1994
DOI: 10.1016/0168-9452(94)90038-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pisum sativum mutants insensitive to nodulation are also insensitive to invasion in vitro by the mycorrhizal fungus, Gigaspora margarita

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
22
0
1

Year Published

1996
1996
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
3
22
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, root exudates of the non-host mycorrhiza-resistant pea mutant P2 (myc -nod -), in which mycorrhizal colonization is inhibited but appressoria are formed (Duc et al, 1989), did not have any inhibitory effects on G mosseae hyphal growth as compared to those from the compatible pea genotypes. This lack of fungitoxic effects in root exudates of non-host roots is in good agreement with results obtained by Bécard and Piché (1990), Giovannetti et al (1993a) and Balaji et al (1994) using the non-host beet and mycorrhizaresistant mutant pea genotypes.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…Interestingly, root exudates of the non-host mycorrhiza-resistant pea mutant P2 (myc -nod -), in which mycorrhizal colonization is inhibited but appressoria are formed (Duc et al, 1989), did not have any inhibitory effects on G mosseae hyphal growth as compared to those from the compatible pea genotypes. This lack of fungitoxic effects in root exudates of non-host roots is in good agreement with results obtained by Bécard and Piché (1990), Giovannetti et al (1993a) and Balaji et al (1994) using the non-host beet and mycorrhizaresistant mutant pea genotypes.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…For example, the myc -1 designation currently comprises mutants with differing phenotypes; these mutants exhibit a colonization block either at the root surface or within the epidermal cell layer (the fungus penetrates the epidermis but cannot exit). The sym8 and sym9 mutants (both considered myc -1 ) exhibit appressoria formation (app + ) but penetration of the epidermis by the AM fungus never occurs (pen -), indicating a root surface block (Balaji et al 1994;Albrecht et al 1998). Although the sym30 mutant (also myc -1 ) is considered a pen -mutant (Gianinazzi-Pearson 1996; Marsh and Schultze 2001), colonization of this mutant occasionally includes short infective hyphae originating from appressoria; however, these abort very quickly (Gollotte et al 1993).…”
Section: Location Of Mutant Defects On a Developmental Scalementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lj-sym4, Ljsym22, and Lj-sym71; Bonfante et al, 2000;Senoo et al, 2000) and pollux (i.e. Lj-sym23 and Lj-sym86; Kistner et al, 2005) mutants in L. japonicus, the dmi1 mutants in M. truncatula (Catoira et al, 2000), and the sym8 mutant in pea (Pisum sativum; Balaji et al, 1994). For the weak alleles of the L. japonicus castor and pollux mutants, the fungus was occasionally able to penetrate the cortical cells and form arbuscules (Senoo et al, 2000;Kistner et al, 2005), but this leaky phenotype was not observed for the knockout lines of rice.…”
Section: Os-castor and Os-pollux Mutant Plants Are Defective In Mycormentioning
confidence: 99%