Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 196, Issue 1, pp 143–149 | Cite as

Hydroponic culture of the mycorrhizal fungus Glomus mosseae with Linum usitatissimum L., Sorghum bicolor L. and Triticum aestivum L.

  • H.-J. Hawkins
  • E. George
Article

Abstract

Linum usitatissimum, Sorghum bicolor and Triticum aestivum plants were further colonised by the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus, Glomus mosseae, during a four week period of hydroponic culture after a pre-culture period of three weeks with the fungus in perlite substrate. The viability of mycorrhizal colonisation of T. aestivum was indicated by an initial experiment where G. mosseae from mycorrhizal plants colonised non-mycorrhizal plants when the plants were grown together in the same hydroponic container using modified Long Ashton nutrient solution. Intermittant aeration of the plant roots (2 h periods, four times per day) provided a compromise between adequate aeration and minimal disturbance of the fungus. In a second experiment, two nutrient media, modified Long Ashton and modified Knop plus Hoagland medium were compared for culturing G. mosseae on T. aestivum. A significantly higher root dry weight was found for the mycorrhizal versus the non-mycorrhizal wheat plants in modified Long Ashton nutrient medium, which contained 10 µM P and an organic buffer. Modified Knop plus Hoagland nutrient medium contained a high P concentration (0.9 mM) and did not produce viable cultures of mycorrhizal colonisation. In a third experiment, modified Long Ashton medium was used for hydroponic culture of mycorrhizal L. usitatissimum, S. bicolor and T. aestivum. The root colonisation percentages for T. aestivum (73%), S. bicolor (36%) and L. usitatissimum (65%) were within the range of colonisation rates obtained with solid substrate culture in perlite. Viability of the mycorrhizal structures in hydroponic culture was assessed by monitoring activity of fungal succinate dehydrogenase and found to be similar to cultures in perlite. No difference in the P concentration of mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal plants was observed, possibly owing to the lack of diffusion limits for P in hydroponic solution. This report describes a system for the viable culture of G. mosseae with different plant species where a high mycorrhizal colonisation rate was produced under conditions of a short culture period using intermittent aeration, a low concentration of P supply and an organic buffer.

arbuscular mycorrhiza hydroponics linseed sorghum wheat 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barber S A 1995 Soil nutrient bioavailability. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, USA. 90 p.Google Scholar
  2. Cress W A, Throneberry G O and Lindsey D L 1979 Kinetics of phosphorus absorbtion by mycorrhizal and nonmycorrhizal tomato roots. Plant Physiol 64, 484–487.Google Scholar
  3. Cress W A, Johnson G V and Barton L L 1986 The role of endomycorrhizal fungi in iron uptake by Hilaria jamesii. J. Plant Nut. 9, 547–556.Google Scholar
  4. Davis F T Jr, Potter J R and Linderman R G 1992 Mycorrhiza and repeated drought exposure effect drought resistance and extraradical hyphae development of pepper plants independent of plant size and nutrient content. J. Plant Physiol. 139, 289–294.Google Scholar
  5. Diop T A, Plenchette C and Strullu D G 1994 In vitro culture of sheared mycorrhizal roots. Symbiosis 17, 217–227.Google Scholar
  6. Duan X, Neuman D S, Reiber J M, Green C D, Saxton A M and Augé R M 1996 Mycorrhizal influence on hydraulic and hormonal factors implicated in the control of stomatal conductance during drought. J. Exp. Bot. 47, 1541–1550.Google Scholar
  7. Dugassa D G, Grunewaldt-StÖcker G and SchÖnbeck F 1995 Growth of Glomus intraradices and its effect on linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.) in hydroponic culture. Mycorrhiza 5, 279–282.Google Scholar
  8. Epstein E 1972 Mineral nutrition of plants: Principles and perspectives, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, USA. pp 60–61.Google Scholar
  9. George E, Marschner H and Jakobsen I 1995 Role of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in uptake of phosphorus and nitrogen from soil. Crit. Rev. Biotech. 15, 257–270.Google Scholar
  10. Giovannetti M and Mosse B 1980 An evaluation of techniques for measuring vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal infection in roots. New Phytol. 84, 489–500.Google Scholar
  11. Hewitt E J 1966 Sand and water culture methods used in the study of plant nutrition, 2nd revised edition, Commonwealth Bureau of Horticulture and Plantation Crops, EastMalling, Technical Communication No. 22, pp. 431–432. Commonwealth Agriculture Bureau, Farnham Royal, U.K.Google Scholar
  12. Hung L-L and Sylvia D M 1988 Production of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus inoculum in aeroponic culture. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 54, 353–255.Google Scholar
  13. Jarstfer A G and Sylvia D M 1995 Aeroponic culture of VAM fungi. In Mycorrhiza-Structure, Function, Molecular Biology and Biotechnology. Ed. A Varma and B Hock. pp 428–441. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  14. Karunaratne S, Baker J H and Barker A V 1986 Phosphorus uptake by mycorrhizal and nonmycorrhizal roots of soybean. J. Plant Nut. 9, 1303–1313.Google Scholar
  15. Kormanik P P and McGraw A-C 1982 Quantification of vesiculararbuscular mycorrhizae in plant roots. In Methods and Principles of Mycorrhizal Research. Ed. N C Schenk. pp 37–45. The American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.Google Scholar
  16. Koske R E and Gemma J N 1989 A modified procedure for staining roots to detect VA mycorrhizas. Mycol. Res. 92, 486–505.Google Scholar
  17. McDonald A J S, Ericsson T and Larsson C-M 1996 Plant nutrition, dry matter gain and partitioning at the whole-plant level. J. Exp. Bot. 47, 1245–1253.Google Scholar
  18. Morard P and Silvestre J 1996 Plant injury due to oxygen deficiency in the root environment of soilless culture: A review. Plant Soil 184, 243–254.Google Scholar
  19. Mosse B and Thompson J P 1984 Vesicular-arbuscular endomycorrhizal inoculum production. Exploratory experiments with beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) in nutrient flow culture. Can. J. Bot. 62, 1523–1530.Google Scholar
  20. Murphy J and Riley J P 1962 A modified single solution method for the determination of phosphate in natural waters. Anal. Chem. Acta 27, 31–36.Google Scholar
  21. Newsham K K, Fitter A H and Watkinson A R 1995 Arbuscular mycorrhiza protect an annual grass from root pathogenic fungi in the field. J. Ecol. 83, 991–1000.Google Scholar
  22. Peuss H 1958 Untersuchungen zur Ökologie und Bedeutung der Tabakmycorrhiza. Arch. Microbiol. 29, 112–142.Google Scholar
  23. Ruiz-Lozano J M, Azcón R and Gomez M 1995 Effects of arbuscular-mycorrhizal Glomus species on drought tolerance: Physiological and nutritional plant responses. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 61, 456–460.Google Scholar
  24. Schaffer G F and Peterson R L 1993 Modifications to clearing methods used in combination with vital staining of roots colonized with vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Mycorrhiza 4, 29– 35.Google Scholar
  25. St. Arnaud M, Hamel C, Vimard B, Caron M and Fortin J A 1996 Enhanced hyphal growth and spore production of the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus intraradices in an in vitro system in the absence of host roots. Mycol. Res. 100, 328–332.Google Scholar
  26. Sylvia D M and Hubbel D H 1986 Growth and sporulation of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in aeroponic and membrane systems. Symbiosis 1, 259–267.Google Scholar
  27. Taylor T N, Remy W, Hass H and Kerp H 1995 Fossil arbuscular mycorrhizae from the Early Devonian. Mycologia 87, 560–573.Google Scholar
  28. Urbach W, Rupp W and Sturm H 1983 Praktikum zur Stoffwechselphysiologie der Pflanzen. pp 330–331. Thieme, Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • H.-J. Hawkins
    • 1
  • E. George
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Plant Nutrition (330)Hohenheim UniversityStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations