4.6 Article

Selection of Sphingomonadaceae at the Base of Laccaria proxima and Russula exalbicans Fruiting Bodies

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 75, 期 7, 页码 1979-1989

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.02489-08

关键词

-

资金

  1. Soil Biotechnology Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dense hyphal network directly underneath the fruiting bodies of ectomycorrhizal fungi might exert strong influences on the bacterial community of soil. Such fruiting bodies might serve as hot spots for bacterial activity, for instance by providing nutrients and colonization sites in soil. Here, we assessed the putative selection of specific members of the Sphingomonadaceae family at the bases of the fruiting bodies of the ectomycorrhizal fungi Laccaria proxima and Russula exalbicans in comparison to the adjacent bulk soil. To do so, we used a previously designed Sphingomonadaceae-specific PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) system and complemented this with analyses of sequences from a Sphingomonadaceae-specific clone library. The analyses showed clear selective effects of the fruiting bodies of both fungi on the Sphingomonadaceae community structures. The effect was especially prevalent with R. exalbicans. Strikingly, similar fungi sampled approximately 100 m apart showed similar DGGE patterns, while corresponding bulk soil-derived patterns differed from each other. However, the mycospheres of L. proxima and R. exalbicans still revealed divergent community structures, indicating that different fungi select for different members of the Sphingomonadaceae family. Excision of specific bands from the DGGE patterns, as well as analyses of the clone libraries generated from both habitats, revealed fruiting body-specific Sphingomonadaceae types. It further showed that major groups from the mycospheres of R. exalbicans and L. proxima did not cluster with known bacteria from the database, indicating new groups within the family of Sphingomonadaceae present in these environments.

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

4.6
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