Cited by 79Mycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions

Microbiological and molecular determination of mycobiota in fresh and ensiled maize silage

Mansfield, M.A., Kuldau, G.A.·2007·Mycologia

Abstract

The mycobiota of fresh and ensiled maize was studied with culturing techniques and a DNA sequence-based approach. Freshly chopped and ensiled maize were collected for 2 y from 12 farms in Pennsylvania. Samples were plated on selective media and isolates identified by morphology and sequences of the internal transcribed spacer regions of rDNA, 800–900 bp of the 5′ end of the translation elongation factor 1-alpha gene and a portion of the rodA gene (Aspergillus fumigatus only). ITS regions were amplified from total silage DNA, cloned, sequenced and compared to fungal ITS sequences in GenBank with the BLAST-N algorithm. For samples analyzed by both methods, the molecular technique detected a greater number of species than selective plating. Plating recovered several Penicillium and Fusarium species and Aspergillus fumigatus, while molecular analysis detected Alternaria, Penicillium and Fusarium species. Data from both methods found that Fusarium and Penicillium were the dominant mycotoxigenic fungi in silage, while yeast made up the majority all fungi recovered or detected. Known mycotoxigenic species often accounted for 50% or more of the total number of species isolated or detected at each site. Viable Fusaria were not isolated from or detected in ensiled maize, suggesting that Fusarium species do not survive the ensiling process. Results from this study suggest that given the numerous species of fungi present in silage with mycotoxin producing ability, there is a strong possibility that silage may be contaminated with multiple toxins simultaneously.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15572536.2007.11832586

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mansfield, M. A., & Kuldau, G. A.
Affiliations
Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
Kuldau, G.A.
Venue
Mycologia
Published
2007-03
Volume
99
Issue
2
Pages
269-278
ISSN
  • 0027-5514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-2536
OpenAlex
W2118094395
Cited by
79
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Mycologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Pennsylvania State University
  • Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Plant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Keywords
fungal communities, corn silage, silage fermentation, mycotoxigenic fungi, Fusarium, Penicillium, Aspergillus fumigatus, Alternaria, yeast, ITS region, silage contamination
MeSH terms
Zea mays, DNA, Fungal, Fungi, Pennsylvania, Silage, Sequence Analysis, DNA, DNA, Ribosomal Spacer, Biodiversity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review