SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • antifungal;
  • biocontrol;
  • cyanolichen;
  • endosymbiont;
  • fungivore;
  • mycoparasitism;
  • mycorrhizal helper bacteria

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. I. What is (bacterial) mycophagy?
  4. II. Strategies for bacterial mycophagy
  5. III. Practical definitions of bacterial mycophagy
  6. IV. Future directions for the study of bacterial mycophagy
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

Contents

 Summary1
I.What is (bacterial) mycophagy?2
II.Strategies for bacterial mycophagy2
III.Practical definitions of bacterial mycophagy9
IV.Future directions for the study of bacterial mycophagy11
 Acknowledgements13
 References13

Summary

This review analyses the phenomenon of bacterial mycophagy, which we define as a set of phenotypic behaviours that enable bacteria to obtain nutrients from living fungi and thus allow the conversion of fungal into bacterial biomass. We recognize three types of bacterial strategies to derive nutrition from fungi: necrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy and endocellular biotrophy. Each is characterized by a set of uniquely sequential and differently overlapping interactions with the fungal target. We offer a detailed analysis of the nature of these interactions, as well as a comprehensive overview of methodologies for assessing and quantifying their individual contributions to the mycophagy phenotype. Furthermore, we discuss future prospects for the study and exploitation of bacterial mycophagy, including the need for appropriate tools to detect bacterial mycophagy in situ in order to be able to understand, predict and possibly manipulate the way in which mycophagous bacteria affect fungal activity, turnover, and community structure in soils and other ecosystems.


I. What is (bacterial) mycophagy?

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. I. What is (bacterial) mycophagy?
  4. II. Strategies for bacterial mycophagy
  5. III. Practical definitions of bacterial mycophagy
  6. IV. Future directions for the study of bacterial mycophagy
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

Mycophagy, from the Greek mykes (= fungus) and phagein (= to eat), can be broadly defined as ‘feeding on fungus’. Synonymous with the terms fungivory and mycetophagy, it covers the practice of purposefully consuming fungal tissue. Mycophagy has been reported for a wide variety of organisms, such as primates (Hanson et al., 2006), pigs (Bertault et al., 2001), rodents (Frank et al., 2006), birds (Simpson, 1998), mollusks (Silliman & Newell, 2003), insects (Mueller et al., 2005; Tuno, 1999; Robertson et al., 2004), mites (Melidossian et al., 2005), and nematodes (Bae & Knudsen, 2001). These fungivores have in common that they ingest fungal material, such as fruiting bodies (‘sporocarps’, i.e. mushrooms or truffles), spores, mycelium and/or hyphae, for internal digestion and nutrient extraction. Owing to their small size and different anatomy and physiology, fungal and bacterial fungivores rely on other mechanisms to derive nutrition from fungi. Fungal mycophagy, also known as mycoparasitism (Barnett, 1963; Jeffries, 1995) has been studied quite extensively in several species, especially Trichoderma (Steyaert et al., 2003). Mycophagous behaviour of the latter is characterized by: formation of coiled hyphal structures around the hyphae of the host fungus; penetration of the cell wall because of the production of enzymes that break down cell wall components (Zeilinger et al., 1999); the release of antibiotics that permeate the perforated hyphae and prevent resynthesis of the host cell wall (Lorito et al., 1996); and growth on the cytoplasm of host hyphae (Inbar et al., 1996). Other fungal fungivores, such as Gliocephalis hyalina (Jacobs et al., 2005), Stephanoma phaeospora (Hoch, 1978) and Verticillium biguttatum (Vandenboogert & Deacon, 1994) employ not a necrotrophic but a biotrophic strategy to derive nutrition from their host (Barnett & Binder, 1973). This interaction may or may not involve direct contact with or even penetration of the target fungus.

The term bacterial mycophagy has been coined only recently (de Boer et al., 2005; Fritsche et al., 2006) to describe the ability of bacteria to grow at the expense of living fungal hyphae. In the current review we will adopt this general definition of bacterial mycophagy, but with the qualification that the mycophagous bacterium must have an active role in obtaining food from fungi. For example, the mere consumption of nutrients that passively leak from a fungus or are released from hyphae damaged or dead through unrelated causes does not meet our strict definition of mycophagy. Also, the ability of some bacteria to lyse fungi (see section II.1) is not necessarily synonymous to mycophagy without direct or indirect evidence that such bacteria actively use fungal-derived nutrients to multiply. The active role of bacteria multiplying inside fungal hyphae (see section II.3) lies less in the ability to utilize cytoplasmic compounds for growth (which makes these bacteria, by definition, mycophagous), but more so in the aptitude to enter into and survive within this intracellular environment. In order to cover as much ground as possible, we define bacterial mycophagy as the demonstrable and quantifiable effect of bacterial phenotypic behaviours that make available nutrients from living fungi and allow the conversion of living fungal biomass into bacterial biomass. Within this context, several demonstrated or suspected examples of mycophagous bacteria are available in the literature (Table 1).

Table 1.  Examples of bacteria with demonstrated or suspected mycophagous traits
Bacterial genus/speciesOriginEvidence for mycophagyTarget fungus or fungiReferences
  1. FISH, fluorescence in situ hybridization.

Aeromonas caviaeHealthy bean plant rootsUse of live mycelium as sole carbon source in liquid mediumRhizoctonia solani, Sclerotium rolfsii, Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. vasinfectumInbar & Chet (1991)
Bacillus cereus, Bacillus megaterium, and Pseudomonas sp.Soils artificially infested with Fusarium oxysporum f. cubenseDirect isolation of halo-forming bacterial colonies on inorganic salts medium containing live fungus as sole carbon sourceFusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubenseMitchell & Alexander (1961)
Bacillus thuringiensisNot specifiedLocal digestion of fungal cell walls, loss of protoplasmFusarium roseum var. sambucinumCherif et al. (2002)
Burkholderia cepacia complexMycosphere of Pleurotus ostreatusImproved bacterial growth in co-culture with fungusPleurotus ostreatusYara et al. (2006)
Burkholderia gladioli pv. agaricicolaMushroom farmRapid degradation of mushroom sporocarpsAgaricus bitorqisChowdhury & Heinemann (2006)
Collimonas spp.Sandy coastal dune soilsIncrease in bacterial CFUs in autoclaved, acid-purified beach sand that was artificially explored by fungal hyphae extending from a potato-dextrose agar diskChaetomium globosum, Mucor hiemalisde Boer et al. (2001)
Myxobacterial spp.SoilPerforation of hyphal and conidial cell walls, invasion and emptying of the fungal cell contentCochliobolus miyabeanus, Rhizoctonia solaniHomma (1984)
Nostoc punctiformeCyanolichensEndocellular locationGeosiphon pyriformeSchuessler et al. (1996)
Paenibacillus polymyxaSoilAttachment and accumulation of bacteria to fungal hyphae in dual cultureFusarium oxysporumDijksterhuis et al. (1999)
Paenibacillus sp.Mycorrhizosphere of Sorghum bicolorDisorganization of fungal cell walls and/or cell contentsFusarium oxysporum Phytophthora parasitica (not a true, but an oomycete fungus)Budi et al. (2000)
Paenibacillus sp.Laccaria bicolor S238N fermentor cultureFISH detection of physiologically active bacteria inside fungal hyphaeLaccaria bicolor S238NBertaux et al. (2003)
Pseudomonas aeruginosaClinical environmentFormation of bacterial biofilms on filamentous host cells during coincubation in spent bacterial mediumFilamentous Candida albicansHogan & Kolter (2002)
Pseudomonas stutzeri Ypl-1Soil cultivated with ginsengLysis of cell walls and outflow of cytoplasm in dual culture of bacteria and fungal mycelium in potato-dextrose brothFusarium solaniLim et al. (1991)
Pseudomonas tolaasiiMushroom compost bedsTolaasin-evoked disruption of fungal membranes, resulting in nutrient releaseAgaricus bisporusSoler-Rivas et al. (1999)
Staphylococcus aureusClinical environmentBacterial-induced fungal cell deathCryptococcus neoformansSaito & Ikeda (2005)
Streptomyces albusNot specifiedBacterial colonization of fungal hyphae in sterile sandAspergillus nigerRehm (1958)
Streptomyces spp.Spores of the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Gigaspora gigantea recovered from a maritime sand duneFormation of internal projections and/or fine radial canals in spore wallsGigaspora giganteaLee & Koske (1994)

Bacterial fungivores may feature a wide range of adaptations that contribute to their mycophagous phenotype. In section II, we will discuss the types of interaction that bacteria can have with fungi (including oomycete fungi such as Pythium and Phytophthora, which are not true fungi; see Alexopoulos et al., 1996) and that contribute to the mycophagy phenotype. For each, we will consider the specific types of adaptations that distinguish this interaction.

II. Strategies for bacterial mycophagy

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. I. What is (bacterial) mycophagy?
  4. II. Strategies for bacterial mycophagy
  5. III. Practical definitions of bacterial mycophagy
  6. IV. Future directions for the study of bacterial mycophagy
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

The strategies used by bacteria to obtain nutrients from fungal tissue can be subdivided into three main categories (Fig. 1), similar to those used to classify bacterial interactions with plants or animals: extracellular necrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy, and endocellular biotrophy. Each of these interactions is characterized by a set of mycophagy determinants (Table 2). In necrotrophic interactions, bacteria secrete proteins or low molecular weight toxins that permeabilize and lyse fungal hyphae, or inhibit fungal metabolism, thereby killing fungal cells and releasing nutrients for bacterial growth. By contrast, extracellular biotrophs do not kill fungal hyphae, but live in close proximity, often colonizing hyphal surfaces, and using nutrients exuded from living fungal cells. Biotrophs are able to tolerate or suppress the production of anti-bacterial metabolites by fungal cells, and may be able to modulate fungal metabolism to promote nutrient release. Finally, endocellular biotrophs multiply inside living fungal cells, absorbing nutrients directly from the fungal cytoplasm. In practice, many interactions may involve one or more of these phases. For example, a biotrophic interaction may progress to necrotrophy as bacterial numbers increase, and an extracellular biotroph may penetrate into and grow inside fungal cells. However, for simplicity we will consider each of these strategies separately.

image

Figure 1. Schematic representation of the three bacterial strategies to derive nutrition from fungi: extracellular necrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy and endocellular biotrophy. The actions/reactions (‘interactivities’) that are thought to play an important role in one or more of these strategies are indicated. A more detailed description of each of these interactivities is given in Section II. Parts 1–3.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 2.  Putative bacterial mycophagy determinants
Putative determinantPredicted targets and functionsType of interaction
Flagella, type IV pili, chemotaxis mechanismsMotility and chemotaxis towards fungal exudatesNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Pili, fimbriae, adhesinsAdhesion to fungal surfacesNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
BiosurfactantsReduce surface tension and hydrophobicity, promote colonization of fungal surfaces, promote membrane lysisNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Transport and assimilation of fungal exudatesNutritionNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
pH toleranceTolerance to acidic fungal exudatesNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Antibiotic resistanceResistance to antibacterial compounds produced by fungiNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Extracellular polysaccharidesStress tolerance, adhesion, colonization of fungal surfaces, carbon storageNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Cell wall degrading enzymes (e.g. chitinase, glucanase, protease)Degradation of fungal cell walls, nutrition, lysis of fungal cells, penetration into fungal cells, movement between fungal cells, promote germination of fungal sporesNecrotrophy, endocellular biotrophy
Pore-forming toxins (e.g. tolaasin)Disrupt membrane transport, promote nutrient release, lysis of fungal cellsNecrotrophy
LipaseLysis of fungal cells, nutrition, degradation of lipid signalling moleculesNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Enzyme-inhibiting toxins (e.g. cyanide)Inhibit fungal respiration and metabolism, kill fungal cells, modulate metabolic activityNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Transport-inhibiting toxinsInhibit or modulate membrane transport, kill fungal cells, promote nutrient releaseNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Intracellular protein delivery (e.g. T3SS, T4SS)Modulate fungal signal transduction and development, modulate fungal metabolism, promote or inhibit apoptosisNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy, endocellular biotrophy
Apoptosis elicitorsPromote apoptosis, e.g. by mimicking fungal apoptosis signalsNecrotrophy
Degrade/mimic fungal quorum-sensing signalsModulate fungal signal transduction and developmentNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Indoleacetic acid (IAA)Modulate fungal signal transduction and developmentNecrotrophy, extracellular biotrophy
Nitrogen fixationProvide fixed nitrogen to fungal host, promote growth of fungal hostExtracellular biotrophy, endocellular biotrophy
PhotosynthesisProvide fixed carbon to fungal host, promote growth of fungal hostExtracellular biotrophy, endocellular biotrophy
Vitamin synthesisProvide essential vitamins for fungal host, promote growth of fungal hostExtracellular biotrophy, endocellular biotrophy
Degrade antibiotics and xenobioticsIncrease drug resistance of fungal host, promote growth and survival of fungal hostEndocellular biotrophy
Transport and assimilation of cytoplasmic or vacuolar nutrientsNutritionEndocellular biotrophy

1. Necrotrophic interactions

The defining feature of necrotrophic interactions is host cell death, which can be caused by the loss of cell wall or membrane integrity, the inhibition of essential metabolic processes, or the induction of programmed cell death. As will be detailed later, all these strategies may be available to mycophagous bacteria, and necrotrophic bacteria may use a combination of two or more of these mechanisms to kill and consume fungal cells. There is likely to be considerable overlap between the molecular mechanisms involved in saprotrophic growth on dead fungal cells and necrotrophic growth on killed fungal cells. Fungal cells have a finite lifespan, and much of the fungal biomass available as a growth substrate for bacteria in natural environments may arise because of endogenous cell death mechanisms and abiotic stress rather than interactions with soil organisms. We define necrotrophic mycophagy as being restricted to examples in which bacteria actively kill fungal cells and subsequently assimilate fungal metabolites.

Bacterial lysis of fungal hyphae has been observed in a wide range of taxonomically distinct bacteria, including actinomycetes, β-proteobacteria, bacilli and myxobacteria (de Boer et al., 2005). Much of the published literature on fungicidal factors produced by bacteria has been generated in the context of mushroom pathogenesis, biocontrol of fungal pathogens, and screens for fungicidal compounds of medicinal value. Very few studies have explicitly examined whether the use of these factors confers direct benefits in terms of facilitating bacterial assimilation of fungal metabolites. The clearest examples of links between fungal cell death and bacterial growth can be found in studies of mushroom pathogenic bacteria, which grow solely on nutrients available from mushroom cap tissue (Soler-Rivas et al., 1999). Mushroom pathogenic bacteria cause a wide range of strain-specific symptoms, in terms of the colour of lesions (ranging from yellow to brown or purple) and the degree to which lesions are sunken or pitted, or have a matt or shiny appearance (Wells et al., 1996; Soler-Rivas et al., 1999; Godfrey et al., 2001), which indicates that mushroom pathogenic bacteria use a diverse range of pathogenicity factors that affect the physical manifestation of disease.

Necrotrophic fungal mycoparasites such as Trichoderma spp. secrete a wide variety of cell wall degrading exoenzymes, such as chitinases, which play an important role in necrotrophic growth (Viterbo et al., 2002; Benitez et al., 2004). However, although chitinolysis is a common trait in bacteria that exhibit antifungal activity (Chernin et al., 1995; Nielsen et al., 1998; de Boer et al., 2004, 2005; Hoster et al., 2005; Ajit et al., 2006; Leveau et al., 2006), chitinase activity alone appears to be insufficient to account for bacterial lysis of fungal hyphae (Chernin et al., 1995; Budi et al., 2000; Zhang & Yuen, 2000; Kobayashi et al., 2002). The complexity of the fungal cell wall makes it a formidable challenge as a primary target for bacterial attack, as bacteria would need to rapidly produce a wide variety of exoenzymes to degrade cell wall components to the level needed to compromise structural integrity (de Boer et al., 2005). For example, the cell wall of Saccharomyces cerevisiae contains 85% polysaccharides (mainly ß-1,3-glucan, ß-1,6-glucan, chitin and chitosan) and 15% proteins (mainly mannoproteins; Lesage & Bussey, 2006). Other chemicals commonly found in fungal cell walls include ß-1,4-glucan, mannan and dityrosine (Coluccio et al., 2004), melanins (Nosanchuk & Casadevall, 2006) and hydrophobins (Linder et al., 2005).The majority of molecular genetic studies of antagonistic and pathogenic interactions between bacteria and fungi have identified low molecular weight toxins as the primary causal agents of fungal inhibition and cell death (Soler-Rivas et al., 1999; Haas et al., 2000; Haas & Defago, 2005). For example, lipodepsipeptide toxins such as tolaasin appear to be the primary pathogenicity factors in brown blotch disease of mushrooms caused by Pseudomonas tolaasii (Rainey et al., 1993; Soler-Rivas et al., 1999; Lo Cantore et al., 2006). However, Wells et al. (1996) identified 14 out of 219 strains of Pseudomonas from mushroom-casing soil that gave positive results in toxin synthesis assays, but were unable to cause symptoms when inoculated onto mushroom caps. This could indicate that toxin synthesis alone is insufficient for disease, or that variation between toxins has a significant effect on the outcome of interactions.

Tolaasin mediates membrane disruption via two routes: pore-formation or biosurfactant activity. Biosurfactant activity allows the pathogen to increase the ‘wettability’ of hydrophobic host surfaces in order to promote bacterial colonisation. Tolaasin does this by the formation of an amphipathic left-handed α-helix in a hydrophobic environment (Jourdan et al., 2003). Pseudomonads are known to produce a wide variety of biosurfactant compounds, including rhamnolipids, peptolipids and other lipodepsipeptides such as the syringopeptins. Toxins such as syringomycin or tolaasin are lethal to fungal cells at concentrations ranging from 0.8 to 200 µm (Sorensen et al., 1996).

Toxin- and enzyme-secreting necrotrophs may use toxins as the primary mechanism for inhibiting and killing fungal cells and subsequently use chitinases, lipases, glucanases and proteases to saprotrophically degrade and assimilate fungal polymers. Nevertheless, several studies have shown that cell wall degrading exoenzymes can also act synergistically with bacterial toxins to enhance antifungal activity (Lorito et al., 1994; Fogliano et al., 2002; Woo et al., 2002; Someya et al., 2007). Proteases have been linked to mushroom pathogenesis by Pseudomonas tolaasii (Soler-Rivas et al., 1999) and lipase activity is a common feature of mushroom pathogenic strains (Wells et al., 1996).

Antagonistic bacterial–fungal interactions are typically assessed in vitro in terms of an unoccupied ‘inhibition zone’ between a bacterial colony and fungal hyphae cocultured on an agar plate. However, microscopic observations of bacteria–fungi interactions in more natural conditions clearly show that at least some antagonistic bacteria actively move towards and colonize the surface of fungal hyphae (Arora et al., 1983; Lim & Lockwood, 1988; Grewal & Rainey, 1991; Singh & Arora, 2001; Bolwerk et al., 2003; de Weert et al., 2004). Detection of fungal-specific compounds may help bacteria find their way to the target. For example, fusaric acid (5-butylpicolinate), a secondary metabolite secreted by Fusarium strains, appears to be an excellent bacterial chemo-attractant (de Weert et al., 2004). Bacteria may use a variety of mechanisms to attach themselves to fungal hyphae, including pili and exopolysaccharide (EPS) (Rainey, 1991; Sen et al., 1996; Peng et al., 2001). In one study, a Streptomyces strain was observed to penetrate and coil around fungal hyphae in a manner analogous to that of fungal parasites such as Trichoderma spp. (de Boer et al., 2005). Biosurfactants may be important in attachment to fungal mycelia and spores, as they reduce surface tension and facilitate contact between bacteria and fungal cells (Nielsen et al., 1999; Braun et al., 2001).

Attachment to fungal surfaces plays a key role in the killing of Cryptococcus neoformans by Staphylococcus aureus (Ikeda et al., 2007). Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase biotin-dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assays for DNA fragmentation show that C. neoformans undergoes contact-dependent programmed cell death (apoptosis) when cocultured with S. aureus (Saito & Ikeda, 2005). Fungi undergo apoptosis in response to a variety of stimuli, including developmental programmes, aging, mating type incompatibility, and toxins (Marek et al., 2003; Buttner et al., 2006). Bacterial modulation of eukaryotic apoptosis is a well-characterized feature of bacterial interactions with plants and animals, but has not been extensively studied in the context of bacteria–fungi interactions, although some examples are known from fungi–fungi interactions. Penicillium chrysogenum produces a small, basic, cysteine-rich protein that is actively internalized by other fungi and induces programmed cell death (Leiter et al., 2005). Any necrotrophic bacterium that acquires the ability to induce apoptosis also acquires the ability to rapidly and efficiently kill fungal cells, and it seems likely that more examples of bacteria-induced apoptosis in fungi will be discovered.

2. Extracellular biotrophic interactions

Bacteria do not need to kill fungal cells in order to obtain nutrients from fungi; neither is the presence of bacteria on fungal surfaces necessarily deleterious. Actively growing hyphae exude a complex mixture of low molecular weight metabolites that include organic acids such as oxalic, citric and acetic acid, peptides, amino acids, sugars and sugar alcohols (Griffiths et al., 1994; de Boer et al., 2005; Medeiros et al., 2006). Some of these are secreted as waste products, whereas others are secreted as antimicrobial compounds or mobilizing compounds for phosphate and other minerals. Fungi also secrete a wide variety of iron-chelating siderophores, which may be degraded or assimilated by bacteria (Winkelmann, 2007). Numerous studies have shown that the bacterial communities associated with fungal hyphae, fungal spores, or with the mycorrhizosphere of mycorrhizal plants display fungi-specific differences in composition (de Boer et al., 2005; Frey-Klett & Garbaye, 2005; Roesti et al., 2005). This suggests that extracellular bacteria are under selection to develop fungi-specific traits that confer a competitive advantage during colonization of fungal surfaces. Such traits could be ‘passive’ traits, such as the ability to use nutrients that are specific to, or particularly abundant in fungal exudates, or the ability to tolerate anti-bacterial metabolites. Alternatively, they could be ‘active’ traits, such as the ability to alter fungal membrane permeability to increase or modify nutrient efflux (de Boer et al., 2005). Chemotaxis, attachment and tolerance to fungal antimicrobial chemicals are all likely to be important traits for extracellular biotrophs.

Bacteria that grow on and tolerate fungal exudates without entering into a direct interaction with fungal cells can be defined as saprotrophs. As per our definition, a mycophagous extracellular biotroph can be defined as a bacterium that actively interacts with living fungal cells to promote bacterial growth, without lysing or killing host cells. Extracellular biotrophic interactions can be beneficial or detrimental to the fungal host.

One example of a beneficial extracellular association between fungi and bacteria can be seen in the form of lichens. Although many lichens are formed as a result of associations between fungi (mycobiont) and algae (photobiont), some lichens, known as cyanolichens, involve bipartite symbioses between fungi and cyanobacteria, or tripartite symbioses between fungi, algae and cyanobacteria (Honegger, 2001; Richardson & Cameron, 2004; Kneip et al., 2007). Many cyanolichens are restricted to, or are most common in, old growth and mature forests. The nutritional benefits provided to the fungal partner by association with photosynthetic and nitrogen-fixing cyanobacteria are clear, although the benefits to the photobiont are less well understood. In tripartite symbioses, cyanobacteria are concentrated in special areas called cephalodias, in which the mycobiont actively envelops the bacteria and incorporates them into the thallus where they are protected from high oxygen concentrations and where they can fix nitrogen efficiently (Honegger, 2001). Cyanolichens may provide a special example of mycophagy, in which the symbiont is primarily dependent on its fungal partner for essential minerals, such as phosphate and iron, rather than carbon and nitrogen (Kneip et al., 2007), although it seems likely that cyanobacteria do take up organic nutrients from fungal partners, particularly at night (Rai et al., 1981).

Biotrophic modulation of fungal physiology by extracellular bacteria is likely to take three main forms: modulation of fungal development; modulation of membrane permeability and nutrient efflux; modulation of fungal metabolism. There is a growing body of evidence to show that bacteria can and do modify fungal differentiation and development in a wide variety of ways. Bacteria-induced alterations to fungal development and differentiation include inhibition or promotion of germination, and alterations to foraging behaviour, hyphal branching, growth, survival, reproduction, exudate composition and production of antibacterial metabolites, each of which could benefit extracellular bacteria (de Boer et al., 2005). For example, mycorrhizal helper bacteria (MHB) promote mycorrhization of plant roots and induce alterations in the architecture of mycorrhizal fungi (Garbaye, 1994; Frey-Klett & Garbaye, 2005; Aspray et al., 2006; Frey-Klett et al., 2007), and soil bacteria such as Pseudomonas putida have been shown to promote sporocarp formation in Agaricus bisporus (Rainey et al., 1990). Mycorrhizal helper bacteria have also been shown to induce changes in the transcriptome of mycorrhizal fungi (Schrey et al., 2005; Deveau et al., 2007). At present, there is no clear evidence to show whether these developmental changes do benefit bacteria, as per our criteria for bacterial mycophagy. However, it seems likely that increased mycorrhization, and associated increases in nutrient availability for plants and fungi may benefit plants, bacteria and fungi in a tri-trophic interaction, while localized accumulation of nutrients in the developing sporocarp, or dispersal in association with fungal spores, could benefit sporocarp-inducing bacteria.

The mechanisms by which bacteria alter fungal development are poorly understood. However, some extracellular molecules secreted by bacteria have been shown to affect fungal development. For example, many plant-associated and rhizosphere bacteria secrete the auxin indole acetic acid (IAA), a molecule that is best known for its role in plant signal transduction (Quint & Gray, 2006). However, IAA has also been shown to act as a signal molecule in bacteria, mammals and fungi (Leveau & Lindow, 2005; Bianco et al., 2006; Liu & Nester, 2006; Yang et al., 2007) and to induce adhesion and filamentation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Prusty et al., 2004).

One set of bacterial signals known to be detected by a wide variety of eukaryotes, including algae, nematodes, plants, fungi and mammalian cells, are quorum sensing (QS) signals (Hogan et al., 2004; Wang et al., 2004; Shiner et al., 2005; Beale et al., 2006; Wheeler et al., 2006). Quorum sensing systems involving peptides and low molecular weight molecules such as farnesol, tyrosol, tryptophol and phenylethanol have also been reported to occur in fungi (Alem et al., 2006; Blankenship & Mitchell, 2006; Sprague & Winans, 2006; Lee et al., 2007). Interestingly, the bacterial QS signals 3-oxo-C12 homoserine lactone and cis-11-methyl-2-dodecenoic acid, and the fungal QS signal farnesol all inhibit filamentation in Candida albicans (Hogan et al., 2004; Wang et al., 2004). Bacteria, plants, algae and fungi have also been shown to degrade QS molecules and to produce QS inhibitors that inhibit or modulate signalling through QS mechanisms (Rasmussen et al., 2005; Shiner et al., 2005; Gonzalez & Keshavan, 2006; Karamanoli & Lindow, 2006). The fungal signal farnesol inhibits production of the Pseudomonas quinoline signal (Cugini et al., 2007). Quorum sensing molecules and QS inhibitors may therefore play a key role in orchestrating interactions between fungi and bacteria.

3. Endocellular biotrophic interactions

Endocellular biotrophs are entirely dependent on their fungal host for nutrients, at least for the duration of their endocellular existence. Some endocellular biotrophs are vertically transmitted, while facultative endocellular biotrophs possess mechanisms for invading and subverting fungal cells. Many of the known examples of endocellular bacteria isolated from fungi belong to the β-proteobacteria, which also contains pathogens that colonise and survive in the cytoplasm of mammalian and amoebae cells, such as Burkholderia mallei and Burkholderia pseudomallei (Levy et al., 2003). Both pathogenic and nonpathogenic Burkholderia spp. can colonize the interior of Gigaspora decipiens spores when applied to spore surfaces (Levy et al., 2003), but the molecular mechanisms involved in this interaction and in most endocellular bacteria–fungi interactions are unknown. The fungus Geosiphon pyriformis forms multinucleated ‘bladders’ at its hyphal tips, which are colonized by the cyanobacterium Nostoc punctiforme. The primary function of these bladders is likely to be photosynthesis, but the symbiont also forms heterocysts, which suggests that it also fixes nitrogen (Schuessler & Kluge, 2001; Kluge, 2002). Experimental results suggest that there is a degree of recognition and host-specificity in the G. pyriformis-Nostoc symbiosis, as some strains of Nostoc are not incorporated into the fungus, and Nostoc has to be in the early primordial (immobile) stage for endocytosis of free-living bacteria to occur (Kluge, 2002). Nostoc cells in a mature bladder are 10 times larger than free-living cells and have a higher concentration of photosynthetic pigments. Interestingly, although the association between G. pyriformis and Nostoc appears to be mutually beneficial, changes in the growth medium, such as an increased level of phosphate, can result in the cyanobacterial symbiont ‘overpowering’ the fungus and terminating the symbiosis (Kluge et al., 2002).

The symbiosis between G. pyriformis and Nostoc is in some respects a relatively primitive and unstable symbiosis, which involves horizontal acquisition of a free-living bacterium. By contrast, the vertically transmitted obligate endocellular bacterium Candidatus Glomeribacter gigasporarum colonizes the spores of Gigaspora margarita at densities ranging from 3700 to 26 000 bacteria per spore (Jargeat et al., 2004). Ca. G. gigasporarum has an estimated genome size of 1.35 Mb, and was originally classified into the genus Burkholderia, but has subsequently been assigned to a new taxon, Glomeribacter (Bianciotto et al., 2003; Jargeat et al., 2004). The small genome size suggests that this bacterium, like other obligate pathogens and symbionts, is entirely dependent on fungal cells for many metabolic functions.

An increasing number of studies have shown evidence to support the hypothesis that endocellular bacteria provide important biochemical functions for their fungal hosts in exchange for their exclusive niche (Minerdi et al., 2001). Lumini and collaborators (2007) cured a strain of G. margarita of its endogenous endocellular bacteria, and found that although the fungus could still colonize plants and complete its lifecycle under laboratory conditions, the cured strain showed altered spore morphology, reduced presymbiotic hyphal growth and reduced branching, which is associated with reduced competitive fitness. A primary function of endocellular bacteria may be to provide nutritional benefits for fungi, for example, by fixing nitrogen or synthesizing essential nutrients, as noted for the cyanobacterial symbioses described earlier (Jargeat et al., 2004). Although symbiotic nitrogen fixation has been most widely studied in relation to α-proteobacteria and cyanobacteria, many β-proteobacteria are also able to fix nitrogen, both as free-living bacteria and in symbioses with plants (Moulin et al., 2001; Chen et al., 2003, 2005; Elliott et al., 2007), and it is possible that some endosymbiotic β-proteobacteria also fix nitrogen.

A second symbiotic function of endocellular bacteria could be as a source of antimicrobial molecules that protect fungi against predation and parasites, or promote pathogenesis towards eukaryotic hosts. For example, the rice seedling blight pathogen Rhizopus microsporus contains endocellular bacterial symbionts belonging to the genus Burkholderia which can be cultured in vitro and which produce the toxins rhizoxin and rhizonin (Partida-Martinez & Hertweck, 2005; Scherlach et al., 2006; Partida-Martinez et al., 2007a). Bacteria may also protect fungi against antifungal chemicals. Zygomycetes have become an increasingly problematic source of opportunistic, drug-resistant infections in hospitals in recent years and researchers have speculated that the emergence of these strains coincides with the acquisition of endocellular, drug-resistant bacteria (Chamilos et al., 2007).

4. Effector proteins – tools to promote necrotrophic and biotrophic mycophagy?

Colonization of animal and plant hosts by extracellular and endocellular bacteria frequently involves the use of protein secretion systems such as the type III and type IV secretion systems (T3SS and T4SS), which can deliver proteins, or in the case of Agrobacterium, proteins and DNA, directly into the cytoplasm of host cells (Preston et al., 2005; Backert & Meyer, 2006; Cambronne & Roy, 2006; Galan & Wolf-Watz, 2006; Angot et al., 2007). T3SS- and T4SS-secreted effectors could have a wide range of roles in bacteria–fungi interactions, based on their functional characterization in animal and plant cells, which include altering fungal development, inducing or suppressing apoptosis, and suppressing antibacterial defence mechanisms (Christie et al., 2005; Guiney, 2005; Suparak et al., 2005; Grant et al., 2006; Gurlebeck et al., 2006; Pilatz et al., 2006; Pizarro-Cerda & Cossart, 2006; Schlumberger & Hardt, 2006; Angot et al., 2007; He et al., 2007; Ninio & Roy, 2007). T3SS-mediated-modulation of cellular processes could play a particularly important role in endocellular colonization by bacteria such as Burkholderia spp., which are known to use T3SSs to promote endocellular colonization of animal cells (Ulrich & DeShazer, 2004; Pilatz et al., 2006; Ribot & Ulrich, 2006; Stevens et al., 2002). However, at present, there is no experimental evidence to show that mutants impaired in T3SS or T4SS are impaired in mycophagy. The only direct evidence of an ecological role for T3SS in bacterial interactions with soil microorganisms comes from studies involving other soil eukaryotes, such as the oomycete pathogen Pythium ultimum (Rezzonico et al., 2005) and the amoebae Dictyostelium (Pukatzki et al., 2002). Nevertheless, several lines of indirect evidence support the hypothesis that intracellular protein delivery could be used by mycophagous bacteria. The first line of evidence comes from the observation that nonflagellar T3SS genes and T3SS-secreted effector genes are present in soil and rhizosphere bacteria belonging to the genera Pseudomonas, Burkholderia, Ralstonia, Chromobacterium and Rhizobium, including strains that are known to interact with fungi (Ferguson et al., 2001; Preston et al., 2001; Smith-Vaughan et al., 2003; Betts et al., 2004). In addition, numerous studies have shown that T3SS-secreted effectors used by bacterial pathogens of plants and animals are biologically active when expressed in fungal cells (Valdivia, 2004). For example, the Shigella effector IpaH9.8 interrupts pheromone response signalling in yeast by promoting the proteasome-dependent destruction of the MAPKK Ste7 (Rohde et al., 2007). Effectors secreted by the plant pathogen Pseudomonas syringae can suppress apoptosis in yeast cells (Jamir et al., 2004), and the YopE effector protein of Yersinia severely inhibits the growth of Saccharomyces cerevisiae when expressed in yeast cells from an inducible promoter (Lesser & Miller, 2001). Intriguingly, Ferguson and collaborators (2001) reported that genes encoding the YopE-related effector ExoS of P. aeruginosa were more common in soil isolates than in clinical isolates. Pseudomonas aeruginosa also secretes a phospholipase, ExoU, which rapidly kills yeast cells when expressed as a transgene (Rabin & Hauser, 2003; Sato et al., 2006; Sitkiewicz et al., 2007). Yeast has also been used as a host to study the cellular localization of T3SS effectors (Sisko et al., 2006).

Numerous studies have shown that the Agrobacterium T4SS can be used to deliver proteins and DNA into fungal cells, and Agrobacterium has been widely used as a tool for fungal transformation (Bundock et al., 1995; de Groot et al., 1998; Schrammeijer et al., 2003; Blaise et al., 2007). This clearly demonstrates that T4SS could be used by bacteria for protein delivery, and even fungal transformation in natural environments. T4SS-secreted effectors have primarily been studied in the context of bacterial interactions with protozoan and mammalian cells, where they perform functions analogous to the T3SS-secreted effectors discussed above (Christie et al., 2005; Ninio & Roy, 2007). However, as with T3SS effectors, the targets and biological activities of numerous T4SS-secreted effectors have also been shown to be functionally conserved in yeast, indicating that T4SS effector proteins could perform similar functions in bacterial interactions with fungi (Campodonico et al., 2005; Ninio & Roy, 2007; Schrammeijer et al., 2003; Garcia-Rodriguez et al., 2006).

III. Practical definitions of bacterial mycophagy

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. I. What is (bacterial) mycophagy?
  4. II. Strategies for bacterial mycophagy
  5. III. Practical definitions of bacterial mycophagy
  6. IV. Future directions for the study of bacterial mycophagy
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

While it is quite easy to define bacterial mycophagy as the ability of bacteria to feed on living fungi, it is by no means a trivial task to establish through experimentation whether a bacterial species or isolate is mycophagous or not. Direct observation of fungivorous behaviour, as has been done for animals (Lee & Widden, 1996; Hanya, 2004) is not practical or even possible for bacteria. Their small size requires the use of high-magnification microscopes, and bacteria typically lack an easily recognizable or measurable reaction to the presence of fungal food. Other techniques that work for animals, for example analysis of stomach or scat content for indirect evidence of mycophagy (Currah et al., 2000; Frank et al., 2006), obviously do not apply. What follows is a list of established or suggested approaches that can be used individually or in combination to provide proof of mycophagous behaviour, and to identify genes and/or proteins that contribute to this behaviour. The list is by no means exhaustive, but serves to provide the phenomenon of bacterial mycophagy with a first set of more practical definitions.

Demonstrate an increase in bacterial biomass or numbers in the presence of fungus as the only source of nutrients   This approach of offering live fungi to bacteria has been used successfully (Mitchell & Alexander, 1961; Inbar & Chet, 1991), although great care should be taken to avoid false-positive interpretation (de Boer et al., 2005). The mycophagous nature of Collimonas species was assessed by introducing collimonads as a suspension into autoclaved, acid-purified beach sand. Bacteria were left to starve for 1 wk, after which fungal hyphae of Mucor hiemalis or Chaetomium globosum were allowed to infiltrate into the soil matrix from potato-dextrose agar. Numbers of Collimonas bacteria in the sand were estimated by plate counting and shown to be higher in sand inoculated with fungi than in uninoculated sand. This assay can be adapted to work on water agar plates, containing no substrate for the bacteria other than fungal inoculum on the same plate (Fig. 2), although controls lacking fungal inoculum should be included to avoid false-positive bacterial growth on components in the agar preparation. As an alternative means of quantifying cell numbers, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) can also be used (Höppener-Ogawa et al., 2007). Evidence for an active role of bacteria in obtaining nutrients must be deduced from control assays (e.g. by using mycophagous mutants of the same strain or other nonmycophagous strains; de Boer et al., 2001). An important consideration is that the conversion of fungal to bacterial biomass does not need to result in a proportional increase in bacteria numbers. Given the low carbon-to-nitrogen ratio of bacteria compared with fungi, a fungal meal to a bacterium is in essence nitrogen-limited, which leads us to predict that bacterial fungivores might have adapted to be efficient at storing excess carbon. The strategy of using EPS for nutrient storage has been reported for other bacteria (Laue et al., 2006). Experimental evidence for this prediction in bacterial fungivores is currently lacking, although it has been noted (Fig. 2) that bacteria of the genus Collimonas and Pseudomonas become slimy during growth on Fusarium culmorum and Magnaporthe grisea, respectively, perhaps suggesting the incorporation of excess carbon into the bacterial EPS layer.

image

Figure 2. (a) Accumulation of bacterial biomass at the interface between Collimonas bacteria (inoculated in the centre of the plate between the two black lines) in confrontation on water agar with the fungus Fusarium culmorum (growing from the agar plug on the top half of the plate). (b) Pseudomonas sp. NZ104 (inoculated top-left) is seen growing towards and encircling the fungus Magnaporthe grisea (centre of the plate).

Download figure to PowerPoint

Demonstrate a nutrient flux from fungus to bacterium  Several approaches are available for this, mostly based on stable or radioactive isotopes. One example involving the fungal mycoparasite Eudarluca caricis is based on measurements of naturally occurring isotope abundances. Comparison of 15N in this fungus, its rust fungus host (Melamspora medusae), and the plant host of M. medusae (Populus trichocarpa) revealed an increasing 15N/14N ratio (Nischwitz et al., 2005), confirming that E. caricis feeds on M. medusae and not on nutrients obtained directly from the plant. Another approach involves the experimental labeling of fungi with a stable isotope and subsequent detection of label in the fungivore (Ruess et al., 2005). Although these types of methodology have not yet been applied to bacterial fungivores, proofs of principle for an isotopic approach towards bacterial mycophagy are plentiful. For example, there are several reports on the use of, for example, 13C-labeled carbon sources to demonstrate their specific utilization by bacterial species or whole communities (Singleton et al., 2007), and 13C-labeled Escherichia coli were used to identify bacteriovores in an agricultural soil (Lueders et al., 2006). Incorporation of stable isotopes in bacteria can be detected by various methods, including Raman spectroscopy (Huang et al., 2007) and analysis of biomolecules such as phospholipids or nucleic acids (Boschker & Middelburg, 2002).

Demonstrate the existence and activity of bacteria living and multiplying inside fungal hyphae   Endocellular bacteria have been detected and quantified by staining with fluorescent dyes or by the use of fluorescent in situ hybridization (Bianciotto & Bonfante, 2002; Bianciotto et al., 2004). The most convincing evidence for the ability of these bacteria to multiply inside their host is the microscopic observation of dividing bacterial cells inside fungal hyphae, spores and other structures (Bianciotto et al., 2004). Indirect proof comes from viability stains for bacterial cells (Bertaux et al., 2003), and from the use of reverse-transcription PCR on RNA isolated from fungal tissue to reveal active bacterial gene expression (Bianciotto & Bonfante, 2002).

Demonstrate the ability of bacteria to destabilize the fungal cell wall   Bacteria that adopt a necrotrophic approach to mycophagy rely at some point on their ability to weaken the fungal cell wall and/or membrane. There are several methods available that allow for the observation or quantification of cell wall integrity. Electron microscopy can reveal cell wall distortions and even holes after attack by bacterial (Budi et al., 2000) and fungal (Siwek et al., 1997; Picard et al., 2000) antagonists. A recently developed assay to assess cell wall integrity is based on a gfp bioreporter strain of Aspergillus niger (Hagen et al., 2007) and was used to confirm the induction of cell wall stress by the antifungal protein AFP from Aspergillus giganteus, which specifically inhibits chitin synthesis in sensitive fungi. Indirect assays for the disruption of cell wall and membrane are based on the detection of cytoplasmic content leaked from damaged fungi, for example detection of an easily measurable fungi-specific enzyme activity (Jewell et al., 2002).

Identify mutants that exhibit reduced or abolished mycophagy   There are several ways to exploit bacterial mutants to discover the mechanism(s) underlying mycophagy, and to confirm that mycophagy is an active process. One is based on random transposon mutagenesis and screening of the resulting library for mutants with an altered mycophagous phenotype. The relative success of this screening depends, among other things, on the compatibility of the screening assay with a high-throughput format. No truly high-throughput assays for bacterial mycophagy exist, which hampers current efforts to identify genes involved in this phenotype. Alternatively, one can hypothesize which bacterial properties are likely to contribute towards mycophagy and then screen for mutants affected in those properties. Such mutants may subsequently be tested in a mycophagy assay, to assess the effect of the gene disruption. For fungal mycoparasites, similar approaches have confirmed the involvement of chitinase activity (Woo et al., 1999; Brunner et al., 2003), N-acetyl-beta-d-glucosaminidase activity (Brunner et al., 2003) or the hyperosmotic stress response (Delgado-Jarana et al., 2006). In a bacterial example, several transposon mutants of Collimonas were isolated which lacked chitinolytic activity on chitin agar plates (Leveau et al., 2006), but none were shown to be significantly affected in mycophagy. Notably, mutants need not always have a reduced mycophagous phenotype: it was shown for Trichoderma virens that a knockout in the tvk1 locus increased the expression level of mycoparasitism-related genes (Mendoza-Mendoza et al., 2003). A potentially very interesting but yet unexplored role in mutant-based approaches is reserved for mutants that are unable to synthesize essential compounds such as amino acids or nucleic acids: these should not be affected in mycophagy as long as the essential compound is provided in their fungal diet. Thus, systematic screening of auxotrophic mutants in a mycophagy assay could be used to determine the nutritional value of fungi to bacteria that feed on them. In this context, it is interesting that a pyrB mutant of antifungal Pseudomonas putida 06909, which is unable to synthesize its own pyrimidine, was not able to grow in the presence of Phytophthora parasitica (Lee & Cooksey, 2000), suggesting that this interaction did not provide the bacterium with sufficient amounts of pyrimidine to sustain growth.

Determine transcriptional profiles of bacteria during mycophagy   Microarrays allow the genome-wide interrogation of gene expression levels of bacteria in interaction with their hosts (Cummings & Relman, 2000). In the study of bacterial mycophagy, they would assist in the discovery of genes involved in but not absolutely required for mycophagy and in the analysis of temporal changes in gene expression during the different phases of mycophagy. However, a microarray strategy requires a (partial) genome sequence and, until now, very few bacterial species have been chosen for sequencing based specifically on their interactions with fungi. The sequenced strain Burkholderia xenovorans LB400 was formerly named Burkholderia fungorum LB400 for its relatedness to Burkholderia species found associated with fungal hyphae, but was primarily sequenced for its ability to aerobically degrade environmental contaminants. Ongoing genome projects include those for the mycophagous bacterium Collimonas fungivorans (de Boer et al., 2004) and the mycorrhizal helper bacterium Pseudomonas fluorescens BBc6 (Deveau et al., 2007). There is a clear need for additional genome sequences from suspected or confirmed bacterial fungivores, not in the least to be able to fully exploit the strength of comparative genomics for the discovery of mycophagy-related genes, for understanding the distribution and diversity of such genes among different bacteria, and for appreciating the evolutionary forces that shaped mycophagy in these different genomes. A list of candidates for genome sequencing also should include bacterial endosymbionts of fungi: the inability of some to be cultured has not proven to be a major obstacle for isolation and analysis of their genomic DNA (Jargeat et al., 2004).

Demonstrate the ability of bacteria to modulate fungal physiology   This can be achieved by different means, one of which would be the identification of changes in gene expression in fungi that are being fed upon. The feasibility of such an approach is confirmed by similar studies on bacterial–fungal interactions. For example, a suppressive subtractive hybridization approach was used to identify changes in gene expression of fly agaric (Agaricus muscaria) in response to the presence of a Streptomyces species (Schrey et al., 2005). Other studies have revealed the effect of Streptomyces (Becker et al., 1999) or Pseudomonas (Deveau et al., 2007) on expression profiles of ectomycorrhizal fungi. A list of the first 50 microarray studies in filamentous fungi (Breakspear & Momany, 2007) does not include data on mycoparasitized fungi, but does contain the names of several fungal species that in other studies have been shown to be susceptible to mycophagy or antifungal activity. The availability of fungal microarrays and microarray data can be exploited to deduce what mechanisms underlie a mycophagous assault by bacteria (e.g. based on comparison with microarray data obtained from the same fungus under controlled conditions of various stresses). Obviously, changes in mycophagy-induced fungal physiology may not only be interpreted from transcriptional profiling, but can also be measured and quantified from the analysis of the proteome, metabolome, or secretome (e.g. as changes in enzyme activity), protein profiles and exudation patterns.

Utilize bioreporter technology for spatial and temporal analysis of bacterial mycophagy   Bacterial bioreporters are useful tools in microbial ecology (Leveau & Lindow, 2002). Fluorescent reporter proteins such as green fluorescent protein (GFP) have revolutionized the in situ observation of bacterial–fungal interactions (Toljander et al., 2006; Kamilova et al., 2007; Partida-Martinez et al., 2007b), by facilitating the quantification of bacterial cells and assessment of their location relative to their host. Fluorescent proteins can also be used to label fungi and fungal proteins, often in contrasting colours (Nahalkova & Fatehi, 2003). Another type of bioreporter is one that carries a reporter gene fused to a promoter with known responsiveness to a specific condition (e.g. the availability of a particular carbon source or the growth status of the bacterium). Such reporters can be used to probe the physical, chemical and biological microenvironment in which bacterial–fungal interactions take place. They have been used with great success to map nutrient availability to bacteria in the rhizosphere and phyllosphere (Leveau & Lindow, 2002), and should do equally well in describing the mycosphere during the different phases of bacterial mycophagy. A third kind of bioreporter addresses the need to know whether a gene of interest is expressed, or not, during the process of mycophagy. This is achieved by cloning the gene's promoter element upstream of a promoterless reporter gene and interpreting the expression of reporter protein as a measure for gene activity. A related type of application is aimed at identifying those genes that are specifically induced during the interaction of bacteria with their hosts. This is often referred to as in vivo expression technology or IVET (Rediers et al., 2005). In a relevant example (Lee & Cooksey, 2000; Ahn et al., 2007), IVET was used to study the colonization of the root-rotting oomycete Phytophthora parasitica by P. putida 06909. Several P. putida promoters were identified, corresponding to genes for diacylglycerol kinase, bacterial ABC transporters, outer membrane porins and proteins with unknown function. The elevated expression of these genes during colonization of Phytophthora could be confirmed by lacZ reporter gene fusions to the recovered promoter fragments (Lee & Cooksey, 2000). In summary, bioreporter technology has the potential to contribute significantly towards an increased understanding of the processes and mechanisms that underlie bacterial mycophagy.

IV. Future directions for the study of bacterial mycophagy

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. I. What is (bacterial) mycophagy?
  4. II. Strategies for bacterial mycophagy
  5. III. Practical definitions of bacterial mycophagy
  6. IV. Future directions for the study of bacterial mycophagy
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

This review aimed to provide an overview of the current knowledge on the phenomenon of bacterial mycophagy. Briefly, one may conclude that there is ample direct and indirect evidence to acknowledge the existence of bacterial behaviours that, as per our definition, make available nutrients from living fungi and allow their conversion into bacterial biomass. Furthermore, it has become clear that bacteria can engage in mycophagous interactions in a variety of ways, so that the term ‘bacterial mycophagy’ really represents an amalgam of many different, serially overlapping bacterial activities, all converging on the same objective, that is, to derive nutrition from fungi.

We conclude this review by listing some of the priorities and challenges that remain on the path to a fuller appreciation of bacterial mycophagy. These include the need for: development of unambiguous and high-throughput methods to screen environmental isolates or mutants for mycophagous phenotypes; an improved understanding of the possibilities and limitations of exploiting bacterial mycophagy for the control of fungal infections (e.g. in agricultural, medical and preservation applications); additional genomic data on bacteria with a mycophagous lifestyle. Another priority is to obtain a more comprehensive insight into the occurrence of mycophagy-related phenotypes across the bacterial domain. Obviously, there exists a bias in our knowledge, which is also reflected in this review, towards fungivores in soil and the phytosphere. Relatively little is known about fungal–bacterial interactions in other environments, such as marine and freshwater habitats, or in mixed infections of humans and animals. Applying our practical definitions of mycophagy to these environments might reveal novel fungivorous players and mechanisms.

Another challenge lies in demonstrating the relative impact of bacterial mycophagy on the structure and activity of fungal communities in nature. Graphical representations of food webs in soils and other environments typically lack an arrow pointing from fungi to bacteria, which would represent the trophic interaction that is bacterial mycophagy. It is too early and presumptuous to insist that such an arrow should be drawn without knowing more about the contribution of bacterial mycophagy in relation to all the other arrows pointing to and from fungi and bacteria. In other words, we need to be able to estimate parameters such as the turnover time of living fungus by bacteria and the amount of bacterial biomass derived from living fungal biomass in natural environments. To begin to address these questions, there is a clear need for the establishment of methods that allow the detection and quantification of bacterial mycophagy in situ. A promising approach is the use of stable isotope probing (Neufeld et al., 2007) to identify in a culture-independent manner, using labelled fungus as bait, bacteria that exhibit mycophagous behaviour in situ. This would be analogous to the efforts that have been made to determine which microorganisms prey on bacteria (Lueders et al., 2006) or which are the prime benefactors of plant root exudates in the rhizosphere (Leake et al., 2006; Lu et al., 2007). Such studies could reveal much of the diversity and specificity of bacterial fungivores in a particular environment, especially when used in combination with a metagenomic approach (Friedrich, 2006). By way of prediction, we would expect that bacterial mycophagy plays a more prominent role in fungus-featuring environments that are otherwise characterized by low alternative nutrient availability. Indeed, culturable representatives from the mycophagous genus Collimonas have been isolated from nutrient-poor soils such as from the dunes on the island of Terschelling, the Netherlands (de Boer et al., 2001, 2004), and from natural grassland and heathland (Höppener-Ogawa et al., 2007) but also forest soils (Aspray et al., 2005; Mannisto & Haggblom, 2006).

The potential of bacterial mycophagy as a biocontrol strategy needs to explored more intensively. Collimonas fungivorans showed efficient biocontrol towards Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. radicis-lycopersici, the causative agent of tomato foot and root rot, but it is unclear whether this involved mycophagous behaviour (Kamilova et al., 2007). It is worth noting that mycophagous biocontrol agents are in essence positive-feedback biocontrol agents: they inhibit the growth of harmful fungi by feeding on them, thus supporting their own growth, which in turn leads to greater biocontrol activity.

An important challenge will be to reveal the evolutionary processes that gave rise to and shaped the various expressions of bacterial mycophagy. Obviously, bacteria and fungi have coinhabited this planet for a very long time, during which there have been many opportunities for the two to interact in a variety of ways. Any one of these interactions, including bacterial mycophagy, has been subject to the process of natural selection and at least part of this process might be reconstructed through comparative genomics of bacterial fungivores to identify which genes underlie this phenotype and how they ended up and evolved in different bacterial species. It will be an interesting exercise to compare the evolution of mycophagy in bacteria with that of other fungus-feeding organisms. With insects, there are examples of evolutionary transitions from one fungal host to another (Robertson et al., 2004), and it has been suggested that mycophagy is a behaviour serving as an evolutionary stepping stone to phytophagy (Lindquist, 1998; Robertson et al., 2004) or predation/parasitism on other insects (Whitfield, 1998; Leschen, 2000). Also, as more and deeper insights are becoming available on the mechanisms that underlie bacterial mycophagy, it will be exciting to start hypothesizing on what types of counter-adaptations fungi have evolved (e.g. resisting bacterial attack by the production of antibiotics and changes in cell wall composition and architecture or, conversely, initiating and sustaining symbiotic relations with beneficial endobacteria).

Finally, the notion that mycophagous bacteria might be beneficial to other fungivorous organisms needs closer examination. The foregut of several species of fungivorous marsupials is enlarged and harbours bacterial endosymbionts that ferment or predigest fungal biomass (Claridge & Cork, 1994). Subsistence of the earthworm, Enchytraeus crypticus, on the fungus Aspergillus proliferans is enhanced by cofeeding with Streptomyces lividans pCHIO12 which overproduces an exochitinase that degrades the fungal hyphae (Kristufek et al., 1999). While these examples need further investigation to see if they meet our criteria of mycophagous bacteria, they still illustrate a possibly broader impact of the phenomenon of bacterial mycophagy on the biology, ecology and evolution of other organisms.

In conclusion, the study of bacterial mycophagy has a future that is characterized by many technical and conceptual challenges. Meeting these challenges will place this unique bacterial–host interaction in a broader ecological context, expand our ability to exploit it for control of unwanted fungi and, above all, feed our growing appreciation for the enormous diversity and adaptability of bacteria when it comes to finding ways to acquire food in order to thrive and survive.

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. I. What is (bacterial) mycophagy?
  4. II. Strategies for bacterial mycophagy
  5. III. Practical definitions of bacterial mycophagy
  6. IV. Future directions for the study of bacterial mycophagy
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

The authors acknowledge financial support (travel grant PPS 872) from the British Council–Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) Partnership Programme. G.M.P. is a Royal Society University Research Fellow. The authors thank Peter Burlinson, Maria Marco and three anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on the manuscript. This is publication 4196 of the Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW).

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. I. What is (bacterial) mycophagy?
  4. II. Strategies for bacterial mycophagy
  5. III. Practical definitions of bacterial mycophagy
  6. IV. Future directions for the study of bacterial mycophagy
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References
  • Ahn, SJ, Yang, CH, Cooksey, DA. 2007. Pseudomonas putida 06909 genes expressed during colonization on mycelial surfaces and phenotypic characterization of mutants. Journal of Applied Microbiology 103: 120132.
  • Ajit N, Verma R, Shanmugam V. 2006. Extracellular chitinases of fluorescent pseudomonads antifungal to Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. Dianthi causing carnation wilt. Current Microbiology 52: 310316.
  • Alem MAS, Oteef MDY, Flowers TH, Douglas LJ. 2006. Production of tyrosol by Candida albicans biofilms and its role in quorum sensing and biofilm development. Eukaryotic Cell 5: 17701779.
  • Alexopoulos CJ, Mims CW, Blackwell M. 1996. Introductory Mycology, 4th edn. New York, NY, USA: Wiley.
  • Angot A, Vergunst A, Genin S, Peeters N. 2007. Exploitation of eukaryotic ubiquitin signaling pathways by effectors translocated by bacterial type III and type IV secretion systems. PLoS Pathogens 3: e3.
  • Arora DK, Filonow AB, Lockwood JL. 1983. Bacterial chemotaxis to fungal propagules in vitro and in soil. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 29: 11041109.
  • Aspray TJ, Frey-Klett P, Jones JE, Whipps JM, Garbaye J, Bending GD. 2006. Mycorrhization helper bacteria: a case of specificity for altering ectomycorrhiza architecture but not ectomycorrhiza formation. Mycorrhiza 16: 533541.
  • Aspray TJ, Hansen SK, Burns RG. 2005. A soil-based microbial biofilm exposed to 2,4-D: bacterial community development and establishment of conjugative plasmid pJP4. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 54: 317327.
  • Backert S, Meyer TF. 2006. Type IV secretion systems and their effectors in bacterial pathogenesis. Current Opinion in Microbiology 9: 207217.
  • Bae YS, Knudsen GR. 2001. Influence of a fungus-feeding nematode on growth and biocontrol efficacy of Trichoderma harzianum. Phytopathology 91: 301306.
  • Barnett HL. 1963. Nature of mycoparasitism by fungi. Annual Review of Microbiology 17: 114.
  • Barnett HL, Binder FL. 1973. Fungal host–parasite relationship. Annual Review of Phytopathology 11: 273292.
  • Beale E, Li G, Tan M-W, Rumbaugh KP. 2006. Caenorhabditis elegans senses bacterial autoinducers. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 72: 51355137.
  • Becker DM, Bagley ST, Podila GK. 1999. Effects of mycorrhizal-associated streptomycetes on growth of Laccaria bicolor, Cenococcum geophilum, and Armillaria species and on gene expression in Laccaria bicolor. Mycologia 91: 3340.
  • Benitez T, Rincon AM, Limon MC, Codon AC. 2004. Biocontrol mechanisms of Trichoderma strains. International Microbiology 7: 249260.
  • Bertault G, Roussett F, Fernandez D, Berthomieu A, Hochberg ME, Callot G, Raymond M. 2001. Population genetics and dynamics of the black truffle in a man-made truffle field. Heredity 86: 451458.
  • Bertaux J, Schmid M, Prevost-Boure NC, Churin JL, Hartmann A, Garbaye J, Frey-Mett P. 2003. In situ identification of intracellular bacteria related to Paenibacillus spp. in the mycelium of the ectomycorrhizal fungus Laccaria bicolor S238N. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 69: 42434248.
  • Betts HJ, Chaudhuri RR, Pallen MJ. 2004. An analysis of type-III secretion gene clusters in Chromobacterium violaceum. Trends in Microbiology 12: 476482.
  • Bianciotto V, Bonfante P. 2002. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi: a specialised niche for rhizospheric and endocellular bacteria. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek International Journal of General and Molecular Microbiology 81: 365371.
  • Bianciotto V, Genre A, Jargeat P, Lumini E, Becard G, Bonfante P. 2004. Vertical transmission of endobacteria in the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Gigaspora margarita through generation of vegetative spores. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 70: 36003608.
  • Bianciotto V, Lumini E, Bonfante P, Vandamme P. 2003. Candidatus Glomeribacter gigasporarum’ gen. nov., sp. nov., an endosymbiont of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. International Journal of Systematics and Evolutionary Microbiology 53: 121124.
  • Bianco C, Imperlini E, Calogero R, Senatore B, Pucci P, Defez R. 2006. Indole-3-acetic acid regulates the central metabolic pathways in Escherichia coli. Microbiology 152: 24212431.
  • Blaise F, Remy E, Meyer M, Zhou L, Narcy J-P, Roux J, Balesdent M-H, Rouxel T. 2007. A critical assessment of Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation as a tool for pathogenicity gene discovery in the phytopathogenic fungus Leptosphaeria maculans. Fungal Genetics and Biology 44: 123138.
  • Blankenship JR, Mitchell AP. 2006. How to build a biofilm: a fungal perspective. Current Opinion in Microbiology 9: 588594.
  • De Boer W, Folman LB, Summerbell RC, Boddy L. 2005. Living in a fungal world: impact of fungi on soil bacterial niche development. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 29: 795811.
  • De Boer W, Gunnewiek P, Kowalchuk GA, Van Veen JA. 2001. Growth of chitinolytic dune soil β-subclass proteobacteria in response to invading fungal hyphae. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 67: 33583362.
  • De Boer W, Leveau JHJ, Kowalchuk GA, Gunnewiek P, Abeln ECA, Figge MJ, Sjollema K, Janse JD, Van Veen JA. 2004. Collimonas fungivorans gen. nov., sp nov., a chitinolytic soil bacterium with the ability to grow on living fungal hyphae. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 54: 857864.
  • Bolwerk A, Lagopodi AL, Wijfjes AH, Lamers GE, Chin-A-Woeng TF, Lugtenberg B, Bloemberg GV. 2003. Interactions in the tomato rhizosphere of two Pseudomonas biocontrol strains with the phytopathogenic fungus Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. radicis-lycopersici. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions 16: 983993.
  • Boschker HTS, Middelburg JJ. 2002. Stable isotopes and biomarkers in microbial ecology. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 40: 8595.
  • Braun PG, Hildebrand PD, Ells TC, Kobayashi DY. 2001. Evidence and characterisation of a gene cluster required for the production of viscosin, a lipopeptide biosurfactant, by a strain of Pseudomonas fluorescens. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 47: 294301.
  • Breakspear A, Momany M. 2007. The first fifty microarray studies in filamentous fungi. Microbiology 153: 715.
  • Brunner K, Peterbauer CK, Mach RL, Lorito M, Zeilinger S, Kubicek CP. 2003. The nag1 N-acetylglucosaminidase of Trichoderma atroviride is essential for chitinase induction by chitin and of major relevance to biocontrol. Current Genetics 43: 289295.
  • Budi SW, Van Tuinen D, Arnould C, Dumas-Gaudot E, Gianinazzi-Pearson V, Gianinazzi S. 2000. Hydrolytic enzyme activity of Paenibacillus sps strain b2 and effects of the antagonistic bacterium on cell integrity of two soil-borne pathogenic fungi. Applied Soil Ecology 15: 191199.
  • Bundock P, Dulk-Ras AD, Beijersbergen A, Hooykaas PJJ. 1995. Trans-kingdom T-DNA transfer from Agrobacterium tumefaciens to Saccharomyces cerevisiae. EMBO Journal 14: 32063214.
  • Buttner S, Eisenberg T, Herker E, Carmona-Gutierrez D, Kroemer G, Madeo F. 2006. Why yeast cells can undergo apoptosis: death in times of peace, love, and war. Journal of Cell Biology 175: 521525.
  • Cambronne ED, Roy CR. 2006. Recognition and delivery of effector proteins into eukaryotic cells by bacterial secretion systems. Traffic 7: 929939.
  • Campodonico EM, Chesnel L, Roy CR. 2005. A yeast genetic system for the identification and characterization of substrate proteins transferred into host cells by the Legionella pneumophila Dot/Icm system. Molecular Microbiology 56: 918933.
  • Chamilos G, Lewis RE, Kontoyiannis DP. 2007. Multidrug-resistant endosymbiotic bacteria account for the emergence of zygomycosis: a hypothesis. Fungal Genetics and Biology 44: 8892.
  • Chen W-M, De Faria SM, Straliotto R, Pitard RM, Simoes-Araujo JL, Chou J-H, Chou Y-J, Barrios E, Prescott AR, Elliott GN et al . 2005. Proof that Burkholderia strains form effective symbioses with legumes: a study of novel mimosa-nodulating strains from South America. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 71: 74617471.
  • Chen W-M, Moulin L, Bontemps C, Vandamme P, Bena G, Boivin-Masson C. 2003. Legume symbiotic nitrogen fixation by β-proteobacteria is widespread in nature. Journal of Bacteriology 185: 72667272.
  • Cherif M, Sadfi N, Benhamou N, Boudabbous A, Boubaker A, Hajlaoui MR, Tirilly Y. 2002. Ultrastructure and cytochemistry of in vitro interactions of the antagonistic bacteria Bacillus cereus X16 and B. thuringiensis 55T with Fusarium roseum var. Sambucinum. Journal of Plant Pathology 84: 8393.
  • Chernin L, Ismailov Z, Haran S, Chet I. 1995. Chitinolytic Enterobacter agglomerans antagonistic to fungal plant pathogens. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 61: 17201726.
  • Chowdhury PR, Heinemann JA. 2006. The general secrotory pathway of Burkholderia gladioli pv. agaricicola bg164r is necessary for cavity disease in white button mushrooms. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 72: 35583565.
  • Christie PJ, Atmakur K, Krishnamoorthy V, Jakubowski S, Cascales E. 2005. Biogenesis, architecture, and function of bacterial type IV secretion systems. Annual Review of Microbiology 59: 451485.
  • Claridge AW, Cork SJ. 1994. Nutritional value of hypogeal fungal sporocarps for the long-nosed potoroo (Potorous tridactylus), a forest-dwelling mycophagous marsupial. Australian Journal of Zoology 42: 701710.
  • Coluccio A, Bogengruber E, Conrad MN, Dresser ME, Briza P, Neiman AM. 2004. Morphogenetic pathway of spore wall assembly in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Eukaryotic Cell 3: 14641475.
  • Cugini C, Calfee MW, Farrow JM, Morales DK, Pesci EC, Hogan DA. 2007. Farnesol, a common sesquiterpene, inhibits PQS production in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Molecular Microbiology 65: 896906.
  • Cummings CA, Relman DA. 2000. Using DNA microarrays to study host–microbe interactions. Emerging Infectious Diseases 6: 513525.
  • Currah RS, Smreciu EA, Lehesvirta T, Niemi M, Larsen KW. 2000. Fungi in the winter diets of northern flying squirrels and red squirrels in the boreal mixed wood forest of Northeastern Alberta. Canadian Journal of Botany 78: 15141520.
  • Delgado-Jarana J, Sousa S, Gonzalez F, Rey M, Llobell A. 2006. ThHog1 controls the hyperosmotic stress response in Trichoderma harzianum. Microbiology 152: 16871700.
  • Deveau A, Palin B, Delaruelle C, Peter M, Kohler A, Pierrat JC, Sarniguet A, Garbaye J, Martin F, Frey-Klett P. 2007. The mycorrhiza helper Pseudomonas fluorescens BBc6R8 has a specific priming effect on the growth, morphology and gene expression of the ectomycorrhizal fungus Laccaria bicolor S238N. New Phytologist 175: 743755.
  • Dijksterhuis J, Sanders M, Gorris LGM, Smid EJ. 1999. Antibiosis plays a role in the context of direct interaction during antagonism of Paenibacillus polymyxa towards Fusarium oxysporum. Journal of Applied Microbiology 86: 1321.
  • Elliott GN, Chen W-M, Chou J-H, Wang H-C, Sheu S-Y, Perin L, Reis VM, Moulin L, Simon MF, Bontemps C et al . 2007. Burkholderia phymatum is a highly effective nitrogen-fixing symbiont of Mimosa spp. and fixes nitrogen ex planta. New Phytologist 173: 168180.
  • Ferguson MW, Maxwell JA, Vincent TS, Da Silva J, Olson JC. 2001. Comparison of the exoS gene and protein expression in soil and clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Infection and Immunity 69: 21982210.
  • Fogliano V, Ballio A, Gallo M, Woo S, Scala F. 2002. Pseudomonas lipodepsipeptides and fungal cell wall-degrading enzymes act synergistically in biological control. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions 15: 323333.
  • Frank JL, Barry S, Southworth D. 2006. Mammal mycophagy and dispersal of mycorrhizal inoculum in Oregon white oak woodlands. Northwest Science 80: 264273.
  • Frey-Klett P, Garbaye J. 2005. Mycorrhiza helper bacteria: a promising model for the genomic analysis of fungal–bacterial interactions. New Phytologist 168: 48.
  • Frey-Klett P, Garbaye J, Tarkka M. 2007. The mycorrhiza helper bacteria revisited. New Phytologist 176: 2236.
  • Friedrich MW. 2006. Stable-isotope probing of DNA: insights into the function of uncultivated microorganisms from isotopically labelled metagenomes. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 17: 5966.
  • Fritsche K, Leveau JHJ, Gerards S, Ogawa S, De Boer W, Van Veen JA. 2006. Collimonas fungivorans and bacterial mycophagy. IOBC/WPRS Bulletin 29: 2730.
  • Galan JE, Wolf-Watz H. 2006. Protein delivery into eukaryotic cells by type III secretion machines. Nature 444: 567573.
  • Garbaye J. 1994. Helper bacteria: a new dimension to the mycorrhizal symbiosis. New Phytologist 128: 197210.
  • Garcia-Rodriguez FM, Schrammeijer B, Hooykaas PJJ. 2006. The Agrobacterium VirE3 effector protein: a potential plant transcriptional activator. Nucleic Acids Research 34: 64966504.
  • Godfrey SAC, Harrow SA, Marshall JW, Klena JD. 2001. Characterization by 16S rRNA sequence analysis of pseudomonads causing blotch disease of cultivated Agaricus bisporus. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 67: 43164323.
  • Gonzalez JE, Keshavan ND. 2006. Messing with bacterial quorum sensing. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 70: 859875.
  • Grant SR, Fisher EJ, Chang JH, Mole BM, Dangl JL. 2006. Subterfuge and manipulation: type III effector proteins of phytopathogenic bacteria. Annual Review of Microbiology 60: 425449.
  • Grewal SIS, Rainey PB. 1991. Phenotypic variation of Pseudomonas putida and P. tolaasii affects the chemotactic response to Agaricus bisporus mycelial exudate. Journal of General Microbiology 137: 27612768.
  • Griffiths RP, Baham JE, Caldwell BA. 1994. Soil solution chemistry of ectomycorrhizal mats in forest soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 26: 331337.
  • De Groot MJA, Bundock P, Hooykaas PJJ, Beijersbergen A. 1998. Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation of filamentous fungi. Nature Biotechnology 16: 839842.
  • Guiney DG. 2005. The role of host cell death in Salmonella infections. Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology 289: 131150.
  • Gurlebeck D, Thieme F, Bonas U. 2006. Type III effector proteins from the plant pathogen Xanthomonas and their role in the interaction with the host plant. Journal of Plant Physiology 163: 233255.
  • Haas D, Blumer C, Keel C. 2000. Biocontrol ability of fluorescent pseudomonads genetically dissected: importance of positive feedback regulation. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 11: 290297.
  • Haas D, Defago G. 2005. Biological control of soil-borne pathogens by fluorescent pseudomonads. Nature Reviews Microbiology 3: 307319.
  • Hagen S, Marx F, Ram AF, Meyer V. 2007. The antifungal protein Afp from Aspergillus giganteus inhibits chitin synthesis in sensitive fungi. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 73: 21282134.
  • Hanson AM, Hall MB, Porter LM, Lintzenich B. 2006. Composition and nutritional characteristics of fungi consumed by Callimico goeldii in Pando, Bolivia. International Journal of Primatology 27: 323346.
  • Hanya G. 2004. Diet of a japanese macaque troop in the coniferous forest of Yakushima. International Journal of Primatology 25: 5571.
  • He P, Shan L, Sheen J. 2007. Elicitation and suppression of microbe-associated molecular pattern-triggered immunity in plant–microbe interactions. Cell Microbiology 9: 13851396.
  • Hoch HC. 1978. Mycoparasitic relationships. 4. Stephanoma phaeospora parasitic on a species of Fusarium. Mycologia 70: 370379.
  • Hogan DA, Kolter R. 2002. Pseudomonas–Candida interactions: an ecological role for virulence factors. Science 296: 22292232.
  • Hogan DA, Vik A, Kolter R. 2004. A Pseudomonas aeruginosa quorum-sensing molecule influences Candida albicans morphology. Molecular Microbiology 54: 12121223.
  • Homma Y. 1984. Perforation and lysis of hyphae of Rhizoctonia solani and conidia of Cochliobolus miyabeanus by soil myxobacteria. Phytopathology 74: 12341239.
  • Honegger R. 2001. The symbiotic phenotype of lichen-forming ascomycetes. In: HockB, ed. The Mycota; IX Fungal Associations. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag, 165188.
  • Höppener-Ogawa S, Leveau JHJ, Smant W, Van Veen JA, De Boer W. 2007. Specific detection and real-time PCR quantification of potentially mycophagous bacteria belonging to the genus Collimonas in different soil ecosystems. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 73: 41914197.
  • Hoster F, Schmitz JE, Daniel R. 2005. Enrichment of chitinolytic microorganisms: isolation and characterization of a chitinase exhibiting antifungal activity against phytopathogenic fungi from a novel Streptomyces strain. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 66: 434442.
  • Huang WE, Bailey MJ, Thompson IP, Whiteley AS, Spiers AJ. 2007. Single-cell Raman spectral profiles of Pseudomonas fluorescens SBW25 reflects in vitro and in planta metabolic history. Microbial Ecology 53: 414425.
  • Ikeda R, Saito F, Matsuo M, Kurokawa K, Sekimizu K, Yamaguchi M, Kawamoto S. 2007. The contribution of the mannan backbone of cryptococcal glucuronoxylomannan and a glycolytic enzyme of Staphylococcus aureus to contact mediated killing of Cryptococcus neoformans. Journal of Bacteriology 189: 48154826.
  • Inbar J, Chet I. 1991. Evidence that chitinase produced by Aeromonas caviae is involved in the biological control of soil-borne plant-pathogens by this bacterium. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 23: 973978.
  • Inbar J, Menendez A, Chet I. 1996. Hyphal interaction between Trichoderma harzianum and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum and its role in biological control. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 28: 757763.
  • Jacobs K, Holtzman K, Seifert KA. 2005. Morphology, phylogeny and biology of Gliocephalis hyalina, a biotrophic contact mycoparasite of Fusarium species. Mycologia 97: 111120.
  • Jamir Y, Guo M, Oh H-S, Petnicki-Ocwieja T, Chen S, Tang X, Dickman MB, Collmer A, Alfano J. 2004. Identification of Pseudomonas syringae type III effectors that can suppress programmed cell death in plants and yeast. Plant Journal 37: 554565.
  • Jeffries P. 1995. Biology and ecology of mycoparasitism. Canadian Journal of Botany 73: S1284S1290.
  • Jargeat P, Cosseau C, Ola’h B, Jauneau A, Bonfante P, Batut J, Becard G. 2004. Isolation, free-living capacities, and genome structure of ‘Candidatus Glomeribacter gigasporarum,’ the endocellular bacterium of the mycorrhizal fungus Gigaspora margarita. Journal of Bacteriology 186: 68766884.
  • Jewell SN, Waldo RH, Cain CC, Falkinham JO. 2002. Rapid detection of lytic antimicrobial activity against yeast and filamentous fungi. Journal of Microbiological Methods 49: 19.
  • Jourdan E, Lazzaroni S, Lopez Mendez B, Lo Cantore P, De Julio M, Amodeo P, Iacobellis N, Evidente A. 2003. A left-handed alpha-helix containing both l- and d-amino acids: the solution structure of the antimicrobial lipodepsipeptide tolaasin. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Genetics 52: 534543.
  • Kamilova F, Leveau JHJ, Lugtenberg BJJ. 2007. Collimonas fungivorans, an unpredicted in vitro but efficient in vivo biocontrol agent for the suppression of tomato foot and root rot. Environmental Microbiology 9: 15971603.
  • Karamanoli K, Lindow SE. 2006. Disruption of n-acyl homoserine lactone-mediated cell signaling and iron acquisition in epiphytic bacteria by leaf surface compounds. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 72: 76787686.
  • Kluge M. 2002. A fungus eats a cyanobacterium: the story of the Geosiphon pyriformis endocyanosis. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 102B: 1114.
  • Kluge M, Mollenhauer D, Wolf E, Schubler A 2002. The NostocGeosiphon endocytobiosis. In: RaiAN, BergmanB, RasmussenU, eds. Cyanobacteria in symbiosis. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1930.
  • Kneip C, Lockhart P, VoSz C, Maier U-G. 2007. Nitrogen fixation in eukaryotes-new models for symbiosis. BMC Evolutionary Biology 7: 55.
  • Kobayashi DY, Reedy RM, Bick J, Oudemans PV. 2002. Characterization of a chitinase gene from Stenotrophomonas maltophilia strain 34S1 and its involvement in biological control. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 68: 10471054.
  • Kristufek V, Fischer S, Buhrmann J, Zeltins A, Schrempf H. 1999. In situ monitoring of chitin degradation by Streptomyces lividans pCHIO12 within Enchytraeus crypticus (Oligochaeta) feeding on Aspergillus proliferans. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 28: 4148.
  • Laue H, Schenk A, Li H, Lambertsen L, Neu TR, Molin SUllrich MS. 2006. Contribution of alginate and levan production to biofilm formation by Pseudomonas syringae. Microbiology 152: 29092918.
  • Leake JR, Ostle NJ, Rangel-Castro JI, Johnson D. 2006. Carbon fluxes from plants through soil organisms determined by field 13CO2 pulse-labelling in an upland grassland. Applied Soil Ecology 33: 152175.
  • Lee H, Chang YC, Nardone G, Kwon-Chung KJ. 2007. Tup1 disruption in Cryptococcus neoformans uncovers a peptide-mediated density-dependent growth phenomenon that mimics quorum sensing. Molecular Microbiology 64: 591601.
  • Lee PJ, Koske RE. 1994. Gigaspora gigantea– parasitism of spores by fungi and actinomycetes. Mycological Research 98: 458466.
  • Lee Q, Widden P. 1996. Folsomia candida, a ‘fungivorous’ collembolan, feeds preferentially on nematodes rather than soil fungi. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 28: 689690.
  • Lee SW, Cooksey DA. 2000. Genes expressed in Pseudomonas putida during colonization of a plant-pathogenic fungus. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 66: 27642772.
  • Leiter E, Szappanos H, Oberparleiter C, Kaiserer L, Csernoch L, Pusztahelyi T, Emri T, Pocsi I, Salvenmoser W, Marx F. 2005. Antifungal protein PAF severely affects the integrity of the plasma membrane of Aspergillus nidulans and induces an apoptosis-like phenotype. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 49: 24452453.
  • Lesage G, Bussey H. 2006. Cell wall assembly in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 70: 317343.
  • Leschen RAB. 2000. Beetles feeding on bugs (Coleoptera, Hemiptera): repeated shifts from mycophagous ancestors. Invertebrate Taxonomy 14: 917929.
  • Lesser CF, Miller SI. 2001. Expression of microbial virulence proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae models mammalian infection. EMBO Journal 20: 18401849.
  • Leveau JHJ, Gerards S, Fritsche K, Zondag G, Van Veen JA. 2006. Genomic flank-sequencing of plasposon insertion sites for rapid identification of functional genes. Journal of Microbiological Methods 66: 276285.
  • Leveau JHJ, Lindow SE. 2002. Bioreporters in microbial ecology. Current Opinion in Microbiology 5: 259265.
  • Leveau JHJ, Lindow SE. 2005. Utilization of the plant hormone indole-3-acetic acid for growth by Pseudomonas putida strain 1290. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 71: 23652371.
  • Levy A, Chang BJ, Abbott LK, Kuo J, Harnett G, Inglis TJJ. 2003. Invasion of spores of the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Gigaspora decipiens by Burkholderia spp. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 69: 62506256.
  • Lim HS, Kim YS, Kim SD. 1991. Pseudomonas stutzeri YPL-1 genetic transformation and antifungal mechanism against Fusarium solani, an agent of plant-root rot. Applied and Environment Microbiology 57: 510516.
  • Lim WC, Lockwood JL. 1988. Chemotaxis of some phytopathogenic bacteria to fungal propagules in vitro and in soil. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 34: 196199.
  • Linder MB, Szilvay GR, Nakari-Setala T, Penttila ME. 2005. Hydrophobins: the protein-amphiphiles of filamentous fungi. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 29: 877896.
  • Lindquist EE. 1998. Evolution of phytophagy in trombidiform mites. Experimental and Applied Acarology 22: 81100.
  • Liu P, Nester EW. 2006. Indoleacetic acid, a product of transferred DNA, inhibits vir gene expression and growth of Agrobacterium tumefaciens C58. Proeedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 103: 46584662.
  • Lo Cantore P, Lazzaroni S, Coraiola M, Serra MD, Cafarchia C, Evidente A, Iacobellis N. 2006. Biological characterization of white line-inducing principle (WLIP) produced by Pseudomonas reactans NCPPB1311. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions 19: 11131120.
  • Lorito M, Farkas V, Rebuffat S, Bodo B, Kubicek CP. 1996. Cell wall synthesis is a major target of mycoparasitic antagonism by Trichoderma harzianum. Journal of Bacteriology 178: 63826385.
  • Lorito M, Peterbauer C, Hayes CK, Harman GE. 1994. Synergistic interaction between fungal cell wall degrading enzymes and different antifungal compounds enhances inhibition of spore germination. Microbiology 140: 623629.
  • Lu YH, Abraham WR, Conrad R. 2007. Spatial variation of active microbiota in the rice rhizosphere revealed by in situ stable isotope probing of phospholipid fatty acids. Environmental Microbiology 9: 474481.
  • Lueders T, Kindler R, Miltner A, Friedrich MW, Kaestner M. 2006. Identification of bacterial micropredators distinctively active in a soil microbial food web. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 72: 53425348.
  • Lumini E, Bianciotto V, Jargeat P, Novero M, Salvioli A, Faccio A, Bécard G, Bonfante P. 2007. Presymbiotic growth and sporal morphology are affected in the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Gigaspora margarita cured of its endobacteria Cellular Microbiology 9: 1716.
  • Mannisto MK, Haggblom MM. 2006. Characterization of psychrotolerant heterotrophic bacteria from Finnish lapland. Systematic and Applied Microbiology 29: 229243.
  • Marek SM, Wu J, Glass NL, Gilchrist DG, Bostock RM. 2003. Nuclear DNA degradation during heterokaryon incompatibility in Neurospora crassa. Fungal Genetics and Biology 40: 126137.
  • Medeiros PM, Fernandes MF, Dick RP, Simoneit BRT. 2006. Seasonal variations in sugar contents and microbial community in a ryegrass soil. Chemosphere 65: 832839.
  • Melidossian HS, Seem RC, English-Loeb G, Wilcox WF, Gadoury DM. 2005. Suppression of grapevine powdery mildew by a mycophagous mite. Plant Disease 89: 13311338.
  • Mendoza-Mendoza A, Pozo MJ, Grzegorski D, Martinez P, Garcia JM, Olmedo-Monfil V, Cortes C, Kenerley C, Herrera-Estrella A. 2003. Enhanced biocontrol activity of Trichoderma through inactivation of a mitogen-activated protein kinase. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 100: 1596515970.
  • Minerdi D, Fani R, Gallo R, Boarino A, Bonfante P. 2001. Nitrogen fixation genes in an endosymbiotic Burkholderia strain. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 67: 725732.
  • Mitchell R, Alexander M. 1961. Mycolytic phenomenon and biological control of Fusarium in soil. Nature 190: 109110.
  • Moulin L, Munive A, Dreyfus B, Boivin-Masson C. 2001. Nodulation of legumes by members of the β-subclass of proteobacteria. Nature 411: 948950.
  • Mueller UG, Gerardo NM, Aanen DK, Six DL, Schultz TR. 2005. The evolution of agriculture in insects. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 36: 563595.
  • Nahalkova J, Fatehi J. 2003. Red fluorescent protein (dsred2) as a novel reporter in Fusarium oxysporum f. sp lycopersici. FEMS Microbiology Letters 225: 305309.
  • Neufeld JD, Dumont MG, Vohra J, Murrell JC. 2007. Methodological considerations for the use of stable isotope probing in microbial ecology. Microbial Ecology 53: 435442.
  • Nielsen MN, Sorensen J, Fels J, Pedersen HC. 1998. Secondary metabolite- and endochitinase-dependent antagonism toward plant-pathogenic microfungi of Pseudomonas fluorescens isolates from sugar beet rhizosphere. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 64: 35633569.
  • Nielsen TH, Christophersen C, Anthoni U, Sorensen J. 1999. Viscosinamide, a new cyclic depsipeptide with surfactant and antifungal properties produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens DR54. Journal of Applied Microbiology 86: 8090.
  • Ninio S, Roy CR. 2007. Effector proteins translocated by Legionella pneumophila: strength in numbers. Trends in Microbiology 15: 372380.
  • Nischwitz C, Newcombe G, Anderson CL. 2005. Host specialization of the mycoparasite Eudarluca caricis and its evolutionary relationship to Ampelomyces. Mycological Research 109: 421428.
  • Nosanchuk JD, Casadevall A. 2006. Impact of melanin on microbial virulence and clinical resistance to anti-microbial compounds. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 50: 35193528.
  • Partida-Martinez LP, Flores de Looss C, Ishida K, Ishida M, Roth M, Buder K, Hertweck C. 2007a. Rhizonin, the first mycotoxin isolated from the zygomycota, is not a fungal metabolite but is produced by bacterial endosymbionts. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 73: 793797.
  • Partida-Martinez LP, Hertweck C. 2005. Pathogenic fungus harbours endosymbiotic bacteria for toxin production. Nature 437: 884888.
  • Partida-Martinez LP, Monajembashi S, Greulich KO, Hertweck C. 2007b. Endosymbiont-dependent host reproduction maintains bacterial-fungal mutualism. Current Biology 17: 773777.
  • Peng X, Sun J, Michiels C, Iserentant D, Verachtert H. 2001. Decrease in cell surface galactose residues of Schizosaccharomyces pombe enhances its cofloculation with Pediococcus damnosus. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 67: 34133417.
  • Picard K, Tirilly Y, Benhamou N. 2000. Cytological effects of cellulases in the parasitism of Phytophthora parasitica by Pythium oligandrum. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 66: 43054314.
  • Pilatz S, Breitbach K, Hein N, Fehlhaber B, Schulze J, Brenneke B, Eberl L, Steinmetz I. 2006. Identification of Burkholderia pseudomallei genes required for the intracellular life cycle and in vivo virulence. Infection and Immunity 74: 35763586.
  • Pizarro-Cerda J, Cossart P. 2006. Bacterial adhesion and entry into host cells. Cell 124: 715727.
  • Preston GM, Bertrand N, Rainey PB. 2001. Type III secretion in plant growth-promoting Pseudomonas fluorescens SBW25. Molecular Microbiology 41: 9991014.
  • Preston GM, Studholme D, Caldelari I. 2005. Profiling the secretomes of plant pathogenic proteobacteria. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 29: 331360.
  • Prusty R, Grisafi P, Fink GR. 2004. The plant hormone indoleacetic acid induces invasive growth in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 101: 41534157.
  • Pukatzki S, Kessin RH, Mekalanos JJ. 2002. The human pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa utilizes conserved virulence pathways to infect the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 99: 31593164.
  • Quint M, Gray WM. 2006. Auxin signaling. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 9: 448453.
  • Rabin SDP, Hauser AR. 2003. Pseudomonas aeruginosa ExoU, a toxin transported by the type III secretion system, kills Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Infection and Immunity 71: 41444150.
  • Rai AN, Rowell P, Stewart WDP. 1981. Nitrogenase activity and dark CO2 fixation in the lichen Peltigera aphthosa Willd. Planta 151: 256264.
  • Rainey PB. 1991. Phenotypic variation of Pseudomonas putida and P. tolaasii affects attachment to Agaricus bisporus mycelium. Journal of General Microbiology 12: 27692779.
  • Rainey PB, Brodey CL, Johnstone K. 1993. Identification of a gene cluster encoding three high-molecular-weight proteins, which is required for synthesis of tolaasin by the mushroom pathogen Pseudomonas tolaasii. Molecular Microbiology 8: 643652.
  • Rainey PB, Cole ALJ, Fermor TR, Wood DA. 1990. A model system for examining involvement of bacteria in basidiome initiation of Agaricus bisporus. Mycological Research 94: 191195.
  • Rasmussen TB, Skindersoe ME, Bjarnsholt T, Phipps RK, Christensen KB, Jensen PO, Andersen JB, Koch B, Larsen TO, Hentzer M et al . 2005. Identity and effects of quorum-sensing inhibitors produced by Penicillium species. Microbiology 151: 13251340.
  • Rediers H, Rainey PB, Vanderleyden J, De Mot R. 2005. Unraveling the secret lives of bacteria: use of in vivo expression technology and differential fluorescence induction promoter traps as tools for exploring niche-specific gene expression. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 69: 217261.
  • Rehm H-J. 1958. Untersuchungen uber das Verhalten von Aspergillus niger und einem Streptomyces albus Stamm in Mischkultur. Zentralbl. Bakt. Parasitenk. Abt. II 112: 235263.
  • Rezzonico F, Binder C, Defago G, Moenne-Loccoz Y. 2005. The type III secretion system of biocontrol Pseudomonas fluorescens KD targets the phytopathogenic chromista Pythium ultimum and promotes cucumber protection. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions 18: 9911001.
  • Ribot WJ, Ulrich RL. 2006. The animal pathogen-like type III secretion system is required for the intracellular survival of Burkholderia mallei within J774.2 macrophages. Infection and Immunity 74: 43494353.
  • Richardson DHS, Cameron RP. 2004. Cyanolichens: their response to pollution and possible management strategies for their conservation in northeastern North America. The Bryologist 11: 122.
  • Robertson JA, McHugh JV, Whiting MF. 2004. A molecular phylogenetic analysis of the pleasing fungus beetles (Coleoptera: Erotylidae): evolution of colour patterns, gregariousness and mycophagy. Systematic Entomology 29: 173187.
  • Roesti D, Ineichen K, Braissant O, Redecker D, Wiemken A, Aragno M. 2005. Bacteria associated with spores of the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi glomus geosporum and glomus constrictum. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 71: 66736679.
  • Rohde JR, Breitkreutz A, Chenal A, Sansonetti PJ, Parsot C. 2007. Type III secretion effectors of the IpaH family are E3 ubiquitin ligases. Cell Host & Microbe 1: 7783.
  • Ruess L, Tiunov A, Haubert D, Richnow HH, Haggblom MM, Scheu S. 2005. Carbon stable isotope fractionation and trophic transfer of fatty acids in fungal based soil food chains. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 37: 945953.
  • Saito F, Ikeda R. 2005. Killing of Cryptococcus neoformans by Staphylococcus aureus: the role of cryptococcal capsular polysaccharide in the fungal–bacteria interaction. Medical Mycology 43: 603612.
  • Sato H, Feix JB, Frank DW. 2006. Identification of superoxide dismutase as a cofactor for the Pseudomonas type III toxin, ExoU. Biochemistry 45: 1036810375.
  • Scherlach K, Partida-Martinez LP, Dahse HM, Hertweck C. 2006. Antimitotic rhizoxin derivatives from a cultured bacterial endosymbiont of the rice pathogenic fungus Rhizopus microsporus. Journal of the American Chemical Society 128: 1152911536.
  • Schlumberger MC, Hardt W-D. 2006. Salmonella type III secretion effectors: pulling the host cell's strings. Current Opinion in Microbiology 9: 4654.
  • Schrammeijer B, Dulk-Ras Ad, Vergunst AC, Jurado Jacome, E, Hooykaas PJJ. 2003. Analysis of Vir protein translocation from Agrobacterium tumefaciens using Saccharomyces cerevisiae as a model: evidence for transport of a novel effector protein VirE3. Nucleic Acids Research 31: 860868.
  • Schrey SD, Schellhammer M, Ecke M, Hampp R, Tarkka MT. 2005. Mycorrhiza helper bacterium Streptomyces ach 505 induces differential gene expression in the ectomycorrhizal fungus Amanita muscaria. New Phytologist 168: 205216.
  • Schuessler A, Bonfante P, Schnepf E, Mollenhauer D, Kluge M. 1996. Characterization of the Geosiphon pyriforme symbiosome by affinity techniques: confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and electron microscopy. Protoplasma 190: 5367.
  • Schuessler A, Kluge M 2001. Geosiphon pyriformis an endosymbiosis between fungus and cyanobacteria, and its meaning as a model for arbuscular mycorrhiza research. In: HockB, ed. The Mycota; IX Fungal Associations. New York, NY, USA: Springer, 151161.
  • Sen R, Nurmiaho-Lassila E-L, Haahtela K, Korhonen T. 1996. Attachment of Pseudomonas fluorescens strains to the cell walls of ectomycorrhizal fungi. In: Azco’n-AguilarC, BareaJM, ed. Mycorhizas in integrated systems from genes to plant development. EUR 16728 EN. Luxembourg: European Commission, 661664.
  • Shiner EK, Rumbaugh KP, Williams SC. 2005. Interkingdom signaling: deciphering the language of acyl homoserine lactones. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 29: 935947.
  • Silliman BR, Newell SY. 2003. Fungal farming in a snail. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 100: 1564315648.
  • Simpson JA. 1998. Why don't more birds eat more fungi? Australasian Mycological Newsletter 17: 6768.
  • Singh T, Arora DK. 2001. Motility and chemotactic response of Pseudomonas fluorescens toward chemoattractants present in the exudate of Macrophomina phaseolina. Microbiological Research 156: 343351.
  • Singleton DR, Hunt M, Powell SN, Frontera-Suau R, Aitken MD. 2007. Stable-isotope probing with multiple growth substrates to determine substrate specificity of uncultivated bacteria. Journal of Microbiological Methods 69: 180187.
  • Sisko JL, Spaeth K, Kumar Y, Valdivia RH. 2006. Multifunctional analysis of Chlamydia-specific genes in a yeast expression system. Molecular Microbiology 60: 5166.
  • Sitkiewicz I, Stockbauer KE, Musser JM. 2007. Secreted bacterial phospholipase A2 enzymes: better living through phospholipolysis. Trends in Microbiology 15: 6369.
  • Siwek K, Harris AR, Scott ES. 1997. Mycoparasitism of Pythium ultimum by antagonistic binucleate rhizoctonia isolates in agar media and on capsicum seeds. Journal of Phytopathology–Phytopathologische Zeitschrift 145: 417423.
  • Smith-Vaughan HC, Gal D, Lawrie PM, Winstanley C, Sriprakash KS, Currie BJ. 2003. Ubiquity of putative type III secretion genes among clinical and environmental Burkholderia pseudomallei isolates in Northern Australia. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 41: 883885.
  • Soler-Rivas C, Jolivet S, Arpin N, Olivier JM, Wichers HJ. 1999. Biochemical and physiological aspects of brown blotch disease of Agaricus bisporus. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 23: 591614.
  • Someya N, Tsuchiya K, Yoshida T, Noguchi MT, Akutsu K, Sawada H. 2007. Co-inoculation of an antibiotic-producing bacterium and a lytic enzyme-producing bacterium for the biocontrol of tomato wilt caused by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici. Biocontrol Science 12: 16.
  • Sorensen KN, Kim KH, Takemoto JY. 1996. In vitro antifungal and fungicidal activities and erythrocyte toxicities of cyclic lipodepsinonapeptides produced by Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 40: 27102713.
  • Sprague GF Jr, Winans SC. 2006. Eukaryotes learn how to count: quorum sensing by yeast. Genes and Development 20: 10451049.
  • Stevens MP, Wood MW, Taylor LA, Monaghan P, Hawes P, Jones PW, Wallis TS, Galyov EE. 2002. An inv/mxi-spa-like type III protein secretion system in Burkholderia pseudomallei modulates intracellular behaviour of the pathogen. Molecular Microbiology 46: 649659.
  • Steyaert JM, Ridgway HJ, Elad Y, Stewart A. 2003. Genetic basis of mycoparasitism: a mechanism of biological control by species of Trichoderma. New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science 31: 281291.
  • Suparak S, Kespichayawattana W, Haque A, Easton A, Damnin S, Lertmemongkolchai G, Bancroft GJ, Korbsrisate S. 2005. Multinucleated giant cell formation and apoptosis in infected host cells is mediated by Burkholderia pseudomallei type III secretion protein BipB. Journal of Bacteriology 187: 65566560.
  • Toljander JF, Artursson V, Paul LR, Jansson JK, Finlay RD. 2006. Attachment of different soil bacteria to arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal extraradical hyphae is determined by hyphal vitality and fungal species. FEMS Microbiology Letters 254: 3440.
  • Tuno N. 1999. Insect feeding on spores of a bracket fungus, Elfvingia applanata (pers.) karst. (Ganodermataceae, Aphyllophorales). Ecological Research 14: 97103.
  • Ulrich RL, DeShazer D. 2004. Type III secretion: a virulence factor delivery system essential for the pathogenicity of Burkholderia mallei. Infection and Immunity 72: 11501154.
  • Valdivia RH. 2004. Modeling the function of bacterial virulence factors in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Eukaryotic Cell 3: 827834.
  • Vandenboogert P, Deacon JW. 1994. Biotrophic mycoparasitism by Verticillium biguttatum on Rhizoctonia solani. European Journal of Plant Pathology 100: 137156.
  • Viterbo A, Ramot O, Chernin L, Chet I. 2002. Significance of lytic enzymes from Trichoderma spp. in the biocontrol of fungal plant pathogens. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 81: 549556.
  • Wang L-H, He Y, Gao Y, Wu JE, Dong Y-H, He C, Wang SX, Weng L-X, Xu J-L, Tay L et al . (2004). A bacterial cell-cell communication signal with cross-kingdom structural analogues. Molecular Microbiology 51: 903912.
  • De Weert S, Kuiper I, Lagendijk EL, Lamers GEM, Lugtenberg BJJ. 2004. Role of chemotaxis toward fusaric acid in colonization of hyphae of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp radicis-lycopersici by Pseudomonas fluorescens WCS365. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions 17: 11851191.
  • Wells JM, Sapers GM, Fett WF, Butterfield JE, Jones JB, Bouzar H, Miller FC. 1996. Postharvest discolouration of the cultivated mushroom Agaricus bisporus caused by Pseudomonas tolaasii, P. reactans, and P. ‘gingeri. Phytopathology 86: 10981104.
  • Wheeler GL, Tait K, Taylor A, Brownlee C, Joint IAN. 2006. Acyl-homoserine lactones modulate the settlement rate of zoospores of the marine alga Ulva intestinalis via a novel chemokinetic mechanism. Plant, Cell & Environment 29: 608618.
  • Whitfield JB. 1998. Phylogeny and evolution of host–parasitoid interactions in hymenoptera. Annual Review of Entomology 43: 129151.
  • Winkelmann G. 2007. Ecology of siderophores with special reference to the fungi. Biometals 20: 379392.
  • Woo S, Fogliano V, Scala F, Lorito M. 2002. Synergism between fungal enzymes and bacterial antibiotics may enhance biocontrol. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 81: 353356.
  • Woo SL, Donzelli B, Scala F, Mach R, Harman GE, Kubicek CP, Del Sorbo G, Lorito M. 1999. Disruption of the ech42 (endochitinase-encoding) gene affects biocontrol activity in Trichoderma harzianum p1. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions 12: 419429.
  • Yang S, Zhang Q, Guo J, Charkowski AO, Glick BR, Ibekwe AM, Cooksey DA, Yang C-H. 2007. Global effect of indole-3-acetic acid biosynthesis on multiple virulence factors of Erwinia chrysanthemi 3937. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 73: 10791088.
  • Yara R, Maccheroni W, Horii J, Azevedo JL. 2006. A bacterium belonging to the Burkholderia cepacia complex associated with Pleurotus ostreatus. Journal of Microbiology 44: 263268.
  • Zeilinger S, Galhaup C, Payer K, Woo SL, Mach RL, Fekete C, Lorito M, Kubicek CP. 1999. Chitinase gene expression during mycoparasitic interaction of Trichoderma harzianum with its host. Fungal Genetics and Biology 26: 131140.
  • Zhang Z, Yuen GY. 2000. The role of chitinase production by Stenotrophomonas maltophilia strain C3 in biological control of Bipolaris sorokiniana. Phytopathology 90: 384389.