4.6 Article

The impacts of treatment with biocontrol fungus (Phlebiopsis gigantea) on bacterial diversity in Norway spruce stumps

Journal

BIOLOGICAL CONTROL
Volume 64, Issue 3, Pages 238-246

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2012.11.015

Keywords

Phlebiopsis gigantea; Bacteria diversity; Biological control; Pyrosequencing

Funding

  1. Maj and Tor Nessling Foundation
  2. Academy of Finland
  3. University of Helsinki
  4. Biological Interactions Graduate School (BIONT)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The biocontrol agent Phlebiopsis gigantea has been intensively applied to the surface of Picea abies stumps to control Heterobasidion root rot. But little is known about the possible impact of this treatment on the resident bacteria community in the stumps. High throughput DNA bar-coded pyrosequencing was used to characterize the diversity of bacteria in the stumps of P. abies at 1, 6 and 13 years after treatment with P. gigantea. The sequences were classified into 12 phyla and 160 genera, of which Proteobacteria and Acidobacteria were the most abundant groups over time. Moreover, at the initial stages of decay, Proteobacteria were the most abundant whereas Acidobacteria were the most common at advanced stages of decay. Treatment with P. gigantea led to significant increase of the genus Acidobacteria-Gp1 at 1 year after treatment. The analysis of observed and estimated operational taxonomic units (OTUs) as well as diversity indices revealed that P. gigantea treatment significantly decreased the initial bacterial richness in the stumps, but the bacterial community gradually recovered and the negative effects of P. gigantea was attenuated. These results provide additional insight on the risk assessment as well as environmental impact on the long-term use of P. gigantea in the control of Heterobasidion root rot in conifer forests. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available