Botryosphaeria is a species-rich genus with a cosmopolitan distribution, commonly associated with dieback and cankers of woody plants. As many as 18 anamorph genera have been associated with Botryosphaeria, most of which have been reduced to synonymy under Diplodia (conidia mostly ovoid, pigmented, thick-walled), or Fusicoccum (conidia mostly fusoid, hyaline, thin-walled). However, there are numerous conidial anamorphs having morphological characteristics intermediate between Diplodia and Fusicoccum, and there are several records of species outside the Botryosphaeriaceae that have anamorphs apparently typical of Botryosphaeria s.str. Recent studies have also linked Botryosphaeria to species with pigmented, septate ascospores, and Dothiorella anamorphs, or Fusicoccum anamorphs with Dichomera synanamorphs. The aim of this study was to employ DNA sequence data of the 28S rDNA to resolve apparent lineages within the Botryosphaeriaceae. From these data, 12 clades are recognised. Two of these lineages clustered outside the Botryosphaeriaceae, namely Diplodia-like anamorphs occurring on maize, which are best accommodated in Stenocarpella (Diaporthales), as well as an unresolved clade including species of Camarosporium/Microdiplodia. We recognise 10 lineages within the Botryosphaeriaceae, including an unresolved clade (Diplodia/Lasiodiplodia/Tiarosporella), Botryosphaeria s.str. (Fusicoccum anamorphs), Macrophomina, Neoscytalidium gen. nov., Dothidotthia (Dothiorella anamorphs), Neofusicoccum gen. nov. (Botryosphaeria-like teleomorphs, Dichomera-like synanamorphs), Pseudofusicoccum gen. nov., Saccharata (Fusicoccum- and Diplodia-like synanamorphs), "Botryosphaeria" quercuum (Diplodia-like anamorph), and Guignardia (Phyllosticta anamorphs). Separate teleomorph and anamorph names are not provided for newly introduced genera, even where both morphs are known. The taxonomy of some clades and isolates (e.g. B. mamane) remains unresolved due to the absence of ex-type cultures.
Botryosphaeria is a species-rich genus with a cosmopolitan distribution, commonly associated with dieback and cankers of woody plants. As many as 18 anamorph genera have been associated with Botryosphaeria, most of which have been reduced to synonymy under Diplodia (conidia mostly ovoid, pigmented, thick-walled), or Fusicoccum (conidia mostly fusoid, hyaline, thin-walled). However, there are numerous conidial anamorphs having morphological characteristics intermediate between Diplodia and Fusicoccum, and there are several records of species outside the Botryosphaeriaceae that have anamorphs apparently typical of Botryosphaeria s.str. Recent studies have also linked Botryosphaeria to species with pigmented, septate ascospores, and Dothiorella anamorphs, or Fusicoccum anamorphs with Dichomera synanamorphs. The aim of this study was to employ DNA sequence data of the 28S rDNA to resolve apparent lineages within the Botryosphaeriaceae. From these data, 12 clades are recognised. Two of these lineages clustered outside the Botryosphaeriaceae, namely Diplodia-like anamorphs occurring on maize, which are best accommodated in Stenocarpella (Diaporthales), as well as an unresolved clade including species of Camarosporium/Microdiplodia. We recognise 10 lineages within the Botryosphaeriaceae, including an unresolved clade (Diplodia/Lasiodiplodia/Tiarosporella), Botryosphaeria s.str. (Fusicoccum anamorphs), Macrophomina, Neoscytalidium gen. nov., Dothidotthia (Dothiorella anamorphs), Neofusicoccum gen. nov. (Botryosphaeria-like teleomorphs, Dichomera-like synanamorphs), Pseudofusicoccum gen. nov., Saccharata (Fusicoccum- and Diplodia-like synanamorphs), "Botryosphaeria" quercuum (Diplodia-like anamorph), and Guignardia (Phyllosticta anamorphs). Separate teleomorph and anamorph names are not provided for newly introduced genera, even where both morphs are known. The taxonomy of some clades and isolates (e.g. B. mamane) remains unresolved due to the absence of ex-type cultures.
The genus BotryosphaeriaCes. & De Not. was introduced in 1863
(Cesati & De Notaris
1863), emended by Saccardo
(1877), and is based on the
type species Botryosphaeria dothidea (Moug.: Fr.) Ces. & De Not.
(Barr 1972,
Slippers ). Botryosphaeria is a species-rich genus with a
cosmopolitan distribution (Denman ). Species occur on a wide range of monocotyledonous,
dicotyledonous and gymnosperm hosts, on woody branches, herbaceous leaves,
stems and haulms of grasses, on twigs and in the thalli of lichens
(Barr 1987). Taxa range in
habit from being saprobic, parasitic and endophytic
(Smith ,
Denman ),
and can cause die-back and canker diseases of numerous woody hosts
(von Arx 1987).Botryosphaeria has been well circumscribed, and can be defined as
forming uni- to multilocular ascomata with multi-layered walls, occurring
singly or in clusters, often intermixed with conidiomata, which are pycnidial.
Asci are bitunicate, with a thick endotunica, stalked or sessile, clavate,
with a well-developed apical chamber, forming in a basal hymenial layer,
intermixed among hyaline pseudoparaphyses that are frequently constricted at
the septa. Ascospores are hyaline, aseptate, fusoid to ellipsoid or ovoid, bi-
to triseriate, mostly without a mucoid sheath or appendages; ascospores turn
brown and become septate and even slightly verruculose upon germination
(von Arx & Müller
1954, Shoemaker
1964, Eriksson
1981, Sivanesan
1984, Denman , Alves ).Theissen & Sydow (1915)
placed Botryosphaeria in the Botryosphaerieae, a sub-family
of the Pseudosphaeriaceae, which was not assigned to any specific
order. The Pseudosphaeriaceae was later placed in the
Myriangiales (Theissen
1916), and in 1917 Theissen & Sydow were of the opinion that
the Pseudosphaeriaceae should be united with the
Dothideaceae (Luttrell
1951). The Dothideales were characterised by the
formation of asci in locules embedded in stromata, and contained the
Dothideaceae, a family established to accommodate multiloculate forms
like Botryosphaeria. Petrak
(1923) placed
Botryosphaeria in the sub-family Pseudosphaerieae, which was
placed in the Pleosporaceae (Sphaeriales).Miller (1928) placed
Botryosphaeria in the Dothideales because true perithecial
walls were absent. He later recognised three orders, namely the
Sphaeriales (with perithecia and paraphyses), the
Dothideales (ascostromatic forms without paraphyses), and the
Pseudosphaeriales (ascostromatic forms with interthecial threads) and
assigned Botryosphaeria to the Pseudosphaeriales.Luttrell (1955) identified
eight types of centrum development, and highlighted the taxonomic value of
sterile, interthecial tissues in the taxonomy of the Ascomycetes. He
furthermore replaced the name Pseudosphaeriales with
Pleosporales, and assigned Botryosphaeria to this order.
Luttrell's views were supported by Eriksson
(1981) and Barr
(1987). The orders proposed by
Luttrell and Barr were not accepted by von Arx & Müller
(1975) and von Arx
(1987), as they comprised a
mixture of unrelated genera (von Arx
1987). Von Arx & Müller
(1975) only delimited the
Dothideales, with two sub-orders and 24 families. Their view was that
this was a more appropriate means of dealing with the taxonomy of this very
large heterogeneous group, at least until a more natural method of
classification could be developed. Thus, Botryosphaeria was
maintained in the Botryosphaeriaceae, but retained in the
Dothideales. This delimitation is widely accepted and the
Dictionary of Fungi accommodates Botryosphaeria in the
Botryosphaeriaceae, and the Dothideales
(Kirk ).
Although the Botryosphaeriaceae is treated in the present study, its
ordinal position in the Dothideomycetes will be treated elsewhere as
part of the AToL (Assembling the Tree of Life) project (Schoch et
al., in prep.).Anamorphs of Botryosphaeria have been assigned to 18 coelomycete
genera, of which only two were recognised by Denman et al.
(2000). This taxonomic
subdivision was supported by comparisons of ITS sequence data, which separated
the examined Botryosphaeria spp. into two groups, correlating to
those species with Diplodia-like anamorphs and those with
Fusicoccum-like anamorphs (Jacobs
& Rehner 1998, Denman
). Later studies including additional species
and a larger suite of DNA-based markers supported this view
(Zhou & Stanosz 2001,
Alves ,
Slippers ). However, this apparently clear sub-division is questioned
by Saccharata proteae Denman & Crous (as Botryosphaeria
proteae (Wakef.) Denman & Crous with Fusicoccum and
Diplodia synanamorphs), which is morphologically and phylogenetically
distinct from representatives of the Diplodia- and
Fusicoccum-like groups (Crous
). Some authors have continued to use
Lasiodiplodia Ellis & Everh. as a genus distinct from
Diplodia Fr., because of its distinct phylogenetic (usually ITS or
EF-1α) and morphological (striate conidia and paraphyses)
characteristics (Pavlic ). Recently, the name Dothiorella Sacc. has also been
re-introduced as a distinct Botryosphaeria anamorph (conidia brown,
septate while still attached to the conidiogenous cells)
(Phillips ) and Dichomera Cooke has been linked to
Botryosphaeria species with Fusicoccum anamorphs
(Barber ).
Many of the other 18 coelomycete genera linked to Botryosphaeria
remain untested in terms of phylogenetic association to the above groups.The representation and phylogenetic understanding of major groups within
Botryosphaeria remains poor. Previous analyses based on DNA sequence
comparisons have included limited numbers of species, not representing the
full anamorph diversity associated with Botryosphaeria. The value of
the intron-dominated sequences of the ITS, β-tubulin and EF 1-α
loci (on which most previous studies were based) to infer phylogenetic
relationships across the diversity of the genus, is also unclear. The more
conserved mtSSU data have, for example, suggested that B. dothidea
and B. corticis (Demaree & Wilcox) Arx & E. Müll. are
unrelated to Fusicoccum s.str.
(Zhou & Stanosz 2001) even
though they are typically assigned to this genus.Botryosphaeria as a single genus is clearly unaligned with
evolutionary radiations in the group, as exemplified by the morphologically
and phylogenetically distinct anamorph genera linked to it. A preferable
approach would be natural unit classification, also referred to as the
“genus for genus concept”
(Seifert ). Here, morphologically distinct anamorph genera are linked
to unique teleomorphs on a one for one basis, correlating with phylogenetic
DNA data. This is an approach that has been applied to genera such as
Calonectria De Not. (Crous
2002), Cryphonectria (Sacc.) Sacc. & D. Sacc.
(Gryzenhout – this volume), Ophiostoma Syd. & P. Syd.
(Zipfel
– this volume) and Botryosphaeria
(Rossman & Samuels 2005).
The primary aim of the present study is to delineate the phylogenetic lineages
of the Botryosphaeriaceae, and to discuss the morphological
differences and generic concepts that can be ascribed to them. For this
purpose, we have chosen comparisons of sequences for the 28S rRNA gene (LSU)
because of its favourable size (approx. 900–1000 bp. used), and its
relatively conserved (medium–high level) nature, suitable to consider
taxonomic sub-divisions at the generic level.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Isolates
Single-conidial or ascospore isolates were made from ascomata or pycnidia
on dead or dying twigs of various hosts as explained in Slippers et
al. (2004). Other
isolates of representative Botryosphaeria spp. were obtained from the
Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures (CBS), Utrecht, the Netherlands and the
Culture Collection of the Tree Protection Co-operative Programme (CMW), FABI,
University of Pretoria, South Africa (Table 1). Cultural characteristics were
determined on plates containing 2 % malt extract agar (MEA), 2 %
potato-dextrose agar (PDA), and oatmeal agar (OA)
(Gams ).
DNA phylogeny
The isolation protocol of Lee & Taylor
(1990) was used to extract
genomic DNA from fungal mycelia grown on MEA. The primers ITS1
(White )
and LR5 (Vilgalys & Hester
1990) were used to amplify part of the nuclear rRNA operon using
the PCR conditions recommended by the authors and spanning the 3' end of the
18S rRNA gene, the internal spacers, the 5.8S rRNA gene and a part of the 5'
end of the 28S rRNA gene. PCR products were separated by electrophoresis at 80
V for 1 h in a 0.8 % (w/v) agarose gel in 0.5× TAE running buffer (0.4
m Tris, 0.05 m NaAc, and 0.01 m EDTA, pH
7.85) and visualised under UV light using a GeneGenius Gel Documentation and
Analysis System (Syngene, Cambridge, U.K.) following ethidium bromide
staining. The amplification products were purified using a GFX PCR DNA and Gel
Band Purification Kit (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech Europe GmbH, Germany). The
purified products were sequenced in both directions using an ABI PRISM Big Dye
Terminator v. 3.1 Cycle Sequencing Ready Reaction Kit (PE Biosystems, Foster
City, CA) containing AmpliTaq DNA Polymerase as recommended by the
manufacturer. The primers LR0R (Rehner
& Samuels 1994), LR3R
(http://www.biology.duke.edu/fungi/mycolab/primers.htm),
LR16 (Moncalvo ), and LR5 (Vilgalys &
Hester 1990) were used to ensure good quality sequences over the
entire length of the amplicon. The resulting fragments were analysed on an ABI
Prism 3100 DNA Sequencer (Perkin-Elmer, Norwalk, CN).DNA sequences were assembled and added to the outgroups and additional
GenBank sequences using Sequence Alignment Editor v. 2.0a11
(Rambaut 2002), and manual
adjustments for improvement were made by eye where necessary. The phylogenetic
analyses of sequence data were done in PAUP (Phylogenetic Analysis Using
Parsimony) version 4.0b10 (Swofford
2002) and consisted of neighbour-joining analysis with the
uncorrected (“p”), the Kimura 2-parameter and the HKY85
substitution model in PAUP. Alignment gaps were treated as missing data and
all characters were unordered and of equal weight. Any ties were broken
randomly when encountered. For parsimony analysis, alignment gaps were treated
as both missing and as a fifth character state and all characters were
unordered and of equal weight. Maximum parsimony analysis was performed using
the heuristic search option with simple taxa additions and tree bisection and
reconstruction (TBR) as the branch-swapping algorithm. Branches of zero length
were collapsed and all multiple, equally parsimonious trees were saved. The
robustness of the trees obtained was evaluated by 1000 bootstrap replications
(Hillis & Bull 1993). Tree
length (TL), consistency index (CI), retention index (RI) and rescaled
consistency index (RC) were calculated and the resulting trees were printed
with TreeView v. 1.6.6 (Page
1996).Bayesian analysis was conducted on the same aligned LSU dataset as the
distance analysis. First MrModeltest v. 2.2
(Nylander 2004) was used to
determine the best nucleotide substitution model. Phylogenetic analyses were
performed with MrBayes v. 3 (Ronquist
& Huelsenbeck 2003) applying a general time-reversible (GTR)
substitution model with gamma (G) and proportion of invariable site (I)
parameters to accommodate variable rates across sites. The Markov Chain Monte
Carlo (MCMC) analysis of 4 chains started from random tree topology and lasted
10 000 000 generations. Trees were saved each 100 000 generations, resulting
in 1000 saved trees. Burn-in was set at 500 000 generations after which the
likelihood values were stationary, leaving 950 trees from which the consensus
trees and posterior probabilities were calculated. PAUP 4.0b10 was used to
reconstruct the consensus tree, and maximum posterior probabilities were
assigned to branches after a 50 % majority rule consensus tree was constructed
from the 950 sampled trees.
Taxonomy
Morphological descriptions were made for isolates sporulating on 2 % wateragar (WA) with sterilised pine needles as substratum, at 25 °C under
near-UV light, to induce sporulation. Structures were mounted in lactic acid,
and 30 measurements at × 1000 magnification were made of each structure
where possible. The 95 % confidence levels were determined, and the extremes
of spore measurements given in parentheses. All cultures used in this study
are maintained in the CBS culture collection.
RESULTS
For the LSU gene, approximately 1000 bases were determined for the isolates
listed in Table 1. Additional sequences, some of which were shorter, were also
obtained from GenBank and added to the alignment. The manually adjusted
alignment contained 115 taxa (including the two outgroups) and 576 characters
including alignment gaps in TreeBASE (S1505, M2707). Of the 576 characters
used in the phylogenetic analysis, 190 were parsimony-informative, 19 were
variable and parsimony-uninformative, and 367 were constant when gaps were
treated as missing characters. When gaps were treated as a new character
state, seven more parsimony informative characters were added.
Neighbour-joining analysis using the three substitution models on the sequence
data yielded trees with similar topology and bootstrap values.Twelve clades could be identified in the distance tree obtained using the
HKY85 substitution model (Fig
1). These are discussed in the Taxonomy and Discussion sections.
Parsimony analysis with gaps treated as missing characters yielded 79604
equally parsimonious trees (TL = 582 steps; CI = 0.509; RI = 0.905; RC =
0.460). Treating gaps as new states resulted in 79775 equally parsimonious
trees (TL = 603 steps; CI = 0.524; RI = 0.910; RC = 0.477). The strict
consensus trees calculated from the equally parsimonious trees were identical
to each other and are shown in TreeBASE. Between the neighbour-joining and
parsimony analyses, the same clades were supported with two exceptions. The
first exception is Botryosphaeria mamane D.E. Gardner
(CBS 117444), which
resides in Clade 3 (Fig. 1),
but is basal to Clades 1 to 6 in the strict consensus trees. Also, Clade 7
groups with Clade 10 in the strict consensus trees, but this is not supported
with a bootstrap analysis (data not shown).
Fig. 1.
Distance tree obtained using the HKY85 substitution model on the LSU
sequence alignment. The scale bar shows 0.01 substitutions per site and
bootstrap support values from 1000 replicates are shown at the nodes. Clades
are numbered from 1 to 12 next to the brackets. The tree was rooted to
Gaeumannomyces graminis var. avenae (AF362556) and
Magnaporthe grisea (AF362554).
Distance tree obtained using the HKY85 substitution model on the LSU
sequence alignment. The scale bar shows 0.01 substitutions per site and
bootstrap support values from 1000 replicates are shown at the nodes. Clades
are numbered from 1 to 12 next to the brackets. The tree was rooted to
Gaeumannomyces graminis var. avenae (AF362556) and
Magnaporthe grisea (AF362554).Bayesian analysis resulted in a tree with largely the same topology and
clades (Fig. 2). Differences
observed were related to the position of B. mamane, which clustered
close to Clade 3 in the distance analysis, but clustered in Clade 4 in the
Bayesian analysis. A further difference was that in the Bayesian analysis
Clades 8–9 clustered basal to the Botryosphaeriaceae.
Fig. 2.
Consensus phylogram of 950 trees resulting from a Bayesian analysis of 115
LSU sequences. Bayesian posterior probabilities are given at the nodes. Clades
are numbered from 1–12 next to the brackets, following the
number-to-clade assignment presented in
Fig. 1. The tree was rooted to
Gaeumannomyces graminis var. avenae (AF362556) and
Magnaporthe grisea (AF362554) (Diaporthales,
Magnaporthaceae).
A total of 113 isolates representing most of the morphological variation
presently recognised in the Botryosphaeriaceae were subjected to DNA
sequence analysis. These analyses revealed 11 clades in the family. These
phylogenetic clades can also be correlated with distinct morphological
features.Clade 1 includes species with Diplodia, Sphaeropsis Sacc. and
Lasiodiplodia anamorphs clustering together. Although sequences of
gene regions such as ITS, EF-1α and β-tubulin, support the synonymy
of Sphaeropsis under Diplodia, in various cases they
separate Lasiodiplodia from the Diplodia clade
(Pavlic ,
Phillips ). This is in contrast to the LSU dataset
(Fig. 1) in which species
having Diplodia anamorphs could not be separated from those in
Lasiodiplodia. Inclusion of additional strains resulted in a basal
polytomy with low bootstrap support. Furthermore, uncertainty remains as to
which teleomorph name is best suited for this clade, as the form genus
Diplodia is known to be polyphyletic
(Sutton 1980,
Sivanesan 1984). The
clustering of three species of Tiarosporella Höhn. in this clade
was also unexpected.Clade 2 is represented by the type species of the genus
Botryosphaeria, namely B. dothidea, and its anamorph
Fusicoccum aesculi Corda. The genus Macrophomopsis N.E.
Stevens & Baechler, represented by a strain identified as M.
coronillae (Desm.) Petr. (type species)
(CBS 769.71),
clusters in this clade, as does the genus Dichomera Cooke,
represented by a strain identified as D. saubinetii (Mont.) Cooke
(type species) (CBS
990.70).Clade 3 is represented by isolates of Macrophomina phaseolina
(Tassi) Goid. This fungus is the coelomycete synanamorph of
“Rhizoctonia” bataticola (Taubenh.) E.J. Butler,
which is shown to be a member of the Botryosphaeriaceae. Conidia also
have apical mucous appendages early in their development, which has in the
past led to confusion, and the allocation of this species to the genus
Tiarosporella (von Arx
1981). With age, conidia lose their apical appendages, and become
brown and slightly roughened, appearing more Diplodia-like in
morphology.Clade 4 represents Fusicoccum dimidiatum (Penz.) D.F. Farr. This
species, which has a large number of synonyms
(Farr ),
is unusual in having a Fusicoccum-like coelomycete anamorph (with
mucoid apical appendages). It also has a powdery Scytalidium-like
hyphomycete synanamorph that is lacking in other species in the
Botryosphaeriaceae. Scytalidium, typified by S. lignicola
Pesante (CBS
233.57) clusters outside of the Botryosphaeriaceae.
However, DNA sequence data derived from the Scytalidium species
present in the CBS collection lead us to conclude that this genus is also
polyphyletic (results not given).Botryosphaeria mamane has a Fusicoccum anamorph and
clusters most closely with species in either Clade 3 or Clade 4 in the various
analyses. The Fusicoccum anamorph is morphologically most similar to
species residing in Clade 2 (Fusicoccum s.str.). It does not have the
apical appendages or discoloration found in species residing in Clade 3, nor
does it have a Scytalidium-like synanamorph occurring in species
residing in Clade 4. Consequenctly, its taxomic position remains
unresolved.Clade 5 represents Botryosphaeria-like teleomorphs with pigmented,
septate ascospores for which the genus Dothidotthia Höhn. is
available (Barr 1987,
1989). Anamorphs of this genus
reside in Dothiorella Sacc.
(Phillips ).Clade 6 represents Botryosphaeria-like species with
Fusicoccum-like anamorphs and Dichomera-like synanamorphs,
for which the name Neofusicoccum gen. nov. is introduced. The
Dichomera-like synanamorphs in this clade are characterised by
globose to pyriform conidia. The older, brown conidia in Clade 2
(Botryosphaeria s.str.) are obovoid, ellipsoid or fusiform, never
globose or subglobose (Phillips , Barber ).Clade 7 represents isolates of “Fusicoccum” stromaticum Mohali, Slippers & M.J. Wingf.
(Mohali ).
This taxon is distinguished from Fusicoccum aesculi and other
Fusicoccum-like genera by having conidia that are enclosed in a
persistent mucous sheath, for which the genus Pseudofusicoccum is
proposed.Clade 8 is represented by a single species, Botryosphaeria
quercuum (Schwein.) Sacc., for which the genus Melanops Nitschke
ex Fuckel is available. Saccharata Denman & Crous (anamorph
Fusicoccum-like; synanamorph Diplodia-like) (Clade 9) is
morphologically distinguished from Botryosphaeria s. str. by having
unilocular ascomata that develop under a clypeus.Clade 10 includes species of Guignardia Viala & Ravaz with
Phyllosticta Pers. anamorphs (Van
der Aa & Vanev 2002). Clade 11 contains several distinct
genera, namely Camarosporium Schulzer [type = C. quaternatum
(Hazsl.) Sacc.], “Phyllosticta” flevolandica Aa,
and other morphologically distinct taxa. “Diplodia”
macrospora Earle and “Diplodia” maydis
(Berk.) Sacc. (Clade 12) are shown to be distinct from the
Botryosphaeriaceae. Stenocarpella Syd. & P. Syd. is appropriate
for them, as they cluster apart from the Botryosphaeriaceae.
Surprisingly, they cluster in the Diaporthales although no teleomorph
connections are currently known for species of Stenocarpella.Consensus phylogram of 950 trees resulting from a Bayesian analysis of 115
LSU sequences. Bayesian posterior probabilities are given at the nodes. Clades
are numbered from 1–12 next to the brackets, following the
number-to-clade assignment presented in
Fig. 1. The tree was rooted to
Gaeumannomyces graminis var. avenae (AF362556) and
Magnaporthe grisea (AF362554) (Diaporthales,
Magnaporthaceae).
DISCUSSION
Based on the LSU phylogeny obtained in the present study
(Fig. 1), 11 clades could be
recognised for species that have been applied to or that have anamorphs allied
to the Botryosphaeriaceae. An additional 12th Clade
included two species that have been treated in Diplodia and that
reside in the Diaporthales. These 12 clades are discussed
individually as follows:
Clade 1: Diplodia/Lasiodiplodia (several teleomorph genera
available)
Species in Clade 1 are poorly resolved in both distance and Bayesian
analyses. This is due to the few informative sites in this clade (19) in the
section of LSU selected for this study. A larger segment of the LSU or
additional gene regions will be required to resolve the phylogenetic
relationships of species residing in this clade.In the past, anamorphs of Botryosphaeria have been described in up
to 18 different genera (Denman ), many of which were not clearly defined and contain
dark conidia typical or similar to those typical of Diplodia. Sutton
(1980) reduced
Macrophoma (Sacc.) Berl. & Voglino to synonymy with
Sphaeropsis. Pennycook & Samuels
(1985) reduced
Macrophomopsis to synonymy with Fusicoccum. Crous & Palm
(1999) showed that
Botryodiplodia (Sacc.) Sacc. was a nomen dubium, and reduced
Dothiorella to synonymy with Diplodia. Denman et
al. (2000) also regarded
Sphaeropsis and Lasiodiplodia as synonyms of
Diplodia. Phillips et al.
(2005a) again separated
Dothiorella from Diplodia, and also provided evidence to
show that the teleomorphs were different.Recent treatments of Botryosphaeria anamorphs have revealed that
they cluster in two clades, namely Diplodia (dark, mostly >10
μm broad, thick-walled conidia), and Fusicoccum (hyaline, mostly
<10 μm broad, thin-walled conidia)
(Jacobs & Rehner 1998,
Denman ,
Zhou & Stanosz 2001,
Alves ).
With age, however, conidia in species of Fusicoccum become dark, and
frequently also septate. This complicates identification, especially where
this is attempted based on structures occurring on natural substrates and in
the absence of fresh cultures.Pavlic et al.
(2004) described a new species
of Lasiodiplodia based on its characteristic conidial ornamentation
typical of the genus (von Arx
1987). Xiao & Rogers
(2004) described a new species
of Diplodia, and placed it in Sphaeropsis. The correct
generic names to be used for the dark-spored anamorphs of
Botryosphaeria thus remains uncertain.The genus Sphaeropsis is based on S. visci (Fr.) Sacc.,
while the genus Lasiodiplodia is based on L. theobromae
(Pat.) Griff. & Maubl. In the present study we included cultures of both
species. Based on the LSU phylogeny, it is clear that strains of
Sphaeropsis visci reside in this clade
(CBS 186.97,
100163).
Furthermore, our data also reveal that the strains deposited in CBS under the
name L. theobromae represent several distinct species with this
typical conidial ornamentation; the LSU phylogenetic data could not resolve
the Lasiodiplodia/Diplodia clade. Lasiodiplodia
gonubiensis and three new species of Lasiodiplodia recently
described (Burgess et al., unpubl. data), were interspersed among
species of Diplodia. The rather atypical Diplodia species
recently described by Van Niekerk et al.
(2004) as D. porosum
Van Niekerk & Crous, also clustered in this clade. Botryosphaeria
subglobosa (C. Booth) Arx & E. Müll. is another interesting
example, as it has an anamorph described as Sphaeropsis subglobosa C.
Booth. Although the latter species is illustrated to have what appears to be a
germ slit in its aseptate conidia
(Punithalingam 1969,
De Hoog ),
conidia of CBS
448.91 were found to be hyaline, thick-walled, and to become
pigmented with age. Mature conidia were observed to have more than one
“germ slit”, actually appearing more like striations
(Fig. 3). This observation
suggests that if Diplodia and Lasiodiplodia are seen as
separate genera, S. subglobosa would be better accommodated in the
latter genus.
Fig. 3.
“Botryosphaeria” subglobosa
(CBS 448.91). A.
Pycnidia on pine needles. B–C. Conidiogenous cells. D. Young conidia.
E–H. Mature conidia with striations. Scale bars: A = 150 μm, B = 9
μm.
The choice of the correct teleomorph name to use for species residing in
Clade 1 is not clear. Denman et al.
(2000) listed several synonyms
of Botryosphaeria, many of which have Diplodia or
Diplodia-like anamorphs, and could thus potentially be available for
this clade. This can be resolved only once appropriate type specimens have
been examined, epitypes recollected and designated, and ex-epitype sequences
generated. To avoid adding to the confusion, we refrain from designating a
teleomorph name for this clade, in anticipation of the additional research
that is needed to elucidate the status of these older names. A further
possibility is that the taxa in Clade 1 still represent more than one
genus.“Botryosphaeria” subglobosa
(CBS 448.91). A.
Pycnidia on pine needles. B–C. Conidiogenous cells. D. Young conidia.
E–H. Mature conidia with striations. Scale bars: A = 150 μm, B = 9
μm.
Clade 2: Botryosphaeria (anamorph Fusicoccum)
Barber et al.
(2005) have recently shown that
species of Fusicoccum can have Dichomera Cooke synanamorphs.
Furthermore, two species of Dichomera, D. versiformis Z.Q. Yuan,
Wardlaw & C. Mohammed and D. eucalypti (G. Winter) B. Sutton also
cluster in Clade 6 with the majority of the “Fusicoccum”
species. Phillips et al.
(2005b) also reported that
conidia of Fusicoccum aesculi from olives can become pigmented,
ovoid, ellipsoid or fusiform, 1–2-septate, similar to those observed by
Barber et al. (2005)
for F. aesculi. Phillips et al.
(2005b) also revealed
Fusicoccum dalmaticum (Thüm.) Vanev is the same as
Camarosporium dalmaticum (Thüm.) Zachos & Tzav.-Klon., both
being later synonyms of F. aesculi. Sutton
(1980) stated that
Camarosporium Schulzer was the pycnidial analogue of
Dichomera, which had more stromatic conidiomata. Given our current
knowledge of the phylogenetic value of conidiomatal structure in the
Dothideomycetes, it seems redundant to separate these anamorph genera
based on this character alone (also see illustrations in
Sutton 1980). The generic name
Camarosporium (1870) is older, and thus has preference over
Dichomera (1876). When a strain identified as D. saubinetii
(Mont.) Cooke (CBS
990.70; sterile, morphology unconfirmed) was subjected to sequence
analysis, it clustered in Clade 2, while strains identified as C.
quaternatum (CBS
134.97,
483.95; fertile,
matching the original description) clustered outside of the
Botryosphaeriaceae. In Fusicoccum s.str. (F.
aesculi) conidia are fusiform to ellipsoid, and with age become septate
and brown, to some extent appearing Dichomera-like. Whether strains
matching D. saubinetii in morphology will cluster in Clade 2 remains
to be determined.Sutton (1980) stated that
Macrophomopsis coronillae was closely related to F. aesculi,
but distinguishable by its annellidic conidiogenous cells. Crous & Palm
(1999) showed that percurrent
proliferation occurred in the type of F. aesculi, and concluded that
Pennycook & Samuels (1985)
were probably correct to reduce M. coronillae to synonymy with F.
aesculi. As shown in the current study, an isolate of M.
coronillae (CBS
769.71) was indistinguishable from F. aesculi based on
sequence data. However, this isolate produced pycnidial paraphyses in culture,
which had not been observed on the type specimen of F. aesculi
(Sutton 1980). Phillips
(2000) used this feature to
distinguish F. populi A.J.L. Phillips from F. aesculi. DNA
sequence comparisons revealed, that this feature is uninformative at the
species level (F. aesculi = F. populi), and that not all
strains of F. aesculi form paraphyses. Furthermore, some pycnidia in
the culture CBS
769.71 produced numerous paraphyses, while they were almost
completely absent in others. A note by H.A. van der Aa in the CBS database
mentions the fact that this isolate had also formed microconidia when it was
first collected.Botryosphaeria mamane
(CBS 117444).
A–B. Conidia in culture. Scale bar = 7 μm.Botryosphaeria mamane was described for a fungus occurring on
Sophora chrysophylla in Hawaii, where it is associated with witches'
brooms of this host (Gardner
1997). By employing simple sequence repeat fingerprinting, Zhou
et al. (2001) were
the first to show that B. mamane clustered apart from other species
of Botryosphaeria. Presently there is no authentic culture of this
species, and subsequent collections from the type locality so far were
unsuccessful. The culture included in the present study (Table 1)
(Fig. 4) has the same ITS
sequence as that of the original ex-type strain. However, its exact position
in our trees remains unresolved, as it clustered differently when distance and
Bayesian analyses were compared (Figs
1,
2). Morphologically its
anamorph is most similar to Fusicoccum s.str. in Clade 2.
Fig. 4.
Botryosphaeria mamane
(CBS 117444).
A–B. Conidia in culture. Scale bar = 7 μm.
Clade 3: Macrophomina (teleomorph unknown)
The asexual, sterile basidiomycete genus Rhizoctonia DC. has been
linked to a number of teleomorphs in different families, namely the
Platygloeaceae, Exidiaceae, Tulasnellaceae, Ceratobasidiaceae, etc.
(Stalpers & Andersen
1996). The reason these species are treated in the form-genus
Rhizoctonia, is that they are mostly sterile, and share the same
vegetative features typical of Rhizoctonia spp. Species have thus
been distinguished based on features such as sclerotium production, mycelial
colour, wide hyphae, all with two or several nuclei, length of cells, shape
and size of monilioid cells, and sclerotial size
(Parmeter & Whitney
1970).Macrophomina phaseolina is the type species of the genus
Macrophomina Petr., and is also the name given to the coelomycete
synanamorph of Rhizoctonia bataticola (Taubenh.) E.J. Butler. The
latter fungus is a root inhabitant, and has been implicated in numerous root
rot diseases of a wide range of crops, commonly causing charcoal rot and ashy
stem blight (Holliday & Punithalingam 1998). The name of the synanamorph,
and its taxonomic placement, has been the topic of much controversy. In their
IMI description sheet of the fungus, Holliday & Punithalingam
(1988) mention that the
conidiophores are hyaline phialides, short obpyriform to cylindrical,
5–13 × 4–6 μm. Conidia are described as being hyaline,
ellipsoid to obovoid, 14–30 × 5–10 μm. Von Arx
(1981) introduced the name
Tiarosporella phaseolina (Tassi) van der Aa for this fungus, and also
reduced the genus Macrophomina to synonymy under
Tiarosporella Höhn. As no explanation was given, this treatment
has largely been ignored by the plant pathological and mycological community,
though von Arx (1987) retained
it. The genus Tiarosporella [based on T. paludosa (Sacc.
& Fiori ex P. Syd.) Höhn.] is characterised by having conidia formed
from smooth, hyaline conidiogenous cells that lack periclinal thickenings and
percurrent proliferations, and hyaline, subcylindrical to fusiform conidia
that have irregular apical mucoid appendages
(Nag Raj 1993). H.A. van der
Aa (pers. comm.) informed the first author that the decision was based upon
the fact that he had succeeded to induce sporulation of M. phaseolina
in culture, and observed that the conidia have apical mucoid appendages, which
prompted von Arx to place this fungus in Tiarosporella. In the
present study we have been able to induce numerous strains of M.
phaseolina to sporulate on sterile pine needles, and found that conidia
form apical mucoid appendages (Figs
5,
6) as previously suggested by
van der Aa. As this is inconsistent with the description provided by Holliday
& Punithaligham (1988), we
provide an emended description below:
Fig. 5.
Macrophomina phaseolina (CPC 11052). Conidiogenous cells, young
conidia with apical mucoid appendages, and mature, brown conidia devoid of
appendages. Scale bar = 10 μm.
Fig. 6.
Macrophomina phaseolina (CPC 11052). A. Conidia and sclerotia
formed on pine needles. B. Conidiogenous cells. C–H. Hyaline conidia
with apical, mucoid appendages. I–M. Brown, mature conidia with
verrucose walls. Scale bars = 8 μm.
(Tassi) Goid., Annali Sper. agr.
N.S. 1: 457. 1947. Figs 5,
6.Basionym: Macrophoma phaseolinaTassi, Bull. Lab. Ort
bot. Siena IV: 9. 1901.= Tiarosporella phaseoli (Maubl.) Aa, Verh. Kon. Ned. Akad.
Wetensch., Sectie 2, 68: 4. 1977.Additional synonyms listed by Holliday & Punithalingam
(1988).Sclerotia occurring in host tissue or in soil, black, smooth,
hard, 100–1000 μm diam. Conidiomata pycnidial, dark brown to
black, solitary or gregarious, up to 200 μm diam, opening by a central
ostiole; wall multilayered, cells dark brown, thick-walled. Conidiogenous
cells lining the inner surface of the conidioma, hyaline, short
obpyriform to subcylindrical, proliferating several times percurrently near
the apex, 6–12 × 4–6 μm; young condiogenous cells covered
by a mucous layer that extends over the apex of the developing conidium.
Conidia ellipsoid to obovoid, (16–)20–24(–32)
× (6–) 7–9(–11) μm; immature conidia hyaline,
enclosed in a mucous sheath, that upon dehiscence encloses the top half of the
conidium, transformed into two lateral tentaculiform, apical mucoid appendages
(type C, Nag Raj 1993); mature
conidia becoming medium to dark brown, with a granular outer layer that in
some cases appears pitted, without any mucoid appendages; conidial hilum
frequently with a marginal frill.Notes: Although Macrophomina phaseolina can have conidia
with apical mucoid appendages as found in Tiarosporella
(Sutton & Marasas 1976),
it is distinguished by having percurrently proliferating conidiogenous cells
[not seen in any species of Tiarosporella sensu Nag Rag
(1993), nor in those
investigated here], and conidia that become dark brown at maturity. Based on
these differences (and in the absence of authentic cultures of T.
paludosa), the genus Macrophomina and the name M.
phaseolina is retained. The three species of Tiarosporella that
were available for this study clustered in Clade 1 (Figs
7,
8), suggesting that the latter
clade is still unresolved.
Fig. 7.
Tiarosporella graminis var. karoo
(CBS 118718). A.
Pycnidium on a pine needle. B–C. Conidiogenous cells. D–G. Conidia
(arrows denote apical, mucoid appendages). H. Conidia. Scale bars: A = 200
μm, B–D = 7 μm.
Fig. 8.
Tiarosporella tritici
(CBS 118719). A.
Pycnidia on a pine needle. B–D. Conidiogenous cells. E–F. Conidia
(arrows denote apical, mucoid appendages). Scale bars: A = 300 μm,
B–F = 10 μm.
Macrophomina phaseolina (CPC 11052). Conidiogenous cells, young
conidia with apical mucoid appendages, and mature, brown conidia devoid of
appendages. Scale bar = 10 μm.
Several distinct Fusicoccum-like fungi with conidia that become
septate with a darker central cell have been treated under the epithet
“mangiferae”. Some isolates, however, formed a
Scytalidium-like synanamorph, while others did not.Dothiorella mangiferae Syd. & P. Syd. was originally described
from mango (Sydow ). Nattrass
(1933) described a similar
fungus from pome and stone fruit trees, but noticed a pigmented conidial
state, which led him to describe Hendersonula toruloidea Nattrass.
Sutton & Dyko (1989)
revised the genus Hendersonula Speg. and synonymised both D.
mangiferae and H. toruloidea under the redescribed
Nattrassia mangiferae (Syd. & P. Syd.) B. Sutton & Dyko.
Furthermore, the mycelial synanamorph was described as Scytalidium
dimidiatum (Penz.) B. Sutton & Dyko. Farr et al.
(2005) made the point that the
oldest name for the fungus was Torula dimidiata Penz., and hence
introduced the combination Fusicoccum dimidiatum (Penz.) D.F. Farr,
stating that the type species of the genera Nattrassia and
Scytalidium were synonyms of F. dimidiatum. As seen in the
present study, this fungus, with its powdery disarticulating aerial mycelium,
is a genus in its own right within the Botryosphaeriaceae.
Furthermore, the ex-type strain of Scytalidium, S. lignicola Pesante,
(CBS 233.57)
clusters outside the Botryosphaeriaceae (results not given), and
hence Scytalidium is unavailable for this fungus.Fusicoccum mangiferae (Syd. & P. Syd.) Johnson, Slippers &
M.J. Wingf. (≡ D. mangiferae, ≡ N. mangiferae)
is a distinct taxon (see Clade 6, Neofusicoccum) that should not be
confused with F. dimidiatum. When Sutton & Dyko
(1989) and Johnson
(1992) re-examined the type of
D. mangiferae, they did not observe the Scytalidium-like
anamorph on the type specimen, in accordance with Sydow et al.
(1916). Slippers et
al. (2005) studied
isolates identified as D. mangiferae (= N. mangiferae) from
mango in Australia, and found them to belong to Fusicoccum, for which
they introduced the name F. mangiferae (now Neofusicoccum,
Clade 6). They also did not observe the Scytalidium-like synanamorph
as described by Sutton & Dyko
(1989). The synonymy of H.
toruloidea (which has a Scytalidium-like synanamorph) with
F. mangiferae (which does not appear to have a
Scytalidium-like synanamorph), is thus rejected here. A new genus is
proposed to accommodate this fungus.Crous & Slippers, gen. nov.
MycoBank
MB500868.Genus anamorphosis hyphomyceticum. Arthroconidia catenata in mycelio aerio,
pulverulenta, disarticulantia, cylindrica-truncata, oblongo-obtusa vel
doliiformia, fusca, crassitunicata, 0–2-septata.Conidia occurring in arthric chains in aerial mycelium, powdery to
the touch, disarticulating, cylindrical–truncate, oblong–obtuse to
doliiform, dark brown, thick-walled, 0–2-septate.Type species: Neoscytalidium dimidiatum (Penz.) Crous
& Slippers, comb. nov.(Penz.) Crous & Slippers,
comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500869.
Fig. 9.
Fig. 9.
Neoscytalidium dimidiatum
(CBS 312.90).
A–B. Neoscytalidium conidia. C. Conidiogenous cells of
coelomycete synanamorph. D–F. Conidia of coelomycete synanamorph (arrows
denote sheath). Scale bars = 4 μm.
Concepts defining morphological features of Botryosphaeria
(ascomata, asci and hamathecium) have developed slowly
(Denman ).
This has resulted in confusion between Botryosphaeria and
superficially similar genera such as Physalospora Niessl. and
Guignardia (von Arx &
Müller 1954, Hanlin
1990), Auerswaldiella Theiss. & Syd.,
Discochora Höhn., Dothidotthia Höhn.,
Neodeightonia C. Booth, Homostegia Fuckel and
Otthia Nitschke. Subsequent to the review of Denman et al.
(2000), two of these genera,
namely Otthia and Dothidotthia, have been variously treated,
and they are discussed here.Macrophomina phaseolina (CPC 11052). A. Conidia and sclerotia
formed on pine needles. B. Conidiogenous cells. C–H. Hyaline conidia
with apical, mucoid appendages. I–M. Brown, mature conidia with
verrucose walls. Scale bars = 8 μm.Tiarosporella graminis var. karoo
(CBS 118718). A.
Pycnidium on a pine needle. B–C. Conidiogenous cells. D–G. Conidia
(arrows denote apical, mucoid appendages). H. Conidia. Scale bars: A = 200
μm, B–D = 7 μm.Tiarosporella tritici
(CBS 118719). A.
Pycnidia on a pine needle. B–D. Conidiogenous cells. E–F. Conidia
(arrows denote apical, mucoid appendages). Scale bars: A = 300 μm,
B–F = 10 μm.Neoscytalidium dimidiatum
(CBS 312.90).
A–B. Neoscytalidium conidia. C. Conidiogenous cells of
coelomycete synanamorph. D–F. Conidia of coelomycete synanamorph (arrows
denote sheath). Scale bars = 4 μm.Dothiorella pyrenophora (K 54912). A–B. Pycnidia on stems.
B. Spermatia and spematogenous cells. D–H. Conidia. Scale bars = 10
μm.The genus Otthia was described as having short-stalked,
cylindrical, bitunicate asci containing hyaline ascospores that become brown
and 1-septate at maturity (Dennis
1981, Sivanesan
1984). Booth
(1958) designated Otthia
spiraeae (Fuckel) Fuckel as lectotype of the genus, citing Diplodia
sarmentorum (Fr.) Fr. as anamorph. Von Arx
(1974) listed Otthia
as the teleomorph of Aplosporella Speg., which is indistinguishable
from Sphaeropsis Sacc., and thus similar to Diplodia
sarmentorum. Denman et al.
(2000) were thus of the
opinion that Otthia should be reduced to synonymy with
Botryosphaeria, but stated that further morphological and DNA
sequence comparisions were first required. Van Niekerk et al.
(2004) showed that the
Wollenweber isolate of Diplodia sarmentorum
(CBS 120.43) is
identical to the Booth isolate of Otthia spiraeae (IMI 63581b).
Recently, Phillips et al.
(2005a) re-examined the
lectotype of O. spiraeae (K 104853), and found that it represents a
fungus distinct from that collected and treated by Booth
(1958) as “O.
spiraeae”. These authors also showed that the anamorph-teleomorph
connection reported by Booth
(1958), was in fact incorrect.
Consequently, the new species, Botryosphaeria sarmentorum A.J.L.
Phillips, Alves & Luque (anamorph: Dothiorella sarmentorum (Fr.)
A.J.L. Phillips, Alves & Luque) was introduced for the fungus treated by
Booth (1958) and Wollenweber
(1941). The incorrect link
between Otthia and “Diplodia”
sarmentorum as reported by Booth
(1958) was thus resolved.
Otthia was retained as a distinct, but poorly known genus,
characterised by cylindrical asci, brown, 1-septate ascospores that are
obliquely uniseriate, and thin, sparingly septate pseudoparaphyses. Due to the
lack of cultures, the correct placement of Otthia remains
unknown.In the phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequence data of the ITS region and EF
1-α gene, Phillips et al.
(2005a) demonstrated that the
“Botryosphaeria” species with pigmented, septate
ascospores and Diplodia-like anamorphs formed a separate clade.
Dothiorella had been reduced to synonymy under Diplodia by
Crous & Palm (1999), who
did not have access to cultures and DNA sequence data and thus used a wider
morphological concept for Diplodia. Phillips et al.
(2005a) re-examined the type
of Dothiorella pyrenophora Sacc. (K 54912)
(Fig. 10), and stated that it
differs from Diplodia by having conidia that are brown and 1-septate
early in their development, while they are still attached to the conidiogenous
cells. In Diplodia (D. mutila), conidial darkening and
septation takes place after discharge. We have re-examined the types of both
genera in the present study, and concur with Phillips et al.
(2005a) that the genera have
distinct conidial characeristics. Teleomorphs of Dothiorella have
pigmented, septate ascospores, for which the genus Dothidotthia is
available. The latter genus had been recognised as a member of the
Botryosphaeriaceae by Barr
(1987,
1989), and is known to have
Diplodia-like anamorphs, which are now accommodated in
Dothiorella. The new taxa described by Phillips et al.
(2005a) must thus be placed in
Dothidotthia. These taxa will be treated elsewhere (A.J.L. Phillips,
in prep.).
Fig. 10.
Dothiorella pyrenophora (K 54912). A–B. Pycnidia on stems.
B. Spermatia and spematogenous cells. D–H. Conidia. Scale bars = 10
μm.
An interesting issue to resolve is the morphological distinction between
the two larger Fusicoccum clades, namely Fusicoccum s.str.
(based on F. aesculi, and linked to the name
Botryosphaeria), and the larger Fusicoccum-like clade
(linked to Botryosphaeria-like teleomorphs), which includes most of
the species that are currently known from DNA sequence data. Although the
teleomorphs are similar in both clades, their anamorphs provide some clues for
a possible separation. There is little to choose in their Fusicoccum
anamorphs, but as seen in Saccharata, the distinguishing feature is
to be found in their synanamorphs. In Fusicoccum s. str. (F.
aesculi) conidia are fusiform to ellipsoid, and with age turn septate and
brown. In the Fusicoccum-like clade, two distinct conidial types are
seen, namely the first with a Fusicoccum-like morphology, which can
turn brown and septate with age (as seen in Clade 2). The second conidial form
has globose to pyriform conidia, which are brown, slightly verruculose, and
muriformly septate. It is debatable if Fusicoccum s.str. (Clade 2)
forms a distinct synanamorph. The synanamorph observed in the
Fusicoccum-like clade (Clade 6) cannot be accommodated in
Camarosporium (the stromatic analogue of Dichomera), as the
type species of Camarosporium, C. quaternatum
(CBS 134.97,
483.95) clusters
outside the Botryosphaeriaceae. As far as we could establish,
however, no genus is presently available for this clade, and thus a new one is
proposed below. We introduce a single generic name, namely for the anamorph
(which occurs with a Dichomera-like synanamorph), which is the more
informative morphological state:Crous, Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips,
gen. nov. MycoBank
MB500870.Teleomorph: Botryosphaeria-likeSynanamorph: Dichomera-likeGenus anamorphosis coelomyceticum. Fusicocco simile sed synanamorphe
Dichomerae simili et conidiis brunneis, globosis vel pyriformibus,
distinguendum.Resembling species of Fusicoccum, but distinct in forming a
Dichomera-like synanamorph with brown, globose to pyriform
conidia.Type species: Neofusicoccum parvum (Pennycook &
Samuels) Crous, Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov.Most species that have thus far been described in Fusicoccum
appear to reside in this clade, as can be seen in the present, as well as
other recent studies. To facilitate clarity, new combinations are proposed for
those known to us from culture:(Mohali, Slippers & M.J.
Wingf.) Mohali, Slippers & M.J. Wingf. comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500871.Basionym: Fusicoccum andinum Mohali, Slippers & M.J.
Wingf., Mycol. Res. 10: 408. 2006.(D.F. Farr & M. Elliott)
Crous, Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500872.Basionym: Fusicoccum arbuti D.F. Farr & M. Elliott,
Mycologia 97: 731. 2005.(Slippers, Crous & M.J. Wingf.)
Crous, Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500873.Basionym: Fusicoccum australe Slippers, Crous & M.J.
Wingf., Mycologia 96: 1035. 2004.Teleomorph: “Botryosphaeria” australis
Slippers, Crous & M.J. Wingf., Mycologia 96: 1035. 2004.(Slippers, Crous & M.J.
Wingf.) Crous, Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500874.Basionym: Fusicoccum eucalypticola Slippers, Crous &
M.J. Wingf., Stud. Mycol. 50: 351. 2005.Teleomorph: “Botryosphaeria”
eucalypticolaSlippers, Crous & M.J. Wingf., Stud. Mycol. 50: 351.
2005.(Crous, H. Sm. ter & M.J.
Wingf.) Crous, Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500875.Basionym: Fusicoccum eucalyptorum Crous, H. Sm. ter &
M.J. Wingf., Mycologia 93: 280. 2001.Teleomorph: “Botryosphaeria”
eucalyptorumCrous, H. Sm. ter & M.J. Wingf., Mycologia 93: 280.
1998.(Pennycook & Samuels) Crous,
Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500876.Pseudofusicoccum stromaticum
(CBS 117448). A.
Pycnidia on pine needles. B–C. Conidiogenous cells. D–H. Conidia
(arrows denote mucoid sheaths). Scale bars = A = 90 μm, B = 6 μm.Basionym: Fusicoccum luteum Pennycook & Samuels,
Mycotaxon 24: 456. 1985.Teleomorph: “Botryosphaeria” lutea
Phillips, Sydowia 54: 59. 2002.(Burgess, Barber & Hardy)
Burgess, Barber & Hardy, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500877.Basionym: Fusicoccum macroclavatum Burgess, Barber &
Hardy, Austral. Pl. Pathol. 34: 562. 2005.Note: For further information about this recently published
species, see Burgess et al.
(2005).(Syd. & P. Syd.) Crous,
Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500878.Basionym: Dothiorella mangiferae Syd. & P. Syd., Ann.
Mycol. 14: 192. 1916.≡ Nattrassia mangiferae (Syd. & P. Syd.) B. Sutton &
Dyko, Mycol. Res. 93: 484. 1989.≡ Fusicoccum mangiferae (Syd. & P. Syd.) Johnson,
Slippers & M.J. Wingf., Mycologia 97: 106. 2005.Teleomorph: “Botryosphaeria” sp.(Pennycook & Samuels) Crous,
Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500879.Basionym: Fusicoccum parvum Pennycook & Samuels,
Mycotaxon 24: 455. 1985.Teleomorph: “Botryosphaeria” parva
Pennycook & Samuels, Mycotaxon 24: 455. 1985.(Denman & Crous) Crous, Slippers
& A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500880.Basionym: Fusicoccum protearum Denman & Crous,
Mycologia 95: 301. 2003.Teleomorph:“Botryosphaeria”
protearum Denman & Crous, Mycologia 95: 301. 2003.(Slippers, Crous & M.J.
Wingf.) Crous, Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500881.Basionym: Fusicoccum ribis Slippers, Crous & M.J.
Wingf., Mycologia 96: 96. 2004.Teleomorph: “Botryosphaeria” ribis
Grossenb. & Duggar, Tech. Bull. N.Y. Agric. Exp. St. 18: 128. 1911.(Niekerk & Crous) Crous,
Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500882.Basionym: Fusicoccum viticlavatum Niekerk & Crous,
Mycologia 96: 792. 2004.(Niekerk & Crous) Crous,
Slippers & A.J.L. Phillips, comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500883.Basionym: Fusicoccum vitifusiforme Niekerk & Crous,
Mycologia 96: 793. 2004.
“Fusicoccum” stromaticum Mohali, Slippers
& M. J. Wingf. (Mohali ) was described for a new Fusicoccum-like species
occurring on Eucalyptus and Acacia spp. in Venezuela. The
taxon was distinguished from other species of Fusicoccum based on its
unusually large conidiomata, the ability to grow at 35 °C, and
thick-walled conidia. Strains of this species have conidia that are encased in
a persistent mucous sheath, which is absent in other species of
Fusicoccum, and is the character that distinguishes it as genus from
Fusicoccum s.str.Mohali, Slippers & M.J. Wingf. gen.
nov. MycoBank
MB500884.Genus anamorphosis coelomyceticum. Fusicocco simile, sed conidiis strato
mucido persistente circumdatis distinguendum.Camarosporium quaternatum
(CBS 134.97). A.
Pycnidia in agar. B–C Conidiogenous cells. D–E. Conidia. Scale
bars: A = 100 μm, B = 6 μm.Resembling species of Fusicoccum, but distinct in having conidia
encased in a persistent mucous sheath.Type species: Pseudofusicoccum stromaticum (Mohali,
Slippers & M.J. Wingf.) Mohali, Slippers & M. J. Wingf., comb.
nov.(Mohali, Slippers & M.J.
Wingf.) Mohali, Slippers & M.J. Wingf., comb. nov. MycoBank
MB500885.
Fig. 11.
Fig. 11.
Pseudofusicoccum stromaticum
(CBS 117448). A.
Pycnidia on pine needles. B–C. Conidiogenous cells. D–H. Conidia
(arrows denote mucoid sheaths). Scale bars = A = 90 μm, B = 6 μm.
Von Arx & Müller
(1954) placed B.
melanops (Tul. & C. Tul.) G. Winter under B. quercuum
(Schwein.) Sacc., which is a complex in need of revision, including
Melanops tulasnei (Tul. & C. Tul.) Fuckel, the oldest generic
name available for this clade. To resolve the status of B. quercuum,
however, authentic cultures of all these names need to be studied, and linked
to existing names. The strain in Clade 8 closely matches the morphology of the
type specimen (Phillips et al., unpubl. data). No name is, however,
proposed for this genus pending the outcome of studies based on authentic
isolates.
Clade 9: Saccharata (anamorph Fusicoccum-like)
Wakefield (1922) described
an ascomycete associated with leaf spots and stem cankers of Protea
and Leucospermum species as Phyllachora proteae Wakef. This
latter fungus is characterised by having unilocular ascomata that develop
under a very small epidermal clypeus, cylindrical asci, pseudoparaphyses, and
hyaline, aseptate, ellipsoidal ascospores. Doidge
(1942) found the ascomatal
walls are continuous with, and similar in structure to the clypeus, and stated
that the fungus should be allocated elsewhere, possibly in
Botryosphaeria. Denman et al.
(1999) recollected this
species, placed it in Botryosphaeria, and also established a cultural
link with its anamorph, “Fusicoccum” proteae
Denman & Crous, which also forms a Diplodia-like synanamorph in
culture. On the basis of ITS DNA sequence comparisons, Denman et al.
(2000) later showed that the
fungus clustered outside the Botryosphaeria clades that accommodated
Fusicoccum and Diplodia anamorphs. Given its unilocular
ascomata, the presence of a clypeus, and its unusual Fusicoccum- and
Diplodia-like synanamorphs, Crous et al.
(2004) established a new
genus, Saccharata Denman & Crous to accommodate S.
proteae (Wakef.) Denman & Crous. The LSU phylogenies in this study
supports Saccharata as a distinct genus that is basal to, but
probably outside the Botryosphaeriaceae.Stenocarpella maydis on Zea mays. A. Pycnidium on upper
leaf surface. B–C. Conidial cirrhi. D. Conidiogenous cells giving rise
to conidia. E–H. Conidia. Scale bars = 10 μm.
Clade 10: Guignardia (anamorph Phyllosticta)
The genus Phyllosticta was revised by Van der Aa & Vanev
(2002), who treated 2936 taxa,
accepting 143 species in Phyllosticta, many of which have teleomorphs
in Guignardia (Botryosphaeriaceae), and
Leptodothiorella spermatial states. As seen with
“Phyllosticta” flevolandica Aa, it is to be
expected that more “Phyllosticta” taxa will be allocated
elsewhere once subjected to DNA analysis (Crous et al. in prep.).
Clade 11: Camarosporium and relatives
Several morphologically discordant taxa group in this clade, including
C. quaternatum, the type species of Camarosporium
(Fig. 12), but also an
unidentified Dothiorella-like strain (1-septate, brown conidia), and
another seen as an atypical Phyllosticta, namely P.
flevolandica (hyaline, 0–1-septate conidia)
(Van der Aa 1973). Other taxa
include Karstenula Speg. (anamorph Microdiplodia Tassi),
Letendraea Sacc. (Tubeufiaceae?), and Byssothecium
Fuckel (anamorph Chaetophoma-like). It appears that the
Dothiorella-like strain (CPC 12268) is, in fact, a species of
Microdiplodia. Sutton
(1977) reported that the genus
was introduced for stem- or branch-inhabiting species with small, brown,
1-septate conidia. This is consistent with the results of this study where the
strain examined was isolated from branches of Sophora chrysophylla
collected in Hawaii. As we have shown here that the genus
Microdiplodia Tassi could be used for these small-spored
Dothiorella-like species, the genus needs to be lectotypified
according to Tassi's original concept (see
Sutton 1977).
Fig. 12.
Camarosporium quaternatum
(CBS 134.97). A.
Pycnidia in agar. B–C Conidiogenous cells. D–E. Conidia. Scale
bars: A = 100 μm, B = 6 μm.
Clade 12: Stenocarpella (teleomorph unknown)
The genus Stenocarpella Syd. & P. Syd. is based on S.
macrospora (Earle) B. Sutton. The genus contains two species that cause
Diplodia ear rot of maize, namely S. macrospora and S.
maydis (Berk.) B. Sutton. These taxa were formerly treated in
Diplodia by Sutton
(1964), and
Macrodiplodia Sacc. by Petrak & Sydow
(1927). Sutton
(1964,
1980) was of the opinion that
these species should be accommodated in a genus other than Diplodia,
and because the status of Macrodiplodia was unknown, he placed them
in Stenocarpella (Sutton
1977). This treatment has not been widely accepted, and plant
pathologists refer to “Diplodia ear rot”, and continue to use the
Diplodia names.Because cultures were not available for S. maydis and S.
macrospora, these two species were recollected as part of the present
study, and subjected to DNA sequence comparisions. Interestingly, they
clustered in the Diaporthales, clearly supporting the decision by
Sutton (1964,
1980) to move them to their
own genus, Stenocarpella. Species of Diplodia are quite
variable in morphology, and hence it is difficult to see immediately which
morphological features separate Stenocarpella from Diplodia.
Species of Stenocarpella tend to have unilocular, thick-walled
pycnidia with walls of brown textura angularis. Under moist
conditions, they exude a long cirrhus of brown conidia via a central ostiole
(reminiscent of Phaeophleospora Rangel). Conidiogenous cells are
phialidic, thin-walled and hyaline, but also proliferating percurrently.
Conidia are septate, brown, smooth, thin-walled, subcylindrical to narrowly
obclavate (Fig. 13), thus
different from typical fusoid to ellipsoid, thick-walled conidia of
Diplodia. To facilitate future research with these pathogens, epitype
specimens and cultures are designated below:
Fig. 13.
Stenocarpella maydis on Zea mays. A. Pycnidium on upper
leaf surface. B–C. Conidial cirrhi. D. Conidiogenous cells giving rise
to conidia. E–H. Conidia. Scale bars = 10 μm.
(Berk.) B. Sutton, in Sutton, The
coelomycetes, fungi imperfecti with pycnidia, acervuli and stromata: 432.
1980.Basionym: Sphaeria maydis Berk., Hooker's J. Bot. London
6: 15. 1847.Additional synonyms listed in Sutton
(1980).Types: U.S.A., Salem, Bethlehem, Zea mays,
Schweinitz, 1832, IMI 96546 isotype. South Africa,
KwaZulu-Natal, Simdlangentsha, Bt Zea mays hybrid from 2003-04
season, J. Rheeder, epitype designated here,
CBS 117558,
preserved as freeze-dried inactive strain (= MRC 8613); ibid.
CBS 117557 = MRC
8612; Hlabisa, commercial hybrid PAN-6043, MRC 8614 =
CBS 117559.(Earle) B. Sutton, Mycol. Pap.
141: 202. 1977. Fig. 13.Basionym: Diplodia macrospora Earle, Bull. Torrey Bot.
Cl. 24: 29. 1897.Additional synonyms in Sutton
(1980).Types: U.S.A., Alabama, Auburn, Lee Co., F.S. Earle, 1896,
IMI 12790, isotype. South Africa, KwaZulu-Natal, Hlabisa, rain
damaged Bt Zea mays hybrid, 2003-04 season, J. Rheeder, epitype
designated here, CBS
117560, preserved as freeze-dried inactive strain (= MRC
8615).This study provides a framework to align the taxonomy of the
Botryosphaeriaceae with the phylogenetic lineages within the group.
It also highlights the previously unrealised morphological and evolutionary
complexity of the group. Specific studies are now needed to clarify some
remaining, and arising, taxonomic and phylogenetic questions within this
family. To resolve remaining taxonomic uncertainties, epitypes of key species,
representing the oldest names in the respective groups, will need to be
collected, studied and designated. To resolve the phylogenetic uncertainties
(e.g. Clade 1 and B. mamane) sequences for additional gene regions
(to add more informative sites, and from unlinked loci) will have to be added.
Specific studies focussing on the phylogenies within the clades, and expanding
on the current set of available cultures (e.g. Clades 1, 10 and 11), will add
valuable information on the evolution within these groups, and also help
identify definitive morphological characters.
Authors: Jan M van Niekerk; Pedro W Crous; J Z Ewald Groenewald; Paul H Fourie; Francois Halleen Journal: Mycologia Date: 2004 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Bernard Slippers; Pedro W Crous; Sandra Denman; Teresa A Coutinho; Brenda D Wingfield; Michael J Wingfield Journal: Mycologia Date: 2004 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Bernard Slippers; Greg I Johnson; Pedro W Crous; Teresa A Coutinho; Brenda D Wingfield; Michael J Wingfield Journal: Mycologia Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Marieka Gryzenhout; Henrietta Myburg; Charles S Hodges; Brenda D Wingfield; Michael J Wingfield Journal: Stud Mycol Date: 2006 Impact factor: 16.097
Authors: Renate D Zipfel; Z Wilhelm de Beer; Karin Jacobs; Brenda D Wingfield; Michael J Wingfield Journal: Stud Mycol Date: 2006 Impact factor: 16.097
Authors: Michael J Wingfield; Z Wilhelm De Beer; Bernard Slippers; Brenda D Wingfield; Johannes Z Groenewald; Lorenzo Lombard; Pedro W Crous Journal: Mol Plant Pathol Date: 2011-12-06 Impact factor: 5.663
Authors: K Bensch; J Z Groenewald; J Dijksterhuis; M Starink-Willemse; B Andersen; B A Summerell; H-D Shin; F M Dugan; H-J Schroers; U Braun; P W Crous Journal: Stud Mycol Date: 2010 Impact factor: 16.097
Authors: Ashok Srinivasan; Brian L Wickes; Anna M Romanelli; Larisa Debelenko; Jeffrey E Rubnitz; Deanna A Sutton; Elizabeth H Thompson; Annette W Fothergill; Michael G Rinaldi; Randall T Hayden; Jerry L Shenep Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2009-04-22 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: P W Crous; R G Shivas; W Quaedvlieg; M van der Bank; Y Zhang; B A Summerell; J Guarro; M J Wingfield; A R Wood; A C Alfenas; U Braun; J F Cano-Lira; D García; Y Marin-Felix; P Alvarado; J P Andrade; J Armengol; A Assefa; A den Breeÿen; I Camele; R Cheewangkoon; J T De Souza; T A Duong; F Esteve-Raventós; J Fournier; S Frisullo; J García-Jiménez; A Gardiennet; J Gené; M Hernández-Restrepo; Y Hirooka; D R Hospenthal; A King; C Lechat; L Lombard; S M Mang; P A S Marbach; S Marincowitz; Y Marin-Felix; N J Montaño-Mata; G Moreno; C A Perez; A M Pérez Sierra; J L Robertson; J Roux; E Rubio; R K Schumacher; A M Stchigel; D A Sutton; Y P Tan; E H Thompson; E van der Linde; A K Walker; D M Walker; B L Wickes; P T W Wong; J Z Groenewald Journal: Persoonia Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 11.051
Authors: P W Crous; U Braun; M J Wingfield; A R Wood; H D Shin; B A Summerell; A C Alfenas; C J R Cumagun; J Z Groenewald Journal: Persoonia Date: 2009-06-09 Impact factor: 11.051
Authors: A J L Phillips; A Alves; S R Pennycook; P R Johnston; A Ramaley; A Akulov; P W Crous Journal: Persoonia Date: 2008-07-16 Impact factor: 11.051