Identification of a nasty fungus

[K N and P J Harris]

> ==========
> bionet/mycology #949, from dje0282 at VMS1.TAMU.EDU, 2756 chars, 28 Jan 
1996 11:19:20 -0
> ----------
> Article: 2981 of bionet.mycology
> Path: 
cix.compulink.co.uk!news.compulink.co.uk!btnet!news.uk0.vbc.net!knews.uk
0.vbc.net!news.vbc.net!news.leonardo.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!biosci!VMS1.TA
MU.EDU!dje0282
> From: dje0282 at VMS1.TAMU.EDU (Dan Ebbole)
> Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
> Subject: Re: Identification of a nasty fungus
> Date: 28 Jan 1996 11:19:20 -0800
> Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Molecular Biology
> Lines: 46
> Sender: daemon at net.bio.net
> Distribution: world
> Message-ID: <199601281919.LAA26523 at net.bio.net>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: net.bio.net
> 
> Peter Harris libelously wrote:
> 
> >I don't know what your present general line of research is but you 
have 
> >just equipped yourself with the favourite fungus of the fungal 
> >geneticists - Neurospora (probably Neurospora crassa after its crass 
> >habits ?). Spores like mad and will get everywhere. You may even find 
> >that you become "persona non grata" in other peoples labs, cos they 
> >don't want it either. Many years ago, here at Reading University UK, 
we 
> >suddenly had a lot of Neurospora around just by having a visiting 
> >speaker who specialised in it !
> >If I see a plate with a suspected Neurospora on it, it gets its own 
> >private immediate trip to the autoclave, Not very PC I agree, but 
thank 
> >God we can still be prejudiced against SOMETHING.
> 
> 1.  The "nasty" fungus may indeed be somehow related to Neurospora, it 
is
> certainly not N. crassa.  
> 
> 2.  Contamination problems can occur with virtually any conidial 
fungus
> from time to time.  But the above story is certainly a gross 
exaggeration
> if not an outright fabrication.  We have a number of fungal labs in 
the
> building my Neurospora lab is in.  No other lab has EVER reported
> Neurospora contamination.  On the other hand, my lab and almost every 
other
> lab has often seen contamination from Aspergillus (probably from the
> environment, not the Aspergillus lab on the floor?).  
> 
> The idea that Neurospora is a major contamination problem is a myth as 
far
> as I can tell.  With the same care in handling, Neurospora is no more 
of a
> contamination problem than the Aspergilli.  In fact, I am sure that it 
is
> less of a problem for neighboring labs then Aspergillus, since the 
smaller
> Aspergillus spores travel much farther before settling.  I do not wish 
to
> suggest that we  autoclave all the Aspergillus cultures.  I also work 
with
> Aspergillus (a little) as well as Neurospora. (Although the work with
> Aspergillus is done in another lab to keep our Neurospora strains from
> getting contaminated).
> 
> P.S.  Peter, perhaps we'll chat about this over a beer someday!
> 
> ------------------------
> Dr. Daniel Ebbole
> dje0282 at summa.tamu.edu
> Assistant Professor
> Dept. of Plant Pathology and Microbiology
> Texas A&M University
> College Station, TX 77843-2132
> USA
> 
OOPS, Daniel
I hope your cultures don't have a good lawyer!
Maybe the explanation is that the media we were were using here was so 
bad that the N.crassa just HAD TO GET OUT. Or maybe the visiting worker 
didn't bring N.crassa with him, just a lot of mites.
Look forward to the beer. Come and try the stuff I brew !
Cheers,
Peter Harris,
Soil Science,
Reading Univ, U.K.
AKA  P.J.Harris at reading.ac.uk