UKTC Archive

RE: Ganoderma applanatum/australe on n.maple - implications

Subject: RE: Ganoderma applanatum/australe on n.maple - implications
From: Richard Fletcher
Date: Dec 22 2011 13:48:28
Don't worry David, this has been very interesting reading

Richard

"David Lonsdale" <d.lonsdale2@xxxxxxxxxxx.com> 22/12/2011 12:18 >>>
Dear Gerrit,

With apologies to Richard Fletcher (since we have strayed far from his 
original query), I thank you for sending the link to the Dutch-language 
definitions in Neth. J. P1. Path. 74 (1968) 65-84.  I speak even less Dutch 
than David Evans, and so I used "Babelfish" to produce some very crude 
translations into English.  This crude translation for "biotroof" is as 
follows:

biotroof - food withdrawing to live parts of a host.

I think that this simply means that the parasite is obtaining its food from 
living tissues.  This is okay as a literal translation of the original Greek: 
"bios" = life / "trophe" = food.  I do not, however, think that this 
definition is precise enough to distinguish between a biotroph and a 
necrotroph (just as you implied in your previous message).

In  Ainsworth and Bisby's Dictionary of the Fungi (8th edition, CAB 
International), the definition of biotroph is as follows:

"Biotroph: an obligate parasite growing on another organism, in intimate 
association with its cytoplasm."

I think that the Ainsworth & Bisby definition means almost the same as the 
one that I wrote yesterday.   I did not, however, use the word "obligate" 
(meaning that the parasite can grow only on the living host; not on a 
non-living culture medium), because I am aware of a few rust fungi (for 
example) that have been grown on artificial media, with great skill and 
difficulty.   On the other hand, it is quite useful to use the word 
'obligate', since this clearly shows that wood decay fungi cannot be 
biotrophic according to the strict definition. They must either be 
necrotrophic parasites (if they invade and kill living tissues) or 
saprotrophs (if they grow only in tissues that are already dead).

I was not very successful when I tried to use Babelfish to translate the 
Dutch definition of "necrotroph". I did, however see the words "dead plant 
cells".  It also seemed to say that a necrotrophic parasite can live 
alternatively as a saprotroph.  This all seems to agree with the definition 
that I sent yesterday, except that there is an important difference between a 
necrotroph parasite and a saproptroph.  Only the former kills the host cells 
before it uses them as a food source.


The Ainsworth & Bisby definition of necrotroph is as follows:

"Necrotroph: a parasite that derives its energy from dead cells of the host 
[from Thrower (1966). Phytopath Z., 56: 258.]"


Kind regards,
David

PS. Is the spelling correct in the Dutch-language definition of "necrotoof"?  
 In my ignorance as a non-Dutch speaker, I would have guessed that it should 
be spelt with an "r": "necrotroof".



-----Original Message-----
From: Viper Snake [mailto:snake24@xxxxx.nl] 
Sent: 22 December 2011 08:43
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: Ganoderma applanatum/australe on n.maple - implications



 
Dear David,
 
I use the definitions from this list (in Dutch) ( 
www.springerlink.com/content/tuj653216XXXXXXX ) and to add some more 
information on the subject of tree species specific strategies of parasitic 
macrofungi being part of and co-evolved within a tree species specific 
ecosystem (Keizer, 2007/2011), the following on the tree species colonised by 
Fomitopsis pinicola on the European continent.
 
Originally Fomitopsis pinicola was only found on coniferous trees, mostly on 
Picea and Pinus. In 1982, I found it on a Betula trunk in a spruce forest 
invested with F. pinicola in Luxemburg. Some years later, I documented F. 
pinicola from old beeches in Luxemburg and Belgium and later on also in 
Germany (Eifel). In Poland it is mainly found on roadside Acer, on which I 
also found it this year along a riverside in Austria (see : 
http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/490816-post37.html ). In Sweden, where it is 
common on coniferous trees, and Germany (Bavaria), I found it on Prunus.
In The Netherlands, it first was found on Picea and nowadays it is mostly on 
Betula and Fagus and twice on Quercus robur. As Laetiporus sulphureus has not 
(yet) been documented from beech in The Netherlands, F. pinicola, apart from 
some saprotrophic Coniophora species, is the only macrofungus causing brown 
rot in Fagus.
 
So I wonder what tree species F. pinicola will use as first and secondary 
"stepping stones" once it starts invading the U.K. (entirely).
 
Regards,
Gerrit
 
 

From: d.lonsdale2@xxxxxxxxxxx.com 
To: uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 
Subject: RE: Ganoderma applanatum/australe on n.maple - implications
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 20:13:10 +0000

Dear Gerrit,

I hadn't realised the use of "biotrophic" and "necrotrophic" were 
differently in the UK and on the continent; thanks for mentioning this.

I don't know whether other UKTC members share my unease about identifying 
species of Ganoderma in the field. I would feel happier if each species 
could be shown to have a distinct combination of characteristics (including 
hyphal structure, average spore-size, DNA-based criteria, thickness and 
hardness of the crust and the presence/absence of insect-galls). Perhaps we 
are wrong in the UK to be identifying a large proportion of the Ganoderma 
on beech as G. australe/adspersum. Various fungi do, however, show 
genuinely different frequencies of occurrence between the UK and parts of 
the near continent. For example, we seem to have more G. pfeifferi here. 
Also, Fomes fomentarius is much less frequent on beech (and on other tree 
species) in southern Britain than on the continent. It is more common in 
northern Britain, where the main host is birch.

Anyway, the question was about Norway maple, and so I'll shut up now!

Regards,
David 


-----Original Message-----
From: Viper Snake [mailto:snake24@xxxxx.nl] 
Sent: 21 December 2011 19:33
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: Ganoderma applanatum/australe on n.maple - implications




Dear David,

Although there is quite a difference in your definition of biotrophic and 
necrotrophic parasites and the definition of both terms on the continent, 
as is included in all Dutch, German and Scandinavian literature I refer to, 
I consider your definition to be the more precise.

And after always microscopically assessing what perennial species of 
Ganoderma I found on beech in The Netherlands and Germany, I have come to 
the conclusion, that about 95 % of perennial Ganoderma species on beech is 
G. lipsiense, followed by the rare G. pfeifferi and the extremely rare G. 
australe.

Regards,
Gerrit



From: d.lonsdale2@xxxxxxxxxxx.com 
To: uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 
Subject: RE: Ganoderma applanatum/australe on n.maple - implications
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 18:29:51 +0000

Dear Gerrit,

In answer to your question, I define the relevant terms as follows:

1. Biotrophic parasite: a parasite which obtains its nutrients from the 
living cells of the host (usually by the penetration of those cells, 
without killing them). Examples include rusts and mildews.

2. Necrotrophic parasite: a parasite which obtains its nutrients by 
killing cells of the host (usually by the secretion of enzymes and/or 
toxins). These parasites are usually able to grow also as saprotrophs (4, 
below) and they are therefore often alternatively called "facultative 
parasites". Examples include many fungi and bacteria that cause general 
dieback and/or decay of host tissue.

3. Hemibiotrophic parasite: a parasite which obtains its nutrients both 
as a biotroph (usually when it first penetrates host tissue) and as a 
nectroph (usually at a later stage, after an initial biotrophic phase). 
Examples include many organisms that cause leaf spot diseases.

4. Saprotroph: an organism which obtains its nutrients from the dead 
remains of one or more living organisms.

As far as I know, there are no wood decay fungi in categories (1) or (3) 
above. Some of them have the ability to grow into previously living 
sapwood, causing it to die (or become "dysfunctional" and then causing 
decay. I think that they can be regarded as necrotrophic parasites (2), 
but I do not like to use this term without qualification, since many of 
them live predominantly on wood that is already dead. This could be 
sapwood that has been damaged by injury, or it could be central wood or 
the tree, which has become heartwood or ripewood because of aging. 

Traditionally, wood decay fungi have been described as "parasitic" if 
they are found on living stems, branches or roots. I do not think that 
this is correct if the fungus concerned is colonising only wood that is 
already dead.

According to the above definitions, Ganoderma applanatum has been 
observed to be mostly saprotrophic, whereas G. adpsersum/australe has 
some capacity to act as a necrotrophic parasite. These observation seem 
to be confirmed by some experimental work by my friends Schwarze & Ferner 
at the University of Freiburg i. Br., Germany. (see: 
http://www.enspec.com/articles/ENSPEC%20Research%20Paper%20-%20Ganoderma%20on%20Trees.pdf
 )

Schwarze & Ferner found that G. adpsersum/australe was able to penetrate 
defensive barriers (reaction zones), thus growing into functional 
sapwood. It does not necessarily harm the tree seriously. Instead, it 
might be able to co-exist with the tree for many years, instead of dying 
out when it has utilised all the wood that was initially available to it. 
In some cases, however, the fungus does enough damage to the sapwood 
(especially in the roots of the tree) to cause the decline and perhaps 
death of the tree. Also, the decay can, in my experience, become 
overwhelmingly rapid if the wood becomes more aerated because of 
excessive pruning or the storm-breakage of major branches. 

As suggested in the recent correspondence, G. adpsersum/australe appears 
to behave differently in different host species. I think that it can be 
especially aggressive in species with which it has not co-evolved. I have 
seen examples where G. adspsersum/australe (or perhaps a similar-looking 
species of Ganoderma) seems to have killed exotic conifers such as 
Araucaria araucana. I agree that it can cause extensive decay in the 
broadleaved trees in your list. However, in Fagus sylvatica (one of its 
main hosts in the UK), the tree and the fungus often seem to co-exist for 
many years. The co-existence is probably even longer in species like 
Quercus robur and Q. petraea, which have durable heartwood and therefore 
tend to become decayed more slowly.

Regards,
David

-----Original Message-----
From: Viper Snake [mailto:snake24@xxxxx.nl] 
Sent: 21 December 2011 14:14
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: Ganoderma applanatum/australe on n.maple - implications




David,

1). Tony Croft has been using the term 'biotrophic parasite' in relation 
to G. adspersum/australe on here. I questioned him about these labels and 
asked him whether he could point me to any research that demonstrated 
that the fungus was 'biotrophic' and/or 'parasitic', because this was 
news to me, but he hasn't replied yet. Can you point me in the right 
direction?

1). Tony uses my terms and the results of my in situ research on 
biotrophic and/or necrotrophic parasites, which I already have explained 
on Arbtalk, see : 2. http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/529703-post53.html .

2). Similarly, that G. adspersum/australe is deterministically fatal to 
Acers, no matter the circumstances, is also news to me. Where does the 
research for this conclusion come from ? 


2). From my own field research on the effects on the stability and 
condition of different deciduous tree species of the biotrophic parasitic 
G. australe, of which the mycelium causes a white rot with selective 
delignification, that is most detrimental to Acer, Platanus, Populus, 
Salix, Tilia, Aesculus (Anne Frank tree) and Quercus rubra.

Gerrit





The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/ 



-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/ 




-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/ 



-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/ 




-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/ 
                                          


-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/ 




-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/

This email, and any attachments, is strictly confidential and may be legally 
privileged. It is intended only for use by the addressee. If you are not the 
intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or other use of 
this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this message 
in error, please contact the sender and delete it from your system. The 
opinions expressed in this email are not necessarily those of Elmbridge 
Borough Council.

This email has been scanned by Email Security Systems.




-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/