Pleosporales - CBS - KNAW

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fungal Diversity Fig. 30 Entodesmium rude (from H, Krieger 1070). a Ascomata in groups on the host surface. Note the erumpent papilla which is cylindrical and has an inconspicuous ostiole. b Section of part of an ascoma. Note the arrangement of asci and pseudoparaphyses. c Section of the peridium comprising cells of textura angularis. d Part-spores inside the ascus. e Relatively immature ascus with filliform ascospores and low ocular chamber. f–h Mature and immature asci with pedicels. Scale bars: a=0.5 mm, b, c=50 μm, d–h=10 μm Notes Morphology Entodesmium is characterized by having immersed ascomata dark cylindrical, periphysate papillae, numerous clavate to cylindrical asci surrounded by narrowly cellular pseudoparaphyses, and ellipsoidal to filliform multi-septate ascospores (Barr 1992b; Shoemaker 1984b). Currently, five species, viz. Entodesmium eliassonii L. Holm, E. lapponicum (L. Holm) L. Holm, E. mayorii (E.Müll.)L.Holm,E. niessleanum (Rabenh. ex Niessl) L. Holm and E. rude are accepted in this genus (Holm 1957; Shoemaker 1984b). Von Arx and Müller (1975) assignedEntodesmium to the Pleosporaceae sensu lato, and Shoemaker (1976) assigned E. rude (as Ophiobolus rudis) to Ophiobolus sensu lato based on the fragmenting filliform ascospores. According to the short, blackish beak and periphysate ostiole, Barr (1992b)
Fungal Diversity assigned Entodesmium to Lophiostomataceae. Thehosts of Entodesmium are restricted to stems of legumes (Barr 1992b; Shoemaker 1984b). Phylogenetic study Limited phylogenetic studies indicate that Entodesmium rude may have affinities to Phaeosphaeriaceae (Liew et al. 2000; Plate 1). Concluding remarks Species of Entodesmium share several morphological characters, such as immersed, papillate ascomata, periphysate ostioles, pale yellow to light yellowish brown, multiseptate (≥ 3), narrowly fusoid to filliform ascospores, and are specific to legumes. All of the above similarities indicate a close relationship among members of Entodesmium. We do not agree with Barr (1992b) who assigned Entodesmium to Lophiostomataceae because the ascomata are immersed, the papilla are not laterally compressed and the peridium comprises a single type of cells of textura angularis. These characters plus multi-septate, lightly pigmented ascospores, which break up into partspores and host specificity to legumes support inclusion in Phaeosphaeriaceae. Entodesmium multiseptatum (G. Winter) L. Holm and E. niessleanum were originally described as Leptosphaeria species (Shoemaker 1984b) indicating their similarity to Phaeosphaeria with which Leptosphaeria is commonly confused (Shoemaker 1984a; Shoemaker and Babcock 1989b). Phylogenetic study has also shown that Entodesmium rude is related to members of Phaeosphaeriaceae (Liew et al. 2000). Thus we assign Entodesmium to Phaeosphaeriaceae as a separate genus until further phylogenetic analysis is carried out on verified specimens. Eudarluca Speg., Revta Mus. La Plata 15: 22 (1908). (?Phaeosphaeriaceae) Generic description Habitat terrestrial, parasitic. Ascomata small, solitary, scattered, immersed to erumpent, subglobose, ostiolate, papillate. Peridium thin, composed of a few layers cells of textura prismatica. Hamathecium of dense, cellular pseudoparaphyses, septate. Asci 8-spored, bitunicate, fissitunicate, cylindrical to fusoid, with a furcate pedicel. Ascospores broadly fusoid to fusoid, hyaline to pale yellow, rarely 1- or 3- septate, mostly 2-septate, constricted at the primary septum. Anamorphs reported for genus: Sphaerellopsis (Sivanesan 1984). Literature: Bayon et al. 2006; Eriksson 1966; Katumoto 1986; Ramakrishnan 1951; Spegazzini 1908. Type species Eudarluca australis Speg., Revta Mus. La Plata 15: 22 (1908). (Fig. 31) Ascomata 160–190 μm high×180–290 μm diam., solitary, scattered, or in small groups, semi-immersed to erumpent, subglobose to broadly ellipsoid, wall black, ostiolate, apex with a short papilla, 40–70 μm broad (Fig. 31a and b). Peridium
Page 1 and 2:
Fungal Diversity DOI 10.1007/s13225
Page 3 and 4:
Fungal Diversity Table 1 Major circ
Page 5 and 6:
Fungal Diversity
Page 7 and 8:
Fungal Diversity biocontrol agent o
Page 9 and 10:
Fungal Diversity substrates and man
Page 11 and 12:
Fungal Diversity 2. To investigate
Page 13 and 14:
Fungal Diversity Table 3 (continued
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18: Fungal Diversity Table 3 (continued
Page 19 and 20: Fungal Diversity
Page 21 and 22: Fungal Diversity Fig. 2 Aigialus gr
Page 23 and 24: Fungal Diversity Fig. 3 Amniculicol
Page 25 and 26: Fungal Diversity Literature: Berkel
Page 27 and 28: Fungal Diversity Ascorhombispora L.
Page 31 and 32: Fungal Diversity Fig. 8 Astrosphaer
Page 33 and 34: Fungal Diversity Fig. 9 Asymmetrico
Page 35 and 36: Fungal Diversity Notes Morphology B
Page 37 and 38: Fungal Diversity Generic descriptio
Page 39 and 40: Fungal Diversity Anamorph: none rep
Page 41 and 42: Fungal Diversity Fig. 14 Bimuria no
Page 43 and 44: Fungal Diversity Fig. 15 Bricookea
Page 45 and 46: Fungal Diversity Fig. 16 Byssolophi
Page 47 and 48: Fungal Diversity Notes Morphology B
Page 49 and 50: Fungal Diversity the reaction of pe
Page 53 and 54: Fungal Diversity Fig. 21 Chaetomast
Page 57 and 58: Fungal Diversity Fig. 23 Cilioplea
Page 59 and 60: Fungal Diversity with one or two ve
Page 61 and 62: Fungal Diversity Moreau 1953; Munk
Page 63 and 64: Fungal Diversity Material examined:
Page 65 and 66: Fungal Diversity Fig. 28 Dothidotth
Page 67: Fungal Diversity Fig. 29 Dubitatio
Page 71 and 72: Fungal Diversity fusoid to somewhat
Page 73 and 74: Fungal Diversity Fig. 33 Hadrospora
Page 75 and 76: Fungal Diversity Fig. 34 Halotthia
Page 77 and 78: Fungal Diversity Notes Morphology H
Page 79 and 80: Fungal Diversity some effused Hypox
Page 81 and 82: Fungal Diversity Fig. 38 Isthmospor
Page 83 and 84: Fungal Diversity Fig. 39 Kalmusia e
Page 85 and 86: Fungal Diversity ascospores were br
Page 87 and 88: Fungal Diversity furcate pedicel an
Page 89 and 90: Fungal Diversity Anamorph: none rep
Page 93 and 94: Fungal Diversity Material examined:
Page 95 and 96: Fungal Diversity Fig. 46 Lewia scro
Page 97 and 98: Fungal Diversity Fig. 47 Lichenopyr
Page 99 and 100: Fungal Diversity Loculohypoxylon M.
Page 101 and 102: Fungal Diversity cells small heavil
Page 103 and 104: Fungal Diversity upper place, septa
Page 107 and 108: Fungal Diversity (CBS 627.86) was i
Page 109 and 110: Fungal Diversity Fig. 54 Mamillisph
Page 111 and 112: Fungal Diversity Fig. 55 Massarina
Page 113 and 114: Fungal Diversity phaeria as a synon
Page 115 and 116: Fungal Diversity 5-8 μm diam., ind
Page 117 and 118: Fungal Diversity cell wall
Page 119 and 120:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 60 Mixtura sa
Page 121 and 122:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 61 Montagnula
Page 123 and 124:
Fungal Diversity spored, bitunicate
Page 125 and 126:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 64 Murispora
Page 127 and 128:
Fungal Diversity Type species Neoph
Page 129 and 130:
Fungal Diversity brown, 8-septate,
Page 131 and 132:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 68 Ohleria mo
Page 133 and 134:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 69 Ohleriella
Page 135 and 136:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 70 Ophiobolus
Page 137 and 138:
Fungal Diversity Type species Ostro
Page 139 and 140:
Fungal Diversity
Page 141 and 142:
Fungal Diversity (Shoemaker and Bab
Page 143 and 144:
Fungal Diversity ium thin, composed
Page 145 and 146:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 76 Platysporo
Page 147 and 148:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 77 1 Pleomass
Page 149 and 150:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 78 Pleophragm
Page 151 and 152:
Fungal Diversity papillate, ostiola
Page 153 and 154:
Fungal Diversity Williams 1963; Mal
Page 155 and 156:
Fungal Diversity Generic descriptio
Page 157 and 158:
Fungal Diversity composed of one ce
Page 159 and 160:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 84 Saccharico
Page 161 and 162:
Fungal Diversity and nearly black a
Page 163 and 164:
Fungal Diversity dense, long trabec
Page 165 and 166:
Fungal Diversity
Page 167 and 168:
Fungal Diversity
Page 169 and 170:
Fungal Diversity Anamorphs reported
Page 171 and 172:
Fungal Diversity
Page 173 and 174:
Fungal Diversity
Page 175 and 176:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 94 Westerdyke
Page 177 and 178:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 95 Wettsteini
Page 179 and 180:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 96 Wilmia bra
Page 181 and 182:
Fungal Diversity Current name: Astr
Page 183 and 184:
Fungal Diversity spores are actuall
Page 185 and 186:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 100 Sporormie
Page 187 and 188:
Fungal Diversity
Page 189 and 190:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 102 Kriegerie
Page 191 and 192:
Fungal Diversity Phylogenetic study
Page 193 and 194:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 104 Zeuctomor
Page 195 and 196:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 105 Muroia ni
Page 197 and 198:
Fungal Diversity pseudoparenchymato
Page 199 and 200:
Fungal Diversity Eremodothis Arx, K
Page 201 and 202:
Fungal Diversity Type species: Macr
Page 203 and 204:
Fungal Diversity ascospores of Plat
Page 205 and 206:
Fungal Diversity monoceras Alcorn n
Page 207 and 208:
Fungal Diversity tomataceae, Melano
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Fungal Diversity 1987b). Based on a
Page 213 and 214:
Fungal Diversity only do so under v
Page 215 and 216:
Fungal Diversity Dennis RWG (1968)
Page 217 and 218:
Fungal Diversity Kirk PM, Cannon PF
Page 219 and 220:
Fungal Diversity Saccardo PA (1880)
Page 221:
Fungal Diversity Winter G (1887) As
show all

Pleosporales - CBS - KNAW

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?