4.7 Article

Bacterial disease induced changes in fungal communities of olive tree twigs depend on host genotype

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-42391-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. FEDER funds through COMPETE (Programa Operacional Factores de Competitividade)
  2. national funds through FCT (Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia) [EXCL/AGR-PRO/0591/2012]
  3. FCT [UID/MULTI/04046/2013]
  4. FSE [SFRH/BD/98127/2013]
  5. COST Action [FA1405]
  6. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [UID/Multi/04046/2013, EXCL/AGR-PRO/0591/2012, SFRH/BD/98127/2013] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In nature, pathogens live and interact with other microorganisms on plant tissues. Yet, the research area exploring interactions between bacteria-fungi and microbiota-plants, within the context of a pathobiome, is still scarce. In this study, the impact of olive knot (OK) disease caused by the bacteria Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. savastanoi (Psv) on the epiphytic and endophytic fungal communities of olive tree twigs from three different cultivars, was investigated in field conditions. The ITS-DNA sequencing of cultivable fungi, showed that OK disease disturbs the resident fungal communities, which may reflect changes in the habitat caused by Psv. In particular, a reduction on epiphyte abundance and diversity, and changes on their composition were observed. Compared to epiphytes, endophytes were less sensitive to OK, but their abundance, in particular of potential pathogens, was increased in plants with OK disease. Host genotype, at cultivar level, contributed to plant fungal assembly particularly upon disease establishment. Therefore, besides fungi - Psv interactions, the combination of cultivar - Psv also appeared to be critical for the composition of fungal communities in olive knots. Specific fungal OTUs were associated to the presence and absence of disease, and their role in the promotion or suppression of OK disease should be studied in the future.

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

4.7
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