Pleosporales - CBS - KNAW

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fungal Diversity Montagnulaceae Montagnula has an Aschersonia anamorph, and Kalmusia and Paraphaeosphaeria have Coniothyrium-like, Cytoplea, Microsphaeropsis and Paraconiothyrium anamorphs. The generic type of Paraphaeosphaeria (P. michotii) is linked with Coniothyrium scirpi Trail (Webster 1955). The Coniothyrium complex is highly polyphyletic, and was subdivided into four groups by Sutton (1980), viz. Coniothyrium, Microsphaeropsis, Cyclothyrium and Cytoplea. Paraconiothyrium was introduced to accommodate Coniothyrium minitans W.A. Campb. and C. sporulosum (W. Gams & Domsch) Aa, which are closely related to Paraphaeosphaeria based on 18S rDNA sequences phylogeny (Verkley et al. 2004). Morosphaeriaceae Based on the multigene phylogenetic analysis in this study, Asteromassaria is tentatively included in Morosphaeriaceae. Asteromassaria macrospora is linked with Scolicosporium macrosporium (Berk.) B. Sutton, which is hyphomycetous. No anamorphic stages have been reported for other species of Morosphaeriaceae. Trematosphaeriaceae Three species from three different genera were included in Trematosphaeriaceae, i.e. Falciformispora lignatilis, Halomassarina thalassiae and Trematosphaeria pertusa (Suetrong et al. data unpublished; Plate 1). Of these, only Trematosphaeria pertusa, the generic type of Trematosphaeria, produces hyphopodia-like structures on agar (Zhang et al. 2008a). Other families of Pleosporales Amniculicolaceae Three anamorphic species nested within the clade of Amniculicolaceae, i.e. Anguillospora longissima (Sacc. & P. Syd.) Ingold, Repetophragma ontariense (Matsush.) W. P. Wu and Spirosphaera cupreorufescens Voglmayr (Zhang et al. 2009a). Sivanesan (1984, p.500)described the teleomorphic stage of Anguillospora longissima as Massarina sp. II, which fits the diagnostic characters of Amniculicola well. Thus this taxon may be another species of Amniculicola. Hypsostromataceae A Pleurophomopsis-like anamorph is reported in the subiculum of the generic type of Hypsostroma (H. saxicola Huhndorf) (Huhndorf 1992). Lophiostomataceae The concept of Lophiostomataceae was also narrowed, and presently contains only Lophiostoma (Zhang et al. 2009a). Leuchtmann (1985) studied cultures of some Lophiostoma species, and noticed that L. caulium (Fr.) Ces. & De Not., L. macrostomum, L. semiliberum (Desm.) Ces. & De Not., Lophiostoma sp. and Lophiotrema nucula produced Pleurophomopsis anamorphic stages, which are similar to those now in Melanomma (Chesters 1938), but Lophiostoma and Melanomma has no proven phylogenetic relationship (Zhang et al. 2009a, b; Plate 1). Species of Aposphaeria have also been reported in Massariosphaeria (Farr et al. 1989; Leuchtmann 1984), but the polyphyletic nature of Massariosphaeria is well documented (Wang et al. 2007). Melanommataceae The anamorphs of the Melanommataceae are mostly coelomycetous and rarely hyphomycetous with various ontogenic structures, such as annellidic or sympodial for hyphomycetes (Exosporiella and Pseudospiropes) and coelomycetes (Aposphaeria-like and Pyrenochaeta). Herpotrichia is reported as having a Pyrenochaeta anamorphic stage with or without seta on the surface of pycnidia (Sivanesan 1984). Aposphaeria and Phoma-like have been reported in Melanomma species (Chesters 1938; Sivanesan 1984). Similarly, the anamorphs of Karstenula are reported as coelomycetous, i.e. Microdiplodia (Constantinescu 1993). The anamorphic stage of Anomalemma is Exosporiella (Sivanesan 1983), and that of Byssosphaeria is Pyrenochaeta (Barr 1984). Ohleria brasiliensis Starbäck has been linked with Monodictys putredinis (Wallr.) S. Hughes (Samuels 1980). Astrosphaeriella is a contentious genus as its familial status is not determined yet. Here we temporarily assigned it under Melanommataceae, which is linked with the anamorph genus Pleurophomopsis. Pleomassariaceae Shearia and Prosthemium are all anamorphs of Pleomassaria, andProsthemium betulinum is linked with the generic type of Pleomassaria (P. siparia) (Barr1982b; Sivanesan 1984; Sutton 1980; Tanaka et al. 2010). Splanchnonema is a genus of Pleomassariaceae, the teleomorphic morphology of which is difficult to distinguish from two other genera, i.e. Asteromassaria and Pleomassaria, and the reported anamorphs of Splanchnonema are Ceuthodiplospora, Myxocyclus and Stegonsporium, which are comparable with those of Asteromassaria and Pleomassaria. Tetraplosphaeriaceae Tetraplosphaeriaceae was introduced to accommodate the Massarina-like bambusicolous fungi that produce Tetraploa sensu stricto anamorphs (Tanaka et al. 2009). Tetraploa aristata Berk. & Broome, the generic type of Tetraploa is widely distributed, associated with various
Fungal Diversity substrates and many occur in freshwater or has been isolated from air. The polyphyletic nature of T. aristata has been well documented (Tanaka et al. 2009). Anamorphic stages can serve as a diagnostic character for this family. Diademaceae, Massariaceae, Sporormiaceae and Teichosporaceae The Sporormiaceae is coprophilous having Phoma or Phoma-related anamorphic states (Cannon and Kirk 2007). Comoclathris (Diademaceae) is linked with Alternaria-like anamorphs (Simmons 1952). Myxocyclus links to Massaria (Massariaceae) (Hyde et al. 2011). The anamorphic stage of Chaetomastia (Teichosporaceae) isAposphaeria- orConiothyrium-like (Barr 1989c). Generally speaking, the morphologically simple conidiophores are usually considered phylogenetically uninformative (Seifert and Samuels 2000). Phoma-like anamorphs commonly occur in Pleosporales, while their colorless and unicellular conidia are also not phylogenetically informative (Seifert and Samuels 2000). All of the above mentioned anamorphic taxa of Pleosporales have phialidic, annellidic or sympodial conidiogenous cells, representing apical wall-building type (compared to ring wall-building and diffused wallbuilding) (Nag Raj 1993), which may indicate that the wall-building type probably has phylogenetic significance. Molecular phylogeny of Pleosporales Numerous genes have been applied in phylogenetic studies of Pleosporales, mostly including LSU, SSU, mtSSU and ITS as well as the protein genes, such as RPB1, RPB2, TEF1, β-tubulin (TUB1) and actin (ACT1). A single gene such as ITS or LSU, has been used to study phylogenetic relationships between Leptosphaeria and Phaeosphaeria (Câmara et al. 2002) or Pleosporaceae and Tubeufiaceae (Kodsueb et al. 2006a, b) (Table2). The use of these phylogenetic markers, although making important contributions, has not been successful in resolving numerous relationships in single gene dendrograms. One exception is the use of SSU sequences to demonstrate the phylogenetic significance of pseudoparaphyses (Liew et al. 2000) whilst rejecting the phylogenetic utility of pseudoparaphyses morphology (cellular or trabeculate). Analyses with combined genes have had more success. For instance combined analyses with LSU and SSU sequence data could be used to define family level classification in a few cases (Dong et al. 1998; de Gruyter et al. 2009; Lumbsch and Lindemuth 2001; Pinnoi et al. 2007; Zhang et al. 2009b) (Table2). The addition of more than two genes has been used to determine relationships between orders. For instance, genes such as LSU, SSU and mtSSU have been used to analyze ordinal relationships in Loculoascomycetes (Lindemuth et al. 2001), and to analyze phylogenetic relationships of coprophilous families in Pleosporales (Kruys et al. 2006). Phaeocryptopus gaeumannii (T. Rohde) Petr. was showntobelonginDothideales based on LSU, SSU and ITS sequence analysis (Winton et al. 2007), while Schoch et al. (2006) used four genes, i.e. LSU, SSU, RPB2 and TEF1 to evaluate the phylogenetic relationships among different orders of the Dothideomycetes. Fivegenes,viz. LSU, SSU, TEF1, RPB1 andRPB2, were used to study the phylogenetic relationships of different orders within Dothideomycetes (Schoch et al. 2009) and of different families within Pleosporales (Zhang et al. 2009a) (Table 2). It is clear that even more genes will be required to address the remaining issues and the promise of genome analyses is within reach (www.jgi.doe.gov/sequencing/ why/dothideomycetes.html) forDothideomycetes. The importance of generic type specimens The type specimen (collection type) is a fundamental element in the current Code of Botanical Nomenclature at familial or lower ranks (Moore 1998). A type specimen fixes the name to an exact specimen at family, genera, species and variety/subspecies rank and is ultimately based on this single specimen, i.e. a family name is based on a genus, the genus name is based on a species, and the species name is based on a specimen (Kirk et al. 2008). The generic type is of great importance in defining generic circumscriptions in fungal taxonomy. The generic types of Pleosporales have been studied previously by many mycologists. For instance, Müller and von Arx (1962) studied the generic types of “Pyrenomycetes”, and described and illustrated them in detail. Sivanesan (1984) described and illustrated the generic representatives of Loculoascomycetes for both their teleomorphs and anamorphs, and their links were emphasized. A large number of pleosporalean genera have been studied by Barr (1990a, b). Almost all of the previous work was conducted more than 20 years ago, when no molecular phylogenetic studies could be carried out and thus had been carried out in a systematic fashion. Aim and outline of present study The present study had two principal objectives: 1. To explore genera under Pleosporales based on the generic types and provide a detailed description and illustration for the type species of selected genera, discuss the study history of those genera, and explore their ordinal, familial, and generic relationships;
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: Fungal Diversity biocontrol agent o
Page 11 and 12: Fungal Diversity 2. To investigate
Page 13 and 14: Fungal Diversity Table 3 (continued
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 and 68:
Fungal Diversity Fig. 29 Dubitatio
Page 69 and 70:
Fungal Diversity assigned Entodesmi
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 91 and 92:
Fungal Diversity
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 105 and 106:
Fungal Diversity
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:
Fungal Diversity Table 4 (continued
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?