不同丝核菌对铁皮石斛的作用研究
摘要
丝核菌是一类在自然界中广泛存在的真菌,自1851年De Candolle建立丝核菌属(Rhizoctonia)以来,人们对其进行了大量的研究。但由于丝核菌只有结构相似的菌丝,很少产生有性和无性孢子,有性态的诱导极为困难,所以给丝核菌的分类鉴定工作带来了很大的困难。丝核菌能够与兰科植物共生,促进兰科植物生长。但是,丝核菌又是一种广泛分布于土壤和植物根部的植物病原真菌,它可以引起松苗、豆科植物等植物的猝倒病、水稻、小麦纹枯病、马铃薯黑痣病等多种病害。丝核菌究竟是植物病原真菌还是菌根菌的问题一直难以解答,激发了广大研究者的广泛兴趣。
本研究收集了11个丝核菌菌株,分别接种到铁皮石斛、马尾松和刺槐上,测定这些菌株与三种苗木之间的相互关系。测定结果将供试菌株分为有促生作用和致病作用两大类;其中有促生作用的菌株是铁皮石斛的菌根真菌。对各丝核菌菌株进行形态学鉴定,并进行菌落形态特征、菌落生长速度、细胞核数目、菌丝融合和有性态诱导等几个方面研究,得出结果如下:
1.通过接种测定发现,有促生作用和有致病作用的丝核菌是两类完全不同的丝核菌。其促生和致病特性是由菌株本身的遗传特性所决定,而与寄主植物种类和接种量关系不大。
2.对收集到的11个丝核菌菌株进行形态学观察,发现有致病作用与有促生作用的两类菌株,无论是在菌落形态还是菌丝形态上都有很大的不同。有致病作用的丝核菌生长速度快,菌落多以褐色为主,菌丝较粗,分枝多,有多核和双核细胞,以双核细胞居多,易形成菌核;有促生作用的丝核菌生长速度慢,菌落多以白色或无色为主,菌丝细,分枝少,全部为多核细胞,不形成菌核。
3.供试丝核菌株中GDB254、MLX102、CLN103、CT301、GH222、GDB181对铁皮石斛、刺槐、马尾松均无致病力,并且还能促进铁皮石斛的生长发育,通过研究接菌铁皮石斛鲜重增长率、叶绿素含量变化、显微观察菌根形态结构,结果表明:接种GDB254、MLX102、CLN103的铁皮石斛鲜重增长率分别比对照增加85%、104%和91%,均达到极显著水平,接种CT301、GH222、GDB181的铁皮石斛鲜重增长率分别比对照增加38%、47%和69%,也达到了显著水平;叶绿素a、b、a+b含量增加分别为:GDB254 76.2%、128%和89.5%,MLX102 84.9%、85.4%和85.1%,CLN103 57.9%、77.8%和63%,CT301 61.2%、54.6%和59.5%,GH222 72.4%、86.7%和76.0%,GDB181 25.9%、36.1%和28.5%;并且显微观察菌根的徒手切片在根被、皮层、中柱细胞中均有菌丝结典型结构。
4.供试丝核菌菌株中DHX121、DHX341、LS、HL、GD142对铁皮石斛、马尾松、刺槐均有致病作用,其中GD142的致病力最强,HL次之,DHX121、DHX341、LS致病力稍弱;且三种苗木的发病情况是:铁皮石斛最易感病,刺槐次之,马尾松最不易感病。不同接种量与寄主发病时间有关,接种量大,发病早;接种量小,发病迟。
Rhizoctonia is a kind of fungi distributed abroad in the nature. Since 1985 De Candolle established Rhizoctonia genus, researchers have done lots of work in this field. However, the classified and identified work of Rhizoctonias is very difficult, because Rhizoctonias only have similar structured hyphae and no teleomorph and anamorphs spore. Rhizoctonia may be the pathogeny of many plants, or saprophyte in cultivated soil or the mycorrhiza of orchids. The research on the relationship between Rhizoctonias and plants has been paid more attention.
This research got 11 strains of Rhizoctonia and inoculated them into the roots of seedlings of the Deudrobium caudidum which were gained by tissue culture, and Pinus massoniana and Robinia pseudoacadiaa which were sterile, in order to study the relationship between the Rhizoctonia and the plants. According to the mensurated result, the Rhizoctonia strains were divided into two groups. They were pathologic group and the non-pathologic group; the non-pathologic group were approved to be the mycorrhiza of D. caudidum, and beneficial to the growth of D. caudidum. According to the research of morphology and physiology, included morphological character of the colony and the hypha, the number of the nuclear of the strains, and anatomosis reaction, the relationship between the Rhizoctonia and the plants and diversity of Rhizoctonia strains had been studied. The main results were as follows:
1. According to the research, there were many differences between the pathogenic and non-pathogenic group.The pathogenicity of the different strains have something to do with the characteristic of the strains themselves. The kinds of host and the quantity of inoculation also have some influence on it, but not the most important ones.
2. According to the study on morphology and physiology of the 11 strains, it has been found that the differences between the pathogenic and non-pathogenic group were extremely distinct not only on morphologic characteristics of the colonies but also on the characteristics of the hyphae. The strains of pathogenic group grew fast, had brown colony colour, thin colony, more divarications of hyphae, binuclear or multinuclear hyphae, and formed the sclerotium easily. The non-pathogenic strains grew slowly, had white colony colour, thick colony, less divarications of hyphae, multicuclear hyphae, and did not produce any sclerotium.
3. The strains of GDB254, MLN102, CLN103, CT301, GH222, GDB181 were non- pathologic for D. caudidum, P. massoniana and R. pseuudoacadiaa, and were the mycorrhizal fungi of D.caudidum. By testing the increasing rate of fresh weight of the seedlings, the rate of chloropphll a,b content, and observing the microstructure of the roots of D. caudidum, it was found that the average fresh weight of seedlings which were inoculated with the six strains were higher than those of constrastive seedlings after 65 days, respectively were 85%, 104%, 91% 38%, 47% and 69%. All these results were extremely significant (α=0.01) and significant (α=0.05). Chloropphll a, b content of seedlings were also higher than those of contrastive seedlings, those were GDB254 76.2%, 128% and 89.5%, MLX102 84.9%, 85.4% and 85.1%, CLN103 57.9%, 77.8% and 63%,CT301 61.2%, 54.6% and 59.5%, GH222 72.4%, 86.7% and 76.0%, GDB181 25.9%, 36.1% and 28.5% respectively. Through observation on the microstructure of mycorrhiza, we found that there were many pelotons in cortical and vascular tissue. So it was confirmed that the relationship of symbiosis was already formed, the growth and chloropphll a, b content of D. candidum were promoted by the mycorrhizal fungi.
4. According to the pathogenic test, it had been found that the strains of DHX121, DHX341, LS, HL and GD142 were all possessed of pathogenic function. Among them, the pathogenicity of strain GD142 was the most serious one, the strain HL was the mild and the strains DHX121, DHX341 and LS were the least. Among the three tested plants, D. candidum could be infected easily, R. pseudoacaciaa is the next one, and P. massoniana is the hardest one to be infected. And it also showed that the more quantity to be inoculated, the quicker to be infected.
本研究收集了11个丝核菌菌株,分别接种到铁皮石斛、马尾松和刺槐上,测定这些菌株与三种苗木之间的相互关系。测定结果将供试菌株分为有促生作用和致病作用两大类;其中有促生作用的菌株是铁皮石斛的菌根真菌。对各丝核菌菌株进行形态学鉴定,并进行菌落形态特征、菌落生长速度、细胞核数目、菌丝融合和有性态诱导等几个方面研究,得出结果如下:
1.通过接种测定发现,有促生作用和有致病作用的丝核菌是两类完全不同的丝核菌。其促生和致病特性是由菌株本身的遗传特性所决定,而与寄主植物种类和接种量关系不大。
2.对收集到的11个丝核菌菌株进行形态学观察,发现有致病作用与有促生作用的两类菌株,无论是在菌落形态还是菌丝形态上都有很大的不同。有致病作用的丝核菌生长速度快,菌落多以褐色为主,菌丝较粗,分枝多,有多核和双核细胞,以双核细胞居多,易形成菌核;有促生作用的丝核菌生长速度慢,菌落多以白色或无色为主,菌丝细,分枝少,全部为多核细胞,不形成菌核。
3.供试丝核菌株中GDB254、MLX102、CLN103、CT301、GH222、GDB181对铁皮石斛、刺槐、马尾松均无致病力,并且还能促进铁皮石斛的生长发育,通过研究接菌铁皮石斛鲜重增长率、叶绿素含量变化、显微观察菌根形态结构,结果表明:接种GDB254、MLX102、CLN103的铁皮石斛鲜重增长率分别比对照增加85%、104%和91%,均达到极显著水平,接种CT301、GH222、GDB181的铁皮石斛鲜重增长率分别比对照增加38%、47%和69%,也达到了显著水平;叶绿素a、b、a+b含量增加分别为:GDB254 76.2%、128%和89.5%,MLX102 84.9%、85.4%和85.1%,CLN103 57.9%、77.8%和63%,CT301 61.2%、54.6%和59.5%,GH222 72.4%、86.7%和76.0%,GDB181 25.9%、36.1%和28.5%;并且显微观察菌根的徒手切片在根被、皮层、中柱细胞中均有菌丝结典型结构。
4.供试丝核菌菌株中DHX121、DHX341、LS、HL、GD142对铁皮石斛、马尾松、刺槐均有致病作用,其中GD142的致病力最强,HL次之,DHX121、DHX341、LS致病力稍弱;且三种苗木的发病情况是:铁皮石斛最易感病,刺槐次之,马尾松最不易感病。不同接种量与寄主发病时间有关,接种量大,发病早;接种量小,发病迟。
Rhizoctonia is a kind of fungi distributed abroad in the nature. Since 1985 De Candolle established Rhizoctonia genus, researchers have done lots of work in this field. However, the classified and identified work of Rhizoctonias is very difficult, because Rhizoctonias only have similar structured hyphae and no teleomorph and anamorphs spore. Rhizoctonia may be the pathogeny of many plants, or saprophyte in cultivated soil or the mycorrhiza of orchids. The research on the relationship between Rhizoctonias and plants has been paid more attention.
This research got 11 strains of Rhizoctonia and inoculated them into the roots of seedlings of the Deudrobium caudidum which were gained by tissue culture, and Pinus massoniana and Robinia pseudoacadiaa which were sterile, in order to study the relationship between the Rhizoctonia and the plants. According to the mensurated result, the Rhizoctonia strains were divided into two groups. They were pathologic group and the non-pathologic group; the non-pathologic group were approved to be the mycorrhiza of D. caudidum, and beneficial to the growth of D. caudidum. According to the research of morphology and physiology, included morphological character of the colony and the hypha, the number of the nuclear of the strains, and anatomosis reaction, the relationship between the Rhizoctonia and the plants and diversity of Rhizoctonia strains had been studied. The main results were as follows:
1. According to the research, there were many differences between the pathogenic and non-pathogenic group.The pathogenicity of the different strains have something to do with the characteristic of the strains themselves. The kinds of host and the quantity of inoculation also have some influence on it, but not the most important ones.
2. According to the study on morphology and physiology of the 11 strains, it has been found that the differences between the pathogenic and non-pathogenic group were extremely distinct not only on morphologic characteristics of the colonies but also on the characteristics of the hyphae. The strains of pathogenic group grew fast, had brown colony colour, thin colony, more divarications of hyphae, binuclear or multinuclear hyphae, and formed the sclerotium easily. The non-pathogenic strains grew slowly, had white colony colour, thick colony, less divarications of hyphae, multicuclear hyphae, and did not produce any sclerotium.
3. The strains of GDB254, MLN102, CLN103, CT301, GH222, GDB181 were non- pathologic for D. caudidum, P. massoniana and R. pseuudoacadiaa, and were the mycorrhizal fungi of D.caudidum. By testing the increasing rate of fresh weight of the seedlings, the rate of chloropphll a,b content, and observing the microstructure of the roots of D. caudidum, it was found that the average fresh weight of seedlings which were inoculated with the six strains were higher than those of constrastive seedlings after 65 days, respectively were 85%, 104%, 91% 38%, 47% and 69%. All these results were extremely significant (α=0.01) and significant (α=0.05). Chloropphll a, b content of seedlings were also higher than those of contrastive seedlings, those were GDB254 76.2%, 128% and 89.5%, MLX102 84.9%, 85.4% and 85.1%, CLN103 57.9%, 77.8% and 63%,CT301 61.2%, 54.6% and 59.5%, GH222 72.4%, 86.7% and 76.0%, GDB181 25.9%, 36.1% and 28.5% respectively. Through observation on the microstructure of mycorrhiza, we found that there were many pelotons in cortical and vascular tissue. So it was confirmed that the relationship of symbiosis was already formed, the growth and chloropphll a, b content of D. candidum were promoted by the mycorrhizal fungi.
4. According to the pathogenic test, it had been found that the strains of DHX121, DHX341, LS, HL and GD142 were all possessed of pathogenic function. Among them, the pathogenicity of strain GD142 was the most serious one, the strain HL was the mild and the strains DHX121, DHX341 and LS were the least. Among the three tested plants, D. candidum could be infected easily, R. pseudoacaciaa is the next one, and P. massoniana is the hardest one to be infected. And it also showed that the more quantity to be inoculated, the quicker to be infected.
引文
1. 陈厚德,梁月农,朱华.1995.江苏玉米纹枯菌的菌丝融合群及致病性.植物病理学报,26:138.
2. 陈京元,徐红梅,蔡三山等.2006.松苗猝倒病不同病原物的致病性差异及生防细菌的筛选.东北林业大学学报,34(2):5-7.
3. 陈连庆,裴致达,韩宁林等.2002.三种石斛菌根形态结构及元素构成的研究.林业科学研究,15(1):96-100.
4. 陈瑞蕊,林先贵,施亚琴.2003.兰科菌根的研究进展.应用与环境生物学报,9(1):97-101.
5. 陈心启,吉占和.1998.中国兰花全书.北京:中国林业出版社,14-118.
6. 陈心启,吉占和.2003.中国兰花全书(第二版).北京:中国林业出版社,11.
7. 陈延熙,张敦华,段霞渝等.1985.关于 Rhizoctonia solani 菌丝融合分类和有性世代的研究.植物病理学报,15(3):139-143.
8. 邓振山.2004.新疆北疆棉田立枯丝核菌菌丝融合群及其再分化的研究.新疆农业大学硕士论文.
9. 范黎,郭顺星,徐锦堂.1998.我国部分兰科植物菌根的内生真菌种类研究.山西大学学报(自然科学版),21(2):169-177.
10. 范黎,郭顺星.1989.十九种兰科植物根的内生担子菌.真菌学报,8(3)221-226.
11. 范黎,郭顺星.1996.墨兰共生真菌一新种的分离、培养、鉴定及其生物活性.真菌学报,15(4):251-255.
12. 范黎,郭顺星.1998.兰科植物菌根真菌的研究进展.微生物学通报,25(4):227-230.
13. 弓明钦,陈应龙,仲崇禄.1994.菌根研究及应用.北京:中国林业出版社,14-15.
14. 郭秀珍,毕国昌.1989.林业菌根及应用技术.北京:中国林业出版社,131-140
15. 何苏琴.2002.引起辣椒茎腐和根腐的立枯丝核菌的生物学特性和致病性研究.甘肃农业科技,9:44-45.
16. 黄江华,杨媚等.2002.丝核菌研究进展.仲恺农业技术学院学报,15(1):61-67
17. 霍纳新.1999.小麦纹枯病原菌遗传多样性分析研究和小麦品种资源抗性鉴定.北京:中国农业科学院研究生院.
18. 金辉.2006.三种兰花的菌根真菌筛选及共生机制研究.南京林业大学硕士研究生学位论文.
19. 金梅松,Korpradiskul V.1998.利用同工酶分析丝核菌菌丝融合群 IA 亚群(Rhizoctonia solani AG1-IA)的遗传多样性.菌物系统,17(4):331-338.
20. 李华荣.1980.丝核菌属真菌的分类学进展.国外农学-植物保护,4:9-14.
21. 李明,张灼,缪锦梅.2000.对一种建兰栽培品种菌根真菌的调查.大理师专学报,(1):50-51.
22. 李明,张灼,彭彦华.2000.兰科菌根研究及应用.云南农业科技,(6):42-44.
23. 李明,张灼.2001.杏黄兜兰菌根研究与应用.生物学杂志,18(6):17-18.
24. 李明.2001.兰科菌根的特点及其菌根真菌在兰花培育中的应用.云南师范大学学报,21(4):68-71.
25. 刘爱新,郑是琳,吴洵耻等.1995.山东省禾谷类作物纹枯病研究.山东植物病理研究.北京:中国农业出版社,157-167.
26. 刘力,葛起新.1988.立枯丝核菌蛋白质电泳图谱研究.真菌学报,7(3):175-182.
27. 刘青林,马伟,郑玉梅.2003.花卉组织培养.中国农业出版社,104-106,128-130.
28. 卢思聪.1994.中国兰与洋兰.北京:金盾出版社,1-63.
29. 陆家云.2001.病原植物真菌学.北京:中国农业出版社,11.
30. 潘超美,陈汝民,叶庆生.1999.菌根真菌在墨兰和建兰根中的感染特征及生理特征.土壤与环境,8(4):287-289.
31. 王洪凯,刘开启,吴洵耻.1997.丝核菌分类研究进展.山东农业大学学报,28(3):375-382.
32. 伍建榕.2005.云南濒危野生兰花与菌根真菌的相互关系.南京林业大学博士研究生论文.
33. 肖炎农,李建生,郑用链等.2002.湖北省玉米纹枯病病原丝核菌的种类和致病性.菌物系统,21(3):419-424.
34. 徐锦堂,郭顺星.1988.供给天麻种子萌发营养的真菌—紫萁小菇.真菌学报,8(3):221-226.
35. 颜容.2004.兰科植物菌根真菌的分类及其在共生植物间的营养关系.西部林业科学,33(4):50-53.
36. 颜容.2005.独花兰菌根真菌的研究.北京林业大学硕士研究生论文.
37. 杨小军,杨立军,赵永玉等.2000.江苏小麦纹枯病病原菌菌丝融合群和致病力研究.华中农业大学学报,19(2):106-111.
38. 杨友联,刘作易.2005.兰科菌根真菌在兰科植物生长发育中的作用与应用.种子,24(5):55-58.
39. 应俊龙,张玉龙.1994.中国种子植物特有属.北京:科学出版社,608-630.
40. 赵桂东,李清铣.1993.江苏大麦纹枯病菌酯酶同工酶的测定.真菌学报,12(2):163-170.
41. Anderson N.A.1982.The genetics and pathology of Rhizoctonia solani Ann. Rev.Phytoapthol.20:329-47.
42. Baruch S.,Jabaji-hare S.,Stephen N. et al.1996.Rhizoctonia Species:Taxonomy,Molecular Biology,Ecology,Pathology and Disease Control.Kluwer academic publishers,London.2-3.
43. Bounou S., Jabaji-hare S.H., Hogue R., et al.1999.Polymerase chain reaction-based assay for specific detection of Rhizoctonia solani AG3 isolate.Mycol Res,103(1):1-8.
44. Chin S.Y.,Richard P.K.1985.Ascorhizoctonia gen.nov. and complexipes emend,two genera for anamorphs of species assigned to Tricharina(Discomycetes).Mycotaxon,XXIII:475-481.
45. Clare B.G.,Flentje N.T.,Atkinson M.R..1967.Eletrophoretic patterns of oxidoreductases and other proteins as criteria in fungal taxonomy.Aust J Biol Sci,21:275-295.
46. Currah R.S.,Zelmer C.,Hambleton S..1987.New records and new taxa of fungi from the mycorrhizae of terrestrial orchids of Alberta.Can J Bot,65:2473-2482.
47. Damaji M.,Jabaji-hare S.H.,Charest R.M..1993.Isozyme variation and genetic relatedness in binucleate Rhizoctonia species.Phytopathol,83:864-871.
48. Duncans, Barton J.E.,Obrien P.A..1993.Analysis of Variatipn in isolates of Rhizoctonia solani by random amplified polymorphic DNA assay.Mycol Res,97(9):1075-1082
49. Fan L.,Guo S.X.,Xu J.T..1999.Interaction between protocorms of Gastrodia elata(Orchid-Daceae)and Mycena dendrobil in symbiotic germination.Mycosysterm,18(2):219-225.
50. Foenys N.T.,Stretton H.M.and Hawn E.J..1962.Nuclear Pistribution and Behaviour throughout the life cycles of Thanatephorus,Waitea and Ceratobasisdium.Aust.J.Biol.Sci,16:450-466.
51. Guo S.X.,Cao W.Q..2000.Isolation and biological activity of mycorrhizal fungi from Dendrobium candidum and D.nobile.China J Chin Materia Med,25(6):338-340.
52. Harley J.L.,Smith S.E..1983.Mycorrhizal Symbilsis.Academic Press.London,268-295.
53. Harley J.L.1959.The Biology of Mycorrhiza.Plant science Momographs.London Leonard Hill Limited Eden Street.N.W.I.141-171.
54. Hietala A.M.,Sen R.B.,Lilja A..1994.Anamorphic and teleomorphic characteristics of a uninucleate Rhizoctonia solani isolated from the roots of nursery grown conifer scedlinns.Mvcol Res,98(9):1044-1050.
55. Laroche J.P.,Jabaji-hare S.H.,Charest P.M..1992.Differentiation of two anastomosis groups of Rhizoctonia solani by isozyme analysis.Phytopathol,82:1387-1393.
56. Lilja A.,Hietala A.M.,Karjalainen R..1996.Identification of a uninucleate Rhizoctonia sp. by pathogenicity,hyphal anastomosis and RAPD analysis.Plant Pathol,45:997-1006.
57. Liu Z.L.,Domier L.L.,Sinclair J.B..1993.ISG specific ribosomal DNA polymorphism of the Rhizoctonia solani species complex.Mycologia,85:795-800.
58. Lo C.T.,Tu C.C. and Tsai W.H..1990.Ananastomosis groups and pathogenicipy of Rhizoctonia spp. from carnation.Plant Prot.Bull.32:158-161.
59. Macnish G.C.,Sweetingham M.W..1993.Evidence of stability of pectic zymogram groups within Rhizoctonia solani AG8.Mycol Res,97:1056-1058.
60. Masuhara G.,Katsuya KandYamaguchi K..1993.Potential for symbiosis of Rhizoctonia solani and binucleate Rhizoctonia with seeds of Spiranthes sinensis var. amoena in vitro.Mycol.Res,97:746-752.
61. Melville L.,Dickson S.,Farquhar M.L..1998.Visualization of mycorrhizal fungal structures in resin embedded tissues with xanthene dyes using laser scanning confocal microscopy.Can J Bot,76(1):174-178.
62. Moore R.T..1987.The genera of Rhizoctonia like fungi Ascorhizgctonia,Ceratorhiza gen.nov,Epulorzhiza gen.nov,Momiliopsis and Rhizoctonia.Mycotaxon,XXIX:91-99.
63. Moore R.T..1987.The genera of Rhizoctonia like fungi:Ascorhitonia,Ceiatorhiza gen.nov.,Epulorhiza gen nov.,Moniliopsis,and Rhizoctonia.Mycotaxon,29:91-99.
64. Mordue E.M.,Gurrahr S.,and Bridge,P.D..1989.An integrated approach to Rhizoctonia taxonomy:cultural biochemical and numerical techniques.Mycol.Res,92(1):78-90.
65. Natio S.,Djaeni M.,Nasution A.et al.1991.Soil-borne diseases affecting yield loss of Soybean.Proceeding of Final Seminar of the Strengthening of Pioneering Research for PALAWIJAJA Crop Production(ATA:378),Indonesia.24-37.
66. Neate S.M.,Cruikshank R.H.,Rovira A.D..1988.Pectic enzyme patterns of Rhizoctonia solani isolates from agricultural soils in South Australia.Trans Brit Mycol Soc,90:37-42.
67. Obrien P.A..1994.Molecular markers in Australia isolates of Rhizoctonia solani.Mycol Res,98(6):665-671.
68. Ogoshi A..1987.Ecology and Pathogenicity of Anastomsis and Intraspecific groups of Rhizoctonia solani Kǖhn.Ann.Rev.Phytopathol,25:125-143.
69. Rasmussen H..1990.Cell differentiation and mycorrhizal infection Dactylorhiza majalis(Rchb.f.) Hunt&Summerh (Orchidaceae)during fermination in vitro.New Phytol,116:137-147.
70. Reynolds M.,Weinhold A.R.,Morris T.J..1983.Comparison of anastomosis groups of Rhizoctonia solani by poly-acrylamide gel electrophoresis of soluble proteins.Phytopathol,73:903-906.
71. Rovira A.D.,Ogoshi A. and Mcdonald H.J..1986.Characterization of isolates of Rhizoctonia solani from crreal roots in South Australia and New South Wales.Phytopahtology,28:233-246.
72. Senthikumar S.,Krishnamurthy KV.,Britto S.J..2000.Visualization of orchid mycorrhizal fungal structures with fluorescence dye using epifluorescence microcopy.Current Sci,79(11):1527-1528.
73. Senthilkumar S..1998.Krishnamurthy K.V.Acytochemical study on the mycorrhizae of Spathoglottis plicata.Biol Plantarum,41(1):111-119.
74. Smith S.E.,Read D.J..1997.Mycorrhizal symbiosis(Second Edition).Academic Press,London.347-376.
75. Smith S.E..1974.Mycorrhizal fungi.CRC Crit.Rev Microviol,(3):275-313.
76. Sneh B.L.,Ogoshi A..1991.Identification of Rhizoctonia species.St Paul,MN:APS Press,133.
77. Sweetingham M.W.,Cruickshnak R.H.,WONG D.H..1986.Pectic zymograms and pathogenicity of the Ceratobasidiaceae.Trans Brit Mycol Soc,86:305-311.
78. Sweetingham M.W..1990.Coping with brown spot and root rots of lupines.J Agric Western Australia,31:5-31.
79. Tu C.C.and Kimbrough J.W..1978.Systematics and phylogeny pf fungi in the Rhizoctonia complex.Bot.Gaz,139(4):454-466.
80. Vilgalys R.and Cubeta M.A..1994.Molecular,systematics and populations biology of Rhizoctonia.Ann.Rev.Phytopathol,32: 135-155.
81. Warcup J.H..1981.The mycorrhizal relationships of Australian orchids.New phytol,87:371-378.
82. Warcup J.H.and Talbot P.H.B..1966.Perfect states of some Rhizoctonias.Trans.Br.Mycol.soc,49(3):427-435.
83. Wu J.P.,Zheng S.Z..1994.Isolation and identification of Fusarium sp.from mycorrhiza fungus in Dendrobium densiflorum and analyses of ies metabolites.J Fudan Univ(Nat Sci),33(5):547-552.
2. 陈京元,徐红梅,蔡三山等.2006.松苗猝倒病不同病原物的致病性差异及生防细菌的筛选.东北林业大学学报,34(2):5-7.
3. 陈连庆,裴致达,韩宁林等.2002.三种石斛菌根形态结构及元素构成的研究.林业科学研究,15(1):96-100.
4. 陈瑞蕊,林先贵,施亚琴.2003.兰科菌根的研究进展.应用与环境生物学报,9(1):97-101.
5. 陈心启,吉占和.1998.中国兰花全书.北京:中国林业出版社,14-118.
6. 陈心启,吉占和.2003.中国兰花全书(第二版).北京:中国林业出版社,11.
7. 陈延熙,张敦华,段霞渝等.1985.关于 Rhizoctonia solani 菌丝融合分类和有性世代的研究.植物病理学报,15(3):139-143.
8. 邓振山.2004.新疆北疆棉田立枯丝核菌菌丝融合群及其再分化的研究.新疆农业大学硕士论文.
9. 范黎,郭顺星,徐锦堂.1998.我国部分兰科植物菌根的内生真菌种类研究.山西大学学报(自然科学版),21(2):169-177.
10. 范黎,郭顺星.1989.十九种兰科植物根的内生担子菌.真菌学报,8(3)221-226.
11. 范黎,郭顺星.1996.墨兰共生真菌一新种的分离、培养、鉴定及其生物活性.真菌学报,15(4):251-255.
12. 范黎,郭顺星.1998.兰科植物菌根真菌的研究进展.微生物学通报,25(4):227-230.
13. 弓明钦,陈应龙,仲崇禄.1994.菌根研究及应用.北京:中国林业出版社,14-15.
14. 郭秀珍,毕国昌.1989.林业菌根及应用技术.北京:中国林业出版社,131-140
15. 何苏琴.2002.引起辣椒茎腐和根腐的立枯丝核菌的生物学特性和致病性研究.甘肃农业科技,9:44-45.
16. 黄江华,杨媚等.2002.丝核菌研究进展.仲恺农业技术学院学报,15(1):61-67
17. 霍纳新.1999.小麦纹枯病原菌遗传多样性分析研究和小麦品种资源抗性鉴定.北京:中国农业科学院研究生院.
18. 金辉.2006.三种兰花的菌根真菌筛选及共生机制研究.南京林业大学硕士研究生学位论文.
19. 金梅松,Korpradiskul V.1998.利用同工酶分析丝核菌菌丝融合群 IA 亚群(Rhizoctonia solani AG1-IA)的遗传多样性.菌物系统,17(4):331-338.
20. 李华荣.1980.丝核菌属真菌的分类学进展.国外农学-植物保护,4:9-14.
21. 李明,张灼,缪锦梅.2000.对一种建兰栽培品种菌根真菌的调查.大理师专学报,(1):50-51.
22. 李明,张灼,彭彦华.2000.兰科菌根研究及应用.云南农业科技,(6):42-44.
23. 李明,张灼.2001.杏黄兜兰菌根研究与应用.生物学杂志,18(6):17-18.
24. 李明.2001.兰科菌根的特点及其菌根真菌在兰花培育中的应用.云南师范大学学报,21(4):68-71.
25. 刘爱新,郑是琳,吴洵耻等.1995.山东省禾谷类作物纹枯病研究.山东植物病理研究.北京:中国农业出版社,157-167.
26. 刘力,葛起新.1988.立枯丝核菌蛋白质电泳图谱研究.真菌学报,7(3):175-182.
27. 刘青林,马伟,郑玉梅.2003.花卉组织培养.中国农业出版社,104-106,128-130.
28. 卢思聪.1994.中国兰与洋兰.北京:金盾出版社,1-63.
29. 陆家云.2001.病原植物真菌学.北京:中国农业出版社,11.
30. 潘超美,陈汝民,叶庆生.1999.菌根真菌在墨兰和建兰根中的感染特征及生理特征.土壤与环境,8(4):287-289.
31. 王洪凯,刘开启,吴洵耻.1997.丝核菌分类研究进展.山东农业大学学报,28(3):375-382.
32. 伍建榕.2005.云南濒危野生兰花与菌根真菌的相互关系.南京林业大学博士研究生论文.
33. 肖炎农,李建生,郑用链等.2002.湖北省玉米纹枯病病原丝核菌的种类和致病性.菌物系统,21(3):419-424.
34. 徐锦堂,郭顺星.1988.供给天麻种子萌发营养的真菌—紫萁小菇.真菌学报,8(3):221-226.
35. 颜容.2004.兰科植物菌根真菌的分类及其在共生植物间的营养关系.西部林业科学,33(4):50-53.
36. 颜容.2005.独花兰菌根真菌的研究.北京林业大学硕士研究生论文.
37. 杨小军,杨立军,赵永玉等.2000.江苏小麦纹枯病病原菌菌丝融合群和致病力研究.华中农业大学学报,19(2):106-111.
38. 杨友联,刘作易.2005.兰科菌根真菌在兰科植物生长发育中的作用与应用.种子,24(5):55-58.
39. 应俊龙,张玉龙.1994.中国种子植物特有属.北京:科学出版社,608-630.
40. 赵桂东,李清铣.1993.江苏大麦纹枯病菌酯酶同工酶的测定.真菌学报,12(2):163-170.
41. Anderson N.A.1982.The genetics and pathology of Rhizoctonia solani Ann. Rev.Phytoapthol.20:329-47.
42. Baruch S.,Jabaji-hare S.,Stephen N. et al.1996.Rhizoctonia Species:Taxonomy,Molecular Biology,Ecology,Pathology and Disease Control.Kluwer academic publishers,London.2-3.
43. Bounou S., Jabaji-hare S.H., Hogue R., et al.1999.Polymerase chain reaction-based assay for specific detection of Rhizoctonia solani AG3 isolate.Mycol Res,103(1):1-8.
44. Chin S.Y.,Richard P.K.1985.Ascorhizoctonia gen.nov. and complexipes emend,two genera for anamorphs of species assigned to Tricharina(Discomycetes).Mycotaxon,XXIII:475-481.
45. Clare B.G.,Flentje N.T.,Atkinson M.R..1967.Eletrophoretic patterns of oxidoreductases and other proteins as criteria in fungal taxonomy.Aust J Biol Sci,21:275-295.
46. Currah R.S.,Zelmer C.,Hambleton S..1987.New records and new taxa of fungi from the mycorrhizae of terrestrial orchids of Alberta.Can J Bot,65:2473-2482.
47. Damaji M.,Jabaji-hare S.H.,Charest R.M..1993.Isozyme variation and genetic relatedness in binucleate Rhizoctonia species.Phytopathol,83:864-871.
48. Duncans, Barton J.E.,Obrien P.A..1993.Analysis of Variatipn in isolates of Rhizoctonia solani by random amplified polymorphic DNA assay.Mycol Res,97(9):1075-1082
49. Fan L.,Guo S.X.,Xu J.T..1999.Interaction between protocorms of Gastrodia elata(Orchid-Daceae)and Mycena dendrobil in symbiotic germination.Mycosysterm,18(2):219-225.
50. Foenys N.T.,Stretton H.M.and Hawn E.J..1962.Nuclear Pistribution and Behaviour throughout the life cycles of Thanatephorus,Waitea and Ceratobasisdium.Aust.J.Biol.Sci,16:450-466.
51. Guo S.X.,Cao W.Q..2000.Isolation and biological activity of mycorrhizal fungi from Dendrobium candidum and D.nobile.China J Chin Materia Med,25(6):338-340.
52. Harley J.L.,Smith S.E..1983.Mycorrhizal Symbilsis.Academic Press.London,268-295.
53. Harley J.L.1959.The Biology of Mycorrhiza.Plant science Momographs.London Leonard Hill Limited Eden Street.N.W.I.141-171.
54. Hietala A.M.,Sen R.B.,Lilja A..1994.Anamorphic and teleomorphic characteristics of a uninucleate Rhizoctonia solani isolated from the roots of nursery grown conifer scedlinns.Mvcol Res,98(9):1044-1050.
55. Laroche J.P.,Jabaji-hare S.H.,Charest P.M..1992.Differentiation of two anastomosis groups of Rhizoctonia solani by isozyme analysis.Phytopathol,82:1387-1393.
56. Lilja A.,Hietala A.M.,Karjalainen R..1996.Identification of a uninucleate Rhizoctonia sp. by pathogenicity,hyphal anastomosis and RAPD analysis.Plant Pathol,45:997-1006.
57. Liu Z.L.,Domier L.L.,Sinclair J.B..1993.ISG specific ribosomal DNA polymorphism of the Rhizoctonia solani species complex.Mycologia,85:795-800.
58. Lo C.T.,Tu C.C. and Tsai W.H..1990.Ananastomosis groups and pathogenicipy of Rhizoctonia spp. from carnation.Plant Prot.Bull.32:158-161.
59. Macnish G.C.,Sweetingham M.W..1993.Evidence of stability of pectic zymogram groups within Rhizoctonia solani AG8.Mycol Res,97:1056-1058.
60. Masuhara G.,Katsuya KandYamaguchi K..1993.Potential for symbiosis of Rhizoctonia solani and binucleate Rhizoctonia with seeds of Spiranthes sinensis var. amoena in vitro.Mycol.Res,97:746-752.
61. Melville L.,Dickson S.,Farquhar M.L..1998.Visualization of mycorrhizal fungal structures in resin embedded tissues with xanthene dyes using laser scanning confocal microscopy.Can J Bot,76(1):174-178.
62. Moore R.T..1987.The genera of Rhizoctonia like fungi Ascorhizgctonia,Ceratorhiza gen.nov,Epulorzhiza gen.nov,Momiliopsis and Rhizoctonia.Mycotaxon,XXIX:91-99.
63. Moore R.T..1987.The genera of Rhizoctonia like fungi:Ascorhitonia,Ceiatorhiza gen.nov.,Epulorhiza gen nov.,Moniliopsis,and Rhizoctonia.Mycotaxon,29:91-99.
64. Mordue E.M.,Gurrahr S.,and Bridge,P.D..1989.An integrated approach to Rhizoctonia taxonomy:cultural biochemical and numerical techniques.Mycol.Res,92(1):78-90.
65. Natio S.,Djaeni M.,Nasution A.et al.1991.Soil-borne diseases affecting yield loss of Soybean.Proceeding of Final Seminar of the Strengthening of Pioneering Research for PALAWIJAJA Crop Production(ATA:378),Indonesia.24-37.
66. Neate S.M.,Cruikshank R.H.,Rovira A.D..1988.Pectic enzyme patterns of Rhizoctonia solani isolates from agricultural soils in South Australia.Trans Brit Mycol Soc,90:37-42.
67. Obrien P.A..1994.Molecular markers in Australia isolates of Rhizoctonia solani.Mycol Res,98(6):665-671.
68. Ogoshi A..1987.Ecology and Pathogenicity of Anastomsis and Intraspecific groups of Rhizoctonia solani Kǖhn.Ann.Rev.Phytopathol,25:125-143.
69. Rasmussen H..1990.Cell differentiation and mycorrhizal infection Dactylorhiza majalis(Rchb.f.) Hunt&Summerh (Orchidaceae)during fermination in vitro.New Phytol,116:137-147.
70. Reynolds M.,Weinhold A.R.,Morris T.J..1983.Comparison of anastomosis groups of Rhizoctonia solani by poly-acrylamide gel electrophoresis of soluble proteins.Phytopathol,73:903-906.
71. Rovira A.D.,Ogoshi A. and Mcdonald H.J..1986.Characterization of isolates of Rhizoctonia solani from crreal roots in South Australia and New South Wales.Phytopahtology,28:233-246.
72. Senthikumar S.,Krishnamurthy KV.,Britto S.J..2000.Visualization of orchid mycorrhizal fungal structures with fluorescence dye using epifluorescence microcopy.Current Sci,79(11):1527-1528.
73. Senthilkumar S..1998.Krishnamurthy K.V.Acytochemical study on the mycorrhizae of Spathoglottis plicata.Biol Plantarum,41(1):111-119.
74. Smith S.E.,Read D.J..1997.Mycorrhizal symbiosis(Second Edition).Academic Press,London.347-376.
75. Smith S.E..1974.Mycorrhizal fungi.CRC Crit.Rev Microviol,(3):275-313.
76. Sneh B.L.,Ogoshi A..1991.Identification of Rhizoctonia species.St Paul,MN:APS Press,133.
77. Sweetingham M.W.,Cruickshnak R.H.,WONG D.H..1986.Pectic zymograms and pathogenicity of the Ceratobasidiaceae.Trans Brit Mycol Soc,86:305-311.
78. Sweetingham M.W..1990.Coping with brown spot and root rots of lupines.J Agric Western Australia,31:5-31.
79. Tu C.C.and Kimbrough J.W..1978.Systematics and phylogeny pf fungi in the Rhizoctonia complex.Bot.Gaz,139(4):454-466.
80. Vilgalys R.and Cubeta M.A..1994.Molecular,systematics and populations biology of Rhizoctonia.Ann.Rev.Phytopathol,32: 135-155.
81. Warcup J.H..1981.The mycorrhizal relationships of Australian orchids.New phytol,87:371-378.
82. Warcup J.H.and Talbot P.H.B..1966.Perfect states of some Rhizoctonias.Trans.Br.Mycol.soc,49(3):427-435.
83. Wu J.P.,Zheng S.Z..1994.Isolation and identification of Fusarium sp.from mycorrhiza fungus in Dendrobium densiflorum and analyses of ies metabolites.J Fudan Univ(Nat Sci),33(5):547-552.