Paper · 1999 · Annales des Sciences Forestières

Effect of inoculation and substrate disinfection method on rooting and ectomycorrhiza formation of Douglas fir cuttings

Javier Parladé; Joan Pera; Isabel F. Álvarez; et al.

10
claims
21
verbatim quotes
12
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Ectomycorrhizal inoculation techniques were applied to Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb) Franco) cuttings, dur- ing the rooting phase, to determine the effect of inoculation on rooting and mycorrhizal colonization. Two experiments were con- ducted: 1) an inoculation experiment, established at three different locations with the same treatments, to determine the effect of inoc- ulation with Laccaria bicolor, Melanogaster ambiguus and Rhizopogon subareolatus; and 2) a local factorial experiment to determine the effect of fungal inoculation, substrate disinfection methods, and their possible interactions. At Peyrat-le-Chteau and Champenoux (France), there were no differences in rooting due to the inoculation treatment. At Cabrils (Spain), the cuttings inoculated with L. bicol- or and R. subareolatus rooted significantly better than non-inoculated cuttings. Vegetative inoculum of L. bicolor and spores of R. subareolatus were effective in forming ectomycorrhizas in the three locations, whereas spores of M. ambiguus were effective only at Cabrils. Substrate disinfection with methyl bromide significantly decreased the percentage of rooted cuttings compared to steam-dis- infected substrate. Methyl bromide application also lowered the percentage of mycorrhizal cuttings after inoculation with L. bicolor and R. subareolatus. The disinfection method did not alter significantly the colonization level among the mycorrhizal plants.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Inoculation did not alter rooting at two French sites.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Treatment
inoculation treatmente0
Outcome
rootinge0
Direction
no differencese0
Setting
Peyrat-le-Chteau and Champenoux (France)e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At Peyrat-le-Chteau and Champenoux (France), there were no differences in rooting due to the inoculation treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 617–731 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

L. bicolor inoculation improved rooting at Cabrils.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Treatment
inoculated with L. bicol- ore0
Interactor
L. bicol- ore0symbiont
Outcome
rootede0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
non-inoculated cuttingse0
Setting
Cabrils (Spain)e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At Cabrils (Spain), the cuttings inoculated with L. bicol- or and R. subareolatus rooted significantly better than non-inoculated cuttings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 733–871 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

R. subareolatus inoculation improved rooting at Cabrils.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Treatment
inoculated with L. bicol- or and R. subareolatuse0
Interactor
R. subareolatusRhizopogon subareolatuse0symbiont
Outcome
rootede0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
non-inoculated cuttingse0
Setting
Cabrils (Spain)e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At Cabrils (Spain), the cuttings inoculated with L. bicol- or and R. subareolatus rooted significantly better than non-inoculated cuttings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 733–871 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

L. bicolor vegetative inoculum formed ectomycorrhizas at all three locations.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Interactor
L. bicolorLaccaria bicolore0symbiont
Outcome
forming ectomycorrhizase0
Setting
three locationse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Laccaria bicolor
Laccaria bicolor · InteractorThis image was created by user Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller) at Mushroom Observer , a source for mycological images. You can contact this user here . · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Vegetative inoculum of L. bicolor and spores of R. subareolatus were effective in forming ectomycorrhizas in the three locations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–1001 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

R. subareolatus spores formed ectomycorrhizas at all three locations.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Interactor
R. subareolatusRhizopogon subareolatuse0symbiont
Outcome
forming ectomycorrhizase0
Setting
three locationse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“spores of R. subareolatus were effective in forming ectomycorrhizas in the three locations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 911–1001 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

M. ambiguus spores formed ectomycorrhizas only at Cabrils.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Interactor
M. ambiguusMelanogaster ambiguuse0symbiont
Outcome
forming ectomycorrhizase1
Setting
Cabrilse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Melanogaster ambiguus
Melanogaster ambiguus · InteractorInger-Lise Fonneland · CC BY 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“spores of M. ambiguus were effective only at Cabrils”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1011–1063 · show in text ↑
e1

“forming ectomycorrhizas”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 955–978 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Methyl bromide disinfection reduced rooting relative to steam disinfection.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Treatment
Substrate disinfection with methyl bromidee0
Outcome
percentage of rooted cuttingse0
Direction
decreasede0
Comparator
steam-dis- infected substratee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Substrate disinfection with methyl bromide significantly decreased the percentage of rooted cuttings compared to steam-dis- infected substrate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1065–1207 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Methyl bromide lowered mycorrhizal cutting percentage after L. bicolor inoculation.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Treatment
Methyl bromide applicatione0
Interactor
L. bicolorLaccaria bicolore0symbiont
Outcome
percentage of mycorrhizal cuttingse0
Direction
lowerede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Laccaria bicolor
Laccaria bicolor · InteractorThis image was created by user Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller) at Mushroom Observer , a source for mycological images. You can contact this user here . · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Methyl bromide application also lowered the percentage of mycorrhizal cuttings after inoculation with L. bicolor and R. subareolatus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1209–1341 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Methyl bromide lowered mycorrhizal cutting percentage after R. subareolatus inoculation.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Treatment
Methyl bromide applicatione0
Interactor
R. subareolatusRhizopogon subareolatuse0symbiont
Outcome
percentage of mycorrhizal cuttingse0
Direction
lowerede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Methyl bromide application also lowered the percentage of mycorrhizal cuttings after inoculation with L. bicolor and R. subareolatus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1209–1341 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Disinfection method did not significantly alter colonization among mycorrhizal plants.

Taxon
Douglas firPseudotsuga menziesiit0
Treatment
disinfection methode0
Outcome
colonization levele0
Direction
did not altere0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pseudotsuga menziesii
Pseudotsuga menziesii · TaxonWalter Siegmund (talk) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The disinfection method did not alter significantly the colonization level among the mycorrhizal plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1343–1446 · show in text ↑
t0

“Douglas fir”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–110 · show in text ↑

Rhizopogon subareolatus · growth · Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

bromomethane · growth · Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

inoculation · growth · Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 10 positive, 4 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.