Abstract
Non-mycorrhizal fungal root endophytes can be found in all natural and cultivated ecosystems, but little is known about their impact on plant performance. The impact of three mitosporic dark septate endophytes (DSE48, DSE49 and Leptodontidium orchidicola) on tomato plant characteristics was studied. Their effects on root and shoot growth, their influence on fruit yield and fruit quality parameters and their ability to diminish the impact of the pathogen Verticillium dahliae were investigated. While shoot biomass of young plants was enhanced between 10% and 20% by the endophytes DSE48 and L. orchidicola in one of two experiments and by DSE49 in both experiments, vegetative growth parameters of 24-week-old plants were not affected except a reproducible increase of root diameter by the isolate DSE49. Concerning fruit yield and quality, L. orchidicola could double the biomass of tomatoes and increased glucose content by 17%, but this was dependent on date of harvest and on root colonisation density. Additionally, the endophytes DSE49 and L. orchidicola decreased the negative effect of V. dahliae on tomato, but only at a low dosage of the pathogen. This indicates that the three dark septate endophytes can have a significant impact on tomato characters, but that the effects are only obvious at early stages of vegetative and generative development and currently too inconsistent to recommend the application of these DSEs in horticultural practice.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Cultivation of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) has been worldwide increasing because of the variety of cultivars with optimum growth under different conditions and due to the properties of its edible fruit which is an important source of carotenoids, flavonoids, vitamins and minerals (Guil-Guerrero and Rebolloso-Fuentes 2009). However, fungal pathogens are responsible for economically important crop losses (e.g. Fradin and Thomma 2006). The pathogens are mainly controlled by application of fungicides, but the high input of fungicides has negative effects on the environment (Soares and Porto 2009) and leads to resistance of the pathogens (Stammler et al. 2006). Also, the increasing demand of consumers for food with less pesticide residue contamination stimulates the use of alternative control methods. The use of tomato-resistant cultivars is the best method in controlling such diseases, but the occurrence of new races of pathogens has overcome the resistance (e.g. Parlevliet 2002). This circumstance has stimulated the research in alternatives to combat fungal pathogens by biocontrol agents with abilities to suppress diseases caused by soil-borne pathogens (e.g. Whipps 2001; Alabouvette et al. 2009).
Although suppression effects of biocontrol agents can be demonstrated under controlled conditions, less candidates are available for application in the field due to lack in effectiveness (Ojiambo and Scherm 2006). The complex interaction in the rhizosphere could be one reason affecting the success of biological agents, because they are not able to compete efficiently with other microorganisms in this environment (Conn and Franco 2004). Due to their colonisation capacity and permanence in the plant, indigenous endophytes, which live within host-plant tissues without causing any visible symptoms of disease (Wilson 1995) could posses an advantage over introduced agents and would be therefore much more effective (Hoitink and Boehm 1999; Conn and Franco 2004). Root fungal endophytes form symbiotic associations with a very wide range of plant species showing a high phylogenetic diversity and possess multiple functions (Rodriguez et al. 2009). The plant–fungus genotype and physiology combination determine the outcome of this symbioses varying from parasitism to mutualism (Redman et al. 2001; Schulz and Boyle 2005; Kogel et al. 2006).
Despite variable and complex interactions, fungal endophytes have been related to plant growth, fitness and stress responses. This has been shown many times and in a broad variation of plant–fungal combinations for mycorrhizal fungi such as arbuscular mycorrhizas (phylum Glomeromycota), for fungi belong to the order Sebacinales (phylum Basidiomycota) which includes the root endophyte Piriformospora indica (Weiss et al. 2004; Varma et al. 1999) and for endophytes of the phylum Ascomycota as Trichoderma species (Harman et al. 2004) and dark septate endophytes (DSE) (Jumpponen et al. 1998). DSE showed no impact (Jumpponen 2001), but some investigations revealed positive effects on plant growth and yield (Shivanna et al. 1994; Wu and Guo 2008) and on nutrient uptake (Jumpponen et al. 1998; Upson et al. 2009). Recently, it was shown for one DSE that it enhanced not only root development and plant biomass of a Chinese medicinal plant, but also increased the level of the flavonoid rutin (Wu et al. 2010).
In order to enlarge the number of indigenous putative biological agents, 51 isolates from tomato roots were screened and 14 were analysed in more detail concerning their taxonomic position and their in vitro colonisation ability (Andrade-Linares et al. unpublished). Based on pot culture experiments under green house conditions (Andrade-Linares et al. 2011), three DSEs were selected for further analysis. Phylogenetic analysis of the internal transcribed spacer regions of rDNA and detailed morphological characterization indicated that DSE48 (AM944359) and DSE49 (AM944355) are unknown ascomycetous fungi belonging to the Pleosporales, while DSE135 (AM944358) represents a new Leptodontidium orchidicola strain (Andrade-Linares et al. unpublished). In the present study, the effects of these three endophytes were further evaluated. Six experiments were carried out to analyse (1) their impact on vegetative tomato growth characters in young and older plants, (2) their capacity to protect tomatoes against the pathogen Verticillium dahliae in order to proof their suitability to be used as biological agents and, (3) their influence on the yield of tomato fruits and their quality concerning taste related compounds such as sugars and titratable acids as well as health promoting carotenoids.
Materials and methods
Experimental design
To investigate the disease suppression effect of the three endophytes, four experiments (A–D) with tomato plants (cv. Hildares F1, Hild Samen GmbH, Marbach, Germany) artificially infested with V. dahliae (see below) were carried out in the greenhouse in Großbeeren (52°N, 13°E). Experiment A and B were also used to show the impact of the endophytes on vegetative growth of young plants. Tomato seeds were disinfected with 70% ethanol for 5 min and subsequently two times with 3.5% NaOCl for 15 min. After each disinfection step, the seeds were washed with sterile water. Seeds were pre-germinated on 0.8% water agar at 24°C to select homogenous and not contaminated plants for the experiments. The tomato seedlings were transplanted into pots (1 L) at 1–2 leaf stage and inoculated with the endophytes (see below). The pots were filled with a substrate based on peat (Fruhstorfer Erde Typ P; Archut, Vechta, Germany) chemical analysis (mg per 100 g: N = 75, P = 75, K = 125; pH 5.9) in experiments A and B or with a sterilised mixture of this substrate and quartz sand (EN12620:EN1339; Euroquarz, Dorsten, Germany) at a 1:1 ratio (v/v) in experiment C and D. The substrate was sterilised at 80°C during 3 days. The plants were further cultivated under greenhouse conditions (Table 1). Each treatment consisted of twice three replicates with six plants each (n = 36; experiment A and B) or twice three replicates with four plants each (n = 24; experiment C and D) arranged in a randomised block design. The pots were watered daily to maintain the substrate moisture and twice a week with nutrient solution (De Kreij et al. 1997; EC = 2 dS m−1; mg per L: N (NO3) = 151.4, N (NH4) = 13.5, P = 40.5, K = 251.4; pH 5.5) dependent on the growth stage through the time during the experiments from 40 to 200 ml. Shoot fresh and dry weights of tomato plants were measured and dry matter contents were calculated after a cultivation time of six (experiment A and B) or 7 weeks (experiment C and D). Disease severity caused by V. dahliae was assessed (experiment A–D) on the following scale according to Morgan et al. (1992): 0 = no symptoms, 1 = slight yellowing of leaf, stunting or wilting, 2 = moderate yellowing of leaf, stunting or wilting, 3 = severe yellowing of leaf, stunting or wilting and 4 = leaf death at harvest.
Two experiments (E and F) were carried out under controlled conditions in a climate chamber (York, Mannheim, Germany; 23/20°C, 60/70% relative humidity day/night, 16 h light h 33.7 Mol × m−² × d−1) to assess the impact of the endophytes on vegetative growth of older plants and on fruit yield and quality. Seeds were prepared as mentioned above for experiment A–D, but pre-germination was carried out first in liquid MS medium (Murashige and Skoog 1962) and after 7 days in plant nutrition medium (Shahollari et al. 2007) at 23°C with a photoperiod of 16/8 h (day/night) to improve the root growth and finally the endophyte root colonisation. The 2–3 leaf stage seedlings without any contamination were transplanted into 1.2 L-pots containing sterilised mix of substrate and sand (see above) which was inoculated with the respective endophyte (see below). Each treatment in each experiment included six replicates with one plant each (n = 6) arranged in a randomised design. Watering of plants and the nutrient application were done as described above. The plants were cultivated in the climate chamber until flowering and then transferred to the greenhouse (Table 1). Fresh and dry weights of shoots and roots were measured and dry matter content were calculated 22 weeks after endophyte inoculation. Additionally, root length and diameter were estimated with a root scanner (Perfection V700 Photo; Epson, Meerbusch, Germany).
Preparing of the endophyte inoculum and inoculation
Each dark septate endophyte isolate was grown in a 300-ml Erlenmeyer flask with 150 ml liquid complete medium (Pontecorvo et al. 1953) for 3–4 weeks at 25°C and 100 rpm agitation. Fresh mycelium was filtered and washed with sterile distilled water until the liquid became clear to avoid any carryover of medium into the inoculum. The fresh mycelium was weighted and part of it was mixed with sterile tap water by a blender (Model D72, Moulinex, Leipzig, Germany) for 1 min at minimal speed.
Number of propagules of the endophytes was estimated by a Thoma chamber and their viability was checked by plating on potato dextrose agar (PDA; VWR, Berlin, Germany). For inoculation, the suspensions were adjusted with sterile tap water to a concentration corresponding to each experiment. For experiments A–D, 36 tomato plants were treated with each endophyte, respectively, by root dipping (5 × 105 cfu/ml) at 1–2 leaf stage before planting, the control plants (36 plants) were mock-inoculated with tap water. The substrate was also drenched with fresh mycelium suspension of the endophytes (1% w/v). For experiment E and F, the pots were filled with a substrate sand mixture inoculated with fresh mycelium suspension of the endophytes (1% w/v), the control plants were mock inoculated in substrate with tap water.
Inoculation of the pathogen V. dahliae
The isolate V. dahliae (accession number GU060637) was grown in 150 ml sucrose sodium nitrate liquid medium (Sinha and Wood 1968) at 28°C and 100 rpm for 1 week, transferred to 200 ml fresh medium and further incubated for 2 weeks. The culture was thereafter mixed by a blender (Model D72, Moulinex, Leipzig, Germany) for 40 s at minimal speed. Number of conidia was estimated by a Thoma chamber and their viability was checked by plating on PDA (VWR, Berlin, Germany). Two weeks after endophyte treatment, half of the tomato plants for each treatment including the control without endophyte (n = 18 for A and B; n = 12 for C and D) were inoculated at 3–4 leaf stage with the pathogen by drenching with 30 ml conidia suspension (2 × 105 conidia mL−1 in experiment A and B or 7 × 106 conidia mL−1 in experiment C and D). Control plants for V. dahliae were treated with 30 ml of sterile tap water.
Effect on fruit yield and quality
In experiment E and F, fruit harvest was started 15 weeks after inoculation and was carried out twice a week for 7 weeks. Numbers of red-ripe fruits, fresh and dry weights were monitored and results were summarised in three groups (weeks 15–16, weeks 17–18, weeks 19–21). For quality analysis, red-ripe tomatoes harvested 19 and 21 weeks after inoculation from plants of experiments E and F were manually sorted, mixed and marketable fruits were separated from blossom-end rot fruits according to the CBT scale (Anonymous 1992). Fruits of the colour stage 10–11 were selected for quality analysis carrying out a double estimation with three replicates of a mixture of 12 fruits from approximately ten different plants. Carotenoids were analysed according to Krumbein et al. (2006). Briefly, 1 g calcium carbonate, 30 g sodium sulphate and 30 ml acetone were added to 15 g homogenised tomatoes and mixed for 2 min. The extract was filtered under suction and the solid materials were repeatedly extracted with acetone until the resulting filtrate was colourless. Carotenoid composition and content were determined by HPLC using a C-18 reversed-phase column (Lichosphere 100; 5 μm, 250 × 4 mm; Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) with an isocratic eluent of 75% acetonitrile, 15% methanol and 10% methylene chloride. In parallel, 50 g of homogenised samples were frozen for acid and reduced sugar (glucose and fructose) analyses. Titratable acid content was determined by potentiometric titration with 0.1 M NaOH, while sugars were enzymatically determined (Krumbein et al. 2004). All results were referred to 100 g fresh weight.
Microscopy
For confirmation of endophyte colonisation, tomato root fragments were sampled 2 and 3 weeks after inoculation, stained with WGA-AF 488 (Molecular Probes, Karlsruhe, Germany) according to Deshmukh et al. (2006). Three plants per treatment and experiment were randomly selected and samples from different parts of the root system were stained. Fifteen root fragments per sample were mounted on glass slides and analysed with an Axioscop 2 Plus Microscope (Zeiss, Germany). WGA-AF 488 was excited with a 488-nm laser line and detected at 505–540. Quantification of the endophytic colonisation was based on a method for arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (Trouvelot et al. 1986) modified for the root endophyte P. indica (Bütehorn et al. 2000). Colonisation was classified from 0 to 5 representing <1%, between 1% and 10%, between 10% and 50%, between 50% and 90% and >90% of fragment colonised by fungal hyphae. Infection frequency (F) and total colonisation intensity (C) were calculated with F = Ne/Nt × 100 (Ne, number of fragments colonised by the endophyte; Nt, total number of analysed root fragments), and C = (95n 5 + 70n 4 + 30n 3 + 5n 2 + n 1)/Nt (n x, number of fragments in infection class x).
Statistical analyses
The STATISTICA programme version 6.0 (StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA) was used for all analyses. Disease severity was non-parametrically analysed by Kruskal–Wallis test. Tomato growth parameters and fruit yield were analysed by one-way ANOVA and the Fisher’s protected least significant difference (LSD; P = 0.05). Data given as percentages (shoot weight losses after pathogen infection) were arcsin transformed before one-way ANOVA with LSD test (P = 0.05).
Results
The endophyte impact on vegetative plant growth
Tomato plants of two parallel experiments (experiment A and B) were harvested 6 weeks after planting in order to determine the impact of the endophytes DSE48, DSE49 and L. orchidicola on shoot growth of young tomato plants (Table 2). Colonisation of the roots was observed, but not quantified. Shoot fresh weights of DSE48-colonised plants increased by 16% in one experiment, while L. orchidicola-colonised plants showed a 14% higher dry matter content compared to controls in the second experiment. The endophyte DSE49, however, showed a significant effect on young tomato plants in both experiments and enhanced shoot fresh weight by 21% and 11% and dry matter content by 5% and 7%. In contrast, experiment E and F showed that the three endophytes affected neither shoot and root biomasses nor leaf numbers of older plants after 22 weeks of cultivation (Table 3). Only inoculation with DSE48 resulted in lower root lengths in experiment E (21% less relative to controls), but this effect on the root was not evident in experiment F. Differences in both experiments were detected for DSE49. Colonised plants had roots with a 15% and 20% larger diameter than those from the controls.
The endophyte impact on plant–pathogen interaction
In order to analyse if DSE48, DSE49 and L. orchidicola could potentially be used as biocontrol agents, plants colonised or not by the three endophytes for 2 weeks were infected in four experiments with two concentrations (2 × 105 and 7 × 106 conidia mL−1) of the fungal pathogen V. dahliae. Four or 5 weeks after pathogen inoculation, fresh and dry weights of shoots were evaluated, weight losses calculated (Table 4) and disease severity was assessed (Fig. 1). In experiment A, no disease symptoms could be observed and the pathogen showed no effect on plant growth within cultivation time. In experiment B, however, symptoms were obvious and weight losses were above 20% in control plants (plants without any endophyte infected with V. dahliae). Plants colonised by DSE48 behaved similar to controls. In contrast, leaves of plants colonised by DSE49 or by L. orchidicola showed 30% less disease symptoms (Fig. 1) and weight losses were significantly reduced to 14% and 4% for DSE49- and L. orchidicola treatment, respectively (Table 4). In the experiments C and D with the higher pathogen dosage, disease index in controls was similar as before, but weight losses were even higher (between 25% and 30%). Reduction of the symptoms and the weight losses were again observable in plants pre-inoculated with DSE49 and L. orchidicola, but differences were only significant for the decrease in the disease index with DSE49 in one experiment (Fig. 1, experiment D).
The endophyte impact on fruit yield and quality
Fruits from plants inoculated with DSE48, DSE49 and L. orchidicola as well as the control plants were harvested between 15 and 21 weeks after inoculation (six plants per treatment), grouped and three groups were analysed concerning number, total FW and DW of tomatoes (Table 5). Two and 3 weeks after inoculation, root endophytic colonisation was visualised by microscopy. In one experiment, fruit number from plants colonised by L. orchidicola was twice as much as those from controls during the first harvest period and biomasses (FW and DW) consequently were similarly increased (Table 5, experiment E, harvest I). Any significant differences were not evident for the other endophytes and also not for the later two harvest periods. This increase could, however, not be observed in the second experiment, where numbers and biomasses were similar in all treatments at the three harvest periods (Table 5, experiment F). If marketable fruits were analysed separated from fruits with blossom-end rot, results showed significantly higher DW of healthy fruits at the beginning of the harvest (Table 5, experiment E, harvest I) and they were similar for blossom-end rot fruits during the harvest periods in both experiments (data not shown) indicating that none of the endophytes had any influence on this type of disease. All treatments of both experiments except control plants showed colonisation by the inoculated fungus in roots after 3 weeks of inoculation. Some root surface contamination by fungi and bacteria was observed in all treatments including controls (data not shown). In order to find a reason for the difference between the two experiments, root colonisation by the endophyte L. orchidicola was quantified. This showed no significant difference between the experiments concerning the infection frequency (68% and 44%) but total colonisation intensity was significantly higher in root of experiment E (16.7%) than in experiment F (3.4%). Colonisation was not quantified for the other two fungi, because they showed no significant impact on fruit yield and quality.
Fruit quality analysis was carried out with mixed samples of red-ripe tomatoes from two dates of the harvest (12 fruits from ten plants per treatment). Amount of titratable acids, reducing sugars and carotenoids (lycopene and ß-carotene) were measured (Table 6). Significant differences, however, could not be detected among the treatments respect to the control plants, except at the first harvest, where glucose levels were 17% higher in fruits from plants colonised by L. orchidicola than in those from control plants.
Discussion
DSEs are in some cases able to form mutualistic interactions with plants (Jumpponen 2001). We therefore analysed the impact of three newly isolated DSEs on their natural host tomato concerning (1) vegetative growth, (2) interaction with a pathogen and (3) fruit yield and quality.
When plants were harvested 6 weeks after inoculation, one of the dark septate endophytes (DSE49) showed a reproducible impact on shoot development of tomato plants, in both experiments. The effects of the other two fungi (DSE48 and L. orchidicola) on young plants seem to depend on the environmental conditions, since these were only obvious in one of the two experiments. The effects on the young plants, however, disappeared after 22 weeks of cultivation. These differences in vegetative plant growth promotion were probably not a result of inoculation and growth conditions, but depend very likely more on plant growth stage of harvest. This indicates that the beneficial effect of the endophytes seems to be only transient up to the stage around inflorescence emergence (about 7 weeks) and can be compensated in controls at later times of development. Most studies on DSE–plant interactions could not show positive effects (Jumpponen 2001). Plant growth promotion could be, however, observed in some investigations, but either plants were relatively young (Wu et al. 2010) and/or effects were dependent on the host (Fernando and Currah 1996) or on environmental conditions like elevated CO2 concentrations (Alberton et al. 2010) or N fertilisation (Jumpponen et al. 1998; Upson et al. 2009). Another factor influencing the outcome of the interaction was the experimental design. Results were different under sterile conditions compared to those obtained in open pot cultures (reviewed in Jumpponen and Trappe 1998). Also in the present study, plants were grown in open pots and showed additional microorganisms on their root surfaces. This could have affected the interaction between the three endophytes and tomato plants, but the conditions are more close to the current horticultural practice than sterile cultures. No studies on the influence of DSE on plant performance at different stages have been conducted, but a similar phenomenon was observed for the endophyte P. indica; colonised barley plants showed significantly higher shoot lengths at 9 and 12 weeks after inoculation, but shoots were not taller at the end of the vegetation period (Achatz et al. 2010). Also, experiments in tomato with P. indica showed that endophyte-inoculated plants increased shoot fresh weights 5–8 weeks after inoculation (Fakhro et al. 2010), but such differences disappeared at later harvests (Andrade-Linares et al. 2010).
Acceleration of early processes of plant development can be caused by several characteristics of root endophytic fungi. It has been shown that such organisms directly produce auxin-like substances (Sirrenberg et al. 2007; Vinale et al. 2008) or indirectly influence hormone signal transduction and hormone-regulated gene expression (Barazani et al. 2007; Vadassery et al. 2008; Schäfer et al. 2009). The growth of younger plants might be more sensitive for such changes and also the observed modifications in root architecture in the older plants could be caused by phytohormones. Root length was reduced in one experiment by DSE48 and root diameter enhanced in both experiments by DSE49 (Table 3). As auxin inhibitors increase root length and reduce root diameter (Zhao and Hasenstein 2009), it will be interesting to analyse if these DSEs also produce auxin-like substances like other fungal root endophytes do (see above).
Isolates of DSEs have been shown to reduce disease symptoms in Chinese cabbage and eggplant after challenge with Verticillium pathogens (Narisawa et al. 2002; 2004). It was therefore analysed in four experiments (A–D), if the three DSEs are able to reduce the symptoms in tomato caused by V. dahliae. At low concentrations (105 conidia mL−1) of the pathogen, weight loss percentage and yellowing of the leaves were only observed in experiment B by two of the endophytes (DSE49 and L. orchidicola; Table 4 and Fig. 1). At higher pathogen concentrations (107 conidia mL−1) symptoms were in the same range, but only DSE49 could reduce the disease index in one out of two experiments. These differences could be based on the variations in the conditions in the four experiments.
Disease symptoms were developed when inoculum density was high (experiment C and D) or at reduced density only, if humidity was low enough (experiment B in Table 1). Stem resistance of water flow is increased in infected plants because of the vessels occluded by the pathogen and it is reflected in lower relative water content in wilted leaves (Pegg and Brady 2002). This phenomenon could be enhanced by the decreased humidity in experiment B, although inoculum density was also low (Table 1). Another factor could be the high radiation in experiment A compared to the other three experiments (Table 1). Leaf photosynthesis is greatly impaired by V. dahliae infection, with lower net assimilation rates (Pegg and Brady 2002) and at the high radiation in experiment A might had compensated this effect. If disease symptoms were detectable, reduction of these symptoms by the two DSEs was only clear in one out of three experiments. One might argue that this is due to the higher inoculum density in experiment C and D. The concentration of the pathogen in the plant must not be correlated with the severity of the symptoms (Veronese et al. 2003) but it could have affected the plant protection ability of DSE49 and L. orchidicola.
Another variation between experiments B on the one site and C or D on the other is the use of pure substrate versus substrate mixed with sand. In spite of the same mineral nutrient solution in all experiments, the amount of organic compounds is higher in the pure substrate. This could be important for the plant–DSE interaction and DSE ability to induce resistance. DSEs can facilitate the uptake of organic nitrogen, phosphate, sulphur compounds and of carbon (reviewed in Mandyam and Jumpponen 2005) and positive growth promotion by different DSEs was only observed when plants were grown in substrate amended with organic nitrogen (Upson et al. 2009). It is interesting to note that plant growth promotion at early stages was much lower in experiment C and D than in A and B (data not shown) also indicating the role of the substrate for the functioning of the DSEs. The mechanism by which DSE49 and L. orchidicola protect the tomato plants and whether this involves plant tolerance or resistance remains to be studied. Antagonistic activity against V. dahliae was evaluated for these isolates, but no growth inhibition or mycoparasitism were observed (data not shown). This might indicate that the induction of plant defence called priming (Conrath et al. 2006) could be the mechanism behind the observed phenomenon. Priming is based on the activity of particular plant hormones like jasmonate, ethylene or salicylic acid (Gutjahr and Paszkowski 2009; Shoresh et al. 2010). If the level of phytohormones is affected by the DSEs remains to be shown.
Two weeks after first flowering, fruit numbers were increased in experiment E by a factor of 3.5 in plants colonised by L. orchidicola and 1.75 and 2.2 for DSE48- and DSE49-inoculated plants. All these differences could not be observed at later dates of harvest (Table 5). As already discussed for the vegetative growth, it seems that inoculated plants reach earlier the generative phase of development and therefore show higher numbers of flowers and fruits in the beginning. At later phases, control plants catch up and develop at the end similar numbers of generative organs. This phenomenon seemed to be related to the intensity of endophytic colonisation which was lower in experiment B where no effect on fruit biomasses was observable. Low temperature of (18°C/15°C day/night) at the beginning of the experiment was monitored in the first 5 weeks after inoculation in the climate chamber for experiment F. This might have directly affected fungal growth rates or indirectly the colonisation process due to influences on plant physiology at low temperatures mirrored by the increased dry matter of the plants compared to those in experiment E (Table 3). Other differences of plants growing at lower temperature are higher starch accumulation and lower rate of net photosynthesis (Venema et al. 1999) or increased abcisic acid contents (Daie and Campbell 1981) which all might influence the colonisation capacity of the fungal endophytes.
Quality analyses were carried out with fruits mixed from both experiments. This mode of sampling was possible, because deviations among the values obtained were low (Table 6). Measuring the contents of titratable acids, reducing sugars and carotenoids (lycopene and ß-carotene) showed only one significant effect by endophytic colonisation: glucose concentrations were increased in tomatoes from plants where the roots were colonised by L. orchidicola (Table 6). As influence on vegetative growth and on the development of generative organs, this could be however only observed at the early date. Glucose amounts depend among others on enzymatic activity of the acid invertase (e.g. Johnson et al. 1988) and this could be also regulated by phytohormones. High levels of gibberellic acid, auxins and abscisic acid induce the expression of the corresponding genes (Roitsch et al. 2003). Hence, differences between inoculated and control plants could be controlled by plant hormones which play an integral role not only in controlling growth and development but also in regulating the sink strength (Roitsch et al. 2003). One could speculate that glucose levels in fruits are enhanced during certain stages in plants colonised by L. orchidicola due to systemic induction of biosynthesis of these phytohormones.
Conclusion
Tomato plants grown under horticultural conditions and colonised by the dark septate endophytes DSE48, DSE49 and L. orchidicola showed some positive responses. The ability of DSEs to confer benefits to the plants seems, however, to be restricted to the early stages of vegetative or generative development. This does not lead to an overall increased yield or fruit quality but yield of the first harvest was increased by L. orchidicola. Also, a plant-protective effect could be only observed under particular conditions. Therefore, the effects of the fungal endophytes depended on the cultivation management employed in the present experiments. Under natural conditions, these slight differences in rate of development and disease resistance might, however, give DSE-colonised plants an advantage which finally leads to a better ecological performance. If this could be used in horticulture under detrimental conditions like drought, low plant-available nutrients or natural occurring pathogens has to be further investigated.
References
Achatz B, von Rüden S, Andrade D, Neumann E, Pons-Kühnemann J, Kogel K-H, Franken P, Waller F (2010) Root colonization by Piriformospora indica enhances grain yield in barley under diverse nutrient regimes by accelerating plant development. Plant Soil 333:59–70
Alabouvette C, Olivain C, Migheli Q, Steinberg C (2009) Microbiological control of soil-borne phytopathogenic fungi with special emphasis on wilt-inducing Fusarium oxysporum. New Phytol 184:529–544
Alberton O, Kuyper TW, Summerbell RC (2010) Dark septate root endophytic fungi increase growth of Scots pine seedlings under elevated CO2 through enhanced nitrogen use efficiency. Plant Soil 328:459–470
Andrade-Linares DR, Grosch R, Franken P (2011) Screening of tomato endophytic fungi for potential biological agents. IOBC/WPRS Bulletin
Anonymous (1992) Kleur-stadia tomaten. Central Bureau van de Tuibouwveilingen in Nederland, Gouda, The Netherlands
Barazani O, Von Dahl CC, Baldwin IT (2007) Sebacina vermifera promotes the growth and fitness of Nicotiana attenuata by inhibiting ethylene signaling. Plant Physiol 144:1223–1232
Bütehorn B, Rhody D, Franken P (2000) Isolation and characterisation of Pitef1 encoding the translation elongation factor EF-1alpha of the root endophyte Piriformospora indica. Plant Biol 2:687–692
Conn VM, Franco CMM (2004) Effect of microbial inoculants on the indigenous actinobacterial endophyte population in the roots of wheat as determined by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism. Appl Environ Microbiol 70:6407–6413
Conrath U, Beckers GJM, Flors V, Garcia-Agustin P, Jakab G, Mauch F, Newman MA, Pieterse CMJ, Poinssot B, Pozo MJ, Pugin A, Schaffrath U, Ton J, Wendehenne D, Zimmerli L, Mauch-Mani B (2006) Priming: getting ready for battle. Mol Plant-Microb Interact 19:1062–1071
Daie J, Campbell WF (1981) Response of tomato plants to stressful temperatures. Plant Physiol 67:26–29
De Kreij C, Voogt W, van den Bos AL, Baas R (1997) Voedingsoplossingen voor de teelt van tomaat in gesloten teeltsystemen. Brochure VG Tomaat, The Netherlands
Deshmukh S, Hueckelhoven R, Schaefer P, Imani J, Sharma M, Weiss M, Waller F, Kogel KH (2006) The root endophytic fungus Piriformospora indica requires host cell death for proliferation during mutualistic symbiosis with barley. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:18450–18457
Fakhro A, Andrade-Linares DR, von Bargen S, Bandte M, Buttner C, Grosch R, Schwarz D, Franken P (2010) Impact of Piriformospora indica on tomato growth and on interaction with fungal and viral pathogens. Mycorrhiza 20:191–200
Fernando AA, Currah RS (1996) A comparative study of the effects of the root endophytes Leptodontidium orchidicola and Phialocephala fortinii (Fungi Imperfecti) on the growth of some subalpine plants in culture. Can J Bot 74:1071–1078
Fradin EF, Thomma BPHJ (2006) Physiology and molecular aspects of Verticillium wilt diseases caused by V. dahliae and V. albo-atrum. Mol Plant Physiol 7:71–86
Guil-Guerrero JL, Rebolloso-Fuentes MM (2009) Nutrient composition and antioxidant activity of eight tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) varieties. J Food Compos Anal 22:123–129
Gutjahr C, Paszkowski U (2009) Weights in the balance: jasmonic acid and salicylic acid signaling in root-biotroph interactions. Mol Plant-Microb Interact 22:763–772
Harman GE, Howell CR, Viterbo A, Chet I, Lorito M (2004) Trichoderma species—opportunistic, avirulent plant symbionts. Nat Rev Microbiol 2:43–56
Hoitink HAJ, Boehm MJ (1999) Biocontrol within the context of soil microbial communities: a substrate-dependent phenomenon. Annu Rev Phytopathol 37:427–446
Johnson C, Hall JL, Ho LC (1988) Pathways of uptake and accumulation of sugars in tomato fruit. Ann Bot 61:593–603
Jumpponen A (2001) Dark septate endophytes—are they mycorrhizal? Mycorrhiza 11:207–211
Jumpponen A, Trappe JM (1998) Performance of Pinus contorta inoculated with two strains of root endophytic fungus, Phialocephala fortinii: effects of synthesis system and glucose concentration. Can J Bot 76:1205–1213
Jumpponen A, Mattson KG, Trappe JM (1998) Mycorrhizal functioning of Phialocephala fortinii with Pinus contorta on glacier forefront soil: interactions with soil nitrogen and organic matter. Mycorrhiza 7:261–265
Kogel KH, Franken P, Hückelhoven R (2006) Endophyte or parasite—what decides? Curr Opin Plant Biol 9:358–363
Krumbein A, Peters P, Brückner B (2004) Flavour compounds and a quantitative descriptive analysis of tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) of different cultivars in short-term storage. Postharvest Biol Technol 32:15–28
Krumbein A, Schwarz D, Kläring HP (2006) Effects of environmental factors on carotenoid content in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) grown in a greenhouse. J Appl Bot Food Qual 80:160–164
Mandyam K, Jumpponen A (2005) Seeking the elusive function of the root-colonising dark septate endophytic fungi. Stud Mycol 56(1):173–189
Morgan DP, Epstein L, Ferguson L (1992) Verticillium wilt resistance in pistachio rootstock cultivars—assays and an assessment of 2 interspecific hybrids. Plant Dis 76:310–313
Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bio-assays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–479
Narisawa K, Kawamata H, Currah RS, Hashiba T (2002) Suppression of Verticillium wilt in eggplant by some fungal root endophytes. Eur J Plant Pathol 108:103–109
Narisawa K, Usuki F, Hashiba T (2004) Control of Verticillium yellows in chinese cabbage by the dark septate endophytic fungus LtVB3. Phytopathology 94:412–418
Ojiambo PS, Scherm H (2006) Biological and application-oriented factors influencing plant disease suppression by biological control: a meta-analytical review. Phytopathology 96:1168–1174
Parlevliet JE (2002) Durability of resistance against fungal, bacterial and viral pathogens; present situation. Euphytica 124:147–156
Pegg G, Brady B (2002) Verticillium wilts. Cabi Publishing, Oxford
Pontecorvo G, Roper JA, Hemmons LM, Macdonald KD, Bufton AWJ (1953) The genetics of Aspergillus nidulans. Adv Genet 5:141–238
Redman RS, Dunigan DD, Rodriguez RJ (2001) Fungal symbiosis from mutualism to parasitism: who controls the outcome, host or invader? New Phytol 151:705–716
Rodriguez R, White J, Arnold A, Redman R (2009) Fungal endophytes: diversity and functional roles. New Phytol 182:314–330
Roitsch T, Balibrea ME, Hofmann M, Proels R, Sinha AK (2003) Extracellular invertase: key metabolic enzyme and PR protein. J Exp Bot 54:513–524
Schäfer P, Pfiffi S, Voll LM, Zajic D, Chandler PM, Waller F, Scholz U, Pons-Kuhnemann J, Sonnewald S, Sonnewald U, Kogel KH (2009) Manipulation of plant innate immunity and gibberellin as factor of compatibility in the mutualistic association of barley roots with Piriformospora indica. Plant J 59:461–474
Schulz B, Boyle C (2005) The endophytic continuum. Mycol Res 109:661–686
Shahollari B, Vadassery J, Varma A, Oelmuller R (2007) A leucine-rich repeat protein is required for growth promotion and enhanced seed production mediated by the endophytic fungus Piriformospora indica in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 50:1–13
Shivanna MB, Meera MS, Hyakumachi M (1994) Sterile fungi from Zoysiagrass rhizosphere as plant-growth promoters in spring wheat. Can J Microbiol 40:637–644
Shoresh M, Harman GE, Mastouri F (2010) Induced systemic resistance and plant responses to fungal biocontrol agents. Annu Rev Phytopathol 48:1–23
Sinha AK, Wood RKS (1968) Resistance to vascular wilt parasites. Neth J Plant Pathol 74:149–156
Sirrenberg A, Goebel C, Grond S, Czempinski N, Ratzinger A, Karlovsky P, Santos P, Feussner I, Pawlowski K (2007) Piriformospora indica affects plant growth by auxin production. Physiol Plant 131:581–589
Soares WL, Porto MFD (2009) Estimating the social cost of pesticide use: an assessment from acute poisoning in Brazil. Ecol Econ 68:2721–2728
Stammler G, Strobel D, Semar M, Klappach K (2006) Diagnostics of fungicide resistance and relevance of laboratory data for the field. Asp Appl Biol 78:29–36
Trouvelot A, Kough JL, Gianinazzi-Pearson V (1986) Mesure du taux de mycorhization VA d’un système radiculaire. Recherche des méthodes d'estimation ayant une signification fonctionnelle. In: Gianinazzi-Pearson V, Gianinazzi S (eds) The mycorrhizae: physiology and genetic. INRA Presse, Paris, pp 217–221
Upson R, Read DJ, Newsham KK (2009) Nitrogen form influences the response of Deschampsia antarctica to dark septate root endophytes. Mycorrhiza 20:1–11
Vadassery J, Ritter C, Venus Y, Camehl I, Varma A, Shahollari B, Novak O, Strnad M, Ludwig-Muller J, Oelmuller R (2008) The role of auxins and cytokinins in the mutualistic interaction between Arabidopsis and Piriformospora indica. Mol Plant-Microb Interact 21:1371–1383
Varma A, Verma S, Sudha SN, Butehorn B, Franken P (1999) Piriformospora indica, a cultivable plant-growth-promoting root endophyte. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:2741–2744
Venema JH, Posthumus F, van Hasselt PR (1999) Impact of suboptimal temperature on growth, photosynthesis, leaf pigments and carbohydrates of domestic and high-altitude wild Lycopersicon species. J Plant Physiol 155:711–718
Veronese P, Narasimhan ML, Stevenson RA, Zhu JK, Weller SC, Subbarao KV, Bressan RA (2003) Identification of a locus controlling Verticillium disease symptom response in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 35:574–587
Vinale F, Sivasithamparam K, Ghisalberti EL, Marra R, Barbetti MJ, Li H, Woo SL, Lorito M (2008) A novel role for Trichoderma secondary metabolites in the interactions with plants. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol 72:80–86
Weiss M, Selosse MA, Rexer KH, Urban A, Oberwinkler F (2004) Sebacinales: a hitherto overlooked cosm of heterobasidiomycetes with a broad mycorrhizal potential. Mycol Res 108:1003–1010
Whipps JM (2001) Microbial interactions and biocontrol in the rhizosphere. J Exp Bot 52:487–511
Wilson D (1995) Endophyte—the evolution of a term, and clarification of its use and definition. Oikos 73:274–276
Wu LQ, Guo SX (2008) Interaction between an isolate of dark-septate fungi and its host plant Saussurea involucrata. Mycorrhiza 18:79–85
Wu LQ, Lv YL, Meng ZX, Chen J, Guo SX (2010) The promoting role of an isolate of dark-septate fungus on its host plant Saussurea involucrata Kar. et Kir. Mycorrhiza 20:127–135
Zhao YC, Hasenstein KH (2009) Primary root growth regulation: the role of auxin and ethylene antagonists. J Plant Growth Regul 28:309–320
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Ministries of Consumer Protection, Food and Agriculture of the Federal Republic of Germany, of the Land Brandenburg and of the Land Thüringen. DR Andrade-Linares was supported by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD). We are grateful for technical assistance to Mrs. Fandrey and Mrs. Widiger (pathosystem and climate chambers experiments), Mrs. Rathenow, Mrs. Hasse, Mrs. Stefanowski, Mrs. Marten (cultivation and harvest of plants) and Mrs. Jankowsky and Mrs. Platalla (quality analysis). The V. dahliae strain was kindly provided by Valerie Grimault (GEVES, Angers, France).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Andrade-Linares, D.R., Grosch, R., Restrepo, S. et al. Effects of dark septate endophytes on tomato plant performance. Mycorrhiza 21, 413–422 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00572-010-0351-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00572-010-0351-1