname> <given-names>T. D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bidartondo</surname> <given-names>M. I.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Taylor</surname> <given-names>D. L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2002</year>). <article-title>Host specificity in ectomycorrhizal communities: what do the exceptions tell us?</article-title> <source>Integr. Comp. Biol.</source> <volume>42</volume>, <fpage>352</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>359</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/icb/42.2.352</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21708728</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B8">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bueno</surname> <given-names>C. G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Aldrich-Wolfe</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chaudhary</surname> <given-names>V. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gerz</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Helgason</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hoeksema</surname> <given-names>J. D.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Misdiagnosis and uncritical use of plant mycorrhizal data are not the only elephants in the room</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>224</volume>, <fpage>1415</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1418</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/nph.15976</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31246312</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B9">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bueno</surname> <given-names>C. G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moora</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gerz</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Davison</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>&#x000D6;pik</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>P&#x000E4;rtel</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Plant mycorrhizal status, but not type, shifts with latitude and elevation in Europe</article-title>. <source>Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr.</source> <volume>26</volume>, <fpage>690</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>699</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/geb.12582</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cameron</surname> <given-names>D. D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Neal</surname> <given-names>A. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>van Wees</surname> <given-names>S. C. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ton</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Mycorrhiza-induced resistance: more than the sum of its parts?</article-title> <source>Trends Plant Sci</source>. <volume>18</volume>, <fpage>539</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>545</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tplants.2013.06.004</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23871659</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B11">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Christensen</surname> <given-names>K. I.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1992</year>). <article-title>Revision of Crataegus Sect. Crataegus and nothosect. crataeguineae (Rosaceae-Maloideae) in the old world</article-title>. <source>Syst. Bot. Monogr.</source> <volume>35</volume>:<fpage>1</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2307/25027810</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dickie</surname> <given-names>I. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Guza</surname> <given-names>R. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Krazewski</surname> <given-names>S. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Reich</surname> <given-names>P. B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Shared ectomycorrhizal fungi between a herbaceous perennial (Helianthemum bicknellii) and oak (Quercus) seedlings</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>164</volume>, <fpage>375</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>382</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01177.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">33873549</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B13">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dickie</surname> <given-names>I. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Koide</surname> <given-names>R. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fayish</surname> <given-names>A. C.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2001</year>). <article-title>Vesicular&#x02013;arbuscular mycorrhizal infection of Quercus rubra seedlings</article-title>. <source>New Phytol</source>. <volume>151</volume>, <fpage>257</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>264</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1046/j.1469-8137.2001.00148.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">33873380</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B14">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dickson</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>F. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>S. E.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>Structural differences in arbuscular mycorrhizal symbioses: more than 100 years after Gallaud, where next?</article-title> <source>Mycorrhiza</source> <volume>17</volume>, <fpage>375</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>393</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00572-007-0130-9</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17476535</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B15">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Edgar</surname> <given-names>R. C.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST</article-title>. <source>Bioinformatics</source> <volume>26</volume>, <fpage>2460</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2461</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/bioinformatics/btq461</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20709691</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B16">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gerz</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bueno</surname> <given-names>C. G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ozinga</surname> <given-names>W. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zobel</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moora</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Niche differentiation and expansion of plant species are associated with mycorrhizal symbiosis</article-title>. <source>J. Ecol.</source> <volume>106</volume>, <fpage>254</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>264</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/1365-2745.12873</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Giovannetti</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mosse</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1980</year>). <article-title>An evaluation of techniques for measuring vesicular arbuscular Mycorrhizal infection in roots</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>84</volume>, <fpage>489</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>500</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1469-8137.1980.tb04556.x</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>G&#x000F3;mez-Aparicio</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zamora</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>G&#x000F3;mez</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>H&#x000F3;dar</surname> <given-names>J. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Castro</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Baraza</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Applying plant facilitation to forest restoration: a meta-analysis of the use of shrubs as nurse plants</article-title>. <source>Ecol. Appl.</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>1128</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1138</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1890/03-5084</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gr&#x000FC;nfeld</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wulf</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rillig</surname> <given-names>M. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Manntschke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Veresoglou</surname> <given-names>S. D.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Neighbours of arbuscular-mycorrhiza associating trees are colonized more extensively by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi than their conspecifics in ectomycorrhizal dominated stands</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>227</volume>, <fpage>10</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>13</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/nph.16377</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31849059</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B20">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Harley</surname> <given-names>J. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Harley</surname> <given-names>E. L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>A check-list of mycorrhiza in the British flora</article-title>. <source>New Phytol</source>. <volume>105</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>102</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1469-8137.1987.tb00674.x</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hausmann</surname> <given-names>N. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hawkes</surname> <given-names>C. V.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Plant neighborhood control of arbuscular mycorrhizal community composition</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>183</volume>, <fpage>1188</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1200</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02882.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19496954</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B22">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Horton</surname> <given-names>T. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>C&#x000E1;zares</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bruns</surname> <given-names>T. D.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1998</year>). <article-title>Ectomycorrhizal, vesicular-arbuscular and dark septate fungal colonization of bishop pine (Pinus muricata) seedlings in the first 5 months of growth after wildfire</article-title>. <source>Mycorrhiza</source> <volume>8</volume>, <fpage>11</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>18</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s005720050205</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B23">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hubert</surname> <given-names>N. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gehring</surname> <given-names>C. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Neighboring trees affect ectomycorrhizal fungal community composition in a woodland-forest ecotone</article-title>. <source>Mycorrhiza</source> <volume>18</volume>, <fpage>363</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>374</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00572-008-0185-2</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18685872</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B24">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ishida</surname> <given-names>T. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nara</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hogetsu</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>Host effects on ectomycorrhizal fungal communities: insight from eight host species in mixed conifer-broadleaf forests</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>174</volume>, <fpage>430</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>440</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.02016.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17388905</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B25">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>K&#x000E1;r&#x000E1;sz</surname> <given-names>I.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Root-system of <italic>Crataegus monogyna</italic> L. in oak forest of S&#x000ED;kfok&#x000FA;t</article-title>. <source>Acta Acad. Paed. Agriensis. Sectio Pericemonologica</source>, <volume>30</volume>:<fpage>79</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>87</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B26">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>K&#x000F5;ljalg</surname> <given-names>U.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nilsson</surname> <given-names>R. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Abarenkov</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tedersoo</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Taylor</surname> <given-names>A. F. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bahram</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Toward a unified paradigm for sequence-based identification of fungi</article-title>. <source>Mol. Ecol.</source> <volume>22</volume>, <fpage>5271</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>5277</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/mec.12481</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24112409</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B27">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kozich</surname> <given-names>J. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Westcott</surname> <given-names>S. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Baxter</surname> <given-names>N. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Highlander</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Schloss</surname> <given-names>P. D.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Development of a dual-index sequencing strategy and curation pipeline for analyzing amplicon sequence data on the MiSeq Illumina sequencing platform</article-title>. <source>Appl. Environ. Microbiol.</source> <volume>79</volume>, <fpage>5112</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>5120</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/AEM.01043-13</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23793624</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B28">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kubota</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>McGonigle</surname> <given-names>T. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hyakumachi</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>Co-occurrence of Arum-and Paris-type morphologies of arbuscular mycorrhizae in cucumber and tomato</article-title>. <source>Mycorrhiza</source> <volume>15</volume>, <fpage>73</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>77</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00572-004-0299-0</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15007710</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B29">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lang</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Seven</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Polle</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Host preferences and differential contributions of deciduous tree species shape mycorrhizal species richness in a mixed Central European forest</article-title>. <source>Mycorrhiza</source> <volume>21</volume>, <fpage>297</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>308</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00572-010-0338-y</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20886243</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B30">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Le</surname> <given-names>H. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nuytinck</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Verbeken</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lumyong</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Desjardin</surname> <given-names>D. E.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>Lactarius in Northern Thailand: 1. Lactarius subgenus Piperites</article-title>. <source>Fungal Divers.</source> <volume>24</volume>, <fpage>173</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>224</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B31">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Maremmani</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bedini</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mato&#x00161;evic</surname> <given-names>I.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tomei</surname> <given-names>P. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Giovannetti</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2003</year>). <article-title>Type of mycorrhizal associations in two coastal nature reserves of the Mediterranean basin</article-title>. <source>Mycorrhiza</source> <volume>13</volume>, <fpage>33</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>40</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00572-002-0194-5</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12634917</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B32">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Martin</surname> <given-names>F. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kohler</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Murat</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Veneault-Fourrey</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hibbett</surname> <given-names>D. S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Unearthing the roots of ectomycorrhizal symbioses</article-title>. <source>Nat. Rev. Microbiol.</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>760</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>773</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nrmicro.2016.149</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27795567</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B33">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Marx</surname> <given-names>D. H.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1972</year>). <article-title>Ectomycorrhizal as biological deterrents to pathogenic root infections</article-title>. <source>Annu. Rev. Phytopathol.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>429</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>454</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1146/annurev.py.10.090172.002241</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18479192</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B34">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>McGonigle</surname> <given-names>T. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Miller</surname> <given-names>M. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Evans</surname> <given-names>D. G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fairchild</surname> <given-names>G. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Swan</surname> <given-names>J. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1990</year>). <article-title>A new method which gives an objective measure of colonization of roots by vesicular&#x02014;arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>115</volume>, <fpage>495</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>501</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1469-8137.1990.tb00476.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">33874272</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B35">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>McHugh</surname> <given-names>T. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gehring</surname> <given-names>C. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Below-ground interactions with arbuscular mycorrhizal shrubs decrease the performance of pinyon pine and the abundance of its ectomycorrhizal</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>171</volume>, <fpage>171</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>178</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01735.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16771992</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B36">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nguyen</surname> <given-names>N. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Song</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bates</surname> <given-names>S. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Branco</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tedersoo</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>FUNGuild: an open annotation tool for parsing fungal community datasets by ecological guild</article-title>. <source>Fungal Ecol.</source> <volume>20</volume>, <fpage>241</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>248</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.funeco.2015.06.006</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B37">
<citation citation-type="web"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Oksanen</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Blanchet</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Friendly</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kindt</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Legendre</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>McGlinn</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2019</year>). <source>vegan: Community Ecology. In Community Ecology Package</source>. Available online at: <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://cran.r-project.org/package=vegan">https://cran.r-project.org/package=vegan</ext-link> (accessed June 1, 2021).</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B38">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Op De Beeck</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lievens</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Busschaert</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Declerck</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vangronsveld</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Colpaert</surname> <given-names>J. V.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Comparison and validation of some ITS primer pairs useful for fungal metabarcoding studies</article-title>. <source>PLoS ONE</source> <volume>9</volume>:<fpage>e97629</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0097629</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24933453</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B39">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>&#x000D6;pik</surname> <given-names>M, V.anatoa, A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vanatoa</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moora</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Davison</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kalwij</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>The online database MaarjAM reveals global and ecosystemic distribution patterns in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (Glomeromycota)</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>188</volume>, <fpage>223</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>241</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03334.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20561207</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B40">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>&#x000D6;pik</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Metsis</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Daniell</surname> <given-names>T. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zobel</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moora</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Large-scale parallel 454 sequencing reveals host ecological group specificity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in a boreonemoral forest</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>184</volume>, <fpage>424</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>437</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02920.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19558424</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B41">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Read</surname> <given-names>D. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Perez-Moreno</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2003</year>). <article-title>Mycorrhizas and nutrient cycling in ecosystems&#x02013;a journey toward relevance?</article-title> <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>157</volume>, <fpage>475</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>492</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1046/j.1469-8137.2003.00704.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">33873410</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B42">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Salom&#x000F3;n</surname> <given-names>M. E. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Barroetave&#x000F1;a</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rajchenberg</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Co-occurrence of Paris-and Arum-type endomycorrhiza in invasive Pseudotsuga menziesii seedlings in Patagonia, Argentina</article-title>. <source>Nova Hedwigia</source> <volume>99</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>12</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1127/0029-5035/2014/0176</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B43">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sang</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Crawford</surname> <given-names>D. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stuessy</surname> <given-names>T. F.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1997</year>). <article-title>Chloroplast DNA phylogeny, reticulate evolution, and biogeography of Paeonia (Paeoniaceae)</article-title>. <source>Am. J. Bot.</source> <volume>84</volume>, <fpage>1120</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1136</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2307/2446155</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21708667</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B44">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sepp</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Davison</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jairus</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vasar</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moora</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zobel</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Non-random association patterns in a plant&#x02013;mycorrhizal fungal network reveal host&#x02013;symbiont specificity</article-title>. <source>Mol. Ecol.</source> <volume>28</volume>, <fpage>365</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>378</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/mec.14924</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30403423</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B45">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>G. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Finlay</surname> <given-names>R. D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stenlid</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vasaitis</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Menkis</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Growing evidence for facultative biotrophy in saprotrophic fungi: data from microcosm tests with 201 species of wood-decay basidiomycetes</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>215</volume>, <fpage>747</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>755</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/nph.14551</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28382741</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B46">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>S. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Read</surname> <given-names>D. J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <source>Mycorrhizal Symbiosis, 3rd Edn</source>. <publisher-loc>Cambridge, MA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Academic Press</publisher-name>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B47">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Soudzilovskaia</surname> <given-names>N. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vaessen</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Barcelo</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>He</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rahimlou</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Abarenkov</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>FungalRoot: global online database of plant mycorrhizal associations</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>227</volume>, <fpage>955</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>966</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/nph.16569</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32239516</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B48">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Szark&#x000E1;ndi</surname> <given-names>J. G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Schmidt-Stohn</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dima</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hussain</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kocsub&#x000E9;</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Papp</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>The genus Parasola: phylogeny and the description of three new species</article-title>. <source>Mycologia</source> <volume>109</volume>, <fpage>620</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>629</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/00275514.2017.1386526</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29140762</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B49">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tedersoo</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bahram</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Mycorrhizal types differ in ecophysiology and alter plant nutrition and soil processes</article-title>. <source>Biol. Rev</source>. <volume>94</volume>, <fpage>1857</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1880</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/brv.12538</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31270944</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B50">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Teste</surname> <given-names>F. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jones</surname> <given-names>M. D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dickie</surname> <given-names>I. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Dual-mycorrhizal plants: their ecology and relevance</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>225</volume>, <fpage>1835</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1851</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/nph.16190</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31514244</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B51">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Trappe</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1962</year>). <article-title>Fungus associates of ectotrophic mycorrhizae</article-title>. <source>Bot. Rev</source>. <volume>28</volume>, <fpage>538</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>606</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/BF02868758</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B52">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>van der Heijden</surname> <given-names>M. G. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Martin</surname> <given-names>F. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Selosse</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sanders</surname> <given-names>I. R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Mycorrhizal ecology and evolution: the past, the present, and the future</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>205</volume>, <fpage>1406</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1423</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/nph.13288</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25639293</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B53">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>van der Linde</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Suz</surname> <given-names>L. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Orme</surname> <given-names>C. D. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cox</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Andreae</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Asi</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Environment and host as large-scale controls of ectomycorrhizal fungi</article-title>. <source>Nature</source> <volume>558</volume>, <fpage>243</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>248</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41586-018-0189-9</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29973729</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B54">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Van Geel</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Busschaert</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Honnay</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lievens</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Evaluation of six primer pairs targeting the nuclear rRNA operon for characterization of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) communities using 454 pyrosequencing</article-title>. <source>J. Microbiol. Methods</source> <volume>106</volume>, <fpage>93</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>100</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.mimet.2014.08.006</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25173951</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B55">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Van Geel</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jacquemyn</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Plue</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Saar</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kasari</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Peeters</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Abiotic rather than biotic filtering shapes the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal communities of European seminatural grasslands</article-title>. <source>New Phytol.</source> <volume>220</volume>, <fpage>1262</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1272</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/nph.14947</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29243832</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B56">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>White</surname> <given-names>T. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bruns</surname> <given-names>T. D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lee</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Taylor</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Michael</surname> <given-names>A. I</given-names></name> <name><surname>David</surname> <given-names>H. G</given-names></name> <name><surname>John</surname> <given-names>J. S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thomas</surname> <given-names>J. W</given-names></name></person-group>. (<year>1990</year>). <article-title>Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics,</article-title> in <source>PCR Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications, Vol. 18</source>, <publisher-name>Academic Press, Inc.</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>San Diego, California</publisher-loc>. <fpage>315</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>322</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/B978-0-12-372180-8.50042-1</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>