Suppression of ectsmycorrhizae on canopy tree seedlislgs in Rfm&~eml~~~ m&mum I., (Eriqceae) thickets ipI the southern Appalachians --

J. Walker,O. K. Miller,Erik Niien
Abstract:Abskact Tlikkets of Rhpdodendron maximbm (Ericaceae) (Rm) iu the southern Appalachians severely limit regeneration of hardwood and coniferous seedlings. Experimental blocks were established in and out of Rm thickets in a mature, mixed hardwood/conifer forest in Maeon County, N.C. Litter and organic layer substrates were removed, cornposited and redistributed among plots within the blocks (except for control plots). Seedliugs of northern red oak (Quercz~ r&a) and eastern hemlock (TIgu cana&n~i~) were planted in the plots and harvested at the end of the first and second growing seasous. Litter manipulation had no effect on total mycorrhizal colonization, but the distribut$m of Centcoccum geophihun mycorrhizae was alter&:.mer the first year, percent mycorrh.izal colonization of hemlocks not in Rm thickets (62%) was at least three times higher than in Rm thickets (19%), and the ramZcation index (no. of mycorrhizae cm”) had increased by more than a factor of four (2.83 versus 0.61). In addition, colonization of l-year-old hemlocks by C. geophilum was significautly higher withiu blocks with (10.4%) than without (4.6%) Rm. Differences in mycorrhizal colonization, ramification indices and colonixation by C geophihun were absent or less pronounced on 2-year-old hemlocks and 1: and 2-year-old oak seedlings. The biomasses of first y&r. oak roots and shoots and second year shoots were 50% less in Rm thickets. Biomasses of first year hemlock roots and second year shoots were ,also reduced Mycorrhizal parameters were correlated
What problem does this paper attempt to address?