4.3 Article

Arabidopsis thaliana model system reveals a continuum of responses to root endophyte colonization

期刊

FUNGAL BIOLOGY
卷 117, 期 4, 页码 250-260

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.funbio.2013.02.001

关键词

Dark septate endophytes (DSE); Microdochium sp.; Mutualism-parasitism continuum; Periconia macrospinosa

类别

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [0344838, 0221489]
  2. NSF Frontiers in Integrative Biological Research [EF-0425759]
  3. NSF Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) program
  4. Division Of Environmental Biology
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [0344838] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We surveyed the non-mycorrhizal model plant Arabidopsis thaliana microscopically for its ability to form dark septate endophyte (DSE) symbioses in field, greenhouse, and laboratory studies. The laboratory studies were also used to estimate host growth responses to 34 Periconia macrospinosa and four Microdochium sp. isolates. Consistent with broad host range observed in previous experiments, field-, greenhouse-, and laboratory-grown A. thaliana were colonized by melanized inter- and intracellular hyphae and microsclerotia or chlamydospores indicative of DSE symbiosis. Host responses to colonization were variable and depended on the host ecotype. On average, two A. thaliana accessions (Col-0 and Cvi-0) responded negatively, whereas one (Kin-1) was unresponsive, a conclusion consistent with our previous analyses with forbs native to the field site where the fungi originate. Despite the average negative responses, examples of positive responses were also observed, a conclusion also congruent with earlier studies. Our results suggest that A. thaliana has potential as a model for more detailed dissection of the DSE symbiosis. Furthermore, our data suggest that host responses are controlled by variability in the host and endophyte genotypes. (c) 2013 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

4.3
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