3.8 Article

Reorganization of mycelial networks of Phanerochaete velutina in response to new woody resources and collembola (Folsomia candida) grazing

期刊

MYCOLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 110, 期 -, 页码 985-993

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mycres.2006.05.013

关键词

connective cords; fungus gnats; hyphal coverage; image analysis; mycelial morphology; mycelial patches

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mycelial development of Phanerochaete velutina extending from wood inocula in 57 x 57 cm trays of non-sterile soil was characterized after adding: (1) collembola; (2) new wood resources; (3) both new wood resources and collembola; and (4) no new resources and no collembola. After 99 d, all systems had produced distinct mycelial cords, much of the diffuse mycelium and thinner cords that were produced early on having regressed. Systems to which new resources (but no collembola) had been added developed thick cords interconnecting inocula with new resources, and much of the non-connected mycelium. regressed. Nonetheless, these systems had significantly greater hyphal coverage and mass fractal dimension than the other treatments, resulting from outgrowth from the new resources. Unexpectedly, morphology of grazed systems with no added resources was very similar to that of ungrazed systems with no added resources, apparently because the collembola grazed on senescing hyphae that would ultimately have regressed. Where new resources and collembola were added, there was proliferation of fine mycelium along connective cords and elsewhere, but this was not as extensive as in the new resource/no collembola systems, the fine mycelium apparently being grazed in patches. Fungus gnat (family Sciaridae) larvae contaminated eight (out of 14) trays with no added collembola, but none of the systems to which collembola had been added. They burrowed around the wood and caused cords to be severed. (c) 2006 The British Mycological Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

3.8
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