Mycorrhizal mushroom biodiversity in PAH polluted areas

Case Somerharju, Finland

Marina Yemelyanova May 4, 2016

Contents

• Somerharju phytoremediation project• My thesis within the project• Research questions and tasks• Methods• Results• Practical use of new knowledge

Somerharju phytoremediation project

• Phytoremediation – planting vegetation for purifying the soil

• Wood impregnation plant in 1950s creosote polluted soil

• Carcinogenic mushrooms and berries! Toxic soil!

• Luke project: young aspen clones for removing PAHs from the soil since 2013 Source: Google Maps

Somerharju: project site, creosote layer

Pictures: Metla

Project map and PAH-pollution levels

Project site: 1,3 hectares

Main research on

• aspen effect on the soil purification

• aspen survival under pollution

Mycorrhizal fungi in the project scope

Mycorrhizal fungi

• purify the soil per se

• as symbionts, help the trees to survive

• may enhance the remediation effect

• improve the tree survival

As an important extra factor, fungi

1. What mycorrhizal mushroom species are present in the project area during a mushroom season?

2. Do mycorrhizal mushroom abundance, species richness and biodiversity depend on different PAH-pollution levels on the site?

3. Does clear cutting affect the mycorrhizal mushroom distribution in the area?

Research questions

NEW!

• regular monitoring of mycorrhizal mushrooms on the site

• identifying mushroom species

• calculating mushroom abundance, species richness and biodiversity

• statistical analysis – dependence of:

- mushroom abundance, species richness and biodiversity

- on PAH-pollution levels and cutting types

Research tasks

Step 1: four random clone numbers (2, 4, 5, 9) 13 squares

Step 2: checking for presence of all pollution levels 16 squares

Step 3: control squares outside the intensive area 18 squares

Sampling grounds selection

Sampling

• May-June, November (non-productive period) – every other week

• July-October (productive period) – every 7-10 days

(based on the average lifetime of a mushroom)

Macroscopic examination:

- shape, size- anatomy- color and discoloration after damaging- spore print- smell - Russula spp and Lactarius spp: taste (in the clean areas only)- Russula spp: separability of a cuticle- substrate, trees nearby

• Key books, guides, handbooks• Discussions with mycological communities online

Species identification

Mushroom diversity calculation

In each square for each month: • Species richness – number of species

• Species abundance – number of fruit bodies of each species

• Biodiversity – Shannon diversity index

Statistics

• Generalized linear mixed model (GLMM)

• R-software (function glmer.nb)

• Fixed factors: - pollution level

- cutting type (= distance from non-cut squares), crucial for mycorrhiza.

Species richness: 28 species in totalAmanita rubescens Leccinum scabrum

Cantharellula umbonata Paxillus involutus

Coltricia perennis Russula sp 1 (presumedly grisea)

Cortinarius mucosus Russula sp 2 (presumedly badia)

Inocybe sp 1 (presumedly bongardii) Russula sp 3 (presumedly consobrina)

Inocybe sp 2 (presumedly napipes) Russula sp 4 (presumedly mustelina)

Inocybe sp 3 (presumedly geophylla) Russula sp 5 (presumedly exalbicans)

Inocybe sp 4 (presumedly flocculosa) Russula sp 6 (presumedly atropurpurea)

Inocybe sp 5 (presumedly calospora) Russula sp 7 (presumedly betularum)

Inocybe sp 6 (presumedly lacera) Russula sp 8 (presumedly versicolor)

Laccaria laccata Russula sp 9 (presumedly vinosa)

Lactarius flexuosus Russula sp 10 (presumedly aeruginea)

Lactarius rufus Suillus luteus

Lactarius torminosus Xerocomus subtomentosus

Changes in mushroom species richness

Mushroom species richness on the entire site

Changes in mycorrhizal species richness over a mushroom season

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

Month

Num

ber o

f spe

cies

Mushroom distribution over the area

Abundance Estimate Std. error z value Pr(>|z|)

Pollution.level 0.01316 0.49343 0.027 0.979

Cutting.type -0.61005 0.42675 -1.430 0.153

Pollution.level:Cutting.type -0.15495 0.30163 -0.514 0.607

Estimate Std. error z value Pr(>|z|)

Pollution.level 0.08084 0.25444 0.318 0.75069

Cutting.type -0.66470 0.21786 -3.051 0.00228 **

Pollution.level:Cutting.type -0.11861 0.15912 -0.745 0.45603

Species richness

Estimate Std. error z value Pr(>|z|)

Pollution.level 0.19370 0.30929 0.626 0.5311

Cutting.type -0.55908 0.27977 -1.998 0.0457 *

Pollution.level:Cutting.type -0.14666 0.20931 -0.701 0.4835

Biodiversity index

Factors affecting the results?• Large variation in:

- heights, - tree coverage, age, species composition.

• Precipitation level• Unconsidered density of wild aspens• Biased data: different number of squares with different

pollution levels• Some mushrooms left unfound?

May be considered in future.

Conclusions and perspectivesMycorrhizal mushroom community in Somerharju is

• tolerant to PAHs• sensitive to presence of adult trees

even emergence of mushrooms in future (study as an affecting factor) possible intentional inoculation of mycorrhiza under the trees for enhancing the remediation effect

Acknowledgements

Pertti Pulkkinen, Luke – head of project, general guidance

Raimo Jaatinen, Luke – GIS-materials

Lu-Min Vaario, Luke, Tokyo University – thesis supervision

Patrik Byholm, Novia – thesis supervision

Welcome to the discussion!