Wildlife Diversity Project Proposal
Please limit to one page (front and back)
Title: AMF community characterization and diversity across habitat substrate, restoration and
seasonal gradients in Missouri’s glades and tallgrass prairies
Location (County): Multiple counties, including Benton, Camden, Cedar, Dade, Dallas, Jackson,
Laclede, Maries, Polk, St. Clair, and Vernon
Project Centroid (UTM Coordinate): Multi-county project
Project Leader: Elizabeth Middleton
Partner Match: $2,920.00
Total Amount Requested: $6,445.00 (EXP = $6,445.00, EQP=$0, HL=$0)
Explain the need and objective of the project:
The objectives of this project are
1) To identify AMF taxa interacting with the plant communities of grassland ecosystems in
Missouri.
2) To determine how variation in grassland habitat type (prairie versus glade), substrate (calcareous
versus acidic), and time since restoration, affects the diversity and composition of AMF taxa.
3) To determine how host plant identity alters AMF responses to habitat, substrate, restoration
time, and seasonal timing.
4) To determine patterns of spatial variation in the AMF community at large in the rhizosphere so
as to shed light on the amount of AMF diversity likely to be missed if dominant host plants are
used to restore fungal communities.
Our findings will produce an inventory of the AMF community in Missouri grasslands that is an
essential step in the restoration and monitoring of soil communities and their vascular plant hosts.
MDC spends considerable money and time on restoring glade and prairie sites, yet restoration
success is variable. This study will guide land managers on new methods for restoration that focus
on replenishing the ecological partnerships on which plants depend. Use of knowledge gained in
this project will improve restoration efforts in prairies and glades, saving limited MDC resources,
and improving habitat for wildlife and natural areas for citizens to enjoy. This project also partners
with the University of Missouri-Columbia, and gains the expertise of researchers using new
technology to address questions of soil community diversity.
List priority geographies (COA(s)) and targeted species and/or natural communities this
project will affect: One COA: Golden Grasslands; tallgrass prairie remnants and restorations;
glade remnants and restorations.
Describe the expected product, result, or outcome:
Following trends of AMF abundance (Tipton unpublished data), we predict that AMF richness
and diversity will increase from degraded/newly restored sites to well-restored sites, and that the
composition of the AMF community will vary between restoration stages. We predict that
differences in the plant community and soil characteristics that occur due to soil substrate and
habitat type will affect the structure of the AMF community belowground. Seasonal variations
(early, mid, and late in the growing season) in AMF community composition are expected in all
substrate and habitat types.
The results from this study will allow us to make educated decisions on the need to include
AMF and soil community supplementation as a tool in the restoration of glades and prairies. If our
research shows that disturbed, recalcitrant glades and prairies are missing important members of
the AMF community, soil community amendment would have the potential to improve restoration
outcomes in those sites. Alternatively, if our research suggests glade and prairie AMF communities
are similar, then we may be able to implement soil restoration of both habitats in similar ways. In
short, whether the results imply site-to-site heterogeneity or broad similarity across habitats, they
will provide valuable information for Missouri grassland restoration and management.
Explain the approach/methodology that will be utilized to complete the project:
The 20 sites chosen for our survey will include five sites for each substrate and habitat
combination. Habitat types include glades and prairies, and soil substrates include acidic and
calcareous. Each site will also represent either a new/degraded site or a well-restored site. In each
site, we will collect host-specific AMF samples from roots of Ruellia humilis (Wild Petunia) and
Schizachyrium scoparium (Little Bluestem) three times throughout the growing season (May, July,
and September 2014). To ensure that we do not miss essential AMF partners by restricting our
survey to only two plant species, we will also collect soil and root from randomly selected (but
vegetatively characterized) locations in each site in July 2014. One concern with this “community
targeted approach” is that too small a sample size could easily yield biased collections in a diverse
and patchy plant community. In July 2013, we collected samples from one glade (Rocky Top Glade
in Lake of the Ozarks State Park) and one prairie (Taberville Prairie) to determine how AMF vary
spatially across core habitat and to obtain informed guidelines for sampling intensity of the AMF
community in the full survey. These samples are currently undergoing genetic analysis.
AMF DNA from the root tissue will be isolated and sequenced to determine AMF
community composition, diversity, and richness. We will use this information to determine
differences in AMF communities across various restoration stages, soil substrates, and habitat types
as well as AMF community variation across seasons in the species specific root samples. This
study will allow us to further understand the role of essential AMF in the success of grassland
restoration, and the potential for using AMF additions as a restoration tool in the future.
Category
Personnel Service (Labor)
Equipment
Expenses
Total
Amount
Requested
Contract
or
Agreement
Non-MDC/
Partner Match
Value
Entity
$6,445.00
$6,445.00
Provide justification for any labor and/or equipment in this proposal:
Indicate your willingness to accept less funding and describe the effect on the overall project
if certain portions were reduced.
$6,000.00 is essential to complete the project. This money will be used to sequence
samples. The $445.00 will be used for lodging expenses, making collecting samples during the
project more feasible. This $445.00 is helpful, though not crucial.