The Origins of Symbiosis
An anthology of the fundamental writings of the field
|
Heinrich Anton De Bary |
Schwendener: The Lichens as Parasites of Algae (1869) van Benedén: Animal Parasites and Messmates (1876) De Bary: The Phenomenon of Symbiosis (1879) Frank: On the Nourishment of Trees Through a Root Symbiosis with Underground Fungi (1885) Except for the van Benedén, which is a long book, all four works are presented complete and unabridged, with study questions for classroom use. |
Simon Schwendener |
Schwendener: As a result of my researches, the lichens are not simple plants, not individuals in the ordinary sense of the word; they are, rather, colonies, which consist of hundreds of thousands of individuals, of which, however, one alone plays the master, while the rest, forever imprisoned, prepare the nutriment for themselves and their master. This master is a fungus... a parasite which is accustomed to live upon others' work. Its slaves are green algæ, which it has sought out, or indeed caught hold of, and compelled into its service. It surrounds them, as a spider its prey, with a fibrous net of narrow meshes, which is gradually converted into an impenetrable covering, but while the spider sucks its prey and leaves it dead, the fungus incites the algæ found in its net to more rapid activity, even to more vigorous increase...
van Benedén: The assistance rendered by animals to each other is as varied as that which is found among men. Some receive merely an abode, others nourishment, others again food and shelter.... But if we see, by the side of these paupers, some which render to one another mutual services, it would be unflattering to call them all either parasites or messmates (commensaux). It would be more just to call these latter kinds mutualists, and thus mutuality will take its place by the side of commensalism and of parasitism.
de Bary: Parasitism, Mutualism, Lichenism, and so on, are equally valid special cases of that general type of association that I call Symbiosis. If one wants to differentiate these primary categories further, then one might come up with antagonists locked in perpetual combat, or mutualists that each promote the welfare of both symbionts. But upon close examination, one cannot really endorse a sharp distinction between the categories. A sharp distinction is also missing in the other direction, that is between a “strict” symbiosis of connected symbionts with a common household, and the multitudinous relationships of organisms to one another that go under the name of social relations.
Frank: [this paper] concerns the fact that certain trees nourish themselves ...in symbiosis with the mycelium of a fungus, which carries out the function of a wet-nurse and takes over the entire nourishment of the tree from the soil. The whole body is thus neither entirely root nor entirely mushroom. Instead, as in the thallus of the lichens, a combination of two different species forms a single morphologically integrated organ, which can perhaps be suitably called a mushroom-root, or mycorrhiza.
|
This paperbound anthology is available for $5 apiece, prepaid only. Send orders to:
Mushroom the Journal Inquiries: leon@mushroomthejournal.com |
Ship to: Name____________________________________________ Address_________________________________________ ________________________________________________ City, State, Zip___________________________________Email address____________________________________ Number of copies_____________ |
Add shipping fee: 1-5 copies: $3. 5-10 copies: $8. 10 or more copies: $15
Shipping costs outside of North America (US & Canada) are double.
A pdf download of this flier is available.