Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:25:08.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XVI.—An Investigation of the Mucorales in the Soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

Marie E. Campbell
Marie E. Campbell
Affiliation:
Mycology Department, Edinburgh University, and Botany Department, St Andrews University.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Mucorales have a wide geographical distribution and for seventy years they have been the subject of investigation both in Europe and in America. In this country, however,little research has been done on this group, the only workers being Bayliss-Elliott (1930) who has investigated the microflora of the Dovey salt marshes, Dale (1912, 1914) who examined the fungus flora of soil at Cambridge, and Brierley (1923, 1927, 1928) who has done considerable work on soil study. Although certain of the Mucorales were isolated by the last named, he was mostly concerned with the general methods of soil culture. The important quantitative technique was devised by Brierley (1927). Oudemans and Koning (1902) were the first to show the presence of Mucors in the soil. They examined the soil fungi in Holland and isolated two new species of Mucors. Möller (1903) investigated the fungi found in Pine mycorrhiza and obtained a further four new species. Hagem (1907, 1910) studied the morphology and physiology of seventeen Mucors from the soil of Norway, seven of which were new species. In 1908 Lendner published his “Les Mucorinées de la Suisse,” an important contribution to the study of this group of fungi. A criticism which might be levelled at this work is that it is difficult to ascertain from it whether or not Lendner used pure cultures on which to base his descriptions. He merely states that “dilution methods used in Bacteriology were employed,” no mention of monospore cultures being made. Further important work on this group has been done by Korpatschewska (1909), Namy-slowski (1906, 1920), Naumov (1914, 1924, 1935), Ling-Young (1930), Johann (1932), Jensen (1912, 1931), and in the Kryptogamenflora der Mark Brandenburg (1935) Zycha gives a complete revision of the classification of the Mucorales. A survey of the geographical distribution of this group of fungi is found in the work of Niethammer (1935), while further classification has been done by Linnemann (1936). In America, Povah (1917) and Waksman(1916, 1917, 1922, 1927) have both added considerably to our knowledge of the Mucorales in the soil.

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 59 , Issue 2 , 1938 , pp. 411 - 436
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1938

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References to Literature

Abbott, E. V., 1925. “The Occurrence of Fungi in Soils,” Soil Sri., vol. xvi, pp. 207–216.Google Scholar
Abbott, and Gilman, , 1927. “A Summary of Soil Fungi,” Iowa St. Coll. Journ. Sci., vol. i, pp. 225–335.Google Scholar
Bainier, G., 1884. “Nouvelles observations sur les zygospores des Mucorinées,” Ann. Sci. nat. Bot., sér. 6, vol. xix, pp. 200–216.Google Scholar
Bayliss-Elliott, , 1930. “Soil Fungi in the Dovey Salt Marshes,” Ann. appl. Biol., vol. xvii, pp. 284–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blakeslee, A., 1904. “Sexual Reproduction in the Mucorineæ,” Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts Sci., vol. xl, pp. 205–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blakeslee, A., 1915. “Sexual Reactions between Hermaphroditic and Diœcious Mucors,” Biol. Bull., Wood's Hole, vol. xxix, pp. 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brierley, W. B., 1923. “Soil Fungi,” Micro-organisms of the Soil, by Russell, E. J., pp. 118–146, Longmans, Green & Co.Google Scholar
Brierley, Jewsen, and Beierley, , 1927. “The Quantitative Study of Soil Fungi,” Congr. Soil Sci., 1, vol. iii, p. 24.Google Scholar
Brierley, W. B., 1928. “The Microflora of the Soil,” Journ. Quekett micr. Cl., vol. xvi, pp. 9–18.Google Scholar
Coleman, D. A., 1916. “Environmental Factors Influencing the Activity of Soil Fungi,” Soil Sci., vol. ii, pp. 1–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, E., 1912. “On the Fungi of the Soil. 1. Sandy Soil,” Ann. mycol., Berl., vol. x, pp. 452–477.Google Scholar
Dale, E., 1914. “On the Fungi of the Soil,” Ann. mycol., Berl., vol. xii, pp. 33–62.Google Scholar
Hagem, O., 1907. “Untersuchungen uber Norwegische Mucorineen,” 1, Vidensk. Selsk. 1. Math. Naturw. KL., 7, pp. 1–50.Google Scholar
Hagem, O., 1910. “Untersuchungen uber Norwegische Mucorineen,” 2, Vidensk. Selsk. I. Math. Naturw. KL., 4, pp. 1–152.Google Scholar
Hagem, O., 1910. “Neue Untersuchungen uber Norwegische Mucorineen,” Ann. mycol., Berl., vol. viii, pp. 265–286.Google Scholar
Jensen, C. N., 1912. “Fungous Flora of the Soil,” N.Y. Cornell agric. Exp. Sta., Bull. 315, pp. 415–501.Google Scholar
Jensen, H. L., 1931. “Fungous Flora of the Soil,” Soil Sci., vol. xxxi, pp. 123–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johann, F., 1932. “Untersuchungen uber Mucorineen des Waldbodens,” Zbl. Bakt., 2, vol. lxxxv, pp. 305–338.Google Scholar
Killian, C., 1936. “Étude sur la biologie des sols des hauts plateaux algeriens,” Ann. agron. Paris, 6, vol. iv, pp. 595–614.Google Scholar
Killian, C., and Fehér, D., 1935. “Recherches sur phénomènes microbiologiques des sols sahariens,” Ann. Inst. Pasteur, 55, vol. v, pp. 573–622.Google Scholar
King, and Doryland, , 1909. “The Influence of Depth of Cultivation upon Soil Bacteria and their Activities,” Bull. 161, Kansas agric. Exp. Sta.Google Scholar
Korpatschewska, J., 1909. “Sur le dimorphisme physiologique de quelque Mucorinées hétérothalliques,” Bull. Soc. bot. Genève, 2, sér. 1, pp. 317–352.Google Scholar
Léger, M., 1895. “Recherches de la structure des Mucorinées,” Thèse, Paris, 151, S.Google Scholar
Lendner, A., 1908. “Les Mucorinées de la Suisse,” Matér. Flore crypt. Suisse, III, vol. i, pp. 1–177.Google Scholar
Ling-Young, M., 1930. “Étude biologique des phénornènes de la sexualité chez les Mucorinées,” Rev. gén. Bot., vol. xlii, pp. 144, etc.Google Scholar
Ling-Young, M., 1931. Ibid., vol. xliii, pp. 30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linnemann, G., 1936. “Beitrag zu einer Flora der Mucorineæ Marburgs,” Flora, vol. cxxx, pp. 176–217.Google Scholar
McLennan, F., 1928. “Growth of Fungi in the Soil,” Ann. appl. Biol., vol. xv, pp. 95–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matruchot, L., 1900. “Notes mycologiques. Piptocephalis Tieghemiana,” Bull. Soc. mycol. Fr., vol. xvi, pp. 58–64.Google Scholar
Möller, A., 1903. “Untersuchungen über ein-und zweijahrige Kiefern im märkischen Sandboden,’ Zeils. Forst-u. Jagdw., vol. xxxv, pp. 321–338.Google Scholar
Namyslowski, B., 1906. “Rhizopus nigricans et les conditions de la formation de ses zygospores,” Bull. Acad. Sci. Cracovie, pp. 676–692.Google Scholar
Namyslowski, B., 1910. “Zygorhynchus Vuillemini, une nouvelle mucorinée isolée du sol,” Ann. mycol., vol. viii, pp. 152–155.Google Scholar
Namyslowski, B., 1910. “Studien über Mucorineen,” Bull. int. Acad. Cracovie. Cl. d. sci. Math. sci. Nat. B., pp. 477–520.Google Scholar
Namyslowski, B., 1920. “Etat actuel des recherches sur les phénoniènes de la sexualite des Mucorinées,” Rev. gén. Bot., vol. xxxii, pp. 193–213.Google Scholar
Naumov, N., 1914. “Materiaux pour la flore mycologique de la Russie,” Bull. Soc. mycol. Fr., vol. xxx, pp. 382–390.Google Scholar
Naumov, N., 1924. “Les bases morphologiques de la systematique dans la famille des Mucoracées,” Bull. Soc. mycol. Fr., vol. xl, pp. 86–92.Google Scholar
Naumov, N., 1935. “Keys for the Determination of the Mucorales,” Publ. Off. Acad. Sci. U.S.S.R. Moscow.Google Scholar
Nielsen, N., 1927. “Fungi isolated from the Soil and from the Excrements of Arctic Animals,” Medd. Gronland.Google Scholar
Niethammer, , 1935. “Die Mucorineen des Erdbodens,” Zeits. Pflkrankh., vol. xlv, pp. 241–280.Google Scholar
Oudemans, and Koning, , 1902. “Prodome d'une flore mycologique de la terre humeuse du Spanderswoud,” Extr. Arch. Néerland Sci. nat., 2, vol. vii, pp. 266–298.Google Scholar
Paine, F. S., 1927. “Studies of the Fungous Flora of Virgin Soils,” Mycologia, vol. xix, pp. 248–266.Google Scholar
Pispek, P., 1929. “Les Mucorinées du sol en Yugoslavia,” Acta. bot., Zagreb., 4, 36 S.Google Scholar
Povah, A., 1917. “A Critical Study of Certain Species of Mucor,” Bull. Torrey bot. Cl., vol. xliv, pp. 241–259, 287–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pratt, O. A., 1918. “Soil Fungi in Relation to Diseases of the Irish Potato in Southern Idaho,” Journ. agric. Res., vol. xiii, pp. 73–100.Google Scholar
Price, B., 1927. “Recherches sur les espèces élèmentaires dans le genre M. hiemalis,” Bull. Soc. bot. Genève, vol. xix, pp. 174–191.Google Scholar
Raillo, A., 1929. “Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Boden-Pilze,” Zbl. Bakt., 2, vol. lxxviii, pp. 515–524.Google Scholar
Sabet, Y., 1935. “A Preliminary Study of the Egyptian Soil Fungi,” Bull. Fac. Sci. Egypt. Univ., vol. v, 29 pp.Google Scholar
Sumstine, D. R., 1910. “The N. American Mucorales,” Mycologia, vol. ii, pp. 125–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swift, M. E., 1929. “Contribution to a Mycological Flora of Local Soils,” Mycologia, vol. xxi, pp. 204–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, R., 1919. “On the Fungous Flora of the Soil,” Ann. phytopath. Soc. Japan, vol. i, pp. 17–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waksman, S., 1916. “Soil Fungi and their Activities,” Soil Sci., vol. ii, pp. 103–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waksman, S., 1917. “Is there any Fungous Flora of the Soil?”, Soil Sci., vol. iii, pp. 565–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waksman, S., 1922. “The Growth of Fungi in the Soil,” Soil Sci., vol. xiv, pp. 153–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waksman, S., 1927. Principles of Soil Microbiology, Baltimore.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werkenthin, F. C., 1916. “Fungous Flora of Texas Soils,” Phytopathology, vol. vi, pp. 241–253.Google Scholar
Zycha, H., 1935. Kryptogamenflora der Mark Brandenburg, Pilz. 2, Mucorineæ.Google Scholar