Microbial Ecology

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 175–182 | Cite as

Interaction of competing fungi with fly larvae

  • John Lussenhop
  • Donald T. Wicklow


Saprophytic fungi have degradative abilities and interspecific interactions which suggest that resource use and yield should increase as species number increases, but previous studies show the opposite. As a test of the possibility that invertebrate activity changes fungal resource use patterns, we grew coprophilous fungi on rabbit feces at the same initial density singly or in mixtures of 2, 4, or 6 species, with or without activity of larvalLycoriella mali (Diptera: Sciaridae). Fungi in mixtures without larvae caused less weight loss in one mixture, and greater weight loss in 2 mixtures than when growing alone; fungi in 4 of 6 mixtures produced fewer spores than when growing alone. Overall, without larvae, weight loss did not increase as number of fungal species increased. Larvae did not change the pattern of weight loss or proportions of spores caused by mixing fungal species. Numbers of larvae surviving to pupate rose as fungal species numbers increased; as a result, weight loss increased with fungal species number in cultures with larvae.


Nature Conservation Fungal Species Initial Density Great Weight Number Increase 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Angel K, Wicklow DT (1974) Decomposition of rabbit faeces: an indication of the significance of the coprophilous microflora in energy flow schemes. J Ecology 62:429–437Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Asthana RP, Hawker LE (1936) The influence of certain fungi on the sporulation ofMelanospora destruens Shear, and some other ascomycetes. Ann Botany (London) 50:325–344Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bahn M, Hock B (1973) Morphogenese vonSordaria macrospara: die indukation der perithezienbildung. Ber Deut Bot Gesell 86:309–311Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Binns ES (1981) Fungus gnats (Diptera:Mycetophilidae/Sciaridae) and the role of mycophagy in soil: a review. Rev Ecol Biol Sol 18:77–90Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blanchette RA, Shaw CG (1978) Associations among bacteria, yeasts, and basidiomycetes during wood decay. Phytopathology 68:631–637Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Buston HW, Rickard B (1956) The effect of a physical barrier on sporulation ofChaetomium globosum. J Gen Microbiol 15:194–197PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frankland JC (1969) Fungal decomposition of bracken petioles. J Ecol 57:25–36Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Garret SD (1970) Pathogenic root-infecting fungi. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hanlon RDG, Anderson JM (1979) The effects of Collembola grazing on microbial activity in decomposing leaf litter. Oecologia 38:93–99Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harper JE, Webster J (1964) An experimental analysis of the coprophilous fungus succession. Trans Br Mycol Soc 47:511–530Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harper JL (1977) Population biology of plants. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hawker LE (1966) Environmetal influences on reproduction. In: Ainsworth GC, Sussman AS (eds) The fungi. Vol. 2. Academic Press, New York, pp 435–469Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Helsel ED, Wicklow DT (1978) Arthropod colonization of pre-aged as compared with fresh feces. Can Entomol 110:217–222Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ikediugwu FEO, Webster J (1970) Antagonism betweenCoprinus heptemerus and other coprophilous fungi. Trans Br Mycol Soc 54:181–204Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ingold C (1965) Spore liberation. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lussenhop J, Kumar R, Wicklow DT, Lloyd JL (1980) Insect effects on bacteria and fungi in cattle dung. Oikos 34:54–58Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lysek G (1976) Formation of perithecia in colonies ofPodospora anserina. Planta 133:81–83Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martin MM (1979) Biochemical implications of insect mycophagy. Biological Reviews 54:1–21Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Norman AG (1930) The biological decomposition of plant materials. III. Physiological studies on some cellulose decomposing fungi. Ann Appl Biol 17:575–613Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Papendick RI, Sanchez PA, Triplett GB (eds) (1976) Multiple cropping. Am Soc Agronomy Special Publication 27Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pollock RT (1973) Environmental factors affecting the pattern of perithecium development inSordaria fimicola on agar medium. Bull Torrey Bot Club 100:78–83Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rayner ADM (1976) Dematiaceous hyphomycetes and the narrow dark zones in decaying wood. Trans Br Mycol Soc 67:546–549Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Risch SJ (1981) Insect herbivore abundance in tropical monocultures and polycultures: an experimental test of two hypotheses. Ecology 62:1325–1340Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Risch SJ, Hansen MK (1982) Plant growth, flowering phenologies, and yields of corn, beans, and squash grown in pure stands and mixtures in Costa Rica. J Appl Ecol 19:901–916Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Robinson W (1926) The conditions of growth and development ofPyronema confluens Tul (P omphalodes (Bull) Fuckel) Ann Bot (London): 40:245–272Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Saito T (1965) Coactions between litter-decomposing Hymenomycetes and their associated microorganisms during decomposition of beech litter. Sci Rep Tohoku Univ 31:255–273Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Salonius PO (1981) Metabolic capabilities of forest soil microbial populations with reduced species diversity. Soil Biol Biochem 13:1–10Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shapiro SS, Wilk MB (1965) An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52:591–611Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Webster J (1970) Coprophilous fungi. Trans Br Mycol Soc 54:161–180Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wicklow DT, Detroy RW, Adams S (1980) Differential modification of the lignin and cellulose components in wheat straw by fungal colonists of ruminant dung: ecological implications. Mycologia 72:1065–1076Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wicklow DT (1981) The coprophilous fungal community: a mycological system for examining ecological ideas. In: Wicklow DT, Carroll GC (eds) The fungal community, its organization and role in the ecosystem. Dekker, New York, pp 47–76Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wicklow DT, Yocom DH (1981) Fungal species numbers and decomposition of rabbit feces. Trans Br Mycol Soc 76:29–32Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wicklow DT, Yocom DH (1981) Effect of larval grazing byLycoriella mali (Diptera:Sciaridae) on species abundance of coprophilous fungi. Trans Br Mycol Soc 78:29–32Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yocom DH, Wicklow DT (1980) Community differentiation along a dune succession: an experimental approach with coprophilous fungi. Ecology 61:868–880Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Lussenhop
    • 1
  • Donald T. Wicklow
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of Illinois, ChicagoChicago
  2. 2.Northern Regional Research CenterUSDA-ARSPeoriaUSA

Personalised recommendations