- , :

630*579.264:630
. .
.
-
,
:
,
.
.
,
,
,
-
.
-
-
,
-
,
.
. .
. [1]
sp.
Lophodermium seditiosum Minter)
.
(
Melampsora larici-populina Kleb.)
:
,
,
,
Pinus
(
,
.
.
,
,
,
,
-
[2],
.
?
-
«
–
–
».
Melampsorella caryophyllacearum
171
ɂɡɜɟɫɬɢɹ ɋɚɧɤɬ-ɉɟɬɟɪɛɭɪɝɫɤɨɣ ɥɟɫɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɟɫɤɨɣ ɚɤɚɞɟɦɢɢ. 2014. ȼɵɩ. 207
hroet [3],
,
«
»
.
-
44–51 % [4].
–
-
M. caryophyllacearum,
.
.
(Abies sibirica Ldb.),
«
»
-
«
».
«
»,
(
,
«
-
. .).
».
(
«
»)
,
,
(
,
. .)
.
,
-
.
,
,
,
[5]
,
2011 .
.
-
.
.
-
,
 1350.
–
25 ° .
-
.
,
,
.
.
-
[6]
.
. .
[7],
.
(
)
.
24
(≈ 0,2 ),
.
.
-
,
: Streptomyces sp.,
Thrichoderma sp., Verticillium sp., Bacillus sp., Micrococcus sp.
172
ȼ.Ⱥ. ɋɟɧɚɲɨɜɚ
Statistica 5
Microsoft Excel 2007.
.
,
»
«
2–3
(
. 1).
-
,
,
.
,
,
,
-
.
(
. 2).
(
,
(53 %),
:
)
(58 %).
,
,
,
.
(
(
72 %).
-
95 %),
.
,
.
,
10
9
8
N x 10*5
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
. 1.
(
«
», 2011
)
173
Nx 10*5
,
ɂɡɜɟɫɬɢɹ ɋɚɧɤɬ-ɉɟɬɟɪɛɭɪɝɫɤɨɣ ɥɟɫɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɟɫɤɨɣ ɚɤɚɞɟɦɢɢ. 2014. ȼɵɩ. 207
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
. 2.
Melampsorella caryophyllacearum
(
«
.
4,67  103
», 2011 .):
1 (
,
⁄1 )
-
,
,
(21,4 %
).
-
.
.
,
6  103
– 3  103
⁄1 ,
,
⁄1 .
[8, 9].
,
(t)
(w)
(
. 1).
.
,
,
[10, 11].
. .
. [12]
,
.
.
174
,
-
ȼ.Ⱥ. ɋɟɧɚɲɨɜɚ
1
(w)* (P ≤ 0,05)
(t)
0,98
0,99
0,71
0,78
0,85
0,98
*
0,84
0,70
0,67
0,38
0,84
0,81
«
».
,
,
:
,
(
. 3).
-
,
.
.
(
)
(
. 4,ɚ).
:
21 %
,
Bacillus sp.
. 3.
(
)
3-
,
2011 .:
(
)
175
ɂɡɜɟɫɬɢɹ ɋɚɧɤɬ-ɉɟɬɟɪɛɭɪɝɫɤɨɣ ɥɟɫɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɟɫɤɨɣ ɚɤɚɞɟɦɢɢ. 2014. ȼɵɩ. 207
ɛ)
5
5
4
,
,
ɚ)
6
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
1
. 4.
–
,
2
Streptomyces sp. (
–
3
4
) 2011 .:
5,00
0,00
ɚ)
ɛ)
18
3
16
,
,
4
3
14
2
12
10
2
8
6
1
4
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
1
4
2
ɷɩɢɮɢɬɧɵɯ ɛɚɤɬɟɪɢɣ (
– Micrococcus sp., – Bacillus sp.
. 5.
3
)
4
2011 :
5,00
0,00
(
).
(
. 4,ɛ).
.
( . 5).
Micrococcus sp.
M. caryophyllacearum.
(
53 % (
) 83 % (
)
,
)
.
,
176
-
ȼ.Ⱥ. ɋɟɧɚɲɨɜɚ
ɚ)
ɛ)
,
,
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
(
. 6.
– Verticillium sp.,
4
)
2011 :
– Thrichoderma sp.
5,00
0,00
,
,
.
37 %
,
,
-
– 55 %.
.
Thrichoderma sp.
-
,
(
-
. 6).
,
,
-
,
.
,
,
«
»
-
,
(
).
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
,
M.
,
,
caryophyllacearum.
.
,
.
,
M. caryophyllacearum,
.
177
ɂɡɜɟɫɬɢɹ ɋɚɧɤɬ-ɉɟɬɟɪɛɭɪɝɫɤɨɣ ɥɟɫɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɟɫɤɨɣ ɚɤɚɞɟɦɢɢ. 2014. ȼɵɩ. 207
,
:
,
.
,
,
-
,
.
.
«
.
.
«
. .
»
»
-
. .
.
1. ɋɟɧɚɲɨɜɚ ȼ.Ⱥ., Ƚɪɨɦɨɜɵɯ Ɍ.ɂ., ɋɨɪɨɤɢɧ ɇ.Ⱦ.
//
.
2012. № 4. . 24–30.
2. ɋɟɦɟɧɤɨɜɚ ɂ.Ƚ., ɋɨɤɨɥɨɜɚ ɗ.ɋ.
:
.
2.,
.
. .:
, 1992. 345 .
3. ɋɟɧɚɲɨɜɚ ȼ.Ⱥ.
,
,
//
.
2012.
. 200. . 275–284.
4. ɋɬɚɲɤɟɜɢɱ ɇ.ɘ., Ⱦɚɧɢɥɢɧɚ Ⱦ.Ɇ., ɋɟɧɚɲɨɜɚ ȼ.Ⱥ.
Pinus sibirica Du Tour. Abies sibirica Ledeb.
//
. 2013. № 9. . 145–150.
5. ȿɥɚɝɢɧ ɂ.ɇ.
// . 1961. № 7. . 982–984.
6. Gregersen T. Rapid method for distinction of gram-negative from gram-positive
bacteria // Eur. J. Appl. Microbiol. and Biotechnol. 1978. Vol.5, № 2. P. 127–132.
7. Ɍɨɤɢɧ Ȼ.ɉ.
. 2. .:
.
.
, 1951.
235 .
8. ȼɢɲɧɹɤɨɜɚ Ɂ.ȼ.
(
.
. - ..
,
. . .
).
:
,
.
, 1974. 142 .
9. ɋɟɧɚɲɨɜɚ ȼ.Ⱥ.
.
:
, 2012. 104 .
10. ɏɨɥɨɞɧɵɣ ɇ.Ƚ.
//
. 1944. . 43, № 2. . 75–78.
11. ȼɨɡɧɹɤɨɜɫɤɚɹ ɘ.Ɇ.
. .:
, 1969. 240 .
12. ɒɭɬɨɜɚ Ⱥ.Ƚ., ɋɩɢɪɢɞɨɜɢɱ ȿ.ȼ., Ƚɚɪɚɧɨɜɢɱ ɂ.Ɇ., ɋɟɧɶɤɟɜɢɱ Ƚ.Ƚ., ɭɪɱɟɧɤɨ ȼ.ɉ.
Abies Hill.,
//
. 2008. . 3,
. 1. . 114–127 .
178
ȼ.Ⱥ. ɋɟɧɚɲɨɜɚ
. .
//
. 2014.
. 207. . 171–179.
ɋɬɚɬɶɹ ɩɨɫɜɹɳɟɧɚ ɢɡɭɱɟɧɢɸ ɷɩɢɮɢɬɧɨɝɨ ɦɢɤɪɨɛɧɨɝɨ ɫɨɨɛɳɟɫɬɜɚ ɡɞɨɪɨɜɨɣ ɯɜɨɢ
ɩɢɯɬɵ ɫɢɛɢɪɫɤɨɣ ɢ ɩɨɪɚɠɟɧɧɨɣ ɪɠɚɜɱɢɧɧɵɦ ɝɪɢɛɨɦ Melampsorella
caryophyllacearum ɋhroet. ɉɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɨ ɫɪɚɜɧɟɧɢɟ ɮɢɬɨɧɰɢɞɧɨɣ ɚɤɬɢɜɧɨɫɬɢ ɨɛɨɢɯ
ɬɢɩɨɜ ɯɜɨɢ. Ʉɨɥɢɱɟɫɬɜɨ ɦɢɤɪɨɨɪɝɚɧɢɡɦɨɜ ɧɚ ɯɜɨɟ ɛɨɥɶɧɵɯ ɩɨɛɟɝɨɜ ɜ 2–3 ɪɚɡɚ ɜɵɲɟ ɱɢɫɥɟɧɧɨɫɬɢ ɷɩɢɮɢɬɨɜ ɡɞɨɪɨɜɨɣ ɯɜɨɢ. ɇɚ ɡɞɨɪɨɜɨɣ ɯɜɨɟ ɜ ɬɟɱɟɧɢɟ ɥɟɬɧɢɯ ɦɟɫɹɰɟɜ ɞɨɦɢɧɢɪɭɸɬ ɫɩɨɪɨɜɵɟ ɛɚɤɬɟɪɢɢ, ɧɚ ɛɨɥɶɧɨɣ – ɭɜɟɥɢɱɢɜɚɟɬɫɹ ɱɢɫɥɟɧɧɨɫɬɶ
ɧɟɫɩɨɪɨɜɵɯ ɦɢɤɪɨɨɪɝɚɧɢɡɦɨɜ. ȼɵɹɜɥɟɧɨ, ɱɬɨ ɯɜɨɹ, ɩɨɪɚɠɟɧɧɚɹ ɪɠɚɜɱɢɧɨɣ ɧɟ
ɨɤɚɡɵɜɚɟɬ ɫɞɟɪɠɢɜɚɸɳɟɝɨ ɜɥɢɹɧɢɹ ɧɚ ɪɨɫɬ ɬɟɫɬɨɜɵɯ ɢɡɨɥɹɬɨɜ ɦɢɤɪɨɦɢɰɟɬɨɜ,
ɨɞɧɚɤɨ ɨɛɥɚɞɚɟɬ ɜɵɪɚɠɟɧɧɵɦ ɛɚɤɬɟɪɢɨɫɬɚɬɢɱɟɫɤɢɦ ɷɮɮɟɤɬɨɦ ɩɨ ɨɬɧɨɲɟɧɢɸ
ɤ ɛɚɤɬɟɪɢɹɦ (ɜɤɥɸɱɚɹ ɚɤɬɢɧɨɦɢɰɟɬɵ).
:
,
,
Senashova V.A. Influence of biotic factors on Siberian fir epiphytic community
formation. Izvestia Sankt-Peterburgskoj Lesotehniceskoj Akademii, 2014, is. 207,
pp. 171–179 (in Russian with English summary).
The study was conducted on epiphytic microbial community of healthy Siberian fir
needles and those under affection by rust fungus Melampsorella caryophyllacearum
Shroet.
A comparison of phytoncide activity of both kinds of needles was made . The study of
infected needles showed that the number of microorganisms on them 2–3 times higher
than on healthy needles. On healthy needles during summer months spore-forming
bacteria are dominating, while on sick needles increasing the number of non-spore
microorganisms. It was found that the needles damaged by rust have no retarding
effect on growth of the test isolates of micromycetes, but has a strong bacteriostatic
effect on bacteria (including actinomycetes).
K e y w o r d s : fir rust, epiphytic microorganisms, phytoncides.
,
,
. .
. SPIN- : 4432-7425. 660036,
,
. 50,
. 28, .
,
. -mail: [email protected]
SENASHOVA Vera A., PhD (Biology), V.N. Sukachev Institute of forest, SB RAS.
SPIN code: 4432-7425. 660036. Akademgorodok. 50. Bild. 28. Krasnoyarsk. Russia.
-mail: [email protected]
.
179