サビキン目




サビキン目（さびきんもく、PuccinialesまたはUredinales）は担子菌門の目の1つで、サビキン（錆菌、銹菌）と総称される。7000種以上が知られる。


植物に寄生する絶対寄生菌で、赤・黒などに着色したさびのように見える無性胞子（さび胞子）を作ることから、これらによる多くの病害はさび病と呼ばれ、農業・林業において重大な病害を含む。リンゴ・ナシなどに寄生する一部のものは特徴的な病斑から赤星病、また樹木に多数の枝葉を叢生させるものは天狗巣病といった別の名で呼ばれる。ただし卵菌による白さび病など、他の菌によるもので「さび病」と呼ばれるものもある。


複雑な生活環を有し、胞子としては「さび胞子」「担子胞子」のほか、種類によって「精子」「夏胞子」「冬胞子」と呼ばれる胞子を作り、またそれぞれの世代が異なる植物に感染・増殖するもの（異種寄生性）も多い。



外部リンク



  • さび病菌（国立科学博物館）

  • さび病菌（筑波大学・山岡博士）












Popular posts from this blog

Can a sorcerer learn a 5th-level spell early by creating spell slots using the Font of Magic feature?

Image
28 6 $begingroup$ Per the Font of Magic feature, sorcerer can use Flexible Casting to create 5th-level spell slots at level 7, even though they are not typically available until level 9. You can transform unexpended sorcery points into one spell slot as a bonus action on your turn. The Creating Spell Slots table shows the cost of creating a spell slot of [5th level is 7] If such a sorcerer levels up while still having this 5th-level spell slot, can they choose a 5th-level spell as the spell they gain upon levelling up? The Spellcasting feature states: Additionally, when you gain a level in this class, you can choose one of the sorcerer spells you know and replace it with another spell from the sorcerer spell list, which also must be of a level for which you have spell slots.
Read more

Does disintegrating a polymorphed enemy still kill it after the 2018 errata?

Image
up vote 13 down vote favorite 1 After the 2018 errata, the disintegrate spell description now reads: A creature targeted by this spell must make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the target takes 10d6 + 40 force damage. The target is disintegrated if this damage leaves it with 0 hit points. If you were to polymorph an enemy into a rat and then disintegrate it, would the enemy be disintegrated or would it just return to its original form? I know that for Druids, it’s not an instant kill anymore, but is this the case for polymorph as well? dnd-5e spells polymorph errata share | improve this question edited 18 hours ago
Read more

A Topological Invariant for $pi_3(U(n))$

Image
3 3 $begingroup$ Recently, I saw a construction of topological invariant for $pi_3(U(n))$ with $ngeq 2$ : $$ N=frac{1}{24pi^2}int_{S^3} d^3x epsilon^{ijk} Tr[(U^{-1}partial_{x_i}U)(U^{-1}partial_{x_j}U)(U^{-1}partial_{x_k}U)] , $$ where $Uin U(n)$ depends on $boldsymbol{x}=(x_1,x_2,x_3)in S^3$ , $epsilon^{ijk}$ is the Levi-Civita symbol, $i,j,k=1,2,3$ , and the duplicated indexes are summed over. It is claimed that $N$ is an integer, but why? Update 02/02/2019 I think I got an argument for $n=2$ . In this case, $U=e^{i varphi} q$ with $qin SU(2)$ . Due to the trace and the Levi-Civita symbol in $N$ , $varphi$ does not contribute to $N$ . As $Tr[q^{dagger}partial_i q]=0$ and $(q^{dagger}partial_i q)^{dagger}=-q^{dagger}partial_i q$ , $q^{dagger}partial_i q$ in geneeral has the form $q^{dagger}partia
Read more