4.2 Article

Culturing and direct PCR suggest prevalent host generalism among diverse fungal endophytes of tropical forest grasses

期刊

MYCOLOGIA
卷 103, 期 2, 页码 247-260

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3852/09-158

关键词

Ascomycota; Barro Colorado Island; diversity; endophytes; environmental sampling; internal transcribed spacer; Poaceae; tropical forest

类别

资金

  1. Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
  2. Sigma Xi
  3. Garden Club of America
  4. College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (UA)
  5. NSF [DEB-0640996]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most studies examining endophytic fungi associated with grasses (Poaceae) have focused on agronomically important species in managed ecosystems or on wild grasses in subtropical, temperate and boreal grasslands. However grasses first arose in tropical forests, where they remain a significant and diverse component of understory and forest-edge communities. To provide a broader context for understanding grass-endophyte associations we characterized fungal endophyte communities inhabiting foliage of 11 species of phylogenetically diverse C-3 grasses in the understory of a lowland tropical forest at Barro Colorado Island, Panama. Our sample included members of early-arising subfamilies of Poaceae that are endemic to forests, as well as more recently arising subfamilies that transitioned to open environments. Isolation on culture media and direct PCR and cloning revealed that these grasses harbor species-rich and phylogenetically diverse communities that lack the endophytic Clavicipitaceae known from diverse woodland and pasture grasses in the temperate zone. Both the incidence and diversity of endophytes was consistent among grass species regardless of subfamily, clade affiliation or ancestral habitat use. Genotype and phylogenetic analyses suggest that these endophytic fungi are predominantly host generalists, shared not only among distinctive lineages of Poaceae but also with non-grass plants at the same site.

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

4.2
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