Premium
Differences in glucosinolate patterns and arbuscular mycorrhizal status of glucosinolate‐containing plant species
Author(s) -
VIERHEILIG H.,
BENNETT R.,
KIDDLE G.,
KALDORF M.,
LUDWIGMÜLLER J.
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
new phytologist
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.742
H-Index - 244
eISSN - 1469-8137
pISSN - 0028-646X
DOI - 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2000.00642.x
Subject(s) - glucosinolate , biology , brassicaceae , glomus , carica , botany , arbuscular mycorrhiza , myrosinase , colonization , mycorrhiza , host (biology) , fungus , symbiosis , brassica , spore , bacteria , microbiology and biotechnology , ecology , genetics
Under defined laboratory conditions it was shown that two glucosinolate‐containing plant species, Tropaeolum majus and Carica papaya , were colonized by arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi, whereas it was not possible to detect AM fungal structures in other glucosinolate‐containing plants (including several Brassicaceae). Benzylglucosinolate was present in all of the T. majus cultivars and in C. papaya it was the major glucosinolate. 2‐Phenylethylglucosinolate was found in most of the non‐host plants tested. Its absence in the AM host plants indicates a possible role for the isothiocyanate produced from its myrosinase‐catalysed hydrolysis as a general AM inhibitory factor in non‐host plants. The results suggest that some of the indole glucosinolates might also be involved in preventing AM formation in some of the species. In all plants tested, both AM hosts and non‐hosts, the glucosinolate pattern was altered after inoculation with one of three different AM fungi ( Glomus mosseae , Glomus intraradices and Gigaspora rosea ), indicating signals between AM fungi and plants even before root colonization. The glucosinolate induction was not specifically dependent on the AM fungus. A time‐course study in T. majus showed that glucosinolate induction was present during all stages of mycorrhizal colonization.