Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T15:06:08.158Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mycorrhizal fungi of Betula spp.: factors affecting their occurrence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

P. A. Mason ,
J. Wilson  and
F. T. Last
P. A. Mason
Affiliation:
Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0QB
J. Wilson
Affiliation:
Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0QB
F. T. Last
Affiliation:
Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0QB
Get access

Synopsis

The production of fruitbodies of mycorrhizal fungi associated with Betula spp. in an experimental site was observed to occur in a pattern ordered in time and space. Certain species of Inocybe, Hebeloma and Laccaria and Thelephora terrestris appeared in the first five years after planting: they were followed by species of Leccinum, Cortinarius and Russula. Usually more fungi were associated with B. pendula than with B. pubescens. More toadstools of Laccaria tortilis developed in association with one clone of B. pubescens than with another which favoured instead the development of Inocybe petiginosa.

The idea of a fungal succession is supported by below-ground observation of mycorrhizas. Early- and late-stage fungi formed mycorrhizas on seedlings growing in sterile conditions whether inoculated with mycelia or spores. However, only early-stage fungi formed mycorrhizas in unsterile conditions.

The concept of succession is based on observations made when treeless sites were planted with Betula spp. However, experimental planting of seedlings into soil with intact roots of older trees with mycorrhizas of Lactarius pubescens resulted in mycorrhizas on the seedlings: but no mycorrhizas formed if the roots of the older tree had been severed. This suggests that the pattern or sequence of mycorrhizal fungi associated with seedlings regenerating within natural stands is likely to differ from that associated with Betula spp. colonizing previously treeless sites.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B: Biological Sciences , Volume 85 , Issue 1-2: Birches , 1984 , pp. 141 - 151
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chu-Chou, M. 1979. Mycorrhizal fungi of Pinus radiata in New Zealand. Soil Biol. Biochem. 11, 557–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu-Chou, M. and Grace, L. J. 1981. Mycorrhizal fungi of Pseudotsuga menziesii in the North Island of New Zealand. Soil. Biol. Biochem. 13, 247–249.Google Scholar
Deacon, J. W., Donaldson, S. J. and Last, F. T. 1983. Sequences and interactions of mycorrhizal fungi on birch. Pl. Soil 71, 257–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickinson, C. H. 1979. Fairy rings in Norfolk. Bull. Br. Mycol. Soc. 13, 91–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleming, L. V. 1983. Succession of mycorrhizal fungi on birch: infection of seedlings planted around mature trees. Pl. Soil 71, 263–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, E. D., Mason, P. A. and Pelham, J. 1980. Spatial patterns of sporophore distribution around a young birch tree in three successive years. Trans. Br. Mycol. Soc. 75, 287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, F. M. 1983. Sources of inoculum of sheathing mycorrhizal fungi of birch (Betula spp.). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, S. D. 1951. Ecological groups of soil fungi: a survey of substrate relationships. New Phytol. 50, 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irving, F., Crossley, A., Mason, P. A., Last, F. T., Wilson, J. and Natarajan, K. Identity of two- and four-spored species of Laccaria forming mycorrhiza with trees, (in preparation).Google Scholar
Last, F. T., Mason, P. A., Wilson, J. and Deacon, J. W. 1983. Fine roots and sheathing mycorrhizas: their formation, function and dynamics. Pl. Soil 71, 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Last, F. T., Mason, P. A., Pelham, J. and Ingleby, K. 1984. Fruitbody production by sheathing mycorrhizal fungi: effects of ‘host’ genotypes and propagating soils. For. Ecol. Mgmt (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Last, F. T., Mason, P. A., Ingleby, K., Smith, R. I. and Cousens, J. E. Fruitbody production by mycorrhizal fungi associated with species of Alnus, Betula, Pinus and Sorbus planted on reclaimed coal spoil, (in preparation).Google Scholar
Malajczuk, N., Molina, R. and Trappe, J. M. 1982. Ectomycorrhiza formation in Eucalyptus. 1. Pure culture synthesis, host specificity and mycorrhizal compatibility with Pinus radiata. New Phytol. 91, 467–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marx, D. H. and Bryan, W. C. 1975. Growth and ectomycorrhizal development of loblolly pine seedings in fumigated soil infested with the fungal symbiont Pisolithus tinctorius. Forest Sci. 21, 245–254.Google Scholar
Marx, D. H., Bryan, W. C. and Cordell, C. E. 1977. Survival and growth of pine seedlings with Pisolithus ectomycorrhizae after two years on reforestation sites in North Carolina and Florida. Forest Sci. 23, 363–373.Google Scholar
Marx, D. H., Mexal, J. G. and Morris, W. G. 1979. Inoculation of nursery seedbeds with Pisolithus tinctorius spores mixed with hydromulch increases ectomycorrhizae and growth of loblolly pines. Sth. J. Appl. For. 3, 175–178.Google Scholar
Mason, P. A. 1980. Aseptic synthesis of sheathing (ecto-) mycorrhizas. In Tissue Culture Methods for Plant Pathologists, ed. Ingram, D. S. andHelgeson, J. P., pp. 173–178. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Mason, P. A., Last, F. T., Pelham, J. and Ingleby, K. 1982. Ecology of some fungi associated with an ageing stand of birches (Betula pendula and B. pubescens). For. Ecol. Mgmt 4, 19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, P. A., Dighton, J., Last, F. T. and Wilson, J. 1983a. Procedure for establishing sheathing mycorrhizas on tree seedlings. For. Ecol. Mgmt 5, 47–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, P. A., Wilson, J., Last, F. T. and Walker, C. 1983b. The concept of succession in relation to the spread of sheathing mycorrhizal fungi on inoculated tree seedlings growing in unsterile soils. Pl. Soil 71, 247–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melin, E. 1923. Experimented Untersuchungen über die Birken- and und Espen-mykorrnizen und ihre Pilzsymbioten. Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 17, 479–520.Google Scholar
Mexal, J. G. 1980. Aspects of mycorrhizal inoculation in relation to reforestation. N.Z. J. For. Sci. 10, 208–217.Google Scholar
Molina, R. 1979. Pure culture synthesis and host specificity of red alder mycorrhizae. Can. J. Bot. 57, 1223–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molina, R. and Trappe, J. M. 1982. Applied aspects of ectomycorrhizae. In Advances in Agricultural Microbiology, ed. Subba Rao, N. S., pp. 305–334. London: Butterworth Scientific.Google Scholar
Mosse, B., Stribley, D. P. andLeTacon, F. 1981. Ecology of mycorrhizae and mycorrhizal fungi. In Advances in Agricultural Microbiology, ed. Alexander, M., pp. 137–210. New York and London: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Pegler, D. N. 1981. The Mitchell Beazley Pocket Guide to Mushrooms and Toadstools. London: Mitchell Beazley.Google Scholar
Pelham, J., Kinnaird, J. W., Gardiner, A. S. and Last, F. T. 1984. Variation in, and reproductive capacity of, Betula pendula and B. pubescens. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 85, 27–41.Google Scholar
Robertson, N. F. 1954. Studies on the mycorrhiza of Pinus sylvestris. 1. The pattern of development of mycorrhizal roots and its significance for experimental studies. New Phytol. 53, 253–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theodorou, C. and Bowen, G. D. 1973. Inoculation of seeds and soil with basidiospores of mycorrhizal fungi. Soil. Biol. Biochem. 5, 765–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trappe, J. M. 1962. Fungus associates of ectotrophic mycorrhizae. Bot. Rev. 28, 538–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watling, R. 1973. Identification of the Larger Fungi. Amersham: Hulton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar