Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) live in symbiosis with most plant species and produce underground extraradical hyphal networks functional in the uptake and translocation of mineral nutrients from the soil to host plants. This work investigated whether fungal genotype can affect patterns of interconnections and structural traits of extraradical mycelium (ERM), by comparing three Glomeraceae species growing in symbiosis with five plant hosts. An isolate of Funneliformis coronatus consistently showed low ability to form interconnected ERM and self-incompatibility that represented up to 21 % of hyphal contacts. The frequency of post-fusion self-incompatible interactions, never detected before in AMF extraradical networks, was 8.9 %. In F. coronatus ERM, the percentage of hyphal contacts leading to perfect hyphal fusions was 1.2-7.7, while it ranged from 25.8-48 to 35.6-53.6 in Rhizophagus intraradices and Funneliformis mosseae, respectively. Low interconnectedness of F. coronatus ERM resulted also from a very high number of non-interacting contacts (83.2 %). Such findings show that AMF genotypes in Glomeraceae can differ significantly in anastomosis behaviour and that ERM interconnectedness is modulated by the fungal symbiont, as F. coronatus consistently formed poorly interconnected networks when growing in symbiosis with five different host plants and in the asymbiotic stage. Structural traits, such as extent, density and hyphal self-compatibility/incompatibility, may represent key factors for the differential performance of AMF, by affecting fungal absorbing surface and foraging ability and thus nutrient flow from soil to host roots.

Different levels of hyphal self-incompatibility modulate interconnectedness of mycorrhizal networks in three arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi within the Glomeraceae

Sbrana Cristiana
2016

Abstract

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) live in symbiosis with most plant species and produce underground extraradical hyphal networks functional in the uptake and translocation of mineral nutrients from the soil to host plants. This work investigated whether fungal genotype can affect patterns of interconnections and structural traits of extraradical mycelium (ERM), by comparing three Glomeraceae species growing in symbiosis with five plant hosts. An isolate of Funneliformis coronatus consistently showed low ability to form interconnected ERM and self-incompatibility that represented up to 21 % of hyphal contacts. The frequency of post-fusion self-incompatible interactions, never detected before in AMF extraradical networks, was 8.9 %. In F. coronatus ERM, the percentage of hyphal contacts leading to perfect hyphal fusions was 1.2-7.7, while it ranged from 25.8-48 to 35.6-53.6 in Rhizophagus intraradices and Funneliformis mosseae, respectively. Low interconnectedness of F. coronatus ERM resulted also from a very high number of non-interacting contacts (83.2 %). Such findings show that AMF genotypes in Glomeraceae can differ significantly in anastomosis behaviour and that ERM interconnectedness is modulated by the fungal symbiont, as F. coronatus consistently formed poorly interconnected networks when growing in symbiosis with five different host plants and in the asymbiotic stage. Structural traits, such as extent, density and hyphal self-compatibility/incompatibility, may represent key factors for the differential performance of AMF, by affecting fungal absorbing surface and foraging ability and thus nutrient flow from soil to host roots.
2016
BIOLOGIA E BIOTECNOLOGIA AGRARIA
Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi
Extraradical networks
Funneliformis coronatus
Hyphal anastomosis
Hyphal incompatibility
Mycelial interconnectedness
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14243/301565
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 31
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 28
social impact