| Literature DB >> 34946177 |
Neeraj Purushotham1, Eirian Jones1, Jana Monk2, Hayley Ridgway1,3.
Abstract
The plant Pseudowintera colorata is well known for its antimicrobial and medicinal properties and is endemic to New Zealand. Using PCR-Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE), we investigated the factors influencing the composition of endophytic fungal communities in P. colorata from ten distinct sites across New Zealand. Our results showed that plant organs of P. colorata influenced the diversity and richness of endophytic fungi (PERMANOVA, p < 0.05). In addition, plant maturity and its interactions revealed that endophytic fungal communities formed discrete clusters in leaves, stems, and roots of mature and immature P. colorata plants (PERMANOVA; p = 0.002, p = 0.001 and p = 0.039, respectively). For identifying isolates with biocontrol potential, dual culture tests were set up against four different phytopathogenic fungi. Isolates with high activity (zone of inhibition > 10 mm) were sequenced and identified as Trichoderma harzianum, Pezicula neosporulosa, Fusariumtricinctum, Metarhizium sp., and Chaetomium sp. Applying selected endophytic fungi (n = 7) as soil drenchers significantly increased the growth of P. colorata seedlings and produced more internodes. Seedling shoots treated with Trichoderma sp. PRY2BA21 were 2.2 × longer (8.36 cm) than the untreated controls (3.72 cm). Our results elucidate the main plant factors influencing fungal community composition and demonstrate a role for endophytic fungi in P. colorata growth and further demonstrate that medicinal plants are a rich source of endophytes with potential as biocontrol agents.Entities:
Keywords: DGGE; New Zealand; antifungal activity; biocontrol; endophytes; endophytic fungi; medicinal plant; microbial ecology; plant pathogens; plant-microbe interactions
Year: 2021 PMID: 34946177 PMCID: PMC8709005 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms9122576
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Sampling information.
| Location | Coordinates |
|---|---|
| Taihape Scenic Reserve (North Island) | −39.67635° S 175.80560° E |
| Tongariro National Park (North Island) | −39.02237° S 175.71810° E |
| Kaimanawa Forest Park (North Island) | −38.94721° S 175.94370° E |
| Lake Rotopounamu Scenic Reserve (North Island) | −39.02656° S 175.73502° E |
| Kahurangi National Park (South Island) | −41.07224° S 172.59166° E |
| Paringa Forest (South Island) | −43.69379° S 169.40724° E |
| Arthur’s Pass National Park (South Island) | −42.94215° S 171.56414° E |
| Kaituna Valley Scenic Reserve (South Island) | −43.71655° S 172.7554° E |
| Peel Forest (South Island) | −43.91835° S 171.25934° E |
| Otago Peninsula Scenic Reserve (South Island) | −45.88184° S 170.58049° E |
Figure 1New Zealand map showing sampling locations (●).
Influence of location and plant organs on the similarity and richness of endophytic fungal communities in Pseudowintera colorata.
| Treatment | Microbial Communities Similarity a | Microbial Richness a |
|---|---|---|
| Location | 0.081 | 0.095 |
| Plant organ | 0.001 ** | <0.001 ** |
| Location vs. Plant organ | 0.002 ** | <0.001 ** |
a Asterisk denotes levels of statistical significance of microbial community similarity based on PERMANOVA and microbial richness based on GLM. ** High significant difference (p ≤ 0.005).
Figure 2Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (MDS) plot showing endophytic fungal communities from different plant organs of Pseudowintera colorata.
Influence of location, plant organ, and plant age on the similarity and richness of endophytic fungal communities in Pseudowintera colorata.
| Treatment | Microbial Communities Similarity a | Microbial Richness a |
|---|---|---|
| Location | 0.002 ** | 0.121 |
| Plant organ | 0.001 ** | 0.015 * |
| Plant age | 0.002 ** | 0.785 |
| Location vs. Plant organ | 0.001 ** | <0.001 ** |
| Location vs. Plant age | 0.164 | 0.448 |
| Plant organ vs. Plant age | 0.001 ** | 0.393 |
| Plant organ vs. Location vs. Plant age | 0.001 ** | 0.060 |
a Asterisk denotes levels of statistical significance of microbial community similarity based on PERMANOVA and microbial richness based on GLM. * Significantly different (p ≤ 0.05), ** High significant difference (p ≤ 0.005).
Figure 3Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (MDS) plot showing endophytic fungal communities from old and young plants. (A) All plant organs, (B) roots, (C) stems and, (D) leaves of Pseudowintera colorata. Fully mature/old plant: ●; Young plant ∇.
Identity of culturable endophytic fungi isolated from Pseudowintera colorata based on ITS sequencing.
| Location | Plant Organ | NCBI Match | Identity (%) | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kahurangi Nat. Park | Stem | 100 | ||
| Kaituna valley scenic reserve | Root | 100 | ||
| Kaituna valley scenic reserve | Root | 99 | ||
| Kaituna valley scenic reserve | Stem | 98 | ||
| Kaituna valley scenic reserve | Stem | 100 | Ascomycota | |
| Kaituna valley scenic reserve | Stem | 100 | ||
| Kaituna valley scenic reserve | Root | 100 | ||
| Arthur’s Pass nat. park | Root | 100 | ||
| Arthur’s Pass nat. park | Stem | 100 | ||
| Tongariro nat. park | Root | 100 | ||
| Lake Rotopounamu | Root | 99 | ||
| Kaituna valley scenic reserve | Root | 100 | ||
| Kahurangi Nat. Park | Stem | 100 | ||
| Kahurangi Nat. Park | Stem | 100 | ||
| Kahurangi Nat. Park | Leaf | 99 | ||
| Taihape scenic reseve | Root | 100 | ||
| Lake Rotopounamu | Stem | 100 | ||
| Lake Rotopounamu | Stem | 100 | ||
| Lake Rotopounamu | Stem | 100 | ||
| Kaimanawa forest park | Stem | 100 | ||
| Arthur’s Pass nat. park | Stem | 100 | ||
| Arthur’s Pass nat. park | Stem | 99 | ||
| Taihape scenic reseve | Root | 99 | ||
| Tongariro nat. park | Root | 100 | ||
| Kaimanawa forest park | Root | 99 | ||
| Arthur’s Pass nat. park | Root | 100 | ||
| Taihape scenic reseve | Root | 100 | ||
| Taihape scenic reseve | Root | 100 | ||
| Taihape scenic reseve | Stem | 100 | ||
| Tongariro nat. park | Stem | 100 | ||
| Taihape scenic reseve | Leaf | 94 | ||
| Taihape scenic reseve | Root | 94 | ||
| Peel forest | Leaf | 94 | ||
| Peel forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Peel forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Peel forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Peel forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Lake Rotopounamu | Root | 100 | ||
| Tongariro nat. park | Root | 100 | ||
| Paringa forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Peel forest | Leaf | 100 | ||
| Paringa forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Arthur’s Pass nat. park | Stem | 100 | ||
| Paringa forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Peel forest | Leaf | 100 | ||
| Arthur’s Pass nat. park | Root | 100 | ||
| Paringa forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Paringa forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Peel forest | Stem | 100 | ||
| Peel forest | Leaf | 100 |
Antagonistic ctivity of endophytic fungi against phytopathogenic fungi (Neofusicoccum luteum, N. parvum, Ilyonectria liriodendri, and Neonectria ditissima) and human pathogens (Candida albicans, Staphylococcus aureus, and Escherichia coli) based on the inhibition zone size (+++ high activity, ++ moderate activity, + low activity, − no activity).
| Isolate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ++ | ++ | ++ | ++ | +++ | +++ | − | |
| ++ | ++ | + | + | +++ | +++ | − | |
| +++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | - | +++ | − | |
| +++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | − | |
| +++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | − | |
| +++ | +++ | + | + | +++ | +++ | − | |
| +++ | +++ | ++ | ++ | ++ | +++ | − | |
| +++ | +++ | ++ | + | +++ | +++ | − | |
| ++ | +++ | ++ | ++ | +++ | +++ | − | |
| ++ | ++ | + | + | +++ | +++ | − |
Response of Pseudowintera colorata seedlings to treatment with endophytic fungi after 4 months growth. Mean of 10 replicate plants per treatment.
| Treatment | Shoot Height (cm) | Shoot Dry Weight (g) | Root Dry Weight (g) | No. of Internodes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.35 ab | 0.98 | 0.54 | 6.0 b | |
| 6.79 ab | 1.10 | 0.59 | 7.0 a | |
| 4.99 cd | 1.10 | 0.47 | 4.3 d | |
| 8.36 a 1 | 1.14 | 0.68 | 6.0 b | |
| 7.46 ab | 0.95 | 0.72 | 4.8 cd | |
| 6.84 ab | 0.99 | 0.62 | 5.3 bc | |
| 5.97 bc | 0.93 | 0.69 | 5.8 b | |
| Untreated Control | 3.72 d | 1.02 | 0.59 | 4.1 d |
| <0.001 | 0.88 | 0.31 | <0.001 | |
| LSD | 1.771 | NSD | NSD | 0.816 |
1 Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different based on least significant difference (LSD) at p = 0.05, NSD—not significantly different.