Comparative Study of Fungal Diversity in the Agricultural soil and Non-agricultural soil of Bhadravathi taluk, Shimoga district, Karnataka, India
Abstract
Fungi play an important role in the maintenance and survival of tropical forests. In the present study, both agricultural soil and non-agricultural soil samples were studied for screening and detection of fungal diversity in these two samples.
Three different methods were subjected for the diversity analysis of fungi. Among all the methods serial dilution method is better compared to the baiting technique and war cup method. One gram of leaf litter soil sample was added into the 10 ml of sterile distilled water and mixed well. Then, PDA media was prepared and poured into sterile petriplates and allowed to solidify. The serial dilutions were prepared and 0.1 ml of each dilution were transferred to sterile plates containing PDA media.
In non-agricultural soil, four samples were screened for fungal diversity. A total of 14 fungal genera were recorded in all the four samples. In agricultural soil, four samples were screened for fungal diversity. A total of 12 fungal genera were recorded in all the four samples. Umblebylu sample shows more fugal diversity than Kuvempu University Campus, Lakkavalli and Back water of Bhadra reservoir. In agricultural soil sample, maize field shows more fungal diversity than groundnut field, paddy field and sugarcane field
References
Anu Kalia and Gupta RP. 2005. Conservation and utilization of microbial diversity. National Biodiversity Authority, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India 1-40.
Aneja KR. 2001. Experiments in Microbiology, Plant Pathology and Biotechnology. New age international publishers Vol.4:157-162.
Barnett HL. 1975. Illustrated genera of imperfect fungi Vol. II:1-225.
Booth C. 1971. Illustrated the genus Fusarium. Common Wealth Mycological Institute 1-237.
Christian K. Dang, Eric Chauvet and Mark O. Gessner. 2005. Magnitude and variability of process rates in fungal diversity litter decomposition relationships. Journal of Ecology, 8: 1129-1137.
Das DK, Chaturvedi OP, Mandal MP and Kumar R. 2007. Reclamation of degraded soil through tree plantation-litter and fertility changes. Journal of Indian forester Vol. 133:647-654.
Doomsch KH and Games W. 1980. Compendium of soil fungi. Academic Press 1:1-858.
Gonzalez Grizelle and Timothy R. Seastrdt. 2001. Soil fauna and plant litter decomposition in tropical and subalpine forests. Journal of Ecology 82(4):955-964.
Ian C, Anderson and Colin P, Campbell. 2005.Diversity of fungi in organic soils under a Moorland-scots pine gradient. Journal of applied and Environmental microbiology Vol72 (11):1129- 1137.
Jennifer L. Kirk, Lee A. Beaudette, Miranda Hart, Petter Moutoglis, John M. Klironomos, Hung Lee and Jack T. Trevor’s. 2004. Methods of studying soil microbial diversity: A review. Journal of Microbiological methods, 58:169-188.
Jonasson SJ, Castro and Michelsen A. 2005. Interactions between plants, litter and microbes in cycling of nitrogen and phosphorous in the arctic. Journal of Soil Biology and Biochemistry 38:526- 532.
Lizhang. 2006. Bacterial diversity of Australian exotic pine forest soil and leaf litter. Thesis, Griffith University, Australia 156-185.
Marie-Madeleine Couteaux, Pierre Bottner and Bjorn Berg. 2000. Litter decomposition, climate and litter quality. JSTOR 4(2):25-32.
Sari Hill, Sari Stark, Maija Salemaa and John Derome. 2006. Plant litter and its relevance in soil cycling. Finnish Forest Research Institute, Vantaa Research Unit, Vantaa. 1-5.
Shobha Sharma, Andrea Rangger, Margit von Lutzow and Heribert Insam. 1999. Functional diversity of soil bacterial communities increases after maize litter amendment. Institute of Soil Ecology 3(1):13-17.
Sigurd Funder. 1961. Practical mycology manual for identification of fungi. A.W. Broggers Boktrykkari A/S, Norway 1-120.
Subramanian CV. 1983. Hyphomycetes taxonomy and biology. Academic Press, London, Vol. I and II:1-930.
