| Literature DB >> 26815170 |
M Helander1,2, T Phillips3, S H Faeth4, L P Bush3, R McCulley3, I Saloniemi5, K Saikkonen6.
Abstract
Many grass species are symbiotic with systemic, vertically-transmitted, asymptomatic Epichloë endophytic fungi. These fungi often produce alkaloids that defend the host against herbivores. We studied how environmental variables affect alkaloids in endophyte-infected tall fescue (Schedonorus phoenix) from three Northern European wild origins and the widely planted US cultivar 'Kentucky-31' (KY31). The plants were grown in identical common garden experiments in Finland and Kentucky for two growing seasons. Plants were left as controls (C) or given water (W), nutrient (N) or water and nutrient (WN) treatments. For 8-10 replications of each plant origin and treatment combination in both experiments, we analyzed ergot alkaloids, lysergic acid, and lolines. In Finland, tall fescue plants produced 50 % more ergot alkaloids compared to plants of the same origin and treatments in Kentucky. Origin of the plants affected the ergot alkaloid concentration at both study sites: the wild origin plants produced 2-4 times more ergot alkaloids than KY31, but the ergot alkaloid concentration of KY31 plants was the same at both locations. Overall lysergic acid content was 60 % higher in plants grown in Kentucky than in those grown in Finland. Nutrient treatments (N, WN) significantly increased ergot alkaloid concentrations in plants from Finland but not in plants from Kentucky. These results suggest that the success of KY31 in US is not due to selection for high ergot alkaloid production but rather other traits associated with the endophyte. In addition, the environmental effects causing variation in alkaloid production of grass-endophyte combinations should be taken into account when using endophyte-infected grasses agriculturally.Entities:
Keywords: Ergot alkaloids; Fungal endophytes; Grasses; Lolines; Lysergic acid; Nutrients; Water
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26815170 PMCID: PMC4799798 DOI: 10.1007/s10886-016-0667-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Chem Ecol ISSN: 0098-0331 Impact factor: 2.626
Fig. 1Total ergot alkaloid, lysergic acid and loline contents of endophyte-infected tall fescue plants from three wild populations and one cultivar (A Åland island, G Gotland island, S mainland Sweden, KY-31 cultivar ‘Kentucky-31’) grown in common garden in Finland and Kentucky. The plants received either water (W), nutrient (N) or combined water and nutrient treatments (WN) while control plants (C) were left without extra water and nutrients (means ± SE)
Linear mixed models for total ergot alkaloids in tall fescue plants. The grasses from the wild origins (Orig) Gotland (G) and Sweden (S) and cultivar ‘Kentucky-31’ (KY31) were compared with wild origin Åland (A) in water (W) and nutrition (N) treatment (Treat) plots. Results for the same model are shown for plants grown in Finland or Kentucky with all main factors and those interactions that were statistically significant in either of the experiments. Model estimates are standard errors (S.E.), degrees of freedom (df), and t-tests (t) with P-values (P) *** < 0.001,** < 0.01,* < 0.05, o < 0.1
| FINLAND | KENTUCKY | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | S.E. |
|
|
| Value | S.E. |
|
|
| |||
| Intercept | 1.980 | 0.104 | 103 | 19.04 | 0.001 | *** | 2.065 | 0.130 | 100 | 15.85 | 0.001 | *** |
| Treat N | 0.839 | 0.130 | 36 | 6.45 | 0.001 | *** | 0.095 | 0.172 | 36 | 0.55 | 0.584 | |
| Treat W | 0.144 | 0.130 | 36 | 1.11 | 0.276 | -0.286 | 0.165 | 36 | -1.74 | 0.091 | o | |
| W*N | -0.262 | 0.123 | 36 | -2.13 | 0.040 | * | -0.064 | 0.165 | 36 | -0.39 | 0.701 | |
| Orig G | -0.092 | 0.139 | 103 | -0.66 | 0.509 | -0.122 | 0.163 | 100 | -0.75 | 0.454 | ||
| Orig S | 0.046 | 0.139 | 103 | 0.33 | 0.741 | -0.278 | 0.159 | 100 | -1.74 | 0.084 | o | |
| Orig KY31 | -0.606 | 0.144 | 103 | -4.20 | 0.001 | -0.694 | 0.160 | 100 | -4.34 | 0.001 | *** | |
| N*G | -0.461 | 0.163 | 103 | -2.84 | 0.006 | ** | -0.036 | 0.189 | 100 | -0.19 | 0.849 | |
| N*S | -0.619 | 0.160 | 103 | -3.86 | 0.001 | *** | 0.027 | 0.188 | 100 | 0.15 | 0.884 | |
| N*KY31 | -0.423 | 0.169 | 103 | -2.50 | 0.014 | * | 0.011 | 0.189 | 100 | 0.06 | 0.953 | |
| W*G | -0.133 | 0.163 | 103 | -0.82 | 0.416 | -0.035 | 0.189 | 100 | -0.18 | 0.855 | ||
| W*S | -0.047 | 0.160 | 103 | -0.29 | 0.772 | 0.151 | 0.188 | 100 | 0.8 | 0.423 | ||
| W*KY31 | -0.176 | 0.170 | 103 | -1.03 | 0.304 | 0.429 | 0.189 | 100 | 2.26 | 0.026 | * | |
| AIC | 177.01 | 214.71 | ||||||||||
| loglikelihood | -73.50 | -92.35 | ||||||||||
Fig. 2Model-based (Table 1) estimated means of treatments (C control, W water treatment, N nutrient treatment, WN water and nutrient treatment) for the endophyte-infected tall fescue plants from three wild populations and one cultivar (A Åland island, G Gotland island, S mainland Sweden, KY-31 cultivar ‘Kentucky-31’) for total ergot alkaloids and lolines in plants grown in Finland or Kentucky. Note that separate models were used for Finland and Kentucky
Linear mixed models for total lysergic acids and lolines in tall fescue plants grown in Kentucky. The grasses from the wild origins (Orig) Gotland (G) and Sweden (S) and cultivar ‘Kentucky-31’ (KY31) were compared with wild origin Åland (A) in water (W) and nutrition (N) treatment (Treat) plots. Results are shown for with all main factors and those interactions that were statistically significant. Model estimates are standard errors (S.E.), degrees of freedom (df), and t-tests (t) with P-values (P) *** < 0.001,** < 0.01,* < 0.05, o < 0.1
| LYSERGIC ACID | ||||||
| Value | S.E. |
|
|
| ||
| Intercept | 0.960 | 0.067 | 106 | 14.355 | 0.001 | *** |
| Treat W | -0.117 | 0.059 | 37 | -1.967 | 0.057 | o |
| Treat N | 0.084 | 0.059 | 37 | 1.427 | 0.162 | |
| Orig G | 0.005 | 0.067 | 106 | 0.073 | 0.941 | |
| Orig S | 0.051 | 0.067 | 106 | 0.762 | 0.448 | |
| Orig KY31 | -0.142 | 0.067 | 106 | -2.106 | 0.038 | * |
| AIC | 102.17 | |||||
| loglikelihood | -43.09 | |||||
| LOLINES | ||||||
| Value | S.E. |
|
|
| ||
| Intercept | 42.354 | 4.426 | 94 | 9.569 | 0.001 | *** |
| Treat W | 11.330 | 6.963 | 36 | 1.627 | 0.112 | |
| Treat N | 4.341 | 6.109 | 36 | 0.711 | 0.482 | |
| W*N | -7.556 | 9.161 | 36 | -0.825 | 0.415 | |
| Orig G | 0.114 | 5.808 | 94 | 0.019 | 0.984 | |
| Orig S | 9.512 | 5.641 | 94 | 1.686 | 0.095 | o |
| Orig KY31 | -8.499 | 5.807 | 94 | -1.463 | 0.147 | |
| N*G | -0.066 | 8.652 | 94 | -0.008 | 0.994 | |
| N*S | -13.004 | 8.541 | 94 | -1.523 | 0.131 | |
| N*KY31 | -4.916 | 8.652 | 94 | -0.568 | 0.571 | |
| W*G | -7.875 | 8.098 | 94 | -0.972 | 0.333 | |
| W*S | -20.203 | 8.125 | 94 | -2.486 | 0.015 | * |
| W*KY31 | 8.132 | 8.420 | 94 | 0.966 | 0.337 | |
| N*W*G | -1.509 | 11.770 | 94 | -0.128 | 0.898 | |
| N*W*S | 26.624 | 11.709 | 94 | 2.273 | 0.025 | * |
| N*W*KY31 | -8.947 | 11.916 | 94 | -0.751 | 0.455 | |
| AIC | 1109.56 | |||||
| loglikelihood | -536.78 |