Guild Patterns of Basidiomycetes Community Associated With Quercus mongolica in Mt. Jeombong, Republic of Korea

Figures & data

Figure 1. Frequency of 15 core basidiomycetes genera found in the root and soil.

Table 1. Relative abundance^a (%) and mOTU number of basidiomycetes genera (53 genera, 515 mOTU) associated with Quercus mongolica.

				Source^b		Site^c						Season^c
Genus	Total	mOTU no.	Guild	R	S	R1	S1	R2	S2	R3	S3	M-R	M-S	A-R	A-S
Agaricomycetes
Amanita*	3.4	26	EMF	1.2 (14)	5.5 (23)	0.1	0.1	0.9	3.4	2.4	12.7	0.4	1.0	1.8	10.6
Amphinema	4.2	7	EMF	2.5 (2)	5.9 (7)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	7.0	16.7	0.2	4.9	4.8	7.0
Astraeus	1.2	1	EMF	2.0 (1)	0.4 (1)	0.0	<0.1	0.0	0.0	5.5	1.2	1.2	0.0	2.7	0.9
Boletus*	0.8	9	EMF	0.4 (6)	1.2 (9)	0.2	0.3	1.1	3.4	0.1	0.3	0.5	2.1	0.4	0.3
Byssocorticium	0.4	3	EMF	0.2 (2)	0.6 (3)	0.6	<0.1	0.0	1.9	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	0.4	<0.1
Ceratobasidium	<0.1	1	EMF	<0.1 (1)	0.0 (0)	0.0	0.0	<0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	<0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0
Chroogomphus	<0.1	1	EMF	0.0 (0)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0
Clavulina*	0.9	11	EMF	0.9 (6)	1.0 (7)	0.2	0.0	2.6	0.3	0.2	2.5	1.2	0.2	0.7	1.9
Cortinarius	3.5	20	EMF	3.9 (10)	3.2 (16)	0.1	0.8	12.7	9.9	0.0	0.0	2.5	4.9	5.2	1.3
Entoloma*	<0.1	3	EMF	<0.1 (2)	<0.1 (2)	<0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.1	<0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.1	<0.1	<0.1
Hydnellum	<0.1	3	EMF	0.1 (3)	0.0 (0)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.0
Hygrophorus	1.1	6	EMF	<0.1 (1)	2.1 (6)	0.0	0.2	<0.1	4.5	0.0	2.0	<0.1	0.0	0.0	4.4
Inocybe	1.4	9	EMF	1.0 (2)	1.8 (8)	<0.1	4.5	0.0	0.0	2.8	0.5	2.1	3.0	0.0	0.3
Laccaria	1.2	5	EMF	1.3 (3)	1.0 (5)	3.8	0.0	0.0	2.6	0.0	0.7	2.6	1.5	0.0	0.6
Lactarius*	0.6	6	EMF	0.5 (5)	0.6 (4)	0.7	<0.1	0.8	2.0	0.1	0.1	0.6	0.3	0.4	1.0
Lactifluus	2.4	4	EMF	1.3 (2)	3.5 (4)	0.0	0.3	2.3	8.8	1.6	2.2	0.3	1.8	2.2	5.4
Leccinum	0.1	2	EMF	0.0 (0)	0.3 (2)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.7	0.0	0.5	0.0	0.1
Phylloporus	<0.1	1	EMF	0.0 (0)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	<0.1	0.0	<0.1
Piloderma*	2.1	6	EMF	1.1 (4)	3.0 (6)	0.9	1.3	0.1	3.0	2.0	4.7	1.9	5.1	0.3	0.7
Protoglossum	<0.1	1	EMF	0.0 (0)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1
Ramaria	0.1	2	EMF	0.0 (0)	0.1 (2)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.0
Rhizopogon	0.1	3	EMF	<0.1 (1)	0.2 (2)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	<0.1	0.7	<0.1	0.4	0.0	0.0
Russula*	12.7	75	EMF	10.4 (51)	14.8 (68)	10.0	15.6	9.6	22.5	11.4	7.7	7.6	20.0	13.1	9.1
Sebacina*	28.9	87	EMF	25.5 (50)	32.1 (74)	45.3	53.6	17.4	21.2	14.2	19.6	20.6	32.1	30.2	32.1
Sistotrema	0.1	4	EMF	0.0 (0)	0.2 (4)	0.0	<0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.6	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.4
Suillus	0.4	4	EMF	0.6 (3)	0.3 (2)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.7	0.7	1.1	0.0	0.1	0.6
Tomentella*	7.5	59	EMF	6.6 (37)	8.3 (48)	6.9	8.5	7.9	4.5	5.3	11.3	4.6	5.9	8.5	11.0
Tomentellopsis	<0.1	1	EMF	<0.1 (1)	<0.1 (1)	<0.1	<0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	<0.1	<0.1
Tricholoma	1.0	6	EMF	1.9 (5)	0.1 (3)	3.8	<0.1	2.0	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.1	0.2	3.6	<0.1
Tylopilus	0.4	1	EMF	0.8 (1)	<0.1 (1)	2.4	0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1	1.6	<0.1
Tylospora	<0.1	1	EMF	0.1 (1)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.1	<0.1
Agaricus	<0.1	1	SPF	<0.1 (1)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1	<0.1	0.1	<0.1	0.0	0.0
Athelia	<0.1	2	SPF	<0.1 (2)	<0.1 (1)	0.1	<0.1	<0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	<0.1	0.0	<0.1	<0.1
Athelopsis*	0.1	2	SPF	0.1 (2)	<0.1 (2)	<0.1	<0.1	0.2	0.1	0.2	<0.1	0.2	<0.1	0.1	0.1
Auricularia	0.1	2	SPF	0.3 (2)	0.0 (0)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.8	0.0	0.5	0.0	0.1	0.0
Clitocybe	<0.1	1	SPF	0.0 (0)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	<0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.0	0.0
Clitocybula	<0.1	1	SPF	0.1 (1)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.0	0.2	<0.1	0.0	0.0	0.1	<0.1	<0.1	0.0
Clitopilus	<0.1	2	SPF	0.0 (0)	<0.1 (2)	0.0	0.0	0.0	<0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0
Delicatula	0.1	1	SPF	0.1 (1)	0.0 (0)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.0
Galerina	1.4	5	SPF	2.9 (5)	0.0 (0)	0.0	0.0	9.5	0.0	0.0	0.0	3.8	0.0	2.0	0.0
Ganoderma	<0.1	1	SPF	0.0 (0)	0.1 (1)	0.0	0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.1	0.0	<0.1
Gymnopilus	0.1	1	SPF	0.1 (1)	0.0 (0)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.0	0.0
Leucoagaricus	0.1	3	SPF	<0.1 (1)	0.1 (2)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	<0.1	0.4	0.0	0.1	<0.1	0.2
Lycoperdon	<0.1	2	SPF	0.0 (0)	0.1 (2)	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	<0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.0	0.1
Marasmiellus*	2.6	2	SPF	5.3 (2)	0.0 (0)	0.9	0.0	3.6	0.0	10.6	0.0	7.4	0.0	3.2	0.0
Marasmius	1.8	1	SPF	3.7 (1)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.0	6.8	<0.1	4.5	<0.1	5.3	<0.1	2.2	<0.1
Mycena*	4.9	34	SPF	9.2 (32)	0.6 (9)	15.2	<0.1	1.7	0.1	10.0	1.5	8.0	1.0	10.4	0.1
Onnia	<0.1	1	SPF	0.0 (0)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.0	0.0
Scopuloides*	0.3	2	SPF	0.4 (1)	0.2 (2)	0.9	0.4	0.2	0.1	<0.1	0.0	<0.1	0.1	0.7	0.3
Sphaerobolus	0.5	2	SPF	0.9 (2)	0.0 (0)	0.0	0.0	3.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.9	0.0	0.0	0.0
Trechispora*	1.4	12	SPF	2.5 (8)	0.5 (9)	<0.1	0.6	0.3	0.5	6.5	0.3	2.8	0.3	2.2	0.7
Asterophora	<0.1	1	Parasitic	0.0 (0)	<0.1 (1)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1
Unidentified	5.8	42	Unknown	8.9 (30)	2.8 (26)	4.3	0.5	11.8	6.6	10.8	2.1	15.7	1.6	2.5	4.2
Tremellomycetes
Cryptococcus*	6.2	26	SPF	3.1 (15)	9.2 (20)	3.4	12.8	5.3	4.3	1.1	9.5	6.3	11.4	0.2	6.6

^a Relative abundance represents proportion of sequence number of genus divided by total sequence number of each categories.

^b The number in parenthesis represents number of mOTU.

^c R, root; S, soil; M, May; A, August.

Asterisk represents core genera associated with Quercus mongolica.

Figure 2. Alpha diversity of (A) EMF and (B) SPF community in the root and soil of Quercus mongolica. Significance of difference was tested using Wilcoxon test (*: p < .05, ***: p < .001).

Figure 3. Constrained Analysis of Principal coordinates (CAP) plots based on the Bray–Curtis distance for total basidiomycetous community. CAP model for communities (A) constrained by source and conditioned by sampling site and season (2.64% explanatory power; p = .001), (B) constrained by sampling site and conditioned by source and sampling season (7.65% explanatory power; p = .001), and (C) constrained by sampling season and conditioned by source and sampling site (1.53% explanatory power; p = .306).

Figure 4. Constrained Analysis of Principal coordinates (CAP) plots based on the Bray–Curtis distance. CAP model constrained by source and conditioned by sampling site and season for (A) EMF and (B) SPF communities.

Figure 5. Pairwise beta diversities based on the Bray–Curtis distance (A) within source (root and soil), and (B) between source. Significance of difference was tested using Kruskal–Walis test (*: p < .05, ***: p < .001).