Institution
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Education•Uppsala, Sweden•
About: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences is a education organization based out in Uppsala, Sweden. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Soil water. The organization has 13510 authors who have published 35241 publications receiving 1414458 citations. The organization is also known as: Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet & SLU.
Topics: Population, Soil water, Species richness, Biodiversity, Gene
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
Institut national de la recherche agronomique1, University of Bordeaux2, Stanford University3, University of California, Berkeley4, Ohio State University5, Museum and Institute of Zoology6, Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust7, Michigan State University8, University of Göttingen9, Technische Universität München10, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences11, United States Department of Agriculture12
TL;DR: In this paper, a quantitative synthesis with data collected from several cropping systems in Europe and North America, analyzed how the level and within-field spatial stability of natural pest control services was related to the simplification of the surrounding landscape.
367 citations
••
TL;DR: It is suggested that ARF17 negatively regulates adventitious root formation in ago1 mutants by repressing GH3 genes and therefore perturbing auxin homeostasis in a light-dependent manner.
Abstract: Adventitious rooting is a quantitative genetic trait regulated by both environmental and endogenous factors. To better understand the physiological and molecular basis of adventitious rooting, we took advantage of two classes of Arabidopsis thaliana mutants altered in adventitious root formation: the superroot mutants, which spontaneously make adventitious roots, and the argonaute1 (ago1) mutants, which unlike superroot are barely able to form adventitious roots. The defect in adventitious rooting observed in ago1 correlated with light hypersensitivity and the deregulation of auxin homeostasis specifically in the apical part of the seedlings. In particular, a clear reduction in endogenous levels of free indoleacetic acid (IAA) and IAA conjugates was shown. This was correlated with a downregulation of the expression of several auxin-inducible GH3 genes in the hypocotyl of the ago1-3 mutant. We also found that the Auxin Response Factor17 (ARF17) gene, a potential repressor of auxin-inducible genes, was overexpressed in ago1-3 hypocotyls. The characterization of an ARF17-overexpressing line showed that it produced fewer adventitious roots than the wild type and retained a lower expression of GH3 genes. Thus, we suggest that ARF17 negatively regulates adventitious root formation in ago1 mutants by repressing GH3 genes and therefore perturbing auxin homeostasis in a light-dependent manner. These results suggest that ARF17 could be a major regulator of adventitious rooting in Arabidopsis.
365 citations
••
University of Antwerp1, James Cook University2, University of Sydney3, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research4, University of Tasmania5, Technical University of Denmark6, Agricultural Research Service7, Texas A&M University8, Purdue University9, North Carolina State University10, University of Basel11, ETH Zurich12, University of Oklahoma13, Duke University14, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences15, Tuscia University16, Wageningen University and Research Centre17
TL;DR: Because single factor CO2 responses often dominated over warming responses in the combined treatments, the results suggest that projected responses to future global warming in Earth System models should not be parameterized using single factor warming experiments.
Abstract: In recent years, increased awareness of the potential interactions between rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations ([ CO2 ]) and temperature has illustrated the importance of multifactorial ecosystem manipulation experiments for validating Earth System models. To address the urgent need for increased understanding of responses in multifactorial experiments, this article synthesizes how ecosystem productivity and soil processes respond to combined warming and [ CO2 ] manipulation, and compares it with those obtained in single factor [ CO2 ] and temperature manipulation experiments. Across all combined elevated [ CO2 ] and warming experiments, biomass production and soil respiration were typically enhanced. Responses to the combined treatment were more similar to those in the [ CO2 ]-only treatment than to those in the warming-only treatment. In contrast to warming-only experiments, both the combined and the [ CO2 ]-only treatments elicited larger stimulation of fine root biomass than of aboveground biomass, consistently stimulated soil respiration, and decreased foliar nitrogen (N) concentration. Nonetheless, mineral N availability declined less in the combined treatment than in the [ CO2 ]-only treatment, possibly due to the warming-induced acceleration of decomposition, implying that progressive nitrogen limitation (PNL) may not occur as commonly as anticipated from single factor [ CO2 ] treatment studies. Responses of total plant biomass, especially of aboveground biomass, revealed antagonistic interactions between elevated [ CO2 ] and warming, i.e. the response to the combined treatment was usually less-than-additive. This implies that productivity projections might be overestimated when models are parameterized based on single factor responses. Our results highlight the need for more (and especially more long-term) multifactor manipulation experiments. Because single factor CO2 responses often dominated over warming responses in the combined treatments, our results also suggest that projected responses to future global warming in Earth System models should not be parameterized using single factor warming experiments.
364 citations
••
Saint Louis University1, University of Northampton2, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences3, Missouri Department of Conservation4, National University of Singapore5, University of Bristol6, University of Sussex7, University of California, Berkeley8, University of Gothenburg9, University of Plymouth10, Oregon State University11, University of Illinois at Chicago12, University of California, Santa Cruz13, University of Reading14, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources15, University of Edinburgh16, University of Melbourne17
TL;DR: It is argued that pollinators put high-priority and high-impact urban conservation within reach, and transforming how environmental managers view the city can improve citizen engagement and contribute to the development of more sustainable urbanization.
Abstract: Urban ecology research is changing how we view the biological value and ecological importance of cities. Lagging behind this revised image of the city are natural resource management agencies’ urban conservation programs that historically have invested in education and outreach rather than programs designed to achieve high-priority species conservation results. This essay synthesizes research on urban bee species diversity and abundance to suggest how urban conservation can be repositioned to better align with a newly unfolding image of urban landscapes. We argue that pollinators put high-priority and high-impact urban conservation within reach. In a rapidly urbanizing world, transforming how environmental managers view the city can improve citizen engagement while exploring more sustainable practices of urbanization.
363 citations
••
TL;DR: It is proposed that understanding, predicting and counteracting consequences of enhanced global homogenization of natural communities through introducing exotic plants, animals and microbes will require future studies on how pathogenic, symbiotic and decomposer soil microbes interact, how they are influenced by higher trophic level organisms and how their combined effects are influencing the composition and functioning of ecosystems.
Abstract: Invasive microbes, plants and animals are a major threat to the composition and functioning of ecosystems; however, the mechanistic basis of why exotic species can be so abundant and disruptive is not well understood. Most studies have focused on invasive plants and animals, although few have considered the effects of invasive microbes, or interactions of invasive plant and animal species with microbial communities. Here, we review effects of invasive plants on soil microbial communities and discuss consequences for plant performance, plant community structure and ecosystem processes. In addition, we briefly discuss effects of invasive soil microbes on plant communities, which has been less well studied, and effects of invasive animals on soil decomposers and ecosystem functioning. We do this by considering each of three important functional groups of microbes, namely soil microbial parasites and pathogens, mutualistic symbionts and decomposers. We conclude that invasive plants, pathogenic and symbiotic soil microbes will have strongest effects on the abundance of individual species, community diversity and ecosystem functioning. Invasive decomposer microbes probably have little impact, because of limited specificity and great functional redundancy. However, invasive plants and animals can have major effects on microbial decomposition in soil. We propose that understanding, predicting and counteracting consequences of enhanced global homogenization of natural communities through introducing exotic plants, animals and microbes will require future studies on how pathogenic, symbiotic and decomposer soil microbes interact, how they are influenced by higher trophic level organisms and how their combined effects are influencing the composition and functioning of ecosystems.
363 citations
Authors
Showing all 13653 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Svante Pääbo | 147 | 407 | 84489 |
Lars Klareskog | 131 | 697 | 63281 |
Stephen Hillier | 129 | 1138 | 83831 |
Carol V. Robinson | 123 | 670 | 51896 |
Jun Yu | 121 | 1174 | 81186 |
Peter J. Anderson | 120 | 966 | 63635 |
David E. Clapham | 119 | 382 | 58360 |
Angela M. Gronenborn | 113 | 568 | 44800 |
David A. Wardle | 110 | 409 | 70547 |
Agneta Oskarsson | 106 | 766 | 40524 |
Jack S. Remington | 103 | 481 | 38006 |
Hans Ellegren | 102 | 349 | 39437 |
Per A. Peterson | 102 | 356 | 35788 |
Malcolm J. Bennett | 99 | 439 | 37207 |
Gunnar E. Carlsson | 98 | 466 | 32638 |