1,143
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Notes

Experimental Analysis of Interactions Among Saprotrophic Fungi from A Phosphorous-Poor Desert Oasis in the Chihuahuan Desert

, , , ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 410-417 | Received 11 Nov 2019, Accepted 22 Jun 2020, Published online: 13 Jul 2020

Figures & data

Table 1. Information of the analyzed fungi isolated from a water sample collected in an oligotrophic desert oasis (N 26° 50′ 55.2′′, W 102° 08′ 34.8′′).

Figure 1. Fungal growth in test plates (co-cultures) and controls (mono-cultures) on three different culture media, x-axis represents days and y-axis signifies fungal radial growth (cm2). Controls (A, B, and C) and test plates on: PDA (D–F), CP (G–I), and MM (J–L); where D, G, and J show A. niger in co-culture; E, H, and K show Cladosporium sp. in co-culture; F, I, and L show C. micaceus in co-culture.

Figure 1. Fungal growth in test plates (co-cultures) and controls (mono-cultures) on three different culture media, x-axis represents days and y-axis signifies fungal radial growth (cm2). Controls (A, B, and C) and test plates on: PDA (D–F), CP (G–I), and MM (J–L); where D, G, and J show A. niger in co-culture; E, H, and K show Cladosporium sp. in co-culture; F, I, and L show C. micaceus in co-culture.

Figure 2. Culture characteristics during intra- and interspecific microfungal pairwise interactions on different culture media: PDA, CP, and MM. Controls: Aspergillus niger (1, 10, 19), Coprinellus micaceus (2, 11, 20), Cladosporium sp. (3, 12, 21). Interactions: A. niger vs A. niger (4, 13, 22), C. micaceus vs. C. micaceus (5, 14, 23), Cladosporium sp. vs. Cladosporium sp. (6, 15, 24), A. niger vs. Cladosporium sp. (7, 16, 25), A. niger vs. C. micaceus (8, 17, 26), C. micaceus vs Cladosporium sp. (9, 18, 27). Front (a) and back (b) of the petri dish.

Figure 2. Culture characteristics during intra- and interspecific microfungal pairwise interactions on different culture media: PDA, CP, and MM. Controls: Aspergillus niger (1, 10, 19), Coprinellus micaceus (2, 11, 20), Cladosporium sp. (3, 12, 21). Interactions: A. niger vs A. niger (4, 13, 22), C. micaceus vs. C. micaceus (5, 14, 23), Cladosporium sp. vs. Cladosporium sp. (6, 15, 24), A. niger vs. Cladosporium sp. (7, 16, 25), A. niger vs. C. micaceus (8, 17, 26), C. micaceus vs Cladosporium sp. (9, 18, 27). Front (a) and back (b) of the petri dish.

Table 2. Overall antagonism index for each fungal species on the three tested culture media: carbohydrates-rich potato dextrose agar medium (PDA), carbohydrates and amino peptides-rich medium (CP), low-nutrient marine agar medium (MM).

Table 3. Fungal percentage of inhibition index (PII) on the three tested culture media: carbohydrates-rich potato dextrose agar medium (PDA), carbohydrates and amino peptides-rich medium (CP), low-nutrient marine agar medium (MM). Values are presented in the same order as the interacting organisms.

Figure 3. Schematic representation of fungal interactions in co-culture on PDA (A), CP (B), and MM (C), where Aspergillus niger is represented as AS, Cladosporium sp. as CL, and Coprinellus micaceus as CO. Red lines indicate antagonism, black lines neutral interactions, and green lines synergistic interactions. Line width is proportional to the intensity of interactions.

Figure 3. Schematic representation of fungal interactions in co-culture on PDA (A), CP (B), and MM (C), where Aspergillus niger is represented as AS, Cladosporium sp. as CL, and Coprinellus micaceus as CO. Red lines indicate antagonism, black lines neutral interactions, and green lines synergistic interactions. Line width is proportional to the intensity of interactions.
Supplemental material

Supplemental Material

Download MS Excel (45.9 KB)