4.5 Article

Characterization of mycorrhizal fungi isolated from the threatened Cypripedium macranthos in a northern island of Japan: two phylogenetically distinct fungi associated with the orchid

期刊

MYCORRHIZA
卷 19, 期 8, 页码 525-534

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00572-009-0251-4

关键词

Cypripedium macranthos var. rebunense; Mycorrhizal fungi; Rhizoctonia; Specificity; Threatened orchid; Tulasnellaceae

资金

  1. Ministry of the Environment, Japan
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan [16310157]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16310157] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We isolated Rhizoctonia-like fungi from populations of the threatened orchid Cypripedium macranthos. In ultrastructural observations of the septa, the isolates had a flattened imperforate parenthesome consisting of two electron-dense membranes bordered by an internal electron-lucent zone, identical to the septal ultrastructure of Rhizoctonia repens (teleomorph Tulasnella), a mycorrhizal fungus of many orchid species. However, hyphae of the isolates did not fuse with those of known tester strains of R. repens and grew less than half as fast as those of R. repens. In phylogenetic analyses, sequences for rDNA and internal transcribed spacer (ITS) regions of the isolates were distinct from those of the taxonomically identified species of Tulasnella. On the basis of the ITS sequences, the isolates clustered into two groups that corresponded exactly with the clades demonstrated for other Cypripedium spp. from Eurasia and North America despite the geographical separation, suggesting high specificity in the Cypripedium-fungus association. In addition, the two phylogenetic groups corresponded to two different plant clones at different developmental stages. The fungi from one clone constituted one group and did not belong to the other fungal group isolated from the other clone. The possibility of switching to a new mycorrhizal partner during the orchid's lifetime is discussed.

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

4.5
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