http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2864-3449
Figures
Abstract
Tricholoma matsutake (pine mushroom, PM) is a prized mushroom in Asia due to its unique flavor and pine aroma. The fruiting body of PM forms only in its natural habitat (pine forest), and little is known regarding the natural conditions required for successful generation of the fruiting bodies in this species. Recent studies suggest that microbial interactions may be associated with the growth of PM; however, there have been few studies of the bacterial effects on PM growth. In this study, we surveyed which bacteria can directly and indirectly promote the growth of PM by using co-cultures with PM and molds associated with the fruiting body. Among 16 bacterial species isolated from the fruiting body, some species significantly influenced the mycelial growth of PM and molds. Most bacteria negatively affected PM growth and exhibited various enzyme activities, which suggests that they use the fruiting body as nutrient source. However, growth-promoting bacteria belonging to the Dietzia, Ewingella, Pseudomonas, Paenibacillus, and Rodococcus were also found. In addition, many bacteria suppressed molds, which suggests an indirect positive effect on PM as a biocontrol agent. Our results provide important insights toward a better understanding of the microbial interactions in the fruiting body of PM, and indicate that growth-promoting bacteria may be an important component in successful cultivation of PM.
Citation: Oh S-Y, Kim M, Eimes JA, Lim YW (2018) Effect of fruiting body bacteria on the growth of Tricholoma matsutake and its related molds. PLoS ONE 13(2): e0190948. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190948
Editor: Kap-Hoon Han, Woosuk University, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Received: October 3, 2017; Accepted: December 24, 2017; Published: February 8, 2018
Copyright: © 2018 Oh et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: Sequences generated from the study were deposited in Genbank under accession numbers KY992547-KY992562.
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Macrofungi develop large mycelial fruiting bodies that serve as reproductive organs producing spores [1], which are an excellent natural food source for a wide range of organisms including bacteria [2, 3]. Fruiting bodies are mostly formed above-ground, although some form underground for short periods [4]. This means that bacterial communities in soil can directly or indirectly contribute to the composition of bacterial communities within fruiting bodies [5]. Pent et al. [4] showed that bacteria occurring within fruiting bodies are non-randomly selected from the surrounding soil based on their symbiotic functions or habitat requirements. Bacteria have been shown to have both positive and negative relationships with fungal fruiting bodies. For example, bacteria can trigger fruiting body formation such as that demonstrated by Pseudomonas putida and button mushrooms (Agaricus bisporus) [6]. Bacteria can also promote mycelial growth, spore germination, mycorrhiza formation [7], and provide an indirect benefit by controlling pathogens [8].
In contrast, bacteria can have negative associations with fruiting bodies. As pathogens and decomposers, bacteria often use fruiting bodies as a nutrient source [9]. For example, Pseudomonas tolaasii is notorious for causing brown blotch of fruiting bodies by degrading them with secreted toxins [10]. In fact, diverse bacteria that are frequently detected from fruiting bodies (e.g. Ewingella, Pseudomonas, and Stenotrophomonas) are known to degrade mycelia by exhibiting high chitinase activity [11–13].
The pine mushroom (PM), Tricholoma matsutake, is a naturally occurring edible mushroom, highly prized in Asia for its unique flavor and pine aroma [14]. The PM has not yet been successfully cultivated, so fruiting bodies are available only from forests [15]. PM fruiting body formation can be suppressed or fruiting bodies prematurely decomposed by molds inhabited in fruiting bodies [16–18]. This results in decreased quality and market prices for PM fruiting bodies. Past research on cultivating or improving yields of PM fruiting bodies has focused on identifying optimal abiotic factors such as nutrition and climatic conditions [19–22]. Recent studies, which reveal a potential close relationship between bacteria and PM [23–25], suggest that bacterial communities may also be important for successful fruiting body generation and growth [26]. Several bacteria (e.g. Janthinobacterium, Pseudomonas, and Stenotrophomonas) have been found in PM fruiting bodies, and the community composition appears to be different than that of the soil bacteria found in the fairy ring of PM [26, 27].
Because bacteria can influence the physiology of mushrooms [3, 8], a better understanding of how bacteria affect specifically PM growth may contribute to the successful cultivation of this mushroom in the future. In this study, we isolated bacteria from PM fruiting bodies and co-cultured them with PM isolate and with several molds associated with PM fruiting bodies to find out which bacteria directly and indirectly promote PM mycelial growth. Direct positive effects were identified by the promotion of PM mycelial growth while indirect positive effects were determined by suppression of molds isolated from PM fruiting bodies. We also characterized enzyme activity in the bacteria and molds to identify their potential roles in bacterial-fungal interactions.
Materials and methods
Isolation of bacteria from PM fruiting bodies
A total of five fresh PM fruiting bodies were collected in September, 2013 from the research forest of the National Institute of Forest Science in Hongcheon (37° 41' 35"N, 127° 58' 51"E), Gangwon province, Korea (approval from the Institute). Sampling sites for each fruiting body were separated by more than 300 m. We used only fresh and immature fruiting bodies (Fig 1A) to reduce the possibility of bacterial contamination that can occur randomly due to wind, rain or other factors. Using a sterilized scalpel, we divided the fruiting bodies into 5 mm × 5 mm pieces including both the inside and outside tissues of each pileus and stipe. A total of 48 pieces from each fruiting body were placed on Tryptic soy agar (TSA; Difco, USA) and Reasoner’s 2A agar medium (R2A; Difco, USA), and incubated at 30°C for 2–7 days. Isolates were subcultured for pure culture on TSA and stored with 20% glycerol at -80°C.
(A) Fruiting bodies of PM at the sampling site. (B) Co-culture experiment with PM and bacteria. Control: PM not paired with any bacteria, Negative effect of bacteria: PM paired with Mycetocola lacteus, Positive effect of bacteria: PM paired with Dietzia aurantiaca.
Molecular identification
Bacteria colony PCR amplification was performed using a Maxime PCR PreMix kit (iNtRON Biotechnology, Korea). The PCR mixture contained 1.0 μl of each of the 27F and 1492R primers [28], 1.0 μl diluted bacterial isolates, and 22.0 μl distilled water. Thermal cycling consisted of 95°C for 10 min, and 35 cycles of 95°C for 40 sec, 55°C for 40 sec, 72°C for 60 sec, and then incubation at 72°C for 5 min. The PCR products were electrophoresed through a 1% agarose gel and purified using ExpinTM PCR Purification Kits (GeneAll Biotechnology, Korea) following the manufacturer’s instructions. Purified PCR products were sequenced using an ABI3700 automated DNA sequencer at Macrogen (Seoul, Korea). The sequences were aligned using MAFFT [29] and edited manually with MEGA v.5.0 [30]. Phylogenetic trees were constructed using the neighbor-joining method with 1000 bootstrap replications. Reference sequences were retrieved from the EzBioCloud database [31]. Based on species identification, the number of species were compared between each part using Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test and Dunn’s test as a post hoc test adjusted by the false discovery rate of Benjamini and Hochberg [32]. Sequences generated from the study were deposited in Genbank under accession numbers KY992547-KY992562.
Co-culture of bacteria with isolates of PM and molds
To prepare bacterial inocula for the co-culture experiment, bacterial strains were recovered from the stocks we isolated and stored on TSA medium at 30°C. Co-culture was performed using 60 mm Petri dishes containing ‘Tricholoma matsutake’ Media (TMM) (glucose 20 g/L, yeast extract 1.5 g/L, soytone 1.5 g/L, and agar 20 g/L) which is one of the best media for the growth of PM [33, 34]. We used a single PM strain that was obtained from a PM fruiting body (KMRB 12100405), which was deposited at the Korea Mushroom Resource Bank (Seoul, South Korea). To inoculate PM strains, the strain was cultured in potato dextrose broth (Difco, USA), then filtered and washed with sterilized distilled water. The washed PM tissues were then ground in 30 ml of sterilized distilled water using a homogenizer, and 20 μl of PM suspension was inoculated at the center of each 60 mm Petri dish. Using a sterile inoculating loop (SPL Life Science, Korea), representative strains selected from each bacterial species were streaked along a 30 mm line situated 15 mm away from the center of the Petri dish (Fig 1B). Plates were sealed and incubated at 25°C for one month. The diameter of PM mycelia on each plate was then measured at two different locations.
Bacterial strains were co-cultured with molds to assess the antifungal activity of bacterial species. For covering various molds that present naturally in PM fruiting bodies, we used 17 isolates of mold species that were originated from PM fruiting bodies and deposited at the Seoul National University Fungal Collection (SFC) (Table 1). Similar to the bacteria-PM strain co-culture experiment, an agar plug of each mold was placed in the center of a 90 mm Petri dish containing potato dextrose agar (PDA; Difco, USA). Bacterial strains were streaked along a 40 mm line situated 25 mm away from the center of each 90 mm Petri dish. All of the co-culture experiments were conducted in triplicate for each condition. Significance of difference was tested using pairwise t-tests with multiple test corrections by the false discovery rate of Benjamini and Hochberg [32].
Enzyme activity assays
We assessed the activity of five different enzymes associated with fungal cell wall component—chitinase, cellulase (endoglucanase and β-glucosidase), protease, and lipase—for bacteria and molds. Chitinase activity was assessed based on the Roberts and Selitrennikoff method [35]. Colloidal chitin was prepared using shrimp shell chitin (Sigma-Aldrich, USA) following the methods of Roberts and Selitrennikoff [35]. Endoglucanase and β-glucosidase activities were assayed using Mandels’ medium with 1% carboxymethylcellulose (Sigma-Aldrich, USA) and 0.5% D-cellobiose (Sigma-Aldrich, USA), respectively [36]. Extracellular protease activity was assayed using yeast extract agar (Difco, USA) with 1.5% skim milk (Difco, USA) [37]. Lipase activity was assayed using 9% agar with Bacto peptone (10 g/L), NaCl (5 g/L), CaCl2·H2O (0.1 g/L), and 1% Tween80 [38]. The association between presence of enzyme activity and effect on fungal growth was tested using Fisher’s exact test.
Results
Microbial diversity associated with the fruiting body of PM
A total of 110 bacterial strains were isolated from 240 fruiting body sections (48 pieces × 5 fruiting bodies). 16S rDNA sequence analysis for 110 bacterial isolates revealed a total of 16 different species of bacteria (Fig 2A). All 16S rDNA sequences had high similarity with the type species (99.6–100%) and final identification was assigned based on the phylogenetic tree. The highest number of species were found in the Proteobacteria (7 species), followed by the Actinobacteria (5 species) and the Firmicutes (4 species). In a total of bacterial isolates, Serratia marcescens was the most dominant species of bacteria (34.5%), followed by Mycetocola lacteus (17.3%) and Pseudomonas endophytica (16.4%). Bacterial diversity varied largely among parts of the fruiting body: the outside of the pileus harbored the largest number (10 species), while the inside of the stipe harbored the least (3 species) (Fig 2B). The number of bacterial species was significantly higher in the pileus compared to the stipe (inside pileus > inside stipe: P = 0.03; outside pileus > inside stipe: P = 0.01; inside pileus > outside stipe: P = 0.04; outside pileus > outside stipe: P = 0.02), while the number of bacterial species was comparable between pileus parts (P = 0.64) and between stipe parts (P = 0.98) (S1 Table). In a total of bacterial isolates from each fruiting body parts, Se. marcescens was dominant at all parts on and within the fruiting body (39.0–50.0%), except inside the stipe, where Ps. endophytica was dominant (85.0%) (Fig 2B).
(A) Phylogenetic analysis based on 16S rRNA sequences using neighbor-joining method with 1000 bootstrap replicates. (B) Relative abundance of bacterial species in different parts of the fruiting body.
Bacterial effect on the growth of PM and molds
Among the 16 bacterial species isolated from PM fruiting bodies, ten appeared to have a strong negative effect on the mycelial growth of PM, as little or no growth (0–3 mm) was observed when these species were present (Fig 3A). The bacterial species that appeared inhibitory to PM growth included some of the species found to dominate the fruiting bodies such as Se. marcescens, My. lacteus, and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. In contrast, six bacterial species stimulated PM mycelial growth significantly (growth change: 123–194%) (Fig 3A; S2 Table). This group of growth-promoting bacteria included Dietzia aurantiaca, Ewingella americana, Paenibacillus taichungensis, Pseudomonas spp., and Rhodococcus degradans. D. aurantiaca (growth change: 194%) and Ps. koreensis (growth change: 190%) had the largest growth-promoting effect (S2 Table). Based on the results of the co-culture experiment, the distribution of bacterial effects was assigned to different locations of the fruiting body: bacteria that had an inhibitory effect on PM were dominant in most areas of the fruiting body (68.3–100%) while growth-promoting bacteria were dominant inside the stipe (85.0%) (Fig 3B).
(A) Mycelial growth of PM co-cultured with bacterial species. Pairwise t-test (one-tailed) was conducted to compare between growth promotion in co-culture and control. Significance of test was corrected by the false discovery rate of Benjamini and Hochberg. (B) Composition of bacterial effect in each part of the fruiting body.
Among the 272 bacteria-mold pairings (16 bacteria × 17 molds) we cultured, a change in growth was significant for 66 pairs (Fig 4; S2 Table): 61 pairs exhibited suppressed growth of mycelial growth of mold species, while five pairs showed growth promotion. No single bacterial species affected all molds (Fig 4). Five of the 16 bacterial species showed a wide range of antifungal activity (bGroup 1) while the remaining 11 species had a narrower range of influence (bGroup 2). Ewingella americana had a suppressive effect on the widest range of mold species (8 molds; growth change: 62–82%), followed by Se. marcescens (7 molds; growth change: 68–87%) and Ps. endophytica (7 molds; growth change: 63–84%). Growth response of our 17 test molds to the 16 bacteria separated into two groups: a generally suppressed group of molds (mGroup 1) and a specifically influenced group of molds (mGroup 2) (Fig 4). mGroup 1 was suppressed by five to nine bacterial species, and included Absidia sp., Mucor irregularis, Penicillium bissettii, Penicillium sp.1, Penicillium sp.2, Sarocladium kiliense, and Simplicillium lamellicola. Mold growth belonging to mGroup 2 was influenced by two to five species, while some bacteria showed growth promotion of molds. Growth of Pe. oxalicum was significantly increased by Comamonas koreensis (145%) and R. degradans (113%), and growth of Umbelopsis nana was significantly increased by My. lacteus (Growth change: 113%), Pa. taichungensis (Growth change: 113%), and Staphylococcus lentus (Growth change: 116%) (S2 Table).
Growth change is represented as color with significance detected by a pairwise t-test. The bacterial names in blue color represent growth-promoting bacteria. bGroup1: bacterial group showing a wide range of antifungal activity, bGroup2: bacterial group with a narrow range of influence, mGroup1: generally suppressed mold group, mGroup2: specifically influenced mold group.
Enzyme activity assays
Among the 16 bacterial species we assayed for five different enzymes (chitinase, endoglucanase, β-glucosidase, protease, and lipase), ten species showed enzyme activity. Only two species, Se. marcescens and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, exhibited activity for all enzymes tested. Chitinase activity was found in three species. Seven species showed cellulase activity. Protease activity was detected from six species and lipase activity from seven species (Table 1).
Nine of 17 mold species we assayed exhibited enzyme activity, and Sa. kiliense and Pe. crustosum exhibited enzyme activity for all enzymes tested except chitinase. In the Ascomycota, four Penicillium species showed cellulase and protease activities. Among seven species in the Zygomycota, only two species showed enzyme activity: Absidia sp. had protease activity and U. nana had cellulase and lipase activities (Table 1).
A Fisher’s exact test showed that there was no relationship between any of the enzyme activities and effect on mycelial growth of PM. Moreover, neither presence of enzyme activity or sharing the same enzyme activity between bacteria and molds significantly influenced growth of mold mycelia.
Discussion
Diverse bacteria have been reported from PM fruiting bodies by culture dependent and high-throughput sequencing methods. Recently, Alcaligenes sp., Ew. americana, Pseudomonas sp., Serratia sp., Sphingobacerium sp., and Stenotrophomonas sp. have been isolated from the fruiting bodies of PM in China [27]. Pyrosequencing showed that Pseudomonas and Stenotrophomonas were abundant in the fruiting bodies of PM [26]. Our results indicate that Se. marcescens was the most abundant species found in PM fruiting bodies, followed by My. lacteus, Ps. endophytica, Ew. americana, and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (Fig 2B). Although our sampling site in Korea is 2,600 km from the Li et al. [26] site in China, similar studies support the idea that the bacterial community is affected by the mushroom identity where bacteria live [4]. The PM fruiting body harbored different dominant bacterial genera compared to the bacterial genera found in the soil of the fairy ring (e.g. Burkholderia, Mycobacterium, and Paenibacillus) [25]. Although part of these community differences probably resulted from the cultural state of bacterial species used in the comparison, our results indicate that the abundance of several bacterial taxa differ considerable between fruiting body and surrounding soil [4, 39]. Interestingly, the bacterial community inside the stipe was distinct from other areas of the fruiting body (Fig 1B). Most bacteria isolated from inside the stipe were Ps. endophytica, which was first reported as an endophytic bacterium in the stem and root of potato [40]. Several bacterial genera detected in this study have been found in a wide variety of fruiting bodies: Agaribus bisporus [41], Armillaria mellea [42], Cantharellus spp. [43], Tuber borchii [44], and Suillus grevillea [45]. This suggests that some fruiting body bacteria may adapt to the fruiting body environment.
Many studies have shown that bacteria associated with mushrooms can positively influence the physiology of fungi [7, 46, 47]. For example, Ps. putida induces initiation of fruiting body formation in Agaricus bisporus [8]. In addition, Streptomyces sp. and Ps. fluorescence promote hyphal growth and mycorrhizal formation in Amanita muscaria and Laccaria bicolor, respectively [48–50]. In Tuber melanosporum, the bacterial community is involved in fruiting body maturation [5] and aroma formation [51]. Similarly, six bacteria had a significant positive effect on the mycelial growth of PM (Fig 3A). Among these, species in Paenbacillus, Pseudomonas, and Rhodococcus are well-known mycorrhiza helper bacteria (MHB) [7]. Although the distribution of growth-promoting bacteria was not restricted to the inside of the PM fruiting bodies we sampled, the proportion of growth-promoting bacteria was higher inside the stipe (85.0%) compared to other areas, primarily due to the high abundance of Ps. endophytica (Fig 3B). In contrast, except to six bacteria, most bacteria associated with the PM fruiting body had a strong negative effect on the mycelial growth of PM (Fig 3A). These results are consistent with those of Danell et al. [52] and Varese et al. [45] who found that bacteria isolated from the fruiting bodies of Cantharellus cibarius and Suillus grevillei suppressed hyphal growth of the fungi. These phenomena imply that most bacteria that have a negative impact on PM growth may use the PM fruiting body as a nutrient source.
Indirect positive effects of bacteria on the PM were tested by measuring the influence of bacteria on the growth of molds (Fig 4; S2 Table). Molds are frequently detected from fungal fruiting bodies [16, 18, 53] and some molds are known as pathogens [54–56] or early decomposers of dead fruiting bodies [57]. Because of the diversity of enzyme activities among the molds (Table 1), it is likely that the presence of molds often introduces some negative effects on the maintenance of the PM fruiting body. Some bacteria associated with the PM fruiting body do appear to act as a biocontrol agent against some mold species [58–60]. For example, Pseudomonas suppresses the growth of molds in the Tuber borchii [44]. Interestingly, in our study, the co-culture results for the bacteria-mold pairings we tested showed that antifungal activity was different among bacterial species (Fig 4). Ewingella americana, Ps. endophytica, and Se. marcescens were the strongest suppressors of a wide range of molds (growth change: 62.6–87.0%). Molds could be separated into two groups according to suppression pattern: a generally suppressed group (mGroup 1) and a specifically influenced group (mGroup 2) (Fig 4). The generally suppressed group was composed of Absidia, Mucor, Penicillium, and Sarocladium, which were abundant in environments associated with PM, including the fruiting body [16], ectomycorrhiza [61], and soil [62]. Thus, it is possible that frequently detected molds may be more likely to be suppressed by abundant fruiting body bacteria (Fig 4). In the case of the specifically influenced group, selective interactions may exist. Interestingly, some bacteria promoted growth in Pe. oxalicum and U. nana, although the mechanisms of this growth promotion are unclear. However, Umbelopsis is frequently found in the fairy rings of PM [25, 63], and its metabolites promote growth of PM [64]. Thus, there appears to be a strong relationship between Umbelopsis and PM, and this relationship appears to be influenced by the growth promotion effect of bacteria on Umbelopsis. The interaction is likely complex, thus the extent of mold influence on PM requires a thorough understanding of the microbial interactions in the fruiting body, and remains to be elucidated.
Many of the bacteria isolated from PM fruiting bodies showed high enzyme activity, which suggests mycophagy in these bacteria is associated with PM fruiting bodies, a phenomenon that has been documented in other studies [43, 65–67]. Our enzyme activity assays suggested that fruiting body bacteria are able to degrade fungal cell walls (Table 1). For example, Pa. taichungensis, Se. marcescens, and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia showed chitinase and cellulase activities as reported previously [13, 68, 69]. Given that carbohydrates and proteins are the major components of the PM [70], high enzyme activity for chitinase, cellulase, and protease indicate that some bacteria may use the PM fruiting body as a nutrient source. On the other hand, bacterial enzymes (e.g. chitinase and protease) are often responsible for the antifungal activity of bacteria [71–73]. In our study, however, enzyme activity was not associated with growth of PM. Thus, any bacterial influence on the growth of PM may be due to antifungal agents other than those assessed in this study.
The common enzyme activities observed in bacteria and molds suggest that bacteria and molds compete for the same nutrient sources. Therefore, antifungal activity may be high in the bacteria-mold pairs that shared same enzyme activity. However, our results did not show any relationship between enzyme activity and antifungal activity, which suggests that bacteria may provide indirect positive effects to PM as a biocontrol agent, irrespective of nutrient competition. Bacteria often use nutrients provided from associated fungi (e.g. sugar and amino acid), rather than consuming the fungal cell wall [74, 75]. If PM provides nutrients for bacteria, then maintenance of PM would be advantageous to these bacteria, which may explain why bacteria suppress molds.
Most bacteria in environmental samples are unculturable; less than 1% of bacteria grow in artificial media [76]. Since our study focused on the complex interactions between PM and bacteria, and required living bacterial strains rather than simply presence/absence of bacterial species indicated by DNA analysis, our data are limited to this small fraction of culturable bacteria. It is likely that we have only scratched the surface in uncovering the complex interactions between bacteria and PM. Evidence for this is highlighted in one metagenomic study that found 40 different prokaryotic phyla in PM fruiting bodies (only 16 bacterial species were cultured in this study) [26]. Future studies that include uncultured bacterial strains identified from metagenomic studies are needed; however, this will require extensive testing of culture methods for strains that do not grow in standard conditions or standard media, and are beyond the scope the present study.
In conclusion, while many bacterial species have a negative effect on the growth of PM mycelia and likely exploit the fruiting body of PM as a nutrient source, others have a positive influence on PM growth. We found direct positive effects of bacteria (e.g. Ewingella and Pseudomonas) on the mycelial growth of PM, as well as indirect positive effects of bacteria as biocontrol agents against molds. The mechanisms associated with these bacterial effects, i.e. specific metabolites and optimal growth conditions, remain to be elucidated and a better understanding of these factors may lead to successful cultivation of PM.
Supporting information
S1 Table. The number of bacterial isolate from each part of PM fruiting bodies.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190948.s001
(DOCX)
S2 Table. Average growth change of PM and molds co-cultured with bacteria.
Significance of difference was tested using pairwise t-test adjusted by the false discovery rate of Benjamini and Hochberg. Significantly different growth changes are highlighted in grey. Significant growth promotions are indicated by bolded numbers.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190948.s002
(DOCX)
Acknowledgments
We would like to appreciate Dr. Myung Soo Park (Seoul National University) for technical advices, and Dr. Kang-Hyeon Ka and Hee-su Kim (Korea Forest Research Institute) for assistance on sampling. Isolate of T. matsutake was provided by the Korea Mushroom Resource Bank (Seoul, South Korea).
References
- 1.
Miles PG, Chang S-T. Mushroom biology: concise basics and current developments. New Jersey, USA: World Scientific; 1997.
- 2. Bernaś E, Jaworska G, Lisiewska Z. Edible mushrooms as a source of valuable nutritive constituents. Acta Sci Pol Technol Aliment. 2006;5(1):5–20.
- 3. Leveau JH, Preston GM. Bacterial mycophagy: definition and diagnosis of a unique bacterial-fungal interaction. New Phytol. 2008;177(4):859–76. pmid:18086226
- 4. Pent M, Põldmaa K, Bahram M. Bacterial communities in boreal forest mushrooms are shaped both by soil parameters and host identity. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:836. pmid:28539921
- 5. Antony‐Babu S, Deveau A, Van Nostrand JD, Zhou J, Le Tacon F, Robin C, et al. Black truffle‐associated bacterial communities during the development and maturation of Tuber melanosporum ascocarps and putative functional roles. Environ Microbiol. 2014;16(9):2831–47. pmid:24118660
- 6. Rainey P. Effect of Pseudomonas putida on hyphal growth of Agaricus bisporus. Mycol Res. 1991;95(6):699–704.
- 7. Frey-Klett P, Garbaye J, Tarkka M. The mycorrhiza helper bacteria revisited. New Phytol. 2007;176(1):22–36. pmid:17803639
- 8. Frey-Klett P, Burlinson P, Deveau A, Barret M, Tarkka M, Sarniguet A. Bacterial-fungal interactions: hyphens between agricultural, clinical, environmental, and food microbiologists. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2011;75(4):583–609. pmid:22126995
- 9. Wargo MJ, Hogan DA. Fungal—bacterial interactions: a mixed bag of mingling microbes. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2006;9(4):359–64. pmid:16777473
- 10. Rainey PB, Brodey CL, Johnstone K. Biological properties and spectrum of activity of tolaasin, a lipodepsipeptide toxin produced by the mushroom pathogen Pseudomonas tolaasii. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol. 1991;39(1):57–70.
- 11. Inglis PW, Peberdy JF. Production and purification of a chitinase from Ewingella americana, a recently described pathogen of the mushroom, Agaricus bisporus. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 1997;157(1):189–94.
- 12. Nielsen MN, Sørensen J. Chitinolytic activity of Pseudomonas fluorescens isolates from barley and sugar beet rhizosphere. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 1999;30(3):217–27. pmid:10525178
- 13. Kobayashi DY, Reedy RM, Bick J, Oudemans PV. Characterization of a chitinase gene from Stenotrophomonas maltophilia strain 34S1 and its involvement in biological control. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2002;68(3):1047–54. pmid:11872449
- 14. Amend A, Garbelotto M, Fang Z, Keeley S. Isolation by landscape in populations of a prized edible mushroom Tricholoma matsutake. Conserv Genet. 2010;11(3):795–802.
- 15. Yamada A, Maeda K, Kobayashi H, Murata H. Ectomycorrhizal symbiosis in vitro between Tricholoma matsutake and Pinus densiflora seedlings that resembles naturally occurring ‘shiro’. Mycorrhiza. 2006;16(2):111–6. pmid:16273392
- 16. Izo I. Biochemical studies on Armillaria matsutake mushrooms (Part 9): On the putrefaction of matsutake mushrooms. J Jpn Soc Nutr Food Sci. 1964;17(2):69–79.
- 17. Ka K-H, Park H, Kim H-J, Lee M-W. Syzygites megalocarpus (Mucorales): A necrotrophic mycoparasite of Tricholoma matsutake. Korean J Mycol. 1999;27(5):345–8.
- 18. Park MS, Oh S-Y, Cho HJ, Fong JJ, Cheon W-J, Lim YW. Trichoderma songyi sp. nov., a new species associated with the pine mushroom (Tricholoma matsutake). Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2014;106(4):593–603. pmid:25052534
- 19. Kang A, Cha D, Kim Y, Park Y, You C. Studies on analyzing meteorological elements related with yield of Tricholoma matsutake (S. Ito et Imai) Singer. Korean J Mycol. 1989;17(2):51–6.
- 20. Guerin-Laguette A, Vaario L-M, Matsushita N, Shindo K, Suzuki K, Lapeyrie F. Growth stimulation of a Shiro-like, mycorrhiza forming, mycelium of Tricholoma matsutake on solid substrates by non-ionic surfactants or vegetable oil. Mycol Prog. 2003;2(1):37–43.
- 21. Wang E-j, Jang Y. Mycelial Growth of Edible Ectomycorrhizal Fungi According to Nitrogen Sources. Korean J Mycol. 2016;44(3):166–70.
- 22. Guo Y, Li X, Zhao Z, Wei H, Gao B, Gu W. Prediction of the potential geographic distribution of the ectomycorrhizal mushroom Tricholoma matsutake under multiple climate change scenarios. Sci Rep. 2017;7:46221. pmid:28393865
- 23. Vaario LM, Fritze H, Spetz P, Heinonsalo J, Hanajik P, Pennanen T. Tricholoma matsutake dominates diverse microbial communities in different forest soils. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011;77(24):8523–31. pmid:21984247
- 24. Kataoka R, Siddiqui ZA, Kikuchi J, Ando M, Sriwati R, Nozaki A, et al. Detecting nonculturable bacteria in the active mycorrhizal zone of the pine mushroom Tricholoma matsutake. J Microbiol. 2012;50(2):199–206. pmid:22538647
- 25. Oh S-Y, Fong JJ, Park MS, Lim YW. Distinctive feature of microbial communities and bacterial functional profiles in Tricholoma matsutake dominant soil. PLoS One. 2016;11(12):e0168573. pmid:27977803
- 26. Li Q, Li X, Chen C, Li S, Huang W, Xiong C, et al. Analysis of bacterial diversity and communities associated with Tricholoma matsutake fruiting bodies by barcoded pyrosequencing in Sichuan province, southwest China. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2016;26(1):89–98. pmid:26428733
- 27. Li Q, Chen C, Penttinen P, Xiong C, Zheng L, Huang W. Microbial diversity associated with Tricholoma matsutake fruiting bodies. Microbiology. 2016;85(5):531–9.
- 28. Weisburg WG, Barns SM, Pelletier DA, Lane DJ. 16S ribosomal DNA amplification for phylogenetic study. J Bacteriol. 1991;173(2):697–703. pmid:1987160
- 29. Katoh K, Standley DM. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30(4):772–80. pmid:23329690
- 30. Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M, Kumar S. MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol Biol Evol. 2011;28(10):2731–9. pmid:21546353
- 31. Yoon S-H, Ha S-M, Kwon S, Lim J, Kim Y, Seo H, et al. Introducing EzBioCloud: A taxonomically united database of 16S rRNA and whole genome assemblies. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2017;67:1613–7. pmid:28005526
- 32. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Series B (Methodological). 1995;57(1):289–300.
- 33. Kim I, Jung G, Han S, Cha J, Sung J. Favorable condition for mycelial growth of Tricholoma matsutake. Korean J Mycol. 2005;33(1):22–9.
- 34. Lee W-H, Han S-K, Kim B-S, Shrestha B, Lee S-Y, Ko C-S, et al. Proliferation of Tricholoma matsutake mycelial mats in pine forest using mass liquid inoculum. Mycobiology. 2007;35(2):54–61. pmid:24015070
- 35. Roberts WK, Selitrennikoff CP. Plant and bacterial chitinases differ in antifungal activity. Microbiology. 1988;134(1):169–76.
- 36. Lee H, Lee YM, Heo YM, Lee H, Hong J-H, Jang S, et al. Halo-tolerance of Marine-derived Fungi and their Enzymatic Properties. BioResources. 2015;10(4):8450–60.
- 37. Teng WL, Khor E, Tan TK, Lim LY, Tan SC. Concurrent production of chitin from shrimp shells and fungi. Carbohydr Res. 2001;332(3):305–16. pmid:11376610
- 38. Lanyi B. Classical and rapid identification methods for medically important bacteria. Methods Microbiol. 1988;19:1–67.
- 39. Zagriadskaia YA, Lysak L, Sidorova I, Aleksandrova A, Voronina EY. Bacterial complexes of the fruiting bodies and hyphosphere of certain basidiomycetes. Biol Bull. 2013;40(4):358–64.
- 40. Ramírez-Bahena M-H, Cuesta MJ, Tejedor C, Igual JM, Fernández-Pascual M, Peix A. Pseudomonas endophytica sp. nov., isolated from stem tissue of Solanum tuberosum L. in Spain. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2015;65(7):2110–7. pmid:25851593
- 41. Inglis PW, Burden JL, Peberdy JF. Evidence for the association of the enteric bacterium Ewingella americana with internal stipe necrosis of Agaricus bisporus. Microbiology. 1996;142(11):3253–60.
- 42. Zagryadskaya YA, Lysak L, Chernov IY. Bacterial communities in the fruit bodies of ground basidiomycetes. Eurasian Soil Sci. 2015;48(6):620–6.
- 43. Kumari D, Reddy MS, Upadhyay RC. Diversity of cultivable bacteria associated with fruiting bodies of wild Himalayan Cantharellus spp. Ann Microbiol. 2013;63(3):845–53.
- 44. Sbrana C, Bagnoli G, Bedini S, Filippi C, Giovannetti M, Nuti M. Adhesion to hyphal matrix and antifungal activity of Pseudomonas strains isolated from Tuber borchii ascocarps. Can J Microbiol. 2000;46(3):259–68. pmid:10749539
- 45. Varese G, Portinaro S, Trotta A, Scannerini S, Luppi-Mosca A, Martinotti M. Bacteria associated with Suillus grevillei sporocarps and ectomycorrhizae and their effects on in vitro growth of the mycobiont. Symbiosis. 1996;21(2):129–47.
- 46. Bowen G, Theodorou C. Interactions between bacteria and ectomycorrhizal fungi. Soil Biol Biochem. 1979;11(2):119–26.
- 47. Garbaye J. Tansley review no. 76 helper bacteria: a new dimension to the mycorrhizal symbiosis. New Phytol. 1994;128(2):197–210.
- 48. Duponnois R, Garbaye J. Mycorrhization helper bacteria associated with the Douglas fir-Laccaria laccata symbiosis: effects in aseptic and in glasshouse conditions. Ann For Sci. 1991;48(3):239–51.
- 49. Brulé C, Frey-Klett P, Pierrat J, Courrier S, Gérard F, Lemoine M, et al. Survival in the soil of the ectomycorrhizal fungus Laccaria bicolor and the effects of a mycorrhiza helper Pseudomonas fluorescens. Soil Biol Biochem. 2001;33(12):1683–94.
- 50. Schrey SD, Schellhammer M, Ecke M, Hampp R, Tarkka MT. Mycorrhiza helper bacterium Streptomyces AcH 505 induces differential gene expression in the ectomycorrhizal fungus Amanita muscaria. New Phytol. 2005;168(1):205–16. pmid:16159334
- 51. Splivallo R, Deveau A, Valdez N, Kirchhoff N, Frey‐Klett P, Karlovsky P. Bacteria associated with truffle‐fruiting bodies contribute to truffle aroma. Environ Microbiol. 2015;17(8):2647–60. pmid:24903279
- 52. Danell E, Alström S, Ternström A. Pseudomonas fluorescens in association with fruit bodies of the ectomycorrhizal mushroom Cantharellus cibarius. Mycol Res. 1993;97(9):1148–52.
- 53. Rudakov O. Physiological groups in mycophilic fungi. Mycologia. 1978:150–9.
- 54. Kazanas N. Pathogenic fungi isolated from desiccated mushrooms, seaweed, anchovies and rice sticks imported from the Orient. J Food Prot. 1987;50(11):933–9.
- 55. Williams J, Clarkson JM, Mills PR, Cooper RM. Saprotrophic and mycoparasitic components of aggressiveness of Trichoderma harzianum groups toward the commercial mushroom Agaricus bisporus. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2003;69(7):4192–9. pmid:12839799
- 56. Choi I-Y, Choi J-N, Sharma PK, Lee W-H. Isolation and identification of mushroom pathogens from Agrocybe aegerita. Mycobiology. 2010;38(4):310–5. pmid:23956671
- 57. Brabcová V, Nováková M, Davidová A, Baldrian P. Dead fungal mycelium in forest soil represents a decomposition hotspot and a habitat for a specific microbial community. New Phytol. 2016;210:1369–81. pmid:26832073
- 58. Pavić A, Stanković S, Saljnikov E, Krüger D, Buscot F, Tarkka M, et al. Actinobacteria may influence white truffle (Tuber magnatum Pico) nutrition, ascocarp degradation and interactions with other soil fungi. Fungal Ecol. 2013;6(6):527–38.
- 59.
Kredics L, Garcia Jimenez L, Naeimi S, Czifra D, Urbán P, Manczinger L, et al. A challenge to mushroom growers: the green mould disease of cultivated champignons. In: Méndez-Vilas A, editor. Current research, technology and education topics in applied microbiology and microbial biotechnology. 1. Badajoz, Spain: Formatex Research Center; 2010. p. 295–305.
- 60.
Nagy A, Manczinger L, Tombácz D, Hatvani L, Gyõrfi J, Antal Z, et al. Biological control of oyster mushroom green mould disease by antagonistic Bacillus species. In: Pertot I, Elad Y, Gessler C, Cini A, editors. Biological Control of Fungal and Bacterial Plant Pathogens. 78. France: IOBC-WPRS Bulletin; 2012. p. 289–93.
- 61. You Y-H, Yoon H-J, Woo J-R, Rim S-O, Lee J-H, Kong W-S, et al. Diversity of Endophytic Fungi Isolated from the Rootlet of Pinus densiflora Colonized by Tricholoma matsutake. Korean J Mycol. 2011;39(3):223–6.
- 62. Song H, Min K. Microfungal flora of Tricholoma matsutake producing and nonproducing sites in the forest of Pinus densiflora. Korean J Mycol. 1991;19(2):109–19.
- 63. Summerbell RC. From Lamarckian fertilizers to fungal castles: recapturing the pre-1985 literature on endophytic and saprotrophic fungi associated with ectomycorrhizal root systems. Stud Mycol. 2005;53:191–256.
- 64. Ogawa M, Kawai M. Studies on the artificial reproduction of Tricholoma matsutake (S. Ito et Imai) Sing., III. Effects of growth promoting natural products on the vegetative growth of T. matsutake. Trans Mycol Soc Japan. 1976;17:492–8.
- 65. Gazzanelli G, Malatesta M, Pianetti A, Baffone W, Stocchi V, Citterio B. Bacteria associated to fruit bodies of the ectomycorrhizal fungus Tuber borchii Vittad. Symbiosis. 1999;26:211–22.
- 66. Tsukamoto T, Murata H, Shirata A. Identification of non-pseudomonad bacteria from fruit bodies of wild agaricales fungi that detoxify tolaasin produced by Pseudomonas tolaasii. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2002;66(10):2201–8. pmid:12450133
- 67. Dahm H, Wrótniak W. Proteolytic and chitinolytic activity of the Pseudomonas isolated from within sporocarps of Cantharellus cibarius. Bull Polish Acad Sci Biol Sci. 2003;3(51):167–74.
- 68. Ordentlich A, Elad Y, Chet I. The role of chitinase of Serratia marcescens in biocontrol of Sclerotium rolfsii. Phytopathology. 1988;78(1):84–8.
- 69. Chen H-B, Kao P-M, Huang H-C, Shieh C-J, Chen C-I, Liu Y-C. Effects of using various bioreactors on chitinolytic enzymes production by Paenibacillus taichungensis. Biochem Eng J. 2010;49(3):337–42.
- 70. Liu G, Wang H, Zhou B, Guo X, Hu X. Compositional analysis and nutritional studies of Tricholoma matsutake collected from Southwest China. J Med Plant Res. 2010;4(12):1222–7.
- 71. Someya N, Nakajima M, Hirayae K, Tadaaki H, Akutsu K. Synergistic antifungal activity of chitinolytic enzymes and prodigiosin produced by biocontrol bacterium, Serratia marcescens strain B2 against gray mold pathogen, Botrytis cinerea. J Gen Plant Pathol. 2001;67(4):312–7.
- 72. Hoster F, Schmitz JE, Daniel R. Enrichment of chitinolytic microorganisms: isolation and characterization of a chitinase exhibiting antifungal activity against phytopathogenic fungi from a novel Streptomyces strain. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2005;66(4):434–42. pmid:15290142
- 73. León M, Yaryura P, Montecchia M, Hernández A, Correa O, Pucheu N, et al. Antifungal activity of selected indigenous Pseudomonas and Bacillus from the soybean rhizosphere. Int J Microbiol. 2009;2009:1–9.
- 74. Rangel-Castro JI, Danell E, Pfeffer PE. A 13C-NMR study of exudation and storage of carbohydrates and amino acids in the ectomycorrhizal edible mushroom Cantharellus cibarius. Mycologia. 2002;94(2):190–9. pmid:21156488
- 75. de Boer W, Folman LB, Summerbell RC, Boddy L. Living in a fungal world: impact of fungi on soil bacterial niche development. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2005;29(4):795–811. pmid:16102603
- 76. Amann RI, Ludwig W, Schleifer K-H. Phylogenetic identification and in situ detection of individual microbial cells without cultivation. Microbiol Rev. 1995;59(1):143–69. pmid:7535888