Open access peer-reviewed chapter - ONLINE FIRST

Effects of Fusarium Diseases on Forest Nursery and Its Controlling Mechanisms

Written By

Adugnaw Mekonene Admas

Submitted: 30 September 2023 Reviewed: 09 October 2023 Published: 04 February 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1004156

Fusarium - Recent Studies IntechOpen
Fusarium - Recent Studies Edited by Ibrokhim Y. Abdurakhmonov

From the Edited Volume

Fusarium - Recent Studies [Working Title]

Ibrokhim Y. Abdurakhmonov

Chapter metrics overview

57 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Fusarium spp. cause severe harm to forest plants. These fungi can induce latent infections that lead to planted seedlings rooting, as well as pre- and post-emergence damping. However, a phylogenetic study suggests that the most virulent strains of Fusarium oxysporum Schlechtend, which has been identified as the primary cause of root and root rot in nurseries, are more closely aligned with the recently identified Fusarium genus, Skovgaard, O’Donnell, and Nirenberg. Before planting, soil fumigation was the primary method of treating Fusarium illnesses in nurseries with bare roots. Alternative therapies are being investigated as rules impede the supply of the most effective fumigants. This entails improving sanitation, preserving a healthy microbial population that inhibits pathogens infecting trees through their roots, and refraining against actions that increase the risk of disease in trees, such as overfertilization and inadequate soil drainage. Although Fusarium circinatum, Nirenberg, and O’Donnell can be problematic in nurseries, they can harm ancient trees in native forests, plantations, seed farms, and landscape plantings. It is not advisable to transfer seeds or seedlings from contaminated to uninfected areas because they can spread the virus. To stop F. circinatum from spreading to nations where it has not yet been discovered, quarantine measures must be upheld. F. circinatum infections are linked to harm from weather-related events, insect activity, pruning, and seed harvesting, among other forest management practices. Pruning during the cold, dry season, when conditions are less conducive to infection, can help minimize the risk of illness in managed plantations and control insects that have the potential to be vectors and pests. Ecologically friendly biological strategies, such as using endophytic fungi and bacteria that are antagonistic to F. circinatum, plant essential oils, chitosan, or phosphite, have also been researched as ways to lessen the impact. Additionally, to reduce the number of contaminated seeds introduced into nurseries in disease-free areas, heat treatment is an easy and affordable way to eradicate the pathogen from contaminated seeds. Therefore, to address the problems of Fusarium spp,effects on nurseries, natural forests, and plantations using integrated approaches is required for sustainable managements of the forests.

Keywords

  • fungi
  • forest trees
  • Fusarium
  • treatment
  • diseases

1. Introduction

Most of the world’s surface area is covered by forests, which are essential ecosystems that play a major role in the global carbon cycle, supply valuable economic products, and provide ecosystem services. Approximately 112.95 million hectares of Europe’s forest area are covered by conifer trees, primarily Pinus species [1].

Pinus is a highly significant tree in terms of both ecology and economics. Furthermore, they are a major supplier of wood, pulp and paper, edible seeds, charcoal, resin, and many other biological activities in forest ecosystems [2]. However, free-market policies and commercial globalization have brought forest infections, particularly dangerous alien species, as invasives into any nation. This causes serious environmental and social impacts and economic losses globally [3, 4, 5].

In this regard, plant protection regulations often fail to prevent biological invasions [6, 7, 8]; and as a result, the number of invasive and damaging forest pathogens has increased dramatically recently [9].

To cope with this global challenge, new pest and disease management approaches are urgently needed to preserve the diverse services of forests under the increasing risks of globalization and climate change [10]. Fusarium species are among the ecologically harmful fungi that can infiltrate the soil and give older trees or young seedlings symptoms of neck and root rot. On the other hand, little is known about the diseases that afflict trees or seedlings in natural and semi-natural forests.

Fusarium species were found in the roots of oak (Quercus robur L.), white oak (Q. petraea (Matt.) Liebl.), and ash (Fraxinus Excelsior L.) in the former Czechoslovakia [11], Austria [12], and Poland [13]. Numerous ecological niches, including those for pathogens, endophytes, and saprotrophs, are occupied by the genus Fusarium in various climatic zones, particularly in tropical and subtropical areas [14]. This species is deemed dangerous primarily because it seriously harms forestry, which restricts seedling output globally [15], as seen with Fusarium circinatum Nirenberg in numerous coniferous O’pine species. Donnell can result in significant drops in the productivity and quality of fruits, vegetables, and other edible plant materials, particularly in South Africa [16, 17, 18, 19]. Fungal pathogen-caused plant illnesses are becoming more and more noticeable to consumers today [16, 17, 18, 20].

Fusarium species cause inhibition of germination, root rot, seedling wilt, stem rot, and seed rot in orchards. Many species of Fusarium, including F. oxysporum sensu lato., F. parish K. Skovg., F. equiseti (Corda) Sacc., F. chlamydosporum Wolverine., F. circinatum Nirenberg ja O’Donnell, F. proliferatum (Matsush.) Nirenberg., F. acuminatum Ellis kaj Everh. Vaca Reinking., F. moniliforme J. Shield, and F. tricinctum (Corda) Sacc. Young seedlings in nurseries and germination-prone seeds are susceptible to infection by Necosmospora solani (Mart.) L. Lombard and Crous (formerly known as Fusarium solani (Mart.) Sacc.). The oxysporum sensu lato species complex poses the greatest threat among Fusarium members [16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24].

It is unknown if Fusarium species are associated with the spontaneous regrowth of forest trees, despite the fact that members of this type of phytopathogenic fungus have been identified in forest litter and soil. For example, F. avenaceum and F. lateritium were discovered in oak and sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus L.) in Great Britain [25], whereas F. proliferatum was discovered in the soil of pine forests (Pinus sylvestris L.) in Scotland [26] and Poland [27]. No representatives of the genus Fusarium are more frequently discovered in soil samples taken from open fields than in samples taken from regenerating and mature forests. Outside Europe, Fusarium spp. was found in the roots of naturally regenerating Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) seedlings in Canada [28, 29] and in Japanese hardwood seedlings with declining symptoms [30]. Pathogenic Fusarium spp. were reported to be associated with tree roots and rhizomes in western Iran [31], whereas F. avenaceum and Freziera longipes Wollenw and Reinking were found as inhibitory pathogens in naturally regenerating Eucalyptus obliqua L’Hértier and E. radiata in Sieber ex DC. in Australia [32]. Recently, F. solani, F. oxysporum, F. verticillioides (Sacc.) Nirenberg, F. equiseti, F. fujikuroi Nirenberg, F. pseudocircinatum O’Donnell Ning Nirenberg kaj F. subglutinans (Wollenw. and Reinking) P.E. Nelson, Toussoun, and Marasas having the potential to cause leaf branch darkening were confirmed in pathogenicity tests [33].

Members of the genus Fusarium are commonly found in soil and forests in different parts of the world. For instance, populations of different Fusarium species have been reported in forests of Canada [34], Australia [35], Sri Lanka [36], India [37], Malaysia [38], Argentina [39], and Indonesia [40]. Fungal pathogens living in the litter layer can reduce the number of budding beech trees. According to a recent study, Neonectria and Ilyonectria species, which inhabit beech beds, are pathogenic and can harm F. sylvatica’s normal regeneration [41]. Numerous members of the genus Fusarium are more common, including unexplored species linked to the early stages of forest trees, according to a 2011 investigation of beech soil fungi in Central Europe [42]. Hence, this book chapter focuses more on Fusarium sp. effects on forest nurseries and its controlling mechanisms.

Advertisement

2. Causative agents of Fusarium fungi and others

Phytophthora, Pythium, Fusarium, and Rhizoctonia are the most frequent causes of plant growth inhibition [43]. However, Table 1 below includes fungi from a number of other genera, such as Colletotrichum, Alternaria, and Cylindrocladium. Commonly, Rhizoctonia spp. have been found to be significant contributors to damping-off in ornamental orchards [60, 61] and to be a source of disease in tree seedlings. It is not isolated more often in the US; it may be that its presence is masked by faster-growing fungi such as Fusarium spp [62]. Recent literature [63] lists the most common damping-off pathogens.

PathogenHost spCountySource
Fusarium spp.Pinus nigraSpain[44]
etotrichum acutatum, Fusarium oxysporumCornus floridaUSA: Georgi[45]
Alternaria tenuis, Fusarium spp., Pythium spp., Rhizoctonia solaniEucalyptus spp.China[46]
Rhizoctonia solaniCaragana arborescensCanada[47]
Cylindrocladium scoparium, Rhizoctonia solaniEucalyptus spp.Brazil[48]
Rhizoctonia spp, Pythium sppPicea smithianaIndia[49]
Rhizoctonia spp.Pinus palustrisUSA: Florida[50]
Fusarium spp.Pinus sylvestrisFinland[51]
Fusarium spp., Pythium spp., Thanatephorus sppEucalyptus spp., Pinus caribaea, Acacia spp.Zimbabwe[52]
Phoma herbarum, Phomopsis occultaLarix deciduaFrance[53]
Fusarium spp., Phytophthora spp., Rhizopus spp.Santalum albumIndia[54]
Colletotrichum dematiumFagus crenataJapan[55]
Fusarium spp.PseudotsugaUSA: Idaho[56]
Phytophthora spp.Fagus sylvaticaPoland[57]
Cylindrocarpon destructansPinus sylvestrisSweden[58]
Cylindrocladium scopariumPinus resinosaCanada[41]
Fusarium spp., Pythium spp., Rhizoctonia sppAcacia mangiumPhillipines[59]
Fusarium spp., Alternaria spp., Pythium spp.Pinus sylvestris, Larix silbiricaRussia[48]

Table 1.

Damping-off is a cosmopolitan disease affecting plants from around the world.

Advertisement

3. Fusarium fungi disease control

Fusaria pathogens can be carried out by the soil and are extremely difficult to eliminate once they have taken over a field. Currently, fumigants such as chloropicrin, hot water, sunlight, or cultivars that are resistant to the pathogen are commonly employed to disinfect the soil and fight diseases caused by soil-borne pathogens.

Unfortunately, the results of these treatments are not as strong as anticipated, will harm the environment, and necessitate reducing their use.

Biological control refers to the use of microorganisms in the management of plant diseases. To combat tobacco Rhizoctonia, for instance, Trichoderma lignorum was registered as a fungicide in 1954 under Japan’s Agricultural Chemicals Regulation Act. This was the world’s first instance of biofungicides being documented. Many investigations were carried out to accomplish biocontrol of Fusarium illnesses throughout the last 3 to 4 decades, including the rice-causing Bakanae disease, which is brought on by soil-borne F. oxysporum and F. fujikuroi. As a biofungicide against F. oxysporum sp on sweet potatoes, a nonpathogenic strain of F. oxysporum was registered in 2002. However, Talaromyces flavus was registered in 2007 after Trichoderma atroviride was registered in 2003 as a biofungicide to control Bakanae rice through seed or nursery treatment. They are both available in the market currently. Furthermore, for plant health certification and effective disease management, soil cleaning, the use of disease-resistant cultivars, the application of fungicides, and the early detection of plant pathogens in the field are crucial. Nevertheless, there was no practical procedure for Fusarium spp. except for the isolation and inoculation test with test plants.

Seeds and seedlings should not be transferred from contaminated to uninfected areas because they can spread the disease. To stop F. circinatum from spreading to nations where it has not yet been discovered, quarantine measures must be upheld. F. circinatum infections are linked to harm from weather-related events, insect activity, pruning, and seed harvesting, among other forest management practices. Pruning should only take place during the cold, dry season when conditions are less conducive to infection. Additionally, insects that can serve as pests and vectors should be carefully controlled to lower the risk of diseases in managed plantations. Furthermore, heat treatment is an easy and affordable way to get rid of the pathogen from contaminated seeds to reduce the entry of the infected seeds into nurseries of disease-free areas.

Advertisement

4. Type of pest and method of propagation

The most common culprits are several genera of fungi (Fusarium, Rhizoctonia) and Oomycetes (Pythium, Phytophthora), but other fungi can also be involved (Table 1). If general controls are not effective, the presence of the pathogen must be confirmed by culturing it in an artificial medium [64]. However, the way of propagation is very different for each pest. Dispersal in contaminated soil or growing medium is typical for all species. Fusarium spp. spores are spread through contaminated seeds, soil, or growing medium and used containers. The role of seed dispersal is readily apparent in cotyledon blight. Although spores are airborne, they are primarily responsible for secondary spread. Thick-walled chlamydos spores help the fungus overwinter in plant litter, and sclerotia also can form [65]. Rhizoctonia sp. can be spread by seeds or airborne spores, but transmission is most common through contaminated soil, as the fungus overwinters in the soil as sclerotia [66]. Oocyst producers of Pythium spp. and Phytophthora spp. have unique zoospores that can swim in water and overwinter in soil or plant debris such as thick-walled oospores or chlamydospores. None of these pathogens produce airborne spores, although spores can be spread by water spray [67].

Advertisement

5. Critical control points for nursery damping

The best management method is to keep pathogens out of the nursery; however, this isnot always feasible, particularly in nurseries with bare roots where diseases can still survive in the soil. Because benches, containers, and other surfaces are easily sanitized, seedling preservation is made easier from the perspective of disease prevention [68], mostly diseases that inhibit seeds, such as Fusarium species and Rhizoctonia species. Table 1 also lists additional, less aggressive fungi that can be problematic for certain species. To remove this possible source of inoculum, seeds are rinsed under running water or sterilized with a diluted (1:10) solution of hydrogen peroxide or chlorine before being sown [69]. Because all suppressive pathogens are frequent soil dwellers, they can readily get caught in-between crops or develop into dormant spores that might linger for months or even years in plant debris. Therefore, sterilizing the soil before sowing would be a wise management practice for bare-root nurseries.

One of the main ways that Rhizoctonia spreads in bare-root at nurseries is through soil splashing, which can be reduced by plant cushions [70]. The majority of media used in container gardens, such as perlite and vermiculite, are practically sterile, and pathogen suppression is hindered by the low pH of sphagnum peat [71]. The most typical way that Pythium and Phytophthora spread is through water because of their motile zoospores. Reducing surface water contact and polluted runoff by storing containers on raised benches is advised to utilize a raised bed in bare-root nurseries to prevent water from standing around the seedlings and to select coarser-textured, well-drained soil for seed sowing [72].

Advertisement

6. The role of the environment

Because most suppressive organisms are opportunistic pathogens, using the right culture techniques can lessen or even eliminate illness. For more than a century, water logging can be avoided by simply maintaining low pH levels in the soil or growing medium. Another way to avoid wetness is to keep the soil or growing medium “moist but not wet” [73].

6.1 Impact of climate change on Fusarium circinatum and other plant pathogens

A virulent infection, a susceptible host plant, and ideal environmental circumstances work together to generate plant disease. Damage caused by diseases has a high correlation with environmental changes [74]. The intensity of the illness and the coevolution of pathogens and plants can be impacted by changes in temperature, precipitation, drought, and other factors [75, 76]. In addition to having a direct impact on pathogen biology, environmental variables have a significant impact on plant germination and reproduction. For foliar pathogens, these parameters include temperature, relative humidity, and leaf wetness [77, 78]. Besides these, temperature and relative humidity can affect pathogen overwintering in the absence of a host.

Because pathogens have evolved to withstand a wide range of temperatures and have evolved at high latitudes, it is anticipated that climate change will boost their fitness and raise the danger of disease outbreaks [79]. Reduced rainfall can lessen grape downing, but higher temperatures offset shorter leaf wetness durations because infections begin earlier in the growth season, giving epidemics more time to spread [80].

Pathogens such as Fusarium circinatum (pine canker), which is more common in Europe, are favored by a drop in the average minimum temperature accompanied by more frost [81].

Conversely, variables such as increased CO2 concentrations, elevated temperatures, or dry spells impact host physiology, which modifies the way biotrophic infections colonize host tissues [82]. According to reports from central Italy, the invasive exotic species Heterobasidion irregular—which is more suited to spread in the Mediterranean climate than the local species Heterobasidion annosum—is directly impacted by dry circumstances [83].

Numerous diseases differ depending on the temperature and humidity. Because they can spread swiftly by wind and have shorter generations than plants, most diseases have an advantage over plants that allows them to move and adapt to changing climate conditions [84].

Changes in the flora of some fungus appear to be linked to climate change, which poses a threat to plant health and, in certain situations, may also increase the prevalence of pests and diseases. Infections with Phytophthora infestans have increased in Finland as a result of climate change [85]. In Canada and the United States, high temperatures have been linked to significant beetle outbreaks [20, 8687]. Models indicate that the number of canola diseases in Scotland will decline due to Pyrenopeziza brassicas and Leptosphaeria maculans [88]. Nonetheless, in the long run (2071–2100), increased average temperatures in northern Germany are anticipated to benefit canola pathogens such Alternaria brassicae, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, and Verticillium longisporum [89]. Although there is currently little knowledge on how climate change may affect plant disease biological control, high temperatures may, in certain situations, make the introduction of biological control easier [90, 91]. Crops, fruits, and other edible plant materials can suffer significant yield and quality losses due to plant diseases. In contemporary times, fungal pathogen-caused plant diseases have garnered the interest of consumers as a significant global health concern [92].

Advertisement

7. Fusarium wilt, root rot, and disease

It has been documented that suppressing pathogenic fungi such as Fusarium oxysporum, R. Solanum, and Pythium aphanidermatum can lead to damping-off illnesses, root rot, and Fusarium wilt in a variety of crops, which can seriously reduce growth and yield [93].

Endophytic bacteria that colonize plant interiors have even been demonstrated in recent research to enhance plant growth and health [94]. For this reason, they seem to be great candidates as biocontrol agents against fungal phytopathogens. Three endophytic bacterial strains were assessed for their antifungal qualities: B.B. Simbolis H18 (Bacillales: Bacillaphy), Pseudomonas aeruginosa H40 (Pseudomonadales: Pseudomonadaceae), and Stenotrophomonas maltophila H8 (Xanthomonadales: Xanthomonadaceae). By treating plants with endophytic bacteria, they were able to lessen the severity of their diseases and boost seed production and seedling survival.

Furthermore, treated seedlings exhibit an apparent increase in the antioxidant enzymes peroxidase, PPO, and catalase (CAT). The capacity of bacterial endophytes to generate a broad range of antifungal chemicals, in addition to bioactive substances, which can cause systemic resistance in infected cotton seeds, has been linked to their antagonistic action against R. solani [95].

Maximum chitinase production was seen in B. thuringiensis GS1, an endophytic bacterium that was isolated from Pteridium aquilinum, a rough fern. It was also investigated if B. thuringiensis GS1 may make cucumber plants resistant to R. solani. R. solani wilt in cucumber plants may be prevented by B. thuringiensis GS1 induction of PRPs and defense-related enzymes [96], as well as the use of endophytic actinomycetes to biocontrol R. solani, which caused tomato wilt disease [97]. The endophytic P. fluorescent strain ENPF1 inhibited the growth of the stem blight pathogen Corynespora casiicola (Berk and Curt) Wei in vitro. P. fluorescents increased defense-related enzymes such as peroxidase, PPO, chitinase, and β-1,3-glucanase in Phyllanthus amarus after exposure to Corynespora cassiicola [98].

Advertisement

8. Biological control of emerging forest diseases

8.1 Biological control of nonnative pathogens

Severe disease outbreaks can result from novel pathogen-host interactions. In actuality, nonnative viruses may have detrimental effects on nearby nonnative tree species as well as native tree species. For instance, Fusarium circinatum on Pinus species (mostly P. radiata) in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, P. pini on Pinus radiata in Chile, and Phytophthora ramorum on Japanese larch (Larix kaempferi) in the British Isles [98]. The native location of the virus is more likely to host coevolved hyperparasites.

It is true that a freshly distributed pathogen epidemic that intensifies can alter the afflicted ecology significantly. Here, polyphagous species coexisting in the same ecosystem might eventually switch to a different carbon source and modify their biology to take advantage of the newcomer [99]. However, attempts have been made to biologically control several of the most devastating nonnative pathogens using a bottom-up strategy; many potential biological control agents (BCAs), although promising in vitro, have almost completely failed in the field (e. g., Fusarium circinatum; failure in situ, and this may be climatic constraints, lack of an alternative host, development of resistance to BCA, and biotic disturbance by native organisms).

Reinforcement of top-down control forces through the recognition of native forest allies is particularly attractive in a foreign species pathogen × (native or alien) host. In relation to this, interspecific variation in host resistance is usually limited, and coevolution does not occur. The effects of symbionts on host defenses must be general enough to protect against pathogens that have not evolved, according to Halecker et al. [100] who identified an endophyte (Hypoxylon rubiginosum) living in European ash (Fraxinus excelsior) leaves that produces metabolites toxic to the nonsymbiotic pathogen Hymenoscyphus fraxineus. Thus, this endophyte may have the potential to evolve into an effective BCA. In the inoculation experiment, it was found that the presence of a local (Heterobasidion annosum) or a foreign root pathogen (H. irregulare) on Pinus pinea seedlings also affected the mycorrhizal density in the same way. However, the ectomycorrhizal symbiont (Tuber borchii) appeared to be able to discriminate between native and nonnative pathogens, possibly through host plant-mediated signaling [100].

Advertisement

9. Treatment of Fusarium diseases on conifers

Numerous Fusarium species are thought to be responsible for conifer diseases, some of which have detrimental effects on the environment and economy. Among these are fungi that result in poor growth in transplanted seedlings, stunting, and root rot in nurseries [101]. In addition to harming seedlings, Fusarium circinatum Nirenberg and O’Donnell are pathogens that affect adult trees, resulting in pitch canker disease. Along with stem and root rot brought on by Fusarium oxysporum and other Fusarium communities, tonal canker also affects planted pines. Fusarium torreyae T. by Aoki, J.A. Smith, L. Mountain, Geiser, and O’Donnell, a recently reported pathogen of Torreya taxifolia, are among the Fusarium species that have been linked to plant illnesses but have not yet been well explored [102].

Tonal canker, which is caused by F. circinatum, was originally discovered to be a disease in North Carolina, U.S.A. in 1945 [103]. The disease was given the moniker “pitch cancer” because the pathogen was found in malignant tumors that produced a lot of resin. Later, pitch canker made its way to the U.S. Southeast, where it still poses a threat to pine plantations, seeds, and seedlings.

Advertisement

10. Conclusions

The majority of forest diseases, particularly dangerous alien species such as Fusarium, are brought into nonnative areas through free market policies and worldwide commerce. This has detrimental effects on the environment, society, and the forest industries’ bottom line. Therefore, laws pertaining to plant protection sometimes fall short of preventing biological invasions, which has led to a sharp rise in the quantity of invasive and harmful forest pathogens in recent years. To cope with this worldwide challenge and protect the various services provided by forests from the growing threats of globalization and climate change, new methods of managing pests and diseases are desperately needed.

In various climatic zones of tropical and subtropical regions, the fungus Fusarium occupies multiple ecological niches, including those of pathogens, endophytes, and saprotrophs. In particular, Fusarium circinatum Nirenbergi in many coniferous species of the O’pine genus is seen to be a problem primarily because it severely harms globally by restricting the generation of seedlings. In addition, Fusarium circinatum Nirenbergi has the potential to significantly lower fruit, crop, and other edible plant material yields as well as quality.

Hence, to prevent this fungus from damaging nurseries, before sowing, the seeds are cleaned under running water or sterilized with a diluted (1:10) solution of chlorine or hydrogen peroxide that can eliminate this potential source of inoculums.

High latitudes are where pathogens evolve. Because of the pathogen’s ability to withstand a broad range of temperatures, it is anticipated that climate change may boost their fitness and raise the possibility of disease outbreaks, especially those involving Fusarium species. The severity of the disease and the coevolution of pathogens and plants can be influenced by variations in temperature, precipitation, drought, and other environmental factors. These changes are closely linked to disease-induced damage. Several species of Fusarium cause diseases of conifers, some of which have serious economic and ecological impacts. These include fungi that cause stunting and root rot in nurseries and poor growth of transplanted seedlings.

Furthermore, reducing the chance of importing contaminated seeds into nurseries in disease-free areas can be achieved easily and affordably by using thermotherapy to eradicate the virus from infected seeds. However, Fusarium spp. will remain an unsolved problem for the foreseeable future due to the absence of practical field intervention strategies and the challenges of preventing its spread to the forest because of asymptomatic nursery plants. Thus, in the near future, significant efforts will be required to address the integrated management of this disease through the application of eco-friendly technologies.

References

  1. 1. De Rigo D, Bosco C, Durrant TH, et al. Forest resources in Europe: An integrated perspective on ecosystem services, disturbances and threats. The European Atlas of Forest Tree Species. Luxembourg: Office of the European Union; 2016. pp. 8-19
  2. 2. Richardson DM, Rundel PW. Ecology and biogeography of Pinus: An introduction. In: Richardson DM, editor. Ecology and Biogeography of Pinus. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2000. pp. 3-46
  3. 3. Holmes TP, Aukema JE, Von Holle B, et al. Economic impacts of invasive species in forests past, present, and future. In: Ostfeld RS, Schlesinger WH, editors. The Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology 2009. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1162. Wiley-Blackwell; 2009. pp. 18-38
  4. 4. Vettraino A, Roques A, Yart A, Fan J, Sun J, Vannini A. Sentinel trees as a tool to forecast invasions of alien plant pathogens. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0120571
  5. 5. Wingfield MJ, Brockerhoff EG, Wingfield BD, Slippers B. Planted forest health: The need for a global strategy. Science. 2015;349:832-836
  6. 6. Liebhold AM, Brockerhoff EG, Garrett LJ, Parke JL, Britton KO. Live plant imports: The major pathway for forest insect and pathogen invasions of the US. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 2012;10:135-143
  7. 7. Eschen R, Britton K, Brockerhoff E, et al. International variation in phytosanitary legislation and regulations governing importation of plants for planting. Environmental Science and Policy. 2015;51:228-237
  8. 8. Boyd IL, Freer-Smith PH, Gilligan CA, Godfray HCJ. The consequence of tree pests and diseases for ecosystem services. Science. 2013;342:1235773
  9. 9. Klapwijk MJ, Hopkins AJM, Eriksson L, et al. Reducing the risk of invasive forest pests and pathogens: Combining legislation, targeted management and public awareness. Ambio. 2016;45:223-234
  10. 10. Stenlid J, Oliva J, Boberg JB, Hopkins AJM. Emerging diseases in European forest ecosystems and responses in society. Forests. 2011;2:486-504
  11. 11. Kubíková J. The surface mycoflora of ash roots. Transactions of the British Mycological Society. 1963;46:107-114
  12. 12. Halmschlager E, Kowalski T. The mycobiota in nonmycorrhizal roots of healthy and declining oaks. Canadian Journal of Botany. 2004;82:1446-1458. Forests 2021, 12, 811 17 of 18
  13. 13. Bartnik C. Symptomy chorobowe i uszkodzenia w systemach korzeniowych zamieraj ˛acych d˛ebów oraz grzyby im towarzysz ˛ace. In: Majewski T, editor. Fitopatologia wczoraj, dzi’s i jutro; Materiały z Sympozjum 75 lat Katedry Fitopatologii SGGW w Warszawie, 23-24 wrze’snia. Warsaw, Poland: Exit; 1997. pp. 3-10
  14. 14. Babadoost M. Fusarium: Historical and continued importance. In: Askun T, editor. Fusarium–Plant Diseases, Pathogen Diversity, Genetic Diversity, Resistance and Molecular Markers. London, UK, London, UK: IntechOpen; 2018. pp. 13-24
  15. 15. James RL, Dumroese RK. Investigations of Fusarium diseases within inland Pacific northwest Forest nurseries. In: Jackson WY, Ogden UT, editors. uyon J.C. Comp. 2006. Proceedings of the 53 Western International Forest Disease Work Conference, Jackson, WY, USA, 26-29 August 2005. Jackson, WY, USA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region; 2006. pp. 3-11
  16. 16. Martin-Pinto P, Pajares JA, Pando V, Diez JJ. Fungi isolated from diseased nursery seedlings in Spain. New Forest. 2006;31:41-56
  17. 17. Menkis A, Vasiljauskas R, Taylor AFS, Stenström E, Stenlid J, Finlay R. Fungi in decayed roots of conifer seedlings in forest nurseries, afforested clear-cuts and abandoned farmland. Plant Pathology. 2006;55:117-129
  18. 18. Fajardo MA, Leon JD, Correa GA, Morales JG. The causal agent of damping-off Pinus patula (Schiede) and Pinus tecunumanii (Schwerdtf.). Floresta Ambient. 2019;26:e20190050
  19. 19. Wingfield MJ, Hammerbacher RJ, Ganley RJ, Steenkamp E, Gordon TR, Wingfield BD, et al. Pitch canker caused by Fusarium circinatum-A growing threat to pine plantations and forests worldwide. Australasian Plant Pathology. 2008;37:319-334
  20. 20. Berg G, Hallmann J. Control of plant pathogenic fungi with bacterial endophytes. In: Schulz BJE, Boyle CJC, Sieber TN, editors. Microbial Root Endophytes. Berlin: Springer; 2006. pp. 53-69. DOI: 10.1007/3-540-33526-9_4
  21. 21. Dumroese RK, James RL. Root diseases in bareroot and container nurseries of the Pacific Northwest: Epidemiology, management, and effects on out planting performance. New Forest. 2005;30:185-202
  22. 22. Chavarriaga D, Bodles WJA, Leifert C, Belbahri L, Woodward S. Phytophthora cinnamomi and other fine root pathogens in north temperate pine forests. FEMS Microbiology Letters. 2007;276:67-74
  23. 23. Kwasna H, Behnke-Borowczyk J, Gornowicz R, Łakomy P. Effects of preparation of clear-cut forest sites on the soil mycobiota with consequences for scots pine growth and health. Forest Pathology. 2019;49:e12494
  24. 24. Newsham KK. Response of saprotrophic fungal communities to declining SO2 pollution in the natural environment. Pedobiologia. 2003;47:77-84
  25. 25. Yamazaki M, Iwamoto S, Seiwa K. Distance- and density-dependent seedling mortality caused by several diseases in eight ng in a temperate forest. Plant Ecology. 2009;201:181-196
  26. 26. Shi L, Dossa GGO, Paudel E, Zang H, Xu J, Harrison RD. Changes in fungal communities across a forest disturbance gradient. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2019;85:e00080-e00019
  27. 27. Axelrood PE, Chapman WK, Seifert KA, Trotter DB, Shrimpton G. Cylindrocarpon and Fusarium root colonization of Douglas-fir seedlings from British Columbia reforestation sites. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 1998;28:1198-1206
  28. 28. Chehri K, Salleh B, Soleimani MJ, Reddy KRN, Zakaria L. Occurrence of Fusarium spp. associated with root tissues and rhizosphere soils of forest trees and assessment of their pathogenicity on Prunus amygdalus seedlings. Australian Journal of Botany. 2010;58:679-686
  29. 29. Mwanza EJM, Kellas JD. Identification of the fungi associated with damping-off in the regeneration of Eucalyptus obliqua and E. radiata in a central Victorian forest. European Journal of Forest Pathology. 1987;17:237-245
  30. 30. Mazarotto EJ, Poitevin CG, do Carmo ALM, dos Santos AF, Tralamazza SM, Pimentel IC. Pathogenic Fusarium species complexes associated to seeds of indigenous Brazilian forest tree Aspidosperma polyneuron. European Journal of Plant Pathology. 2020;158:849-857
  31. 31. Weidensaul TC, Wood FA. Sources of species of Fusarium in Northern hardwood forests. Phytopathology. 1973;63:367-371
  32. 32. Summerell BA, Rugg CA, Burgess LW. Mycogeography of Fusarium: Survey of Fusarium species associated with forest and woodland communities in North Queensland, Australia. Mycological Research. 1993;97:1015-1019
  33. 33. Kannangara BTSDP, Deshappriya N. Microfungi associated with leaf litter decomposition of Michelia nilagirica and Semecar-puscoriacea at Hakgala Montane Forest. Journal of the National Science Foundation of Sri Lanka. 2005;33:81-91
  34. 34. Sharma G, Pandey RR, Singh MS. Microfungi associated with surface soil and decaying leaf litter of Quercus serrata in a subtropical natural oak forest and managed plantation in Northeastern India. African Journal of Microbiology Research. 2011;5:777-787
  35. 35. Manshor N, Rosli H, Ismail NA, Salleh B, Zakaria L. Diversity of Fusarium species from highland areas in Malaysia. Tropical Life Sciences Research. 2012;23:1-15
  36. 36. Allegrucci N, Bucsinszky AM, Arturi M, Cabello MN. Comunities of anamorphic fungi on green leaves and leaf litter of native forests of Scutia buxifolia and Celtis tala: Composition, diversity, seasonability and substrate specificity. Revista Iberoamericana de Micología. 2015;32:71-78
  37. 37. Rambey R, Sianturi SD. Decomposition rate of Rhizopora stylosa litter in Tanjung Rejo Village, deli Serdang Regeney, north Sumatera Province. In: International Conference of Agriculture, Environment and Food Security, IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP. Vol. 122. London, UK; 2008. p. 012058
  38. 38. James RL. Damping-off. In: Cram MM, Frank MS, Mallams KM, tech. coords. Forest Nursery Pests. Agriculture Handbook 680. Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service; 2012a. pp. 115-116
  39. 39. Jankowiak R, St. Epniewska H, Szwagrzyk J, Bilanski P, Gratzer G. Characterization of Cylindrocarpon-like species associated with litter in the old-growth beech forests of Central Europe. Forest Pathology. 2016;46:582-594
  40. 40. Pérez Sierra A, Landeras E, León M, Berbegal M, Armengol J, García-Jiménez J. Characterization of Fusarium circinatum from Pinus spp. in Northern Spain. Mycological Research. 2007;111:832-839
  41. 41. James RL. Damping-off. In: Cram MM, Frank MS, Mallams KM, tech. coords. Forest Nursery Pests. Agriculture Handbook. vol. 680. Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service; 2012. 115-116
  42. 42. Baker KF. Damping-off and related diseases. In: Baker KF, editor. The U.C. System for Producing Healthy Container-Grown Plants. Calif. Agric. Exper. Sta. Ext. Serv. Manual 23. Parramatta, Australia: Australian Nurserymen’s Association Ltd; 1957. pp. 34-51
  43. 43. Peterson GW. Disease problems in the production of containerized forest tree seedlings in North America. In: Tinus RW, Stein I, Balmer WE, editors. Proceedings, North American Containerized Forest Tree Seedling Symposium. Vol. 68. Great Plains Agricultural Council Pub; 1974. pp. 170-172
  44. 44. Dequn Z, Sutherland JR. Diseases of eucalyptus forest nursery seedlings and their management in forest nurseries in Yunnan Province, China. In: Perrin R, Sutherland JR, editors. Diseases and Insects in Forest Nurseries. Vol. 68. Paris: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique. INRA; 1994. pp. 45-49
  45. 45. Vaartaja O, Cram WH. Damping-off pathogens of conifers and of Caragana in Saskatchewan. Phytopathology. 1956;46:391-397
  46. 46. Ferreira FA, Garcia MCC, Sanfuentes EVS. Evaluation of Fungi for Biocontrol of Cylindrocladium Scoparium, Rhizoctonia Solani and Botrytis Cinferea to be Used in Suspended Brazilian Eucalyptus Nurseries. 1997
  47. 47. Singh O, Chaukiyal SP, Sharma HP. Control against damping off in spruce nurseries. Indian Journal of Forestry. 1985;8(4):321-322
  48. 48. Starkey T, Enebak SA. Rhizoctonia blight of southern pines. In: Cram MM, Frank MS, Mallams KM, tech. coords. Forest Nursery Pests. Agriculture Handbook. vol. 680. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service; 2012. 680 pp. 63-65
  49. 49. Lilja A, Hallaksela AM, Heinonen R. Fungi colonizing scots pine cone scales and seeds and their pathogenicity. European Journal of Forest Pathology. 1995;25(1):38-46
  50. 50. Mazodze R. An overview of forest nursery diseases and insects in Zimbabwe. In: Perrin R, Sutherland JR, editors. Diseases and Insects in Forest Nurseries. Vol. 68. Paris: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique. INRA; 1994. pp. 293-297
  51. 51. Motta E, Perrin R. Phoma herbarum and Phomopsis occulta, seed-borne pathogens causing dampingoff of larch. In: Perrin R, Sutherland JR, editors. Diseases and Insects in Forest Nurseries. Vol. 68. Paris: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique. INRA; 1994. pp. 93-101
  52. 52. Remadevi OK, Nagaveni HC, Muthukrishnan R. Pests and diseases of sandalwood plants in nurseries and their management. In: Lilja A, Sutherland JR, Poteri M, Mohanan C, editors. Diseases and Insects in Forest Nurseries - Proceedings of the 5th Eeting of IUFRO Working Party S7.03.04, Helsinki: Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 11. Available from: http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2005/mwp011.htm. 2005 [Accessed: January 2, 2013]
  53. 53. Sahashi N, Kubono T, Shoji T. Pathogenicity of Colletotrichum dematium isolated from current-year beech seedlings exhibiting damping-off. European Journal of Forest Pathology. 1995;25(3):145-151
  54. 54. James RL. Diseases of conifer seedlings caused by seed-borne Fusarium species. In: Shearer RC, editor. Proceedings: Conifer Tree Seed in the Inland Mountain West Symposium. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. General Technical Report GTR-INT-203:; 1986. pp. 267-271
  55. 55. Stepniewska H. Phytophthora spp. on beech seedlings in some forest nurseries of South Poland. In: Phytophthora Spp. in Nurseries and Forest Stands. Warsaw, Poland: Forest Research Institute; 2005. pp. 47-52
  56. 56. Unestam T, Beyer-Ericson L, Strand M. Involvement of Cylindrocarpon destructans in root death of pinus sylvestris seedlings: Pathogenic behaviour and predisposing factors. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research. 1989;4(4):521-535
  57. 57. Zethner O, Jorgensen J, Husaeni EA. The current status of diseases and pests of forest tree seeds in south East Asia, especially diseases in Indonesia. In: ISTA Tree Seed Pathology Meeting, Proceedings, 1996. International Seed Testing Association; 1997. pp. 86-94
  58. 58. Gromovykh TI, Malinovsky AL, Gukasyan BM, Tulpanova BA, Golovanova TI. The application of microbiological antagonism for biological control of damping-off in nurseries. In: James RL, editor. Proceedings of the 3rd Meeting of IUFRO Working Party S7.03.04. Missoula (MT): USDA Forest Service, Northern Region. Forest Health Protection Report 97-4; 1997. pp. 138-144
  59. 59. James RL. Fusarium root and stem diseases. In: Cram MM, Frank MS, Mallams KM, tech. coords. Forest Nursery Pests, Agriculture Handbook. vol. 680. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service; 2012b. pp. 117-120
  60. 60. Martin-Pinto P, Pajares J, Diez J. Pathogenicity of Fusarium verticillioides and Fusarium oxysporum on Pinus nigra seedlings in Northwest Spain. Forest Pathology. 2008;38:78-82
  61. 61. Yang D, Bernier L, Dessureault M. Phaeotheca dimorphospora increases Trichoderma harzianum density in soil and suppresses red pine damping-off caused by Cylindrocladium scoparium. Canadian Journal of Botany. 1995;73(5):693-700
  62. 62. Britton KO. Damping-off of flowering dogwood seedlings caused by Colletotrichum acutatum and Fusarium oxysporum. Plant Disease. 1995;79(11):1188
  63. 63. Camporota P, Perrin R. Survey for damping-off in forest nurseries in France. Preliminary results. In: Perrin R, Sutherland JR, editors. Diseases and Insects in Forest Nurseries. Vol. 68. Paris: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique. INRA; 1994. pp. 51-58
  64. 64. Weiland JE. Pythium root rot. In: Cram MM, Frank MS, Mallams KM, tech. coords. Forest Nursery Pests Agriculture Handbook. vol. 680. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service; 2012a. pp. 129-131
  65. 65. Landis TD, Tinus RW, McDonald SE, Barnett JP. The container tree nursery manual. In: Volume 5, the Biological Component: Nursery Pests and Mycorrhizae, Agriculture Handbook. Vol. 674. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service; 1990. 171 p
  66. 66. Fraedrich SW, Cram MM. 2012. Seed fungi. In: Cram MM, Frank MS, Mallams KM, tech. coords. Forest Nursery Pests, Agriculture Handbook. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service. 680: 132-134
  67. 67. Landis TD, Tinus RW, McDonald SE, Barnett JP. The container tree nursery manual. In: Volume 2, Containers and Growing Media. Agriculture Handbook. Vol. 674. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service; 1990b. 88 p
  68. 68. Weiland JE. Soil-pest relationships. In: Cram MM, Frank MS, Mallams KM, tech. coords. Forest Nursery Pests, Agriculture Handbook. vol. 680. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service; 2012. pp. 16-19
  69. 69. Anderson PK, Cunningham AA, Patel NG, Morales FJ, Epstein PR, Daszak P. Emerging infectious diseases of plants: Pathogen pollution, climate change and agrotechnology drivers. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 2004;19:535-544. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2004.07.021
  70. 70. Chakraborty S. Potential impact of climate change on plant–pathogen interactions. Australasian Plant Pathology. 2005;34:443-448
  71. 71. Eastburn DM, McElrone AJ, Bilgin DD. Influence of atmospheric and climatic change on plant-pathogen interactions. The Plant Pathology. 2011;60:54-59
  72. 72. Colhoun J. Effect of environmental factors on plant disease. Annual Review of Phytopathology. 1973;11:343-364
  73. 73. Huber L, Gillespie TJ. Modelling leaf wetness in relation to plant disease epidemiology. Annual Review of Phytopathology. 1992;30:553-577
  74. 74. Deutsch CA, Tewksbury JJ, Huey RB, Sheldon KS, Ghalambor CK, Haak DC, et al. Impacts of climate warming on terrestrial ectotherms across latitude. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2008;105(18):6668-6672. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0709472105. Epub 2008 May 5
  75. 75. Salinari F, Giosue S, Tubiello FN, Rettori A, Rossi V, Spanna F, et al. Downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola) epidemics on grapevine under climate change. Global Change Biology. 2006;12:1299-1307
  76. 76. Watt MS, Palmer DJ, Bulman LS. Predicting the severity of Dothistroma needle blight on Pinus radiata under future climate in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science. 2011;41:207-215
  77. 77. Chakraborty S, Datta S. How will plant pathogens adapt to host plant resistance at elevated CO2 under a changing climate? New Phytologist. 2003;159:733-742
  78. 78. Garbelotto M, Linzer R, Nicolotti G, Gonthier P. Comparing the influences of ecological and evolutionary factors on the successful invasion of a fungal forest pathogen. Biological Invasions. 2010;12:943-945
  79. 79. Davis MB, Shaw RG. Range shifts and adaptive responses to quaternary climate change. Science. 2001;292:673-679
  80. 80. Hannukkala AO, Kaukoranta T, Lehtinen A, Rahkonen A. Late-blight epidemics on potato in Finland, 1933-2002; increased and earlier occurrence of epidemics associated with climate change and lack of rotation. Plant Pathology. 2007;56:167-176
  81. 81. Bentz BJ, Régnière J, Fettig CJ, Hansen EM, Hayes JL, Hicke JA, et al. Climate change and bark beetles of the Western United States and Canada: Direct and indirect effects. Bioscience. 2010;60:602-613. DOI: 10.1525/bio.2010.60.8.6
  82. 82. Woods AJ, Heppner D, Kope HH, Burleigh J, Maclauchlan L. Forest health and climate change: A British Columbia perspective. The Forestry Chronicle. 2010;86:412-422
  83. 83. Fitt BDL, Fraaije BA, Chandramohan P, Shaw MW. Impacts of changing air composition on severity of arable crop disease epidemics. Plant Pathology. 2011;60:44-53. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3059.2010.02413.x
  84. 84. Siebold M, von Tiedemann A. Potential effects of global warming on oil seed rape pathogens in Northern Germany. Fungal Ecology. 2012;5:62-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.funeco.2011.04.003
  85. 85. Ghini R, Hamada E, Bettiol W. Climate change and plant diseases. Scientia Agricola. 2008;65:98-107. DOI: 10.1590/S0103-90162008000700015
  86. 86. Compant S, van der Heijden MGA, Sessitsch A. Climate change effects in beneficial plant-microorganism interactions. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. 2010;73:197-214. DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2010.00900.x
  87. 87. Siddiqui ZA, Mahmood I. Effects of rhizobacteria and root symbionts on the reproduction of Meloidogyne javanica and growth of chickpea. Bioresource Technology. 2001;79:41-46
  88. 88. Downing KJ, Thomson JA. Introduction of the Serratia marcescens chi A gene into an endophytic Pseudomonas fluorescens for the biocontrol of phytopathogenic fungi. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 2000;46:363-369
  89. 89. Sturz AV, Christie BR, Nowak J. Bacterial endophytes: Potential role in developing sustainable systems of crop production. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences. 2000;19:1-30
  90. 90. Adhikari TB, Joseph CM, Yang G, Phillips DA, Nelson LM. Evaluation of bacteria isolated from rice for plant growth promotion and biological control of seedling disease of rice. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 2001;47:916-924
  91. 91. Tjamos EC, Tsitsigiannis DI, Tjamos SE, Antoniou P, Katinakis P. Selection and screening of endorhizosphere bacteria from solarised soils as biocontrol agents against Verticillium dahliae of solanaceous hosts. European Journal of Plant Pathology. 2004;110:35-44
  92. 92. Selim NA, Abdel Magied AH, Habib HH, Waly HA, Fadl AA, Shalash SM. Effect of pectinase enzyme supplementation and low energy corn-soybean meal diets on broiler performance and quality of carcass and meat. Egyptian Poultry Science. 2016;36:319-335
  93. 93. Goudjal Y, Toumatia O, Sabaou N, Barakate M, Mathieu F, Zitouni A. Endophytic actinomycetes from spontaneous plants of Algerian Sahara: Indole-3-acetic acid production and tomato plants growth promoting activity. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2013;29(10):1821-1829
  94. 94. Mathiyazhagan S, Kavitha K, Nakkeeran S, Chandrasekar G, Manian K, Renukadevi P, et al. PGPR mediated management of stem blight of Phyllanthus amarus (Schum and Thonn) caused by Corynespora cassiicola (Berk and Curt) Wei. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection. 2004;37:183-199. DOI: 10.1080/03235400410001730658
  95. 95. Brasier C, Webber J. Sudden larch death. Nature. 2010;466:824-825
  96. 96. Wingfield JC. Comparative endocrinology, environment and global change. General and Comparative Endocrinology. 2008;157:207-216
  97. 97. Gilbert GS, Parker IM. Rapid evolution in a plant pathogen interaction and the consequences for introduced host species. Evolutionary Applications. 2010;3:144-156
  98. 98. Martin-Garcia J, Zas R, Solla A, Woodward S, Hantula J, Vainio EJ, et al. Environmentally friendly methods for controlling pine pitch canker. Plant Pathology. 2019;68:843-860
  99. 99. Schulz AN, Lucardi RD, Marsico TD. Successful invasions and failed biocontrol: The role of antagonistic species interactions. Bioscience. 2019;69:711-724
  100. 100. Halecker S, Wennrich JP, Rodrigo S, Andree N, Rabsch L, Baschien C, et al. Fungal endophytes for biocontrol of ash dieback: The antagonistic potential of Hypoxylon rubiginosum. Fungal Ecology. 2020;45:100918
  101. 101. Zampieri E, Giordano L, Lione G, Vizzini A, Sillo F, Balestrini R, et al. A nonnative and a native fungal plant pathogen similarly stimulate ectomycorrhizal development but are perceived differently by a fungal symbiont. The New Phytologist. 2017;213:1836-1849
  102. 102. Jones O, Scheuerlein A, Salguero-Gómez R, et al. Diversity of ageing across the tree of life. Nature. 2014;505:169-173. DOI: 10.1038/nature12789
  103. 103. Aoki T, Smith JA, Mount LL, Geiser DM, O’Donnell K. Fusarium torreyae Sp. Nov., a pathogen causing canker disease of Florida torreya (Tarreya taxifolia), a critically endangered conifer restricted to Northern Florida and Southwestern Georgia. Mycologia. 2013;105(2):312-319. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43924156

Written By

Adugnaw Mekonene Admas

Submitted: 30 September 2023 Reviewed: 09 October 2023 Published: 04 February 2024