Premium
Mycorrhizal fungi and parasitic plants: Reply
Author(s) -
Vega Clara,
Arista Montserrat,
Ortiz Pedro L.,
Talavera Salvador
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
american journal of botany
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.218
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1537-2197
pISSN - 0002-9122
DOI - 10.3732/ajb.1100036
Subject(s) - biology , host (biology) , mycorrhizal fungi , botany , association (psychology) , genealogy , ecology , epistemology , history , horticulture , philosophy , inoculation
In a recent study ( American Journal of Botany 97: 730–737), we described the first case of a tripartite association in natural conditions among a holoparasitic plant ( Cytinus ), its host Cistaceae species, and mycorrhizal fungi at an anatomical level. In a letter to the editor, Brundrett ( American Journal of Botany 98: 595–596) commented on our manuscript and questioned our conclusions, arguing that they are not adequately supported by the data. We reject this point of view and believe that the controversy has arisen because of the parasitic way of life of Cytinus . We maintain and demonstrate that there is enough evidence in the data that we presented to confirm the existence of mycorrhizal associations in the Cytinus –Cistaceae complex, supporting the functionality of the tripartite association. Most holoparasitic plants have been considered as nonmycorrhizal. However, it is not advisable to be categorical in drawing conclusions about the mycorrhizal status of a group of plants that has not been fully studied.