Data Nugget ‣ Data Nuggets

4.16.14

Is chocolate for the birds?

Cocoa beans used to make chocolate!

The activities are as follows:

About 9,000 years ago humans invented agriculture as a way to grow enough food for people to eat. Today, agriculture happens all over the globe and takes up 40% of Earth’s land surface. To make space for our food, humans must clear large areas of land, which creates a drastic change, or disturbance, to the habitat. This land-clearing disturbance removes the native plants already there including trees, small flowering plants, and grasses. Many types of animals including mammals, birds, and insects depend on these native plants for food or shelter. Large scale disturbances can make it difficult to live in the area. For example, a woodpecker bird cannot live somewhere that has no trees because they live and find their food in the trees.

However, some agriculture might help some animals because they can use the crops being grown for the food and shelter they need to survive. One example is the cacao tree, which grows in the rainforests of South America. Humans use the seeds of this plant to make chocolate, so it is a very important crop! Cacao trees need very little light. They grow best in a unique habitat called the forest understory, which is composed of the shorter trees and bushes under the large trees found in rainforests. To get a lot of cacao seeds for chocolate, farmers need to have large rainforest trees above their cacao trees for shade. In many ways, cacao farms resemble a native rainforest. Many native plant species grow there and there are still taller tree species. However, these farms are different in important ways from a native rainforest. For example, there are many more short understory trees in the farm than there are in native rainforests. Also, there are fewer small flowering plants on the ground because humans that work on cacao farms trample them as they walk around the farm.

Part I: Skye is a biologist who wanted to know whether rainforest birds use the forest when they are disturbed by adding cacao farms. Skye predicted she would see many fewer birds in the cacao farms, compared to the rainforest. To measure bird abundance, she simply counted birds in each habitat. To do this she chose one rainforest and one cacao farm and set up two transects in each. Transects are parallel lines along which the measurements are taken. She spent four days counting birds along each transect, for a total of eight days in each habitat. She had to get up really early and count birds between 6:00 and 9:00 in the morning because that’s when they are most active.

Part II: Skye was shocked to see so many birds in cacao farms! She decided to take a closer look at her data. Skye wanted to know how the types of birds she saw in the cacao farms compared to the types of birds she saw in the rainforest. She predicted that cacao farms would have different types of birds than the undisturbed rainforest. She thought the bird types would differ because each habitat has different types of food available for birds to eat and different types of plants for birds to live in.

Skye broke her abundance data down to look more closely at four types of birds:

Toucans (Eat: large insects and fruit from large trees, Live: holes in large trees)
Hummingbirds (Eat: nectar from flowers, Live: tree branches and leaves)
Wrens (Eat: small insects, Live: small shrubs on the forest floor)
Flycatchers (Eat: Small insects, Live: tree branches and leaves)

Featured scientist: Skye Greenler from Colorado College and Purdue University

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 8.5

Additional teacher resources related to this Data Nugget:

The research described in this activity has been published. The citation and a PDF of the scientific paper can be found here:
- Greenler, S.M. and J.J. Ebersole (2015) Bird communities in tropical agroforestry ecosystems: an underappreciated conservation resource. Agroforestry Systems 89: 691–704.
The complete dataset for the study has been published to a data repository and is available for classroom use. This dataset has even more data than what is in the Data Nugget activity. While the Data Nugget has data for just two habitats (cacao and rainforest), the full dataset also includes two other agroforest habitat types. The dataset also includes data for every species (169) recorded during the study, whereas the Data Nugget only has data for four families (toucans, wrens, flycatchers, hummingbirds).
Study Location: Skye’s study took place in a 10 km² mixed rainforest, pasture, agro-forest, and monoculture landscape near the village of Pueblo Nuevo de Villa Franca de Guácimo, Limón Province, Costa Rica (10˚20˝ N, 83˚20˝ W), in the Caribbean lowlands 85 km northeast of San José.
For more background on the importance of biodiversity, students can eat this article in The Guardian – What is biodiversity and why does it matter to us?

About Skye: As a child Skye was always asking why; questioning the behavior, characteristics, and interactions of plants and animals around her. She spent her childhood reconstructing deer skeletons to understand how bones and joints functioned and creating endless mini-ecosystems in plastic bottles to watch how they changed over time. This love of discovery, observation, questioning, and experimentation led her to many technician jobs, independent research projects, and graduate research study at Purdue University. At Purdue she studies the factors influencing oak regeneration after ecologically based timber harvest and prescribed fire. While Skye’s primary focus is ecological research, she loves getting to leave the lab and bring science into classrooms to inspire the next generation of young scientists and encourage all students to be always asking why!

SaveSave

3.25.14

Won’t you be my urchin?

The vegetarian sea urchin Diadema antillarum.

The activities are as follows:

Éste Data Nugget también está disponible en Español:

Imagine you are snorkeling on a coral reef where you can see many species living together. Some animals, like sharks, are predators that eat other animals. Other species, like anemones and the fish that live in them, are mutualists and protect each other from predators. There are also herbivores, like urchins, that eat plants and algae on the reef. All of these species, and many more, need the coral reef to survive.

Experimental setup with tiles in bins. Some bins have sea urchins and some do not.

Corals are the animals that build coral reefs. They are very sensitive and can be hurt by human activity, like boating and pollution. Coral reef ecosystems are also in danger from warming waters due to climate change. Sadly, today many coral reefs around the world are dying because the places they grow are changing. Sarah is a marine biologist who is determined to figure out ways to save coral reefs. Sarah wants to understand how to help the dying corals so they can keep building important and diverse coral reef habitats.

Corals compete with large types of algae, like seaweed, for space to grow on the reef. Corals are picky and only like to live in certain places. If there is too much algae, corals will have no place to attach and grow. Sea urchins are important herbivores and one of the species that like to eat algae. Sarah thought that when urchins are present on the reef, corals will have less competition from algae for space, and thus more room to grow. Maybe adding urchins to a coral reef is a way to help corals!

To test her idea Sarah set up an experiment. She set 8 bins out on the reef. Into half of the bins, Sarah added urchins. She left the other half without urchins as a control. Sarah put tiles into all of the bins. Tiles gave an empty space for coral and algae to compete and grow. After a few months, Sarah looked at the tiles. She counted how many corals were growing on each tile. Sarah predicted that more corals would grow on the tiles in bins with sea urchins compared to the control bins with no sea urchins.

B. Photograph of Agaricia juvenile on experimental substratum. C. Photograph of Porites juvenile on experimental substratum

B. Photograph of coral species Agaricia juvenile on experimental tile. C. Photograph of coral species Porites juvenile on experimental tile.

Featured scientist: Sarah W. Davies (she/her) from the University of Texas at Austin

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 6.5

There is one scientific paper associated with the research in this Data Nugget. The citation and PDF of the paper is below.

Davies SW, MV Matz, PD Vize (2013) Ecological Complexity of Coral Recruitment Processes: Effects of Invertebrate Herbivores on Coral Recruitment and Growth Depends Upon Substratum Properties and Coral Species. PLOS ONE 8(9):e72830

After students have completed the Data Nugget, you can have them discuss the management implications of this research. Watch the news story below and have students consider how urchins can be used as a management tool to help restore coral reefs!

SaveSave

3.25.14

Coral bleaching and climate change

A Pacific coral reef with many corals

The activities are as follows:

Éste Data Nugget también está disponible en Español:

Corals are animals that build coral reefs. Coral reefs are home to many species of animals – fish, sharks, sea turtles, and anemones all use corals for habitat! Corals are white, but they look brown and green because certain types of algae live inside them. Algae, like plants, use the sun’s energy to make food. The algae that live inside the corals’ cells are tiny and produce more sugars than they themselves need. The extra sugars become food for the corals. At the same time, the corals provide the algae a safe home. The algae and corals coexist in a relationship where each partner benefits the other, called a mutualism: these species do better together than they would alone.

When the water gets too warm, the algae can no longer live inside corals, so they leave. The corals then turn from green to white, called coral bleaching. Climate change has been causing the Earth’s air and oceans to get warmer. With warmer oceans, coral bleaching is becoming more widespread. If the water stays too warm, bleached corals will die without their algae mutualists.

Scientist Carly working on a coral reef

Carly is a scientist who wanted to study coral bleaching so she could help protect corals and coral reefs. One day, Carly observed an interesting pattern. Corals on one part of a reef were bleaching while corals on another part of the reef stayed healthy. She wondered, why some corals and their algae can still work together when the water is warm, while others cannot?

Ocean water that is closer to the shore (inshore) gets warmer than water that is further away (offshore). Perhaps corals and algae from inshore reefs have adapted to warm water. Carly wondered whether inshore corals are better able to work with their algae in warm water because they have adapted to these temperatures. If so, inshore corals and algae should bleach less often than offshore corals and algae. Carly designed an experiment to test this. She collected 15 corals from inshore and 15 from offshore reefs in the Florida Keys. She brought them into an aquarium lab for research. She cut each coral in half and put half of each coral into tanks with normal water and the other half into tanks with heaters. The normal water temperature was 27°C, which is a temperature that both inshore and offshore corals experience during the year. The warm water tanks were at 31°C, which is a temperature that inshore corals experience, but offshore corals have never previously experienced. Because of climate change, offshore corals may experience this warmer temperature in the future. After six weeks, she recorded the number of corals that bleached in each tank.

Featured scientist: Carly Kenkel from The University of Texas at Austin

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 8.0

There are two scientific papers associated with the data in this Data Nugget. The citations and PDFs of the papers are below.

Kenkel CD, E Meyer, MV Matz (2013) Gene expression under chronic heat stress in populations of the mustard hill coral (Porites astreoides) from different thermal environments. Molecular Ecology 22:4322-433
Kenkel CD, G Goodbody-Gringley, D Caillaud, SW Davies, E Bartels, MV Matz (2013) Evidence for a host role in thermotolerance divergence between populations of the mustard hill coral (Porites astreoides) from different reef environments. Molecular Ecology 22:4335-4348

If your students are looking for more data on coral bleaching, check out HHMI BioInteractive’s classroom activity in which students use authentic data to assess the threat of coral bleaching around the world. Also, check out the two videos below!

A video in BioInteractive’s “Scientists at Work” series showing researchers working on the same hypothesis in another part of the world: Steve Palumbi & Megan Morikawa Study Coral Reef Damage in American Samoa

Another BioInteractive video, appropriate for upper level high school classrooms. Visualizes the process of coral bleaching at different scales. Video includes lots of complex vocabulary about cells and the process of photosynthesis.

SaveSave

3.17.14

Finding a Foothold

The activities are as follows:

Have you ever noticed that the ground at a beach has rocks of many different sizes? These rocks, sand, and dirt are all called substrates. The types of substrate we see are described by the size of the particles that cover the ground. These can range from large boulders down to fine grains of sand and dirt, with many sizes in between. No matter what type of substrate you see at the beach, you can find organisms that will live in or on it. Just like there are different types of substrates, there are different types of organisms that can live there. How can we determine which types of organisms prefer which types of substrates? That is the job of field researchers!

Students collecting mollusk data on different beach substrates.

Students and teachers at Kentridge High School have made many field trips to the beach and have seen lots of organisms. Normally, they just noticed what they could see easily in front of them. Students became interested to know how the type of substrate influences which organisms will live there. They noticed that the snails in the aquarium at school like to stick to the glass walls of the tank. Do snails and other shelled mollusks found near the ocean, like chitons, periwinkles, whelks and limpets, also like to live on large, stable substrates? The students went to beach to find out!

Mollusks have a “foot” which may be able to attach more securely to larger substrates, such as boulders, and allow them more room to move. So, the students expected to find more mollusks on boulders than on other types of substrates. To gather the data needed to answer this question, the students went to a local beach. They looked at sections of the beach with substrates of all types. On these different substrates, they kept track of all the different types of organisms that were present. They measured the frequency that they observed four types of mollusks (chitons, limpets, whelks, and periwinkles) on the following substrates: boulder, gravel, pebble, logs, sand, and shell debris. Frequency was measured as the proportion of times that a particular organism was present on a substrate type, out of the total number of observations. For example, if they observed 2 boulders and saw limpets on 1, the frequency would = ½ or 0.5.

Featured scientists: Darrel Nash and Sarah Hall from Kentridge High School, Washington

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 7.4

For more information on the Seattle Aquarium’s citizen science project, and to download the dataset from this project, click here.

1.21.14

Float down the Kalamazoo River

Morrow Lake, a reservoir created along the Kalamazoo River. The water is held in a reservoir by a dam. When water flows into the reservoir it slows, potentially letting some of the total suspended solids settle to the bottom of the river.

The activities are as follows:

Ever since she was a kid, rivers have fascinated Leila. One of her hobbies is to kayak and canoe down the Kalamazoo River in Michigan, near where she lives. For her work, she researches all the living things in the river and how humans affect them. She is especially interested in changes in the river food web, caused by humans building dams along the river, and an oil spill in 2010.

Leila knows there is a lot more in river water than what meets the eye! As the river flows, it picks up bits of dead plants, single-celled algae, and other living and nonliving particles from the bottom of the river. The mix of all these particles is called total suspended solids (TSS) because these particles are suspended in the river water as it flows. The food web in the Kalamazoo River depends on the particles that are floating in the water. Invertebrates eat decomposing leaves and algae, and fish eat the invertebrates.

Leila showing off some of the cool invertebrates that can be found in the Kalamazoo River.

As you float down the river, particles settle to the river bottom and new ones are picked up. The amount of suspended solids in a river is influenced by how fast the water in the river is flowing. The faster the water flows, the more particles are picked up and carried down the river. The slower the water flows, the more particles will settle to the bottom. Discharge is a measure of how fast water is flowing. You can think about discharge as the number of cubes (one foot on each side) filled with water that pass by a point every second. During certain times of the year, water flows faster and there is more discharge. In spring, when the snow starts melting, a lot of water drains from the land into the river. There also tends to be a lot more rain in the fall. Things humans build on the river can also affect discharge. For example, we build dams to generate hydroelectric power by capturing the energy from flowing water. Dams slow the flow of river water, and therefore they may cause some of the suspended solids to settle out of the water and onto the bottom of the river.

Leila wanted to test how a dam that was built on the Kalamazoo River influenced total suspended solids. If the dam is reducing the amount of total suspended solids, it could have negative effects on the food chain. She was also curious to see if the dam has different effects depending on the time of year. On eight different days from May to October in 2009, Leila measured total suspended solids at two locations along river. She collected water samples upstream of the dam, before the water enters the reservoir, and samples downstream after the water has been in the reservoir and passed over the dam. She also measured discharge downstream of the dam.

KalamazooRiver

Featured scientist: Leila Desotelle from Michigan State University

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 8.7

If your students are looking for more information on how the amount of water flowing in the river affects the food chain and the health of the ecosystem overall, check out the video below!

A video in BioInteractive’s “Scientists at Work” series showing researchers working on the same questions in a different river system: Riverine Food Webs – How Flow Rates Affect Biomass

1.10.14

The ground has gas!

Measuring nitrogen (N2O) gas escaping from the soil in summer. Photo credit: Julie Doll, Michigan State University

The activities are as follows:

If you dig through soil, you’ll notice that soil is not hard like a rock, but contains many air pockets between soil grains. These spaces in the soil contain gases, which together are called the soil atmosphere. The soil atmosphere contains the same gases as the atmosphere that surrounds us above ground, but in different concentrations. It has the same amount of nitrogen, slightly less oxygen (O₂), 3-100 times more carbon dioxide (CO₂), and 5-30 times more nitrous oxide (N₂O, which is laughing gas!).

Measuring nitrogen (N2O) gas escaping from the soil in winter. Photo credit: Julie Doll Michigan State University.

Nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide are two greenhouse gasses responsible for much of the warming of global average temperatures. Sometimes soils give off, or emit, these greenhouse gases into the earth’s atmosphere, adding to climate change. Currently scientists are working to figure out why soils emit different amounts of these greenhouse gasses.

During the summer of 2010, Iurii and his fellow researchers at Michigan State University studied nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions from farm soils. They measured three things: (1) the concentration of nitrous oxide 25 centimeters below the soil’s surface (2) the amount of nitrous oxide leaving the soil (3) and the average temperature on the days that nitrous oxide was measured. The scientists reasoned that the amount of nitrous oxide entering the atmosphere is positively associated with how much nitrous oxide is in the soil and on the soil temperature.

Featured scientist: Iurii Shcherbak from Michigan State University

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 9.2

More information on the research associated with this Data Nugget can be found here.

Data associated with this Data Nugget can be found on the MSU LTER website data tables under GLBRC Biofuel Cropping System Experiment. Bioenergy research classroom materials can be found here. More images can be found on the LTER website.

SaveSave

1.9.14

Fertilizing biofuels may cause release of greenhouse gasses

An aerial view of the experiment at MSU where biofuels are grown. Photo credit: K. Stepnitz, MSU

The activities are as follows:

Greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, like carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄), and nitrous oxide (N₂O), trap heat from the sun and warm the earth. We need some greenhouse gases to keep the planet warm enough for life. But today, the majority (97%) of scientists agree that the levels of greenhouse gases are getting dangerously high and are causing changes in our climate that may be hard for us to adjust to.

Scientist Leilei collecting samples of gasses released by the growing of biofuels. Photo credit: K. Stepnitz, MSU

When we burn fuels to heat and cool our homes or power our cars we release greenhouse gasses. Most of the energy used today comes from fossil fuels. These energy sources are called “fossil” fuels because they come from plants, algae, and animals that lived hundreds of millions of years ago! After they died, their tissues were buried and slowly turned into coal, oil, and natural gas. An important fact about fossil fuels is that when we use them, they release CO₂ into our atmosphere that was stored millions of years ago. The release of this stored carbon is adding more and more greenhouse gases to our atmosphere, and much faster than today’s plants and algae can remove during photosynthesis. In order to reduce the effects of climate change, we need to change the way we use energy and think of new ways to power our world.

One potential solution could be to grow our fuel instead of drilling for it. Biofuels are a potential substitute for fossil fuels. Biofuels, like fossil fuels, are made from the tissues of plants. The big difference is that they are made from plants that are alive and growing today. Unlike fossil fuels that emit CO₂, biofuel crops first remove CO₂ from the atmosphere as the plants grow and photosynthesize. When biofuels are burned for fuel, the CO₂ is emitted back into the atmosphere, balancing the total amount that was removed and released.

Scientists are interested in figuring out if biofuels make a good replacement for fossil fuels. It is still not clear if the plants that are used to produce biofuels are able to absorb enough CO₂ to offset all of the greenhouse gases that are emitted when biofuels are produced. Additional greenhouse gases are emitted when producing biofuels because it takes energy to plant, water, and harvest the crops, as well as to convert them into fuel. In order to maximize plant growth, many biofuel crops are fertilized by adding nitrogen (N) fertilizer to the soil. However, if there is too much nitrogen in the soil for the crops to take up, it may instead be released into the atmosphere as the gas nitrous oxide (N₂O). N₂O is a greenhouse gas with a global warming potential nearly 300 times higher than CO₂! Global warming potential is a relative measure of how much heat a greenhouse gas traps in the atmosphere.

Leilei is a scientist who researches whether biofuels make a good alternative to fossil fuels. He wondered what steps farmers could take to reduce the amount of N₂O released when growing biofuel crops. Leilei designed an experiment to determine how much N₂O is emitted when different amounts of nitrogen fertilizer are added to the soil. In other words, he wanted to know whether the amount of N₂O that is emitted into the atmosphere is associated with how much fertilizer is added to the field. To test this idea, he looked at fields of switchgrass, a perennial grass native to North America. Switchgrass is one of the most promising biofuel crops. The fields of switchgrass were first planted in 2008 as a part of a very large long-term study at the Kellogg Biological Station in southwest Michigan. The researchers set up eight fertilization treatments (0, 28, 56, 84, 112, 140, 168, and 196 kg N ha⁻¹) in four replicate fields of switchgrass, for a total of 32 research plots. Leilei measured how much N₂O was released by the soil in the 32 research plots for many years. Here we have two years of Leilei’s data.

Featured scientist: Leilei Ruan from Michigan State University

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 10.1

Additional teacher resources related to this Data Nugget:

Data related to this Data Nugget can be found on the MSU LTER website data tables under GLBRC Biofuel Cropping System Experiment. The data in this activity is the Trace Gas Fluxes from Static Chambers dataset which has N₂O, CO₂, and CH₄ data.
More information on LTER climate change research can be found here.
Bioenergy research classroom materials can be found here.
More images can be found on the LTER website.

SaveSave

1.9.14

Does a partner in crime make it easier to invade?

The invasive legume plant, hairy vetch, growing in the field.

The activities are as follows:

A mutualism is a relationship between individuals of two different species in which both partners benefit. One example exists between a type of plant, legumes, and a type of bacteria, rhizobia. Rhizobia live inside bumps on the roots of legumes, called nodules. There, they convert nitrogen from the air into a form that can be used by plants; in return, plants provide the rhizobia with food and protection in the root nodule.

Rhizobia nodules on plant roots. In exchange for carbon and protection in the nodules from plants, rhizobia provide fixed nitrogen for plants.

Mutualisms can affect what happens when a plant is moved to a location where that species hasn’t been before. Invasive plants have been transported by humans from one location to another and grow and spread quickly in their new location. For invasive legumes with rhizobia mutualists, there is a chance that the rhizobia will not be moved with it and the plant will have to form new relationships in the new location. These new partners might work well together or might not. Scientists predict that in their new ranges, invasive legumes will grow poorly at first, and then better and better over time. Over generations, invasive plants and their new rhizobia partners may coevolve to become more efficient mutualism partners.

Yi and Tomomi are scientists who tested this hypothesis using one invasive plant species, hairy vetch. They took soil samples from three different spots based on the invasion history: vetch had never been there (no invasion, 0 years), vetch arrived recently (new invasion, less than 3 years), and vetch invaded a long time ago (old invasion, more than 10 years). These soils had rhizobia in them, each with different histories with hairy vetch. Yi and Tomomi took these soils into the greenhouse, divided them into pots, and grew several hairy vetch plants in each soil type. When the plants had grown for some time in the soils, Yi and Tomomi dug them up and measured two things. First, they counted number of nodules on the roots of each plant, which is a way to see how well the mutualism between rhizobia and plants is going. Second, they dried and weighed the plants to measure biomass, which shows how much the plants were growing.

Featured scientists: REU Yi Liu and Tomomi Suwa from Michigan State University

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 8.2

If you are interested in performing your own classroom experiment using the plant-rhizobium mutualism, check out this paper published in the American Biology Teacher describing methods and a proposed experimental design: Suwa and Williamson 2014

1.8.14

Fair traders or freeloaders?

Measuring chlorophyll content in the greenhouse

The activities are as follows:

When two species do better when they cooperate than they would on their own, the relationship is called a mutualism. One example of a mutualism is the relationship between a type of bacteria, rhizobia, and legume plants. Legumes include plants like peas, beans, soybeans, and clover. Rhizobia live in bumps on the legume roots, where they trade their nitrogen for sugar from the plants. Rhizobia fix nitrogen from the air into a form that plants can use. This means that legumes that have rhizobia living in their roots can get more nitrogen than those that don’t.

Under some conditions, this mutualism can break down. For example, if one of the traded resources is very abundant in the environment. When the plant doesn’t need the nitrogen traded by rhizobia, it doesn’t trade as many sugars to the rhizobia. This could cause the rhizobia to evolve to be less cooperative as well. Less-cooperative rhizobia may be found where the soil already has lots of nitrogen. These less-cooperative bacteria are freeloaders: they fix less nitrogen, but still get sugars from the plant and other benefits of living in nodules on their roots.

Rhizobia nodules on plant roots. In exchange for carbon and protection in the nodules from plants, rhizobia provide fixed nitrogen for plants.

One very important legume crop species is the soybean. Soybeans are used to produce vegetable oil, tofu, soymilk, and many other food products. Soybeans trade with rhizobia for nitrogen, but often farmers add more nitrogen into the field as fertilizer. Since farms use a lot of nitrogen fertilizer, researchers at KBS were interested in how different types of farming affected the plant-rhizobia mutualism.

They grew soybean plants in a greenhouse and added rhizobia from three different farms: a high N farm, low N farm, and organic farm that used no N fertilizer. After four weeks, the researchers measured chlorophyll content of the soybean plants. Healthy plants that have lots of nitrogen will have high chlorophyll content, and plants with not enough nitrogen will have low chlorophyll content. Because high nitrogen could lead to the evolution of less-cooperative rhizobia, they expected that rhizobia from organic plots would be most cooperative. They predicted rhizobia from high N plots would be the least cooperative, and rhizobia from low N plots would fall somewhere in the middle. More-cooperative rhizobia provide more nitrogen, so the researchers expected plants grown with cooperative rhizobia to have higher chlorophyll content than plants receiving less-cooperative rhizobia.

Featured scientist: REU Jennifer Schmidt from the Kellogg Biological Station

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 10.1

For more information on the evolution of cheating rhizobia, check out these popular science articles:

SaveSave

1.7.14

Cheaters in nature – when is a mutualism not a mutualism?

The activities are as follows:

Mutualisms are a special type of relationship in nature where two species work together and both benefit. Each partner trades with the other species, giving a resource and getting one in return. This cooperation leads to partner species doing better when the other is around, and without their partner, each species would have a harder time getting resources.

One important mutualism is between clover, a type of plant, and rhizobia, a type of bacteria. Rhizobia live in small bumps on the clovers’ roots, called nodules, and receive protection and sugar food from the plant. In return, the rhizobia trade nitrogen to the plant, which plants need to photosynthesize and make new DNA. This mutualism works well when soil nitrogen is rare, because it is hard for the plant to collect enough nitrogen on its own, and the plant must rely on rhizobia to get all the nitrogen it needs. But what happens when humans change the game by fertilizing the soil? When nitrogen is no longer rare, will one partner begin to cheat and no longer act as a mutualist?

Worldwide, the nitrogen cycle is off. Not that long ago, before farmers used industrial fertilizers and people burned fossil fuels, nitrogen was rare in the soil. Today, humans are adding large amounts of nitrogen to soils. The nitrogen that we apply to agricultural fields doesn’t stay on those fields, and nitrogen added to the atmosphere when we burn fossil fuels doesn’t stay by the power plant that generates it. The result is that today, more and more plants have all the nitrogen they need. With high nitrogen, plants may no longer depend on rhizobia to help them get nitrogen. This may cause the plant to trade less with the rhizobia in high nitrogen areas. In response, rhizobia from high nitrogen areas may evolve to try harder to get food from the plant, and may even cheat and become parasitic to plants. If this happens, both species will no longer be acting as mutualists.

When Iniyan was a college student, he wanted to study human impacts on the clover-rhizobia mutualism. To find out more, he contacted Jen Lau’s lab at the Kellogg Biological Station one summer, and joined a team of scientists asking these questions. For his own experiment, Iniyan chose two common species of clover: hybrid clover (Trifolium hybridum) and white clover (Trifolium pretense). He chose these two species because they are often planted by farmers. Iniyan then went out and collected rhizobia from farms where nitrogen had been added in large amounts for many years, and other farms where no nitrogen had been added.

Iniyan completed this research as an REU at KBS.

To make sure that there were no rhizobia already in the soil, Iniyan set up his experiment in a field where no clover had grown before. He then planted 45 individuals of each species in the field. He randomly assigned each plant to one of three treatments. For each species, he grew 15 individuals with rhizobia from high nitrogen farms, and 15 with rhizobia from low nitrogen farms. To serve as a control, he grew the remaining 15 individuals without any rhizobia. To add rhizobia to the plants he made two different mixtures. The first was a mix of rhizobia from high nitrogen farms and water, and the second was a mix of rhizobia from low nitrogen farms and water. He then poured one of these mixtures over each of the plants, depending on which rhizobia treatment they were in. The control plants just got water. No nitrogen was added to the plants.

After the plants grew all summer, Iniyan counted the number of leaves and measured the shoot height (cm) for each individual plant. He did not collect biomass because he wanted to let the plants continue to grow. He then averaged the data from each set of 15 individuals. Plants with fewer leaves and shorter shoots are considered less healthy. He predicted rhizobia that evolved in high nitrogen soils would be worse mutualists to plants, while rhizobia that evolved in low nitrogen soils would be good mutualists.

Featured scientist: REU (NSF Research Experience for Undergraduates) Iniyan Ganesan from the Kellogg Biological Station

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 9.5

For more information on the evolution of cheating rhizobia, check out these popular science articles: