{"title":"环境中游离DNA及其在大型真菌分类学中的应用","authors":"V. Pomohaibo, N. Vlasenko, L. D. Orlova","doi":"10.15421/031905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On the basis of the review of numerous scientific publications, in our article there is compared the effectiveness of various study methods of macrofungi groups, the species diversity of which remains largely unknown. Macrofungi form the visible fruit body. They are found in most environmental conditions, but are most common in forest ecosystems, where they are reducers. Macrofungi belong to the Ascomycota and Basidiomycota types within the Dikarya subkingdom and are divided into saprotroph, parasitic and mycorrhizal fungi. Saprotroph species play a main part in the decomposition of organic matter of soil, fallen leaves and dead wood. Parasitic macrofungi cause a number of diseases of other mushrooms, plants and animals (mostly invertebrates). Mycorrhizal fungi form a symbiotic system with plant roots, which is useful for both partners. There are known over 90000 species of macrofungi that is about 60 % of the number of all described fungal species in the present (Deacon, 2006; Orgiazzi et al., 2016). Macrofungi are considered to be studied in the best way, but their species diversity remains largely unknown. For example, in the course of over last 60 years more 56000 species of macrofungi have been identified in Australasia, China, and Japan, of which 35000 species, or 62 %, are unknown (Mueller et al., 2007). At the same time, in China and Japan the part of new macrofungal species was 37 %, and in Australasia – 72 %. To determine the diversity of macrofungi three methods can be used: a collections of fruit bodies, mycelium cultivation on the agar substrate and free fungal DNA in the environment. The study of collections are used most commonly. However, in the case when mushrooms have large fruit bodies, but they are short-lived, this method is not always able to detect them and attach them to the collection. For other two methods, the presence of fruit bodies is not obligatory. But the mycelium cultivation method also has a drawback, since not all mycorrhizal and parasitic mushrooms can be cultivated in the laboratory because they can’t exist outside the symbiosis with the roots of living plants or outside the host's body, respectively. Altogether together both collection studying and mycelium cultivation methods can find a significant majority of the environmental fungal taxons, which form fruit bodies. However, they can not reflect the relative prevalence of species. The method of molecular genetic analysis of the environmental DNA (eDNA) has the greatest advantages of other two, since it is also suitable for the discovery of such taxonomic units. This method has allowed to identify new branches, including ancient branched fungal lines, such as Cryptomycota or Archaeorhizomycetes. True, sometimes the method of eDNA analysis does not find taxonomic units, which are detected by the collection of fruit bodies or by mycelium cultivating. But this may have been due to sample incompleteness or to errors in the complex process of eDNA analysis. Since in these analysis there are used fragments of DNA or RNA only a few hundred bases long, this method is not able to detect a number of biological indices that can be obtained by examining of a fungal collection or culture. Thus to obtain most complete information about macrofungal community structure as well as their genomic, physiological and ecological properties it is necessary to use all three methods.","PeriodicalId":11457,"journal":{"name":"Ecology and Noospherology","volume":"57 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Free DNA in environment and its use in systematics of macrofungi\",\"authors\":\"V. Pomohaibo, N. Vlasenko, L. D. Orlova\",\"doi\":\"10.15421/031905\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"On the basis of the review of numerous scientific publications, in our article there is compared the effectiveness of various study methods of macrofungi groups, the species diversity of which remains largely unknown. Macrofungi form the visible fruit body. They are found in most environmental conditions, but are most common in forest ecosystems, where they are reducers. Macrofungi belong to the Ascomycota and Basidiomycota types within the Dikarya subkingdom and are divided into saprotroph, parasitic and mycorrhizal fungi. Saprotroph species play a main part in the decomposition of organic matter of soil, fallen leaves and dead wood. Parasitic macrofungi cause a number of diseases of other mushrooms, plants and animals (mostly invertebrates). Mycorrhizal fungi form a symbiotic system with plant roots, which is useful for both partners. There are known over 90000 species of macrofungi that is about 60 % of the number of all described fungal species in the present (Deacon, 2006; Orgiazzi et al., 2016). Macrofungi are considered to be studied in the best way, but their species diversity remains largely unknown. For example, in the course of over last 60 years more 56000 species of macrofungi have been identified in Australasia, China, and Japan, of which 35000 species, or 62 %, are unknown (Mueller et al., 2007). At the same time, in China and Japan the part of new macrofungal species was 37 %, and in Australasia – 72 %. To determine the diversity of macrofungi three methods can be used: a collections of fruit bodies, mycelium cultivation on the agar substrate and free fungal DNA in the environment. The study of collections are used most commonly. However, in the case when mushrooms have large fruit bodies, but they are short-lived, this method is not always able to detect them and attach them to the collection. For other two methods, the presence of fruit bodies is not obligatory. But the mycelium cultivation method also has a drawback, since not all mycorrhizal and parasitic mushrooms can be cultivated in the laboratory because they can’t exist outside the symbiosis with the roots of living plants or outside the host's body, respectively. Altogether together both collection studying and mycelium cultivation methods can find a significant majority of the environmental fungal taxons, which form fruit bodies. However, they can not reflect the relative prevalence of species. The method of molecular genetic analysis of the environmental DNA (eDNA) has the greatest advantages of other two, since it is also suitable for the discovery of such taxonomic units. This method has allowed to identify new branches, including ancient branched fungal lines, such as Cryptomycota or Archaeorhizomycetes. True, sometimes the method of eDNA analysis does not find taxonomic units, which are detected by the collection of fruit bodies or by mycelium cultivating. But this may have been due to sample incompleteness or to errors in the complex process of eDNA analysis. Since in these analysis there are used fragments of DNA or RNA only a few hundred bases long, this method is not able to detect a number of biological indices that can be obtained by examining of a fungal collection or culture. Thus to obtain most complete information about macrofungal community structure as well as their genomic, physiological and ecological properties it is necessary to use all three methods.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecology and Noospherology\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecology and Noospherology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15421/031905\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecology and Noospherology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15421/031905","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文在查阅大量文献的基础上,比较了各种研究方法对大型真菌类群的有效性,这些类群的物种多样性在很大程度上是未知的。大型真菌形成可见的子实体。它们在大多数环境条件下都能发现,但在森林生态系统中最常见,因为它们是还原剂。大型真菌属于子囊菌纲和担子菌纲,属于Dikarya亚界,分为腐生菌、寄生菌和菌根菌。腐养菌在土壤有机质、落叶和枯木的分解中起主要作用。寄生大型真菌引起其他蘑菇、植物和动物(主要是无脊椎动物)的许多疾病。菌根真菌与植物根系形成共生系统,这对双方都有好处。已知的大型真菌超过90,000种,约占目前所有已描述真菌种类数量的60% (Deacon, 2006;Orgiazzi等人,2016)。大型真菌被认为是最好的研究方式,但它们的物种多样性仍然很大程度上是未知的。例如,在过去的60年里,在澳大利亚、中国和日本发现了56000多种大型真菌,其中35000种,即62%是未知的(Mueller et al., 2007)。与此同时,中国和日本的大型真菌新种占37%,大洋洲占72%。为了确定大型真菌的多样性,可以采用三种方法:收集子实体,在琼脂基质上培养菌丝体和在环境中游离真菌DNA。集合的研究是最常用的。然而,当蘑菇有很大的果体,但它们寿命很短时,这种方法并不总是能够检测到它们并将它们附着在收集物上。对于另外两种方法,果体的存在不是必须的。但是菌丝体培养方法也有一个缺点,因为并不是所有的菌根蘑菇和寄生蘑菇都可以在实验室中培养,因为它们分别不能在与活植物的根共生之外存在,也不能在宿主的身体之外存在。收集研究和菌丝培养方法可以发现绝大多数形成果体的环境真菌分类。但是,它们不能反映物种的相对流行度。环境DNA (eDNA)的分子遗传学分析方法在其他两种方法中具有最大的优势,因为它也适用于这类分类单位的发现。这种方法可以识别新的分支,包括古老的分支真菌系,如隐菌门或古菌门。诚然,有时eDNA分析方法找不到分类单位,这是通过收集果体或菌丝体培养来检测的。但这可能是由于样本不完整或复杂的eDNA分析过程中的错误。由于在这些分析中,使用的DNA或RNA片段只有几百个碱基长,因此这种方法无法检测到通过检查真菌收集或培养物可以获得的许多生物学指标。因此,为了获得最完整的大型真菌群落结构及其基因组、生理和生态特性信息,有必要同时使用这三种方法。
Free DNA in environment and its use in systematics of macrofungi
On the basis of the review of numerous scientific publications, in our article there is compared the effectiveness of various study methods of macrofungi groups, the species diversity of which remains largely unknown. Macrofungi form the visible fruit body. They are found in most environmental conditions, but are most common in forest ecosystems, where they are reducers. Macrofungi belong to the Ascomycota and Basidiomycota types within the Dikarya subkingdom and are divided into saprotroph, parasitic and mycorrhizal fungi. Saprotroph species play a main part in the decomposition of organic matter of soil, fallen leaves and dead wood. Parasitic macrofungi cause a number of diseases of other mushrooms, plants and animals (mostly invertebrates). Mycorrhizal fungi form a symbiotic system with plant roots, which is useful for both partners. There are known over 90000 species of macrofungi that is about 60 % of the number of all described fungal species in the present (Deacon, 2006; Orgiazzi et al., 2016). Macrofungi are considered to be studied in the best way, but their species diversity remains largely unknown. For example, in the course of over last 60 years more 56000 species of macrofungi have been identified in Australasia, China, and Japan, of which 35000 species, or 62 %, are unknown (Mueller et al., 2007). At the same time, in China and Japan the part of new macrofungal species was 37 %, and in Australasia – 72 %. To determine the diversity of macrofungi three methods can be used: a collections of fruit bodies, mycelium cultivation on the agar substrate and free fungal DNA in the environment. The study of collections are used most commonly. However, in the case when mushrooms have large fruit bodies, but they are short-lived, this method is not always able to detect them and attach them to the collection. For other two methods, the presence of fruit bodies is not obligatory. But the mycelium cultivation method also has a drawback, since not all mycorrhizal and parasitic mushrooms can be cultivated in the laboratory because they can’t exist outside the symbiosis with the roots of living plants or outside the host's body, respectively. Altogether together both collection studying and mycelium cultivation methods can find a significant majority of the environmental fungal taxons, which form fruit bodies. However, they can not reflect the relative prevalence of species. The method of molecular genetic analysis of the environmental DNA (eDNA) has the greatest advantages of other two, since it is also suitable for the discovery of such taxonomic units. This method has allowed to identify new branches, including ancient branched fungal lines, such as Cryptomycota or Archaeorhizomycetes. True, sometimes the method of eDNA analysis does not find taxonomic units, which are detected by the collection of fruit bodies or by mycelium cultivating. But this may have been due to sample incompleteness or to errors in the complex process of eDNA analysis. Since in these analysis there are used fragments of DNA or RNA only a few hundred bases long, this method is not able to detect a number of biological indices that can be obtained by examining of a fungal collection or culture. Thus to obtain most complete information about macrofungal community structure as well as their genomic, physiological and ecological properties it is necessary to use all three methods.