Past research on plant-soil feedbacks (PSF), largely undertaken in highly controlled greenhouse conditions, has established that plant species differentially alter abiotic and biotic soil conditions that in turn affect growth of other conspecific and heterospecific individuals in that soil. Yet, whether feedbacks under controlled greenhouse conditions reflect feedbacks in natural environments where plants are exposed to a range of abiotic and biotic pressures is still unresolved. To address how environmental context affects PSF, we conducted a meta-analysis of previously published studies that examined plant growth responses to multiple forms of competition, stress, and disturbance across various PSF methodology. We asked the following questions: (1) Can competition, stress, and disturbance alter the direction and/or strength of PSF? (2) Do particular types of competition, stress, or disturbance affect the direction and/or strength of PSF more than others? and (3) Do methods of conducting PSF research (i.e., greenhouse vs. field experiments and whether the source of soil inoculum conditioning is from the field vs. greenhouse) affect plant growth responses to PSF or competition, stress, and disturbance, or their interactions? We discovered four patterns that may be predictive of what future PSF studies conducted under more realistic conditions might reveal. First, relatively little is known about how PSF responds to environmental stress and disturbance compared to plant-plant competition. Second, specific types of competition enhanced negative effects of soil microbes on plant growth, and specific environmental stressors enhanced positive effects of soil microbes on plant growth. Third, whether PSF experiments are conducted in the field or greenhouse can change plant growth responses. And, fourth, how the soil conditioning phase is conducted can change plant growth responses. With more detail than previously shown, these results confirm that environmental context writ large can change plant growth responses in PSF experiments. These data should aid theory and predictions for conservation and restoration applications by showing the relative importance of competition, stress, and disturbance in PSF studies over time. Lastly, these data demonstrate how variation in experimental methods can alter interpretation and conclusions of PSF studies.

Summary: The rapidly growing industry of crop biostimulants leverages the application of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) to promote plant growth and health. However, introducing nonnative rhizobacteria may impact other aspects of ecosystem functioning and have legacy effects; these potential consequences are largely unexplored. Nontarget consequences of PGPR may include changes in resident microbiomes, nutrient cycling, pollinator services, functioning of other herbivores, disease suppression, and organic matter persistence. Importantly, we lack knowledge of whether these ecosystem effects may manifest in adjacent ecosystems. The introduced PGPR can leave a functional legacy whether they persist in the community or not. Legacy effects include shifts in resident microbiomes and their temporal dynamics, horizontal transfer of genes from the PGPR to resident taxa, and changes in resident functional groups and interaction networks. Ecosystem functions may be affected by legacies PGPR leave following niche construction, such as when PGPR alter soil pH that in turn alters biogeochemical cycling rates. Here, we highlight new research directions to elucidate how introduced PGPR impact resident microbiomes and ecosystem functions and their capacity for legacy effects.

Soil organic carbon (SOC) regulates terrestrial ecosystem functioning, provides diverse energy sources for soil microorganisms, governs soil structure, and regulates the availability of organically bound nutrients. Investigators in increasingly diverse disciplines recognize how quantifying SOC attributes can provide insight about ecological states and processes. Today, multiple research networks collect and provide SOC data, and robust, new technologies are available for managing, sharing, and analyzing large data sets. We advocate that the scientific community capitalize on these developments to augment SOC data sets via standardized protocols. We describe why such efforts are important and the breadth of disciplines for which it will be helpful, and outline a tiered approach for standardized sampling of SOC and ancillary variables that ranges from simple to more complex. We target scientists ranging from those with little to no background in soil science to those with more soil‐related expertise, and offer examples of the ways in which the resulting data can be organized, shared, and discoverable.