与转基因植物相关的根部内生真菌群落的特征

Q3 Agricultural and Biological Sciences Ecological genetics Pub Date : 2023-12-04 DOI:10.17816/ecogen568501
Sonya Sokornova, Maryna N. Mandrik-Litvinkovich, T. Matveeva
{"title":"与转基因植物相关的根部内生真菌群落的特征","authors":"Sonya Sokornova, Maryna N. Mandrik-Litvinkovich, T. Matveeva","doi":"10.17816/ecogen568501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Root endophytic fungi (EF) spend at least parts of their life cycle inside plant tissues without apparent harm to the host. There is a hypothesis that the endophytic lifestyle is a common strategy for most fungi and they have endophytic ancestors [1]. By receiving habitat and nutrients EF can increase the solubility of nutrients in the plant rhizosphere, stimulate plant growth, and activate the plant’s systemic resistance to stress. One of the alternatives to the use of pesticides is the use of resistant transgenic plants, but the potential effects of crop modifications on their associated microorganisms are poorly studied. \nThe EF communities of transgenic lines of cotton, sugar cane, and maize containing the expressed Cry1 protein from Bacillus thuringiensis were compared with communities of non-transgenic plants. There were no significant differences in the composition of the EF community [2, 3]. The introduction of phosphinothricin-N-acetyltransferase and imazapyr herbicide resistance genes for corn and sugar cane also did not affect on EF communities but did affect the bacterial community [3, 4]. The similar effect was observed for transgenic maple plants [5]. The stage of plant development had a more significant effect on EF community than the fact of transformation itself [1]. \nWe believe that the fungal community is more conservative and the introduction of herbicide resistance or toxin synthesis genes into the plant genome has a significantly lesser effect on EF community than on the bacterial one.","PeriodicalId":11431,"journal":{"name":"Ecological genetics","volume":"3 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characteristics of root endophytic fungi communities associated with genetically modified plants\",\"authors\":\"Sonya Sokornova, Maryna N. Mandrik-Litvinkovich, T. Matveeva\",\"doi\":\"10.17816/ecogen568501\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Root endophytic fungi (EF) spend at least parts of their life cycle inside plant tissues without apparent harm to the host. There is a hypothesis that the endophytic lifestyle is a common strategy for most fungi and they have endophytic ancestors [1]. By receiving habitat and nutrients EF can increase the solubility of nutrients in the plant rhizosphere, stimulate plant growth, and activate the plant’s systemic resistance to stress. One of the alternatives to the use of pesticides is the use of resistant transgenic plants, but the potential effects of crop modifications on their associated microorganisms are poorly studied. \\nThe EF communities of transgenic lines of cotton, sugar cane, and maize containing the expressed Cry1 protein from Bacillus thuringiensis were compared with communities of non-transgenic plants. There were no significant differences in the composition of the EF community [2, 3]. The introduction of phosphinothricin-N-acetyltransferase and imazapyr herbicide resistance genes for corn and sugar cane also did not affect on EF communities but did affect the bacterial community [3, 4]. The similar effect was observed for transgenic maple plants [5]. The stage of plant development had a more significant effect on EF community than the fact of transformation itself [1]. \\nWe believe that the fungal community is more conservative and the introduction of herbicide resistance or toxin synthesis genes into the plant genome has a significantly lesser effect on EF community than on the bacterial one.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological genetics\",\"volume\":\"3 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17816/ecogen568501\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological genetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17816/ecogen568501","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

根内生真菌(EF)至少在植物组织内度过其生命周期的一部分,对寄主没有明显的危害。有一种假设认为,内生生活方式是大多数真菌的共同策略,它们有内生祖先[1]。EF通过接受生境和养分,增加养分在植物根际的溶解度,促进植物生长,激活植物的系统抗逆性。使用杀虫剂的替代方案之一是使用具有抗性的转基因植物,但对作物改造对其相关微生物的潜在影响的研究很少。对苏云金芽孢杆菌Cry1蛋白转基因棉花、甘蔗和玉米品系与非转基因植株的EF群落进行了比较。EF群落的组成没有显著差异[2,3]。引入玉米和甘蔗的膦-丙氨酸- n-乙酰基转移酶和抗伊马扎吡除草剂基因对EF群落也没有影响,但对细菌群落有影响[3,4]。在转基因枫树中也观察到类似的效果[5]。植物发育阶段对EF群落的影响比转化本身更为显著[1]。我们认为真菌群落更为保守,在植物基因组中引入抗除草剂或毒素合成基因对EF群落的影响明显小于对细菌群落的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Characteristics of root endophytic fungi communities associated with genetically modified plants
Root endophytic fungi (EF) spend at least parts of their life cycle inside plant tissues without apparent harm to the host. There is a hypothesis that the endophytic lifestyle is a common strategy for most fungi and they have endophytic ancestors [1]. By receiving habitat and nutrients EF can increase the solubility of nutrients in the plant rhizosphere, stimulate plant growth, and activate the plant’s systemic resistance to stress. One of the alternatives to the use of pesticides is the use of resistant transgenic plants, but the potential effects of crop modifications on their associated microorganisms are poorly studied. The EF communities of transgenic lines of cotton, sugar cane, and maize containing the expressed Cry1 protein from Bacillus thuringiensis were compared with communities of non-transgenic plants. There were no significant differences in the composition of the EF community [2, 3]. The introduction of phosphinothricin-N-acetyltransferase and imazapyr herbicide resistance genes for corn and sugar cane also did not affect on EF communities but did affect the bacterial community [3, 4]. The similar effect was observed for transgenic maple plants [5]. The stage of plant development had a more significant effect on EF community than the fact of transformation itself [1]. We believe that the fungal community is more conservative and the introduction of herbicide resistance or toxin synthesis genes into the plant genome has a significantly lesser effect on EF community than on the bacterial one.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological genetics
Ecological genetics Environmental Science-Ecology
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: The journal Ecological genetics is an international journal which accepts for consideration original manuscripts that reflect the results of field and experimental studies, and fundamental research of broad conceptual and/or comparative context corresponding to the profile of the Journal. Once a year, the editorial Board reviews and, if necessary, corrects the rules for authors and the journal rubrics.
期刊最新文献
CRISPR/Cas editing of a CPC gene in Arabidopsis thaliana Hairy roots biochemical characteristics of vegetable pea’s morphotype with modified leaf Erratum to “The strong base for using base editing in plants” (doi: 10.17816/ecogen567885) PCR-based genome walking methods (review) Ecological genetics. What is it? 20 years later
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1