4.6 Article

Quantification of fungal colonization in modified wood: Quantitative real-time PCR as a tool for studies on Trametes versicolor

期刊

HOLZFORSCHUNG
卷 64, 期 5, 页码 645-651

出版社

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.1515/HF.2010.074

关键词

acetylation; CCA; Cu-HDO; furfurylation; Pinus sylvestris; qPCR; quantitative real-time PCR; thermal modification

资金

  1. Research Council of Norway
  2. Formas
  3. WoodWisdom-Net
  4. WoodExter
  5. EcoBuild institute Centre of Excellence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Traditional wood preservatives based on biocides are effective against wood-deteriorating organisms because of their toxicity. By contrast, modified woods are non-toxic by definition. To investigate the efficiency of various wood modifications, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) was used to profile the DNA amounts of the white-rot fungus Trametes versicolor (L.) [Lloyd strain CTB 863 A] during an 8-week-long growth period in treated Pinus sylvestris (L.) sapwood. The studied wood was modified by acetylation, furfurylation, and thermal treatment. The traditional wood preservatives bis-(N-cyclohexyldiazeniumdioxy)-copper (Cu-HDO) and chromated copper arsenate (CCA) were used as references, whereas untreated P. sylvestris (L.) sapwood served as a control. The maximum levels of fungal DNA in native wood occurred at the end of the experiment. For all wood treatments, the maximum fungal DNA level was recorded after an incubation period of 2 weeks, followed by a decline until the end of the trial. For the preservative-treated woods, Cu-HDO showed the lowest level of fungal DNA throughout the experiment, indicating that exploratory hyphal growth is limited owing to the phytotoxicity of the treatment. The other treatments did not inhibit the exploratory hyphal growth phase. We conclude that qPCR studies of hyphal growth patterns within wood should provide a powerful tool for evaluating and further optimizing new wood protection systems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据