2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0038-0717(01)00090-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Survival in the soil of the ectomycorrhizal fungus Laccaria bicolor and the effects of a mycorrhiza helper Pseudomonas fluorescens

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
51
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
1
51
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The reasons are decreased photosynthetic activity of needles under lower illumination and utilization of almost all available assimilates for plant regeneration. ECM formation can be stimulated by soil bacteria -plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (höf-lich et al 2001), especially in adverse conditions for the development of fungi (Brulé et al 2001). The rooting substrate amended with bacteria in our experiment (product BactoFil B) did not affect the ECM development; the result coincides with findings of Shishido et al (1996).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reasons are decreased photosynthetic activity of needles under lower illumination and utilization of almost all available assimilates for plant regeneration. ECM formation can be stimulated by soil bacteria -plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (höf-lich et al 2001), especially in adverse conditions for the development of fungi (Brulé et al 2001). The rooting substrate amended with bacteria in our experiment (product BactoFil B) did not affect the ECM development; the result coincides with findings of Shishido et al (1996).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If MHB inoculation leads to increased mycelial biomass in the soil, the occurrence of rootfungus encounters should increase too, resulting in faster mycorrhization (Brulé et al 2001). In line with this hypothesis, a significant correlation has been shown to exist between improved mycelial extension and promoted mycorrhiza establishment (Garbaye and Bowen 1989;Garbaye and Duponnois 1992;Gryndler and Vosatka 1996;Founoune et al 2002;Schrey et al 2005;Riedlinger et al 2006).…”
Section: Promoted Mycelial Growthmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…In a long-term survey, Brulé et al (2001) trapped fungal mycelium with Douglas fir seedlings, with and without the influence of P. fluorescens BBc6. The authors suggested that BBc6 promotes the survival of the fungal inoculum in the soil, since they observed a significant positive bacterial influence on fungal biomass only after autoclaving the nursery soil prior to adding bacteria and fungal inoculum, e.g., under adverse conditions for fungal development (Brulé et al 2001).…”
Section: Modification Of the Mycorrhizosphere Soilmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Garbaye & Duponnois (1993), MHB are not plant-specific, but they are clearly selective in their interactions with various fungal species, being therefore fungus-specific. Because P. fluorescens CECT 844 may be a MHB not specific to Pinus sp., we hypothesize that P. fluorescens CECT 844 as MHB could significantly increase the colonization by T. melanosporum only when the environment (soil) is unsuitable for fungal growth, as suggested by Brule et al (2001) for the fungus Laccaria bicolor. Under unfavorable conditions, it may be also hypothesized that the fungus is not able to prepare a suitable environment to promote mycorrhization, e.g., potentially increasing the mycorrhizal root tips or creating nutritional stress to promote the fungus-plant symbiosis.…”
Section: Seedling Growth and Mycorrhizal Colonizationmentioning
confidence: 91%