Literature DB >> 30622885

Novel primers improve species delimitation in Cercospora.

Mounes Bakhshi1, Mahdi Arzanlou2, Asadollah Babai-Ahari2, Johannes Z Groenewald3, Pedro W Crous3,4,5.   

Abstract

The genus Cercospora includes many important plant pathogens that are commonly associated with leaf spot diseases on a wide range of cultivated and wild plant species. Due to the lack of useful morphological features and high levels of intraspecific variation, host plant association has long been a decisive criterion for species delimitation in Cercospora. Because several taxa have broader host ranges, reliance on host data in Cercospora taxonomy has proven problematic. Recent studies have revealed multi-gene DNA sequence data to be highly informative for species identification in Cercospora, especially when used in a concatenated alignment. In spite of this approach, however, several species complexes remained unresolved as no single gene proved informative enough to act as DNA barcoding locus for the genus. Therefore, the aims of the present study were firstly to improve species delimitation in the genus Cercospora by testing additional genes and primers on a broad set of species, and secondly to find the best DNA barcoding gene(s) for species delimitation. Novel primers were developed for tub2 and rpb2 to supplement previously published primers for these loci. To this end, 145 Cercospora isolates from the Iranian mycobiota together with 25 additional reference isolates preserved in the Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute were subjected to an eight-gene (ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, his3, tub2, rpb2 and gapdh) analysis. Results from this study provided new insights into DNA barcoding in Cercospora, and revealed gapdh to be a promising gene for species delimitation when supplemented with cmdA, tef1 and tub2. The robust eight-gene phylogeny revealed several novel clades within the existing Cercospora species complexes, such as C. apii, C. armoraciae, C. beticola, C. cf. flagellaris and Cercospora sp. G. The C. apii s. lat. isolates are distributed over three clades, namely C. apii s. str., C. plantaginis and C. uwebrauniana sp. nov. The C. armoraciae s. lat. isolates are distributed over two clades, C. armoraciae s. str. and C. bizzozeriana. The C. beticola s. lat. isolates are distributed over two clades, namely C. beticola s. str. and C. gamsiana, which is newly described.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bar codes; Cercospora apii complex; biodiversity; host specificity; multi-gene phylogeny; new taxa

Year:  2018        PMID: 30622885      PMCID: PMC6317581          DOI: 10.5598/imafungus.2018.09.02.06

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IMA Fungus        ISSN: 2210-6340            Impact factor:   3.515


INTRODUCTION

Fungi belonging to the genus Cercospora (Mycosphaerellaceae, Capnodiales) are common etiological agents of leaf spots, but some also cause necrotic lesions on flowers, fruits, bracts, seeds and pedicels of many woody and herbaceous plants in a range of climates worldwide (Ellis 1976, Crous & Braun 2003, Agrios 2005, Groenewald, Bakhshi). Cercospora is a species-rich genus of cercosporoid fungi that was established by Fresenius (1863) for passalora-like species with pluriseptate conidia. During the course of the next 100 years, the concept of Cercospora had been continuously widened (Saccardo 1880, Solheim 1930) and all kinds of superficially similar species, with or without conspicuous conidiogenous loci, with hyaline or pigmented conidia, formed singly or in chains, were assigned to this genus (Braun). In 1954, the genus was monographed by Chupp (1954), who treated 1419 Cercospora species while applying this broad generic concept. He also stated that species of Cercospora were generally host-specific and used this argument as the basis of formulating the concept that each plant host genus or family would have its own Cercospora species. The number of Cercospora species increased rapidly to more than 3000, which led Pollack (1987) to publish her annotated list of Cercospora names. Since the introduction of the genus, several attempts to split Cercospora s. lat. into smaller generic units have been made by applying a combination of characters such as conidiomatal structure, mycelium, conidiophores, conidiogenous cells, and conidia (e.g. Deighton 1973, 1979, 1983, Ellis 1971, 1976, Braun 1995, 1998). Crous & Braun (2003) published an annotated list of the names published in Cercospora and Passalora and used the structure of conidiogenous loci and hila as well as the absence or presence of pigmentation in conidiophores and conidia in their revision. They recognised 659 names in Cercospora, with a further 281 species names reduced to synonymy with C. apii s. lat., since they were morphologically not or barely distinguishable from C. apii s. str. Braun , 2014, 2015a, b, 2016) published a series of papers in a stepwise approach at plant family level in order to update the monograph of Cercospora and allied genera. Scientific advances in DNA sequencing and supplementary software to store, share and compare the emerging molecular data have revolutionised the procedures underpinning the discovery and identification of fungal taxa, including the cercosporoid fungi (Crous & Groenewald 2005, Groenewald, Bakhshi, Nguanhom et al. 2015, Guatimosim). Numerous molecular studies of Cercospora species have been conducted based on ITS nrDNA data as well as multi-gene approaches (Stewart, Crous, 2004b, 2009a, b, Goodwin, Tessmann, Pretorius, Groenewald, 2006, 2013, Montenegro-Calderón, Bakhshi, 2015a, Nguanhom et al. 2015, Soares, Albu, Guatimosim, Guillin ). A comprehensive and detailed molecular examination of Cercospora s. str. based on a multi-locus DNA sequence dataset of five genomic loci including the ITS (ITS1, 5.8S nrRNA gene and ITS2), together with parts of four protein coding genes, viz. translation elongation factor 1-alpha (tef1), actin (actA), calmodulin (cmdA) and histone H3 (his3) was conducted by Groenewald . The main conclusion of this study was that C could not be confirmed as a plurivorous monophyletic species, and that several lineages originally referred to C. apii s. lat., or considered close to this complex based on morphology (Crous & Braun 2003), were separated as distinct phylogenetic species. Hence, speciation within Cercospora s. str. is more complicated than formerly assumed, and far from being resolved. To date, multi-locus DNA sequence analyses combined with ecology, morphology and cultural characteristics, referred to as the Consolidated Species Concept (Quaedvlieg), proved the most effective method for the delimitation of Cercospora species (Groenewald, 2013). At a higher taxonomic level, among the genera of cercosporoid fungi, the monophyly of Cercospora s. str. has until recently been tested based on phylogenetic association of taxa with the type species of Cercospora, C. apii (Groenewald, Bakhshi, Braun & Crous 2016). Bakhshi recovered some cercospora-like isolates from Ammi majus, and in their subsequent multi-gene phylogenetic study (28S nrDNA, ITS, actA, tef1 and his3), elucidated these isolates to represent a new genus, Neocercospora, clustering in a clade in Mycosphaerellaceae apart from Cercospora s. str., suggesting that cercospora-like morphologies are not necessarily part of a single monophyletic genus. This finding led to the conclusion that identification and descriptions of new cercospora-like taxa should be avoided without support of molecular sequence data, not only at species but also at generic level. Species of Cercospora are known to be widely distributed, occurring on a broad range of plant hosts in many climate zones of Iran (Bakhshi et al. 2012, Hesami, Pirnia), where the biodiversity of the genus has recently received much attention (Bakhshi, b). The most inclusive study was that of Bakhshi , who compared 161 Cercospora isolates, recovered from 74 host species from Iran based on DNA sequence data of five genomic loci (ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA and his3), host, cultural, and morphological data, revealing a rich species diversity. However, the problem concerning species delimitation in Cercospora due to the high level of conservation among DNA sequences of commonly used loci, (i.e. ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, and his3), could not be resolved. Furthermore, cryptic clades in several species complexes remained unresolved in the five-gene phylogenetic tree, for example C. apii, C. armoraciae, C. cf. flagellaris, and Cercospora sp. G (Groenewald, Bakhshi). Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess three additional potential candidate gene regions including the partial β-tubulin (tub2) gene, part of the second largest subunit of RNA-polymerase II (rpb2) gene, and part of the glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (gapdh) gene, in order to firstly generate an eight-gene DNA dataset to resolve cryptic taxa within these species complexes, and secondly to identify the best barcoding gene(s) for species resolution in Cercospora.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Specimens and isolates

A total of 170 strains, including 145 previously identified as Cercospora species in Bakhshi, as well as 25 other related strains formerly identified by Groenewald, were studied. Isolates used in this study (Table 1) are maintained in the collection of the Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute (CBS), Utrecht, The Netherlands, the working collection of Pedro Crous (CPC; housed at CBS), the culture collection of the Iranian Research Institute of Plant Protection (IRAN C), Tehran, Iran, and the culture collection of Tabriz University (CCTU), Tabriz, Iran. Type material of the new species recognized is preserved in the Fungal Herbarium of the Iranian Research Institute of Plant Protection (IRAN F).
Table 1.

Collection details and GenBank accession numbers of isolates included in this study. Ex-type isolates and newly generated sequences are highlighted in bold.

SpeciesCulture accession number (s)1HostHost FamilyOrigionCollectorGenBank accession numbers2
ITStef1actAcmdAhis3tub2rpb2gapdh
Cercospora althaeinaCCTU 1028Althaea roseaMalvaceaeIran, Guilan, Sowme`eh SaraM. BakhshiKJ886394KJ886233KJ885911KJ885750KJ886072MH496336MH511833MH496166
CCTU 1001Althaea roseaMalvaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886392KJ886231KJ885909KJ885748KJ886070MH496337MH511834MH496167
CCTU 1026Althaea roseaMalvaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886393KJ886232KJ885910KJ885749KJ886071MH496338MH511835MH496168
CCTU 1152Althaea roseaMalvaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886396KJ886235KJ885913KJ885752KJ886074MH496339MH511836MH496169
CBS 248.67; CPC 5117 (TYPE)Althaea roseaMalvaceaeRomania, FunduleaO. ConstantinescuJX143530JX143284JX143038JX142792JX142546MH496340_MH496170
CCTU 1194; IRAN 2674CMalva sylvestrisMalvaceaeIran, East Azerbaijan, KaleybarM. ArzanlouKJ886397KJ886236KJ885914KJ885753KJ886075MH496341MH511837MH496171
CCTU 1071Malva sylvestrisMalvaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886395KJ886234KJ885912KJ885751KJ886073MH496342MH511838MH496172
Cercospora apiiCBS 116455; CPC 11556 (TYPE)Apium graveolensApiaceae Germany, HeilbronK. SchrameyerAY840519AY840486AY840450AY840417AY840384MH496343_MH496173
CBS 536.71; CPC 5087Apium graveolensApiaceaeRomania, BucurestiO. ConstantinescuAY752133AY752166AY752194AY752225AY752256MH496344MH511839MH496174
CCTU 1069Cynanchum acutumApocynaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886410KJ886249KJ885927KJ885766KJ886088MH496345MH511840MH496175
CCTU 1086; CBS 136037; IRAN 2655CCynanchum acutumApocynaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886411KJ886250KJ885928KJ885767KJ886089MH496346MH511841MH496176
CCTU 1215Cynanchum acutumApocynaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886412KJ886251KJ885929KJ885768KJ886090MH496347MH511842MH496177
CCTU 1219; CBS 136155Cynanchum acutumApocynaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886413KJ886252KJ885930KJ885769KJ886091MH496348MH511843MH496178
CPC 5112Molucella laevisLamiaceaeNew zealand, AucklandC.F. HillDQ233321DQ233347DQ233373DQ233399DQ233425MH496349MH511844MH496179
CBS 110813; CPC 5110; 01-3Molucella laevisLamiaceaeU.S.A., CaliforniaS.T. KoikeAY156918DQ233345DQ233371DQ233397DQ233423MH496350MH511845MH496180
Cercospora armoraciaeCBS 250.67; CPC 5088 (TYPE)Armoracia rusticana (= A. lapathifolia)Brassicaceae Romania, FunduleaO. ConstantinescuJX143545JX143299JX143053JX142807JX142561MH496351_MH496181
Cercospora beticolaCPC 12028Beta vulgarisChenopodiaceaeEgyptM. HasemDQ233336DQ233362DQ233388DQ233414DQ233437MH496352MH511846MH496182
CPC 12029Beta vulgarisChenopodiaceaeEgyptM. HasemDQ233337DQ233363DQ233389DQ233415DQ233438MH496353MH511847MH496183
CCTU 1135Beta vulgarisChenopodiaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886432KJ886271KJ885949KJ885788KJ886110MH496354MH511848MH496184
CBS 116456; CPC 11557 (TYPE)Beta vulgarisChenopodiaceaeItaly, RavennaV. RossiAY840527AY840494AY840458AY840425AY840392MH496355KT216555MH496185
CCTU 1057; IRAN 2651CChenopodium sp.ChenopodiaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886424KJ886263KJ885941KJ885780KJ886102MH496356MH511849MH496186
CCTU 1065Chenopodium sp.ChenopodiaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886425KJ886264KJ885942KJ885781KJ886103MH496357MH511850MH496187
CCTU 1087Chenopodium sp.ChenopodiaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886427KJ886266KJ885944KJ885783KJ886105MH496358MH511851MH496188
CCTU 1089; CPC 24911Plantago lanceolataPlantaginaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886429KJ886268KJ885946KJ885785KJ886107MH496359MH511852MH496189
CCTU 1108Plantago lanceolataPlantaginaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886430KJ886269KJ885947KJ885786KJ886108MH496360MH511853MH496190
CCTU 1088; CBS 138582Sonchus asperAsteraceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886428KJ886267KJ885945KJ885784KJ886106MH496361MH511854MH496191
Cercospora bizzozerianaCCTU 1013??Iran, East Azerbaijan, MianehM. TorbatiKJ886414KJ886253KJ885931KJ885770KJ886092MH496362MH511855MH496192
CCTU 1022; CBS 136028??Iran, East Azerbaijan, MianehM. TorbatiKJ886415KJ886254KJ885932KJ885771KJ886093MH496363MH511856MH496193
CCTU 1127; CBS 136133Capparis spinosaCapparidaceaeIran, Khuzestan, AhvazE. MohammadianKJ886420KJ886259KJ885937KJ885776KJ886098MH496364MH511857MH496194
CCTU 1117; CBS 136132Cardaria drabaBrassicaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886418KJ886257KJ885935KJ885774KJ886096MH496365MH511858MH496195
CCTU 1234Cardaria drabaBrassicaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886419KJ886258KJ885936KJ885775KJ886097MH496366MH511859MH496196
CCTU 1107??Iran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886417KJ886256KJ885934KJ885773KJ886095MH496367MH511860MH496197
CBS 258.67; CPC 5061 (TYPE)Cardaria drabaBrassicaceaeRomania, FunduleaO. ConstantinescuJX143546JX143300JX143054JX142808JX142562MH496368_MH496198
CBS 540.71; IMI 161110; CPC 5060Cardaria drabaBrassicaceaeRomania, HagieniO. ConstantinescuJX143548JX143302JX143056JX142810JX142564MH496369_MH496199
CCTU 1040; CBS 136131Tanacetum balsamitaAsteraceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886416KJ886255KJ885933KJ885772KJ886094MH496370MH511861MH496200
Cercospora chenopodiiCCTU 1060; IRAN 2652CChenopodium albumChenopodiaceaeIran, Guilan, Bandar-e AnzaliM. BakhshiKJ886438KJ886277KJ885955KJ885794KJ886116MH496371MH511862MH496201
CCTU 1163Chenopodium albumChenopodiaceaeIran, Guilan, LahijanM. BakhshiKJ886440KJ886279KJ885957KJ885796KJ886118MH496372MH511863MH496202
CCTU 1033Chenopodium albumChenopodiaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886437KJ886276KJ885954KJ885793KJ886115MH496373MH511864MH496203
Cercospora convolvulicolaCCTU 1083; CBS 136126 (TYPE)Convolvulus arvensis ConvolvulaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886441KJ886280KJ885958KJ885797KJ886119MH496374MH511865MH496204
CCTU 1083.2Convolvulus arvensis ConvolvulaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886442KJ886281KJ885959KJ885798KJ886120MH496375MH511866MH496205
Cercospora conyzae-canadensisCCTU 1008Conyza canadensis AsteraceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886443KJ886282KJ885960KJ885799KJ886121MH496376MH511867MH496206
CCTU 1119; CBS 135978 (TYPE)Conyza canadensis AsteraceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886445KJ886284KJ885962KJ885801KJ886123MH496377MH511868MH496207
CCTU 1105; IRAN 2657CConyza canadensis AsteraceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886444KJ886283KJ885961KJ885800KJ886122MH496378MH511869MH496208
Cercospora cylindraceaCCTU 1016Cichorium intybusAsteraceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886446KJ886285KJ885963KJ885802KJ886124MH496379MH511870MH496209
CCTU 1114Cichorium intybusAsteraceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886450KJ886289KJ885967KJ885806KJ886128MH496380MH511871MH496210
CCTU 1081; CBS 138580; IRAN 2654C (TYPE)Lactuca serriola AsteraceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886449KJ886288KJ885966KJ885805KJ886127MH496381MH511872MH496211
CCTU 1207Lactuca serriola AsteraceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886453KJ886292KJ885970KJ885809KJ886131MH496382MH511873MH496212
CCTU 1044; CBS 136021Lactuca serriola AsteraceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886447KJ886286KJ885964KJ885803KJ886125MH496383MH511874MH496213
CCTU 1183Lactuca serriola AsteraceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886451KJ886290KJ885968KJ885807KJ886129MH496384MH511875MH496214
CCTU 1189Lactuca serriola AsteraceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886452KJ886291KJ885969KJ885808KJ886130MH496385MH511876MH496215
CCTU 1049Lactuca serriola AsteraceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886448KJ886287KJ885965KJ885804KJ886126MH496386MH511877MH496216
Cercospora cf. flagellaris clade 1CPC 5441Amaranthus sp.Amaranthaceae FijiC.F. HillJX143611JX143370JX143124JX142878JX142632MH496387MH511878MH496217
CCTU 1159; CBS 136148Arachis hypogaeaFabaceaeIran, Guilan, LahijanM. BakhshiKJ886493KJ886332KJ886010KJ885849KJ886171MH496388MH511879MH496218
CCTU 1162; IRAN 2670CCitrullus lanatusCucurbitaceaeIran, Guilan, LahijanM. BakhshiKJ886496KJ886335KJ886013KJ885852KJ886174MH496389MH511880MH496219
CBS 132653; CPC 10884Dysphania ambrosioides (≡ Chenopodium ambrosioides)ChenopodiaceaeSouth Korea, JejuH.D. ShinJX143603JX143361JX143115JX142869JX142623MH496390MH511881MH496220
CCTU 1007; CBS 136031Hydrangea sp.HydrangeaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886456KJ886295KJ885973KJ885812KJ886134MH496391MH511882MH496221
CCTU 1027; CBS 136034Lepidium sativumBrassicaceaeIran, Guilan, ChamkhalehM. BakhshiKJ886459KJ886298KJ885976KJ885815KJ886137MH496392MH511883MH496222
CCTU 1128; CBS 136141; IRAN 2661CPhaseolus vulgarisFabaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886476KJ886315KJ885993KJ885832KJ886154MH496393MH511884MH496223
CCTU 1168; IRAN 2715CPhaseolus vulgarisFabaceaeIran, Guilan, KiashahrM. BakhshiKJ886499KJ886338KJ886016KJ885855KJ886177MH496394MH511885MH496224
CPC 1051Populus deltoidesSalicaceaeSouth AfricaP.W. CrousAY260069JX143367JX143121JX142875JX142629MH496395MH511886MH496225
CCTU 1171Raphanus sativusBrassicaceaeIran, Guilan, KiashahrM. BakhshiKJ886500KJ886339KJ886017KJ885856KJ886178MH496396MH511887MH496226
CCTU 1120Raphanus sativusBrassicaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886475KJ886314KJ885992KJ885831KJ886153MH496397MH511888MH496227
CCTU 1031; CBS 136036; IRAN 2648CUrtica dioicaUrticaceaeIran, Guilan, Sowme`eh SaraM. BakhshiKJ886461KJ886300KJ885978KJ885817KJ886139MH496398MH511889MH496228
Cercospora cf. flagellaris clade 2CCTU 1204Abutilon theophrasti MalvaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886505KJ886344KJ886022KJ885861KJ886183MH496399MH511890MH496229
CCTU 1198; CBS 136151Acer velutinumAceraceaeIran, Mazandaran, RamsarM. BakhshiKJ886504KJ886343KJ886021KJ885860KJ886182MH496400MH511891MH496230
CBS 132667; CPC 11643Celosia argentea var. cristata (≡ C. cristata)AmaranthaceaeSouth Korea, HoengseongH.D. ShinJX143604JX143362JX143116JX142870JX142624MH496401MH511892MH496231
CCTU 1115; CBS 136139; IRAN 2659CCercis siliquastrumCaesalpinaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886473KJ886312KJ885990KJ885829KJ886151MH496402MH511893MH496232
CCTU 1195Datura stramoniumSolanaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886503KJ886342KJ886020KJ885859KJ886181MH496403MH511894MH496233
CCTU 1059; CBS 136136Ecballium elateriumCucurbitaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886464KJ886303KJ885981KJ885820KJ886142MH496404MH511895MH496234
CCTU 1216; IRAN 2717CEcballium elateriumCucurbitaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886510KJ886349KJ886027KJ885866KJ886188MH496405MH511896MH496235
CCTU 1223; CBS 136154; IRAN 2683CEclipta prostrataAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886512KJ886351KJ886029KJ885868KJ886190MH496406MH511897MH496236
CCTU 1068Xanthium spinosumAsteraceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886466KJ886305KJ885983KJ885822KJ886144MH496407MH511898MH496237
CCTU 1085Xanthium strumariumAsteraceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886471KJ886310KJ885988KJ885827KJ886149MH496408MH511899MH496238
Cercospora cf. flagellaris clade 3CCTU 1172Oenothera biennisOnagraceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886501KJ886340KJ886018KJ885857KJ886179MH496409MH511900MH496239
CCTU 1154; CBS 136147Abutilon theophrastiMalvaceaeIran, Guilan, RashtM. BakhshiKJ886489KJ886328KJ886006KJ885845KJ886167MH496410MH511901MH496240
CCTU 1072; IRAN 2653CAmaranthus blitoidesAmaranthaceae Iran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886468KJ886307KJ885985KJ885824KJ886146MH496411MH511902MH496241
CCTU 1064Amaranthus retroflexusAmaranthaceae Iran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886465KJ886304KJ885982KJ885821KJ886143MH496412MH511903MH496242
CCTU 1021; CBS 136033Amaranthus retroflexusAmaranthaceae Iran, Guilan, FumanM. BakhshiKJ886458KJ886297KJ885975KJ885814KJ886136MH496413MH511904MH496243
CCTU 1084; CBS 136156Amaranthus sp.Amaranthaceae Iran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886470KJ886309KJ885987KJ885826KJ886148MH496414MH511905MH496244
CCTU 1167; CBS 136150Anubias sp.AraceaeIran, Guilan, KiashahrM. BakhshiKJ886498KJ886337KJ886015KJ885854KJ886176MH496415MH511906MH496245
CBS 143.51; CPC 5055Bromus sp.PoaceaeM.D. WhiteheadJX143607JX143365JX143119JX142873JX142627MH496416MH511907MH496246
CCTU 1150Buxus microphyllaBuxaceaeIran, Guilan, FumanM. BakhshiKJ886488KJ886327KJ886005KJ885844KJ886166MH496417MH511908MH496247
CCTU 1140; CBS 136143; IRAN 2666CCalendula officinalisAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886481KJ886320KJ885998KJ885837KJ886159MH496418MH511909MH496248
CBS 115482; A207 Bs+; CPC 4410Citrus sp.RutaceaeSouth Africa, MessinaM.C. PretoriusAY260070DQ835095DQ835114DQ835141DQ835168MH496419MH511910MH496249
CCTU 1029; CBS 136035; IRAN 2647CCucurbita maximaCucurbitaceaeIran, Guilan, RudsarM. BakhshiKJ886460KJ886299KJ885977KJ885816KJ886138MH496420MH511911MH496250
CCTU 1136Cucurbita pepoCucurbitaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886478KJ886317KJ885995KJ885834KJ886156MH496421MH511912MH496251
CCTU 1143; CBS 136145Datura stramoniumSolanaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886484KJ886323KJ886001KJ885840KJ886162MH496422MH511913MH496252
CCTU 1209; CBS 136152Glycine maxFabaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886506KJ886345KJ886023KJ885862KJ886184MH496423MH511914MH496253
CCTU 1210; IRAN 2679CGlycine maxFabaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886507KJ886346KJ886024KJ885863KJ886185MH496424MH511915MH496254
CCTU 1211Glycine maxFabaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886508KJ886347KJ886025KJ885864KJ886186MH496425MH511916MH496255
CCTU 1218; IRAN 2682CHibiscus trionumMalvaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886511KJ886350KJ886028KJ885867KJ886189MH496426MH511917MH496256
CCTU 1006; CBS 136030Impatiens balsaminaBalsaminaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886455KJ886294KJ885972KJ885811KJ886133MH496427MH511918MH496257
CCTU 1130; CBS 136142Olea europaeaOleaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. TorbatiKJ886477KJ886316KJ885994KJ885833KJ886155MH496428MH511919MH496258
CCTU 1010; CBS 136032Pelargonium hortorumGeraniaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886457KJ886296KJ885974KJ885813KJ886135MH496429MH511920MH496259
CCTU 1138; IRAN 2664CPhaseolus vulgarisFabaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886479KJ886318KJ885996KJ885835KJ886157MH496430MH511921MH496260
CCTU 1139; IRAN 2665CPhaseolus vulgarisFabaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886480KJ886319KJ885997KJ885836KJ886158MH496431MH511922MH496261
CCTU 1155.11Phaseolus vulgarisFabaceaeIran, Guilan, FumanM. BakhshiKJ886490KJ886329KJ886007KJ885846KJ886168MH496432MH511923MH496262
CCTU 1161; IRAN 2669CPhaseolus vulgarisFabaceaeIran, Guilan, LahijanM. BakhshiKJ886495KJ886334KJ886012KJ885851KJ886173MH496433MH511924MH496263
CCTU 1175; IRAN 2673CPhaseolus vulgarisFabaceaeIran, Guilan, Sowme`eh SaraM. BakhshiKJ886502KJ886341KJ886019KJ885858KJ886180MH496434MH511925MH496264
CCTU 1142; IRAN 2667CPhaseolus vulgarisFabaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886483KJ886322KJ886000KJ885839KJ886161MH496435MH511926MH496265
CCTU 1118; CBS 136140; IRAN 2660CPopulus deltoides SalicaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886474KJ886313KJ885991KJ885830KJ886152MH496436MH511927MH496266
CCTU 1075Raphanus sativusBrassicaceaeIran, Guilan, Sowme`eh SaraM. BakhshiKJ886469KJ886308KJ885986KJ885825KJ886147MH496437MH511928MH496267
CCTU 1212; CBS 136153; IRAN 2680CSilybum marianumAsteraceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886509KJ886348KJ886026KJ885865KJ886187MH496438MH511929MH496268
CCTU 1141; CBS 136144Tagetes patulaAsteraceae Iran, Guilan, RudsarM. BakhshiKJ886482KJ886321KJ885999KJ885838KJ886160MH496439MH511930MH496269
CCTU 1147Urtica dioicaUrticaceaeIran, Guilan, MasalM. BakhshiKJ886486KJ886325KJ886003KJ885842KJ886164MH496440MH511931MH496270
CCTU 1160; CBS 136149Vicia fabaFabaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886494KJ886333KJ886011KJ885850KJ886172MH496441MH511932MH496271
CCTU 1158; IRAN 2668CXanthium strumariumAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, LangarudM. BakhshiKJ886492KJ886331KJ886009KJ885848KJ886170MH496442MH511933MH496272
CCTU 1156Xanthium strumariumAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, RashtM. BakhshiKJ886491KJ886330KJ886008KJ885847KJ886169MH496443MH511934MH496273
CCTU 1005; IRAN 2644CXanthium strumariumAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886454KJ886293KJ885971KJ885810KJ886132MH496444MH511935MH496274
CCTU 1048; CBS 136029Xanthium strumariumAsteraceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886462KJ886301KJ885979KJ885818KJ886140MH496445MH511936MH496275
Cercospora gamsianaCBS 144962; CCTU 1074; CPC 24909 (TYPE)Malva neglectaMalvaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886426KJ886265KJ885943KJ885782KJ886104MH496446MH511937MH496276
CCTU 1035Malva sylvestrisMalvaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886423KJ886262KJ885940KJ885779KJ886101MH496447MH511938MH496277
CCTU 1109Malva sylvestrisMalvaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886431KJ886270KJ885948KJ885787KJ886109MH496448MH511939MH496278
CCTU 1199; CBS 136128; IRAN 2675CRumex crispusPolygonaceaeIran, Mazandaran, RamsarM. BakhshiKJ886433KJ886272KJ885950KJ885789KJ886111MH496449MH511940MH496279
CCTU 1205; CBS 136127; IRAN 2677CSesamum indicumPedaliaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886435KJ886274KJ885952KJ885791KJ886113MH496450MH511941MH496280
CCTU 1208; IRAN 2678CSonchus sp.AsteraceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886436KJ886275KJ885953KJ885792KJ886114MH496451MH511942MH496281
Cercospora cf. gossypiiCCTU 1070; CBS 136137Gossypium herbaceumMalvaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886467KJ886306KJ885984KJ885823KJ886145MH496452MH511943MH496282
CCTU 1055; IRAN 2650CHibiscus trionumMalvaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886463KJ886302KJ885980KJ885819KJ886141MH496453MH511944MH496283
Cercospora iranicaCCTU 1196; CBS 136123Hydrangea sp.HydrangeaceaeIran, Mazandaran, RamsarM. BakhshiKJ886515KJ886354KJ886032KJ885871KJ886193MH496454MH511945MH496284
CCTU 1137; CBS 136124 (TYPE)Vicia faba FabaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886513KJ886352KJ886030KJ885869KJ886191MH496455MH511946MH496285
Cercospora plantaginisCCTU 1082; CBS 138728Plantago lanceolataPlantaginaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886402KJ886241KJ885919KJ885758KJ886080MH496456MH511947MH496286
CCTU 1095Plantago lanceolataPlantaginaceaeIran, East Azerbaijan, HorandM. BakhshiKJ886403KJ886242KJ885920KJ885759KJ886081MH496457MH511948MH496287
CCTU 1041; CPC 24910Plantago lanceolataPlantaginaceaeIran, Guilan, ChaboksarM. BakhshiKJ886400KJ886239KJ885917KJ885756KJ886078MH496458MH511949MH496288
CCTU 1179; IRAN 2716CPlantago lanceolataPlantaginaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886404KJ886243KJ885921KJ885760KJ886082MH496459MH511950MH496289
CCTU 1047Plantago lanceolataPlantaginaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886401KJ886240KJ885918KJ885757KJ886079MH496460MH511951MH496290
CBS 252.67; CPC 5084 (TYPE)Plantago lanceolataPlantaginaceaeRomania, DomnestiO. ConstantinescuDQ233318DQ233342DQ233368DQ233394DQ233420MH496461_MH496291
Cercospora pseudochenopodiiCCTU 1176Chenopodium albumChenopodiaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886518KJ886357KJ886035KJ885874KJ886196MH496462MH511952MH496292
CCTU 1045Chenopodium sp.ChenopodiaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886517KJ886356KJ886034KJ885873KJ886195MH496463MH511953MH496293
CCTU 1038; CBS 136022; IRAN 2649C (TYPE)Chenopodium sp.ChenopodiaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886516KJ886355KJ886033KJ885872KJ886194MH496464MH511954MH496294
Cercospora cf. richardiicolaCCTU 1004Bidens tripartitaAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886519KJ886358KJ886036KJ885875KJ886197MH496465MH511955MH496295
Cercospora rumicisCCTU 1123Rumex crispusPolygonaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886521KJ886360KJ886038KJ885877KJ886199MH496466MH511956MH496296
CCTU 1129; IRAN 2662CRumex crispusPolygonaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886522KJ886361KJ886039KJ885878KJ886200MH496467MH511957MH496297
CCTU 1121Urtica dioicaUrticaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886520KJ886359KJ886037KJ885876KJ886198MH496468MH511958MH496298
Cercospora solaniCCTU 1043; CBS 136038Solanum nigrumSolanaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886523KJ886362KJ886040KJ885879KJ886201MH496469MH511959MH496299
CCTU 1050Solanum nigrumSolanaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886524KJ886363KJ886041KJ885880KJ886202MH496470MH511960MH496300
Cercospora sorghicolaCCTU 1173; CBS 136448; IRAN 2672C (TYPE)Sorghum halepensePoaceaeIran, Guilan, KiashahrM. BakhshiKJ886525KJ886364KJ886042KJ885881KJ886203MH496471MH511961MH496301
Cercospora sp. G clade 1CCTU 1197Bidens tripartitaAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886540KJ886379KJ886057KJ885896KJ886218MH496472MH511962MH496302
CCTU 1015; CBS 136024; IRAN 2645CPlantago majorPlantaginaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886528KJ886367KJ886045KJ885884KJ886206MH496473MH511963MH496303
CPC 5438Salvia viscosaLamiaceaeNew Zealand, ManurewaC.F. HillJX143682JX143442JX143196JX142950JX142704MH496474_MH496304
Cercospora sp. G clade 2CCTU 1058Helminthotheca echioidesAsteraceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886534KJ886373KJ886051KJ885890KJ886212MH496475MH511964MH496305
CCTU 1090Abutilon theophrastiMalvaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886536KJ886375KJ886053KJ885892KJ886214MH496476MH511965MH496306
CCTU 1079; CBS 136025Amaranthus retroflexus AmaranthaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886535KJ886374KJ886052KJ885891KJ886213MH496477MH511966MH496307
CCTU 1054Amaranthus sp.Amaranthaceae Iran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886533KJ886372KJ886050KJ885889KJ886211MH496478MH511967MH496308
CCTU 1122Amaranthus sp.Amaranthaceae Iran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886538KJ886377KJ886055KJ885894KJ886216MH496479MH511968MH496309
CBS 115518; CPC 5360Bidens frondosaAsteraceaeNew Zealand, KopukuC.F. HillJX143681JX143441JX143195JX142949JX142703MH496480_MH496310
CCTU 1030; CBS 136026Bidens tripartitaAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886530KJ886369KJ886047KJ885886KJ886208MH496481MH511969MH496311
CCTU 1002Celosia cristata Amaranthaceae Iran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886527KJ886366KJ886044KJ885883KJ886205MH496482MH511970MH496312
CCTU 1053; CBS 136027Cichorium intybusAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, Sowme`eh SaraM. BakhshiKJ886532KJ886371KJ886049KJ885888KJ886210MH496483MH511971MH496313
CCTU 1144; CBS 136130Cucurbita maximaCucurbitaceaeIran, Guilan, MasalM. BakhshiKJ886539KJ886378KJ886056KJ885895KJ886217MH496484MH511972MH496314
CCTU 1046Plantago majorPlantaginaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886531KJ886370KJ886048KJ885887KJ886209MH496485MH511973MH496315
CCTU 1116Plantago majorPlantaginaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886537KJ886376KJ886054KJ885893KJ886215MH496486MH511974MH496316
CCTU 1020; CBS 136023Sorghum halepensePoaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886529KJ886368KJ886046KJ885885KJ886207MH496487MH511975MH496317
Cercospora sp. TCCTU 1148; CBS 136125Coreopsis sp.AsteraceaeIran, Guilan, RashtM. BakhshiKJ886541KJ886380KJ886058KJ885897KJ886219MH496488MH511976MH496318
Cercospora uwebraunianaCCTU 1200; CBS 138581 (TYPE)Heliotropium europaeumBoraginaceaeIran, Ardabil, MoghanM. BakhshiKJ886408KJ886247KJ885925KJ885764KJ886086MH496489MH511977MH496319
CCTU 1134Heliotropium europaeumBoraginaceaeIran, Guilan, AstaraM. BakhshiKJ886407KJ886246KJ885924KJ885763KJ886085MH496490MH511978MH496320
Cercospora violaeCCTU 1025; IRAN 2646CViola sp.ViolaceaeIran, Mazandaran, NowshahrM. BakhshiKJ886543KJ886382KJ886060KJ885899KJ886221MH496491MH511979MH496321
CBS 251.67; CPC 5079 (TYPE)Viola tricolorViolaceaeRomania, Cazanele DunariiO. ConstantinescuJX143737JX143496JX143250JX143004JX142758MH496492_MH496322
Cercospora zebrinaCCTU 1039Alhagi camelorumFabaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886545KJ886384KJ886062KJ885901KJ886223MH496493MH511980MH496323
CBS 108.22; CPC 5091Medicago arabica (= M. maculata)FabaceaeE.F. HopkinsJX143744JX143503JX143257JX143011JX142765MH496494_MH496324
CCTU 1225Medicago sativaFabaceaeIran, East Azerbaijan, MarandM. BakhshiKJ886550KJ886389KJ886067KJ885906KJ886228MH496495MH511981MH496325
CCTU 1180Medicago sativaFabaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886547KJ886386KJ886064KJ885903KJ886225MH496496MH511982MH496326
CCTU 1110; IRAN 2658CMedicago sativaFabaceaeIran, Zanjan, TaromM. BakhshiKJ886546KJ886385KJ886063KJ885902KJ886224MH496497MH511983MH496327
CCTU 1012; CBS 136129Medicago sp.FabaceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886544KJ886383KJ886061KJ885900KJ886222MH496498MH511984MH496328
CCTU 1181Trifolium repensFabaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886548KJ886387KJ886065KJ885904KJ886226MH496499MH511985MH496329
CBS 113070; CPC 5367Trifolium repensFabaceaeNew Zealand, Blockhouse BayC.F. HillJX143745JX143507JX143261JX143015JX142769MH496500_MH496330
CBS 118790; IMI 262766; WA 2030; WAC 7973Trifolium subterraneumFabaceaeAustraliaM.J. BarbettiJX143748JX143510JX143264JX143018JX142772MH496501_MH496331
CBS 129.39; CPC 5078Trifolium subterraneumFabaceaeU.S.A., WisconsinJX143750JX143512JX143266JX143020JX142774MH496502_MH496332
CCTU 1185Vicia sp.FabaceaeIran, West Azerbaijan, KhoyM. ArzanlouKJ886549KJ886388KJ886066KJ885905KJ886227MH496503MH511986MH496333
CCTU 1239; CBS 135977Vitis viniferaVitaceaeIran, East Azerbaijan, KaleybarM. ArzanlouKJ886551KJ886390KJ886068KJ885907KJ886229MH496504MH511987MH496334
Cercospora cf. zinniaeCCTU 1003Zinnia elegansAsteraceaeIran, Guilan, TaleshM. BakhshiKJ886552KJ886391KJ886069KJ885908KJ886230MH496505MH511988MH496335

1CBS: Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands; CCTU: Culture Collection of Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran; CPC: Culture collection of Pedro Crous, housed at CBS; IMI: International Mycological Institute, CABI-Bioscience, Egham, Bakeham Lane, U.K.; IRAN: Iranian Fungal Culture Collection, Iranian Research Institute of Plant Protection, Tehran, Iran; WAC: Department of Agriculture Western Australia Plant Pathogen Collection, Perth, Australia.

2ITS: internal transcribed spacers and intervening 5.8S nrDNA; tef1: partial translation elongation factor 1-alpha gene, actA: partial actin gene, cmdA: partial calmodulin gene, his3: partial histone H3 gene, tub2: partial beta-tubulin gene, rpb2: partial RNA polymerase II gene, gapdh: partial glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase gene.

DNA extraction and PCR amplification

DNA samples comprised those previously extracted by Bakhshi and Groenewald. Three additional partial nuclear genes were targeted for PCR amplification and sequencing, namely, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (gapdh), RNA polymerase II second largest subunit (rpb2), and β-tubulin (tub2), using corresponding primer sets (Table 2). PCR amplifications were performed in a total volume of 12.5 μL on a GeneAmp PCR System 9700 (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). The gapdh PCR mixture consisted of 5–10 ng genomic DNA, 1 × PCR buffer (Bioline, London), 2 mM MgCl2 (Bioline), 50 μM of each dNTP, 0.5 μL BSA (10 mg/ml) (Promega, Madison, WI), 0.28 μM of each primer and 0.5 units GoTaq® Flexi DNA polymerase (Promega). The tub2 PCR mixture contained 5–10 ng genomic DNA, 1 × PCR buffer, 2 mM MgCl2, 40 μM of each dNTP, 0 μL / 0.5 μL BSA, 0.25 μM of each primer and 0.5 units GoTaq® Flexi DNA polymerase using respectively the BT-1F/BT-1R (this study) or T1 (O’Donnell & Cigelnik 1997)/β-Sandy-R (Stukenbrock) primer sets. The rpb2 gene was amplified in three parts with three primer sets. Part three was only amplified in some selected species in order to design a new reverse primer for amplification of part two. The rpb2 PCR mixtures using the fRPB2-5F (Liu)/fRPB2-414R (Quaedvlieg) primer set consisted of 5–10 ng genomic DNA, 1 × PCR buffer, 2 mM MgCl2, 40 μM of each dNTP, 0.5 μL BSA, 0.2 μM of each primer and 0.5 units GoTaq® Flexi DNA polymerase. The PCR mixtures using RPB2-C5F/RPB2-C8R (this study) and fRPB2-7cF/fRPB2-11aR primer sets (Liu) were the same as gapdh.
Table 2.

Primer combinations used during this study for amplification and sequencing.

LocusPrimerPrimer sequence 5’ to 3’Annealing temperature (°C)OrientationReference
Beta-tubulin (tub2)T1AAC ATG CGT GAG ATT GTA AGT48ForwardO’Donnell & Cigelnik 1997
β-Sandy-RGCR CGN GGV ACR TAC TTG TT48ReverseStukenbrock et al. 2012
BT-1FGTC CWC ACC GCC CCT GAT56ForwardThis study
BT-1RCTT GTT RCC RGA AGC CTR TGS56ReverseThis study
RNA polymerase II second largest subunit (rpb2)fRPB2-5FGAY GAY MGW GAT CAY TTY GG47ForwardLiu et al. 1999
fRPB2-414RACM ANN CCC CAR TGN GWR TTR TG47ReverseQuaedvlieg et al. 2011
fRPB2-7cFATG GGY AAR CAA GCY ATG GG49ForwardLiu et al. 1999
fRPB2-11aRGCR TGG ATC TTR TCR TCS ACC49ReverseLiu et al. 1999
RPB2-C5FTGG GGA GAY CAR AAR AAA GC60→58→56ForwardThis study
RPB2-C8RACG GAA TCT TCC TGG TTG TA60→58→56ReverseThis study
Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (gapdh)Gpd1-LMATT GGC CGC ATC GTC TTC CGC AA60→58→53ForwardMyllys et al. 2002
Gpd2-LMCCC ACT CGT TGT CGT ACC A60→58→53ReverseMyllys et al. 2002
To obtain the partial tub2 and rpb2 (using the fRPB2-5F/fRPB2-414R and fRPB2-7cF/fRPB2-11aR primer sets) sequences, PCR amplification conditions were set as follows: an initial denaturation temperature of 94 °C for 3 min, followed by 40 (tub2) or 45 (rpb2) cycles of denaturation temperature of 94 °C for 30 s, primer annealing at the temperature stipulated in Table 2 for 30 s, primer extension at 72 °C for 45 s and a final extension step at 72 °C for 5 min. A touchdown PCR protocol was used to amplify the partial gapdh (using the Gpd1-LM/Gpd2-LM primer set (Myllys)) and rpb2 (using the RPB2-C5F/RPB2-C8R primer set) sequences: initial denaturation (94 °C, 5 min), five amplification cycles (94 °C, 45 s; 60 °C, 45 s; 72 °C, 90 s), five amplification cycles (94 °C, 45 s; 58 °C, 45 s; 72 °C, 90 s), 30 amplification cycles (94 °C, 45 s; 53 °C (gapdh) or 56 °C (rpb2), 45 s; 72 °C, 90 s) and a final extension step (72 °C, 5 min). PCR products were visualised by electrophoresis using a 1.2 % agarose gel, stained with GelRedTM (Biotium, Hayward, CA) and viewed under ultra-violet light. Size estimates were made using a HyperLadderTM I molecular marker (Bioline).

Sequencing and phylogenetic analyses

The resulting PCR fragments were sequenced in both directions using the same primers used for amplification (Table 2) and the BigDye Terminator Cycle Sequencing Kit v. 3.1 (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA), following the manufacturer's instructions. DNA sequencing amplicons were purified through Sephadex G-50 Superfine columns (SigmaAldrich, St Louis, MO) in 96-well MultiScreen HV plates (Millipore, Billerica, MA) as outlined by the manufacturer and analysed with an ABI Prism 3730xl Automated DNA analyser (Life Technologies Europe BV, Applied BiosystemsTM, Bleiswijk, The Netherlands). The raw DNA sequences of tub2, gapdh and rpb2 were edited using MEGA v. 6 (Tamura) and forward and reverse sequences for each isolate were assembled manually to generate consensus sequences. Two parts of the rpb2 gene (part amplified with the fRPB2-5F/fRPB2-414R primer set + part amplified with the RPB2-C5F/RPB2-C8R primer set) were compiled manually using MEGA v. 6. The assembled consensus sequences were initially aligned with MEGA v. 6 and optimised with the multiple sequence alignment online interface of MAFFT using default settings (http://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server/) (Katoh & Standley 2013), and adjusted manually where necessary. In addition, sequences of the same isolates corresponding to the ITS locus (including ITS1, 5.8S, ITS2), together with parts of four protein coding genes, viz. translation elongation factor 1-alpha (tef1), actin (actA), calmodulin (cmdA) and histone H3 (his3), were retrieved from the NCBIs GenBank nucleotide database and included in the analyses, after separate alignment as described above. Sequences of Cercospora sorghicola (CBS 136448 = IRAN 2672C) were used as outgroup. Evolutionary models for phylogenetic analyses were selected independently for each locus using MrModeltest v. 2.3 (Nylander 2004) under the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) (Table 3). The individual alignments of the different loci were subsequently concatenated with Mesquite v. 2.75 (Maddison & Maddison 2011) prior to being subjected to a combined multi-gene analysis. Given the different sizes of the data partitions, they could not be properly used in statistical tests for (in)congruency. Phylogenetic reconstruction was performed using Bayesian inference (BI) Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm in MrBayes v. 3.2.2 (Ronquist). Two simultaneous MCMC analyses, each consisting of four Markov chains, were run from random trees until the average standard deviation of split frequencies reached a value of 0.01, with trees saved every 100 generations and the heating parameter was set to 0.15. Burn-in phase was set to 25 % and the posterior probabilities (Rannala & Yang 1996) were calculated from the remaining trees. The resulting phylogenetic tree was generated with Geneious v. 5.6.7 (Drummond).
Table 3.

Phylogenetic data and the substitution models used in the phylogenetic analysis, per locus. Abbreviations of loci follow Table 1.

LocusITStef1actAcmdAhis3tub2rpb2gapdh
Number of characters4702911872483584151229869
Unique site patterns1675486663105259231
Substitution model usedSYM-gammaK80-gammaK80-gammaK80-gammaHKY-gammaGTR-gammaGTR-gammaGTR-I-gamma

Number of generations (n)2 405 000
Total number of trees (n)4 812
Sampled trees (n)3 610
All new sequences generated in this study were deposited in NCBIs GenBank nucleotide database (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov; Table 1) and the alignment and phylogenetic trees in TreeBASE S22944 (www.TreeBASE.org).

Morphology

Morphological descriptions are based on structures from dried material. Diseased leaf tissues were viewed under a Nikon® SMZ1500 stereo-microscope and taxonomically informative morphological structures (stromata, conidiophores and conidia) were picked up from lesions with a sterile dissecting needle and mounted on glass slides in clear lactic acid. Structures were examined under a Nikon Eclipse 80i light microscope, and photographed using a mounted Nikon digital sight DS-f1 high definition colour camera. Thirty measurements were made at ×1000 for each microscopic structure, and 95 % conӿdence intervals were derived for the measurements with extreme values given in parentheses. Colony macro-morphology on MEA was determined after 1 mo at 25 °C in the dark in duplicate and colony colour was described using the mycological colour charts of Rayner (1970). Nomenclatural novelties and descriptions were deposited in MycoBank (www.mycobank.org; Crous). The naming system for tentatively applied names used by Groenewald and Bakhshi is continued in this manuscript to simplify comparison between the studies.

Identification of the best-performing DNA barcode

The dataset of the eight loci, ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, his3, tub2, rpb2 and gapdh, was individually tested for two factors: Kimura-2-parameter (K2P) values (barcode gap) and molecular phylogenetic resolution (clade recovery). Inter- and intraspecific distances of eight loci were calculated for each single-locus sequence data alignment, using MEGA v. 6.0 with the Kimura-2-parameter distance values using the pairwise deletion model. Microsoft Excel 2010 was subsequently used to sort these distance values into distribution bins (from distance 0–0.1 with intervals of 0.01 between bins) and the frequency of entries for each individual bin was then plotted against the Kimura-2-parameter distance of each bin. In addition, Bayesian analyses using the corresponding nucleotide substitution models (Table 3) were applied to each data partition to check the stability and robustness of each species clade (clade recovery) under the different loci (data not shown, trees deposited in TreeBASE S22944) (Table 4). The clade recovery and Kimura-2-parameter values for each locus were calculated after applying the consolidated species concept to the results of eight-gene phylogenetic tree.
Table 4.

Summary of clade support (Bayesian posterior probabilities (PP) values) for each species and locus or combination of loci. Green cells represent the PP values of species which are supported as distinct species, purple cells represent the PP values of species which are indistinct from one other species; while white cells represent species which cannot be distinguished from several other species for the given locus or combination of loci. The K2P inter-/intraspecies variation ratio as well as the number of species in the three different coloured categories are indicated per locus below the table. Abbreviations of loci follow Table 1.

Allele group designation

The isolates in each of the Cercospora species complexes, including C. apii, C. armoraciae, C. beticola, C. cf. flagellaris, and Cercospora sp. G, were compared using the individual alignments of the eight single loci in MEGA v. 6. Allele groups were established for each locus based on sequence identity, i.e. each sequence with one or more nucleotide difference from the other sequence was regarded as a different allele.

RESULTS

DNA amplification and phylogenetic analysis

New primers were designed for rpb2 and tub2 in this study (Table 2) and proved to be effective for the selected Cercospora species. Approximately 400, 1000, and 1200 bp were obtained for tub2, gapdh and rpb2 loci, respectively. The final concatenated eight-locus alignment contained 169 ingroup taxa and a total of 4 099 characters including alignment gaps were processed. The gene boundaries were 1–470 bp for ITS, 475–765 bp for tef1, 770–956 bp for actA, 961–1 208 bp for cmdA, 1 213–1 570 bp for his3, 1 575–1 989 bp for tub2, 1 994–3 222 bp for rpb2, and 3 227–4 099 bp for gapdh. For the total alignment, 28 characters which were artificially introduced as spacers to separate the loci, were excluded from the phylogenetic analyses. The alignment contained 863 unique site patterns (Table 3). The Bayesian analysis lasted 2 405 000 generations and generated 4 812 trees from which the first 1 202 trees (25 %), representing the burn-in phase of the analyses, were discarded, and the remaining trees (3 610) were used for calculating posterior probabilities (PP) values in the phylogenetic tree (50 % majority rule consensus tree) (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1.

Consensus phylogram (50 % majority rule) of 3 610 trees resulting from a Bayesian analysis of the combined eight-gene sequence alignment using MrBayes v. 3.2.2. The scale bar indicates 0.02 expected changes per site. Hosts and country of origin are indicated in green and black text, respectively. The tree was rooted to Cercospora sorghicola (isolate CBS 136448 = IRAN 2672C).

TAXONOMY

Species delimitation in the genus Cercospora in this study follows the Consolidated Species Concept accepted in recent revisions of the taxonomy of cercosporoid fungi (e.g. Groenewald , Crous , Bakhshi , Videira ). Twenty-eight lineages of Cercospora were resolved based on the clustering and support in the Bayesian tree obtained from the combined ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, his3, tub2, rpb2, and gapdh alignment (Fig. 1, Table 4). Of these, 15 species including C. althaeina, C. chenopodii, C. convolvulicola, C. conyzae-canadensis, C. cylindracea, C. iranica, C. pseudochenopodii, C. cf. richardiicola, C. rumicis, C. solani, C. sorghicola, Cercospora sp. T, C. violae, C. zebrina, and C. cf. zinnia, were the same as those also accepted before in the five-gene phylogenetic tree (ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, and his3) (Bakhshi ). However, the eight-gene phylogenetic tree separated strains previously recognised as C. apii, C. armoraciae, C. beticola, C. cf. flagellaris, and Cercospora sp. G, based on five-gene phylogenetic tree (Groenewald, Bakhshi) into at least three, two, two, four and two well-supported clades respectively (Fig. 1). Some of these clades are supported by the host range or morphological characters of the isolates and are therefore described as new below.

Cercospora apii complex

The 16 isolates previously recognised as C. apii based on five-gene phylogenetic tree (Groenewald, Bakhshi) are assigned here to three lineages based on the eight-gene phylogenetic tree, host association, and morphology, including C. apii s. str., C. uwebrauniana sp. nov., and C. plantaginis (Fig. 1, part 2). The results of allele group designation for the isolates in this complex detected one, four, two, two, four, three, four and two allele groups for the ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, his3, tub2, rpb2, and gapdh sequences, respectively (Table 5).
Table 5.

Results from allele group designation per locus for Cercospora apii s. lat. isolates in this study. Abbreviations of loci and collection accession numbers follow Table 1.

SpeciesCulture accession numberHostAllele group per locus
ITStef1actAcmdAhis3tub2rpb2gapdh
C. apii s. str.CCTU 1069Cynanchum acutumIIIIIIIIIVI
CCTU 1086; CBS 136037; IRAN 2655CCynanchum acutumIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1215Cynanchum acutumIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1219; CBS 136155Cynanchum acutumIIIIIIIIIII
CBS 536.71; CPC 5087Apium graveolensIIIIIIIIII
CBS 116455; CPC 11556 (TYPE)Apium graveolensIIIIII_I
CBS 110813; CPC 5110Molucella laevisIIIIIIIIIII
CPC 5112Molucella laevisIIIIIIIIIII
C. plantaginisCCTU 1041; CPC 24910Plantago lanceolataIIIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1047Plantago lanceolataIIIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1082; CBS 138728Plantago lanceolataIIIIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1095Plantago lanceolataIIIIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1179Plantago lanceolataIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
CBS 252.67; CPC 5084 (TYPE)Plantago lanceolataIIIIIIIIIIIII_II
C. uwebraunianaCCTU 1134Heliotropium europaeumIIVIIIIVIIIII
CCTU 1200; CBS 138581 (TYPE)Heliotropium europaeumIIVIIIIVIIIII
Cercospora apiiFresen., Beitr. Mykol. 3: 91 (1863). Sensu Groenewald et al., Phytopathology 95: 954 (2005). (Fig. 2)
Fig. 2.

Cercospora apii (CBS 136037). A.Leaf spots. B–C. Fasciculate conidiophores. D–H.Conidia. Bars = 10 μm.

Type: Germany: Oestrich, on Apium graveolens (Apiaceae), Fuckel, Fungi rhen. 117, in HAL (lectotype designated by Groenewald ); Heilbronn, Landwirtschaftsamt, on A. graveolens, 10 Aug. 2004, K. Schrameyer (CBS 116455 = CPC 11556 – epitype designated by Groenewald). Description: Leaf spots amphigenous, distinct, circular to subcircular, 1–9 mm diam, white-grey in centre, surrounded by a dark purple-brown border. Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores aggregated in moderately dense fascicles (4–15), arising from the upper cells of a well-developed brown stroma, to 50 μm wide; conidiophores brown, becoming pale brown towards the apex, 1−6-septate, straight to variously curved, unbranched, uniform in wide, (45−)80–95(−125) × 4–5.5 μm. Conidiogenous cells integrated, lateral or terminal, unbranched, brown, smooth, proliferating sympodially, 20–40 × 3.5–5 μm, multi-local; loci thickened, darkened, refractive, apical or lateral, 2–3.5 μm diam. Conidia solitary, smooth, obclavate-cylindrical to acicular, straight to slightly curved, hyaline, distinctly 3–9(−15)-septate, apex subacute or subobtusely rounded, base subtruncate to obconically truncate, (30–)65–80(−115) × 3–5 μm; hila thickened, darkened, refractive, 2–3.5 μm diam. Note: This clade includes the ex-epitype strain of C. apii (isolate CBS 116455 = CPC 11556), therefore we fixed the application of C. apii s. str. to this clade. Specimens examined: Germany: Heilbron, Landwirtschaftsamt, on A. graveolens, K. Schrameyer (CBS 116455 = CPC 11556 −ex-epitype culture). – Iran: Ardabil Province: Moghan, on leaves of Cynanchum acutum (Apocynaceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17016F, IRAN 17017F, CCTU 1069, CCTU 1086 = IRAN 2655C = CBS 136037); Moghan, on leaves of C. acutum, Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17018F, IRAN 17019F, CCTU 1215, CCTU 1219 = CBS 136155). – New Zealand: Auckland, on M. laevis, C.F. Hill (CPC 5112). – Romania: Bucuresti, on A. graveolens, 2 Oct. 1969, O. Constantinescu (CBS 536.71 = CPC 5087). – USA: California: on Moluccella laevis (Lamiaceae), S.T. Koike (CBS 110813 = CPC 5110). Cercospora plantaginisSacc., Michelia 1: 267 (1878). (Fig. 3)
Fig. 3.

Cercospora plantaginis (CPC 24910). A.Leaf spots. B–C.Fasciculate conidiophores. D–J. Conidia. Bars = 10 μm.

Type: Italy: Selva, on Plantago lanceolata (Plantaginaceae), Sep. 1873, P.A. Saccardo (PAD, s.n. – holotype, according to Art. 9.1, Note 1). – Romania: Domnesti, on P. lanceolata, 3 Aug. 1965, O. Constantinescu (CBS 252.67 – , MBT 383093, preserved as a metabolically inactive culture). Description: Leaf spots amphigenous, circular to subcircular, 1–4 mm diam, white to grey with distinct raised brown borders. Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores aggregated in loose fascicles, arising from a moderately developed, intraepidermal and substomatal, dark brown stroma, to 30 μm diam; conidiophores brown at the base, becoming paler towards the apex, 2–10-septate, straight to geniculate-sinuous due to sympodial proliferation, simple, uniform in width, somewhat constricted at the proliferating point, (45−)60–85 × 4–5 μm. Conidiogenous cells integrated, terminal or lateral, pale brown to brown, proliferating sympodially, 8–25 × 3.5–5 μm, multi-local; loci distinctly thickened, darkened and somewhat refractive, apical or formed on shoulders caused by sympodial proliferation, 2–3 μm diam. Conidia solitary, subcylindrical, filiform to acicular, straight to mildly curved, hyaline, (40−)60–70(−105) × 2–3.5 μm, (4−)8–13(−17)-septate, with subobtuse to subacute apices and truncate bases; hila thickened, darkened, refractive, 1.5–2.5 μm diam. Notes: Based on the results of the eight-gene phylogenetic tree, all isolates obtained from P. lanceolata from five different provinces in Iran together with a European isolate from this host plant, previously recognised as C. apii based on a five-gene phylogenetic tree (Groenewald, Bakhshi), cluster separately from the other isolates in this clade (Fig. 1, part 2). Three species of Cercospora, including C. apii, C. pantoleuca and C. plantaginis, have been reported from Plantago (Crous & Braun 2003, https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/). This species is morphologically close to C. plantaginis described from Italy on P. lanceolata (Chupp 1954). Since one European isolate from P. lanceolata in Romania (CBS 252.67 = CPC 5084) also resides in this clade, we designate an epitype here for this species, and fix the application of the name C. plantaginis to this clade. Additional specimens examined: Iran: Guilan Province: Chaboksar, on P. lanceolata, Jul. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17076F, CCTU 1041 = CPC 24910). Zanjan Province: Tarom, Pasar, on P. lanceolata, Sep. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17078F, CCTU 1047). Ardabil Province: Moghan, on P. lanceolata, Sep. 2011, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1082 = CBS 138728). East Azerbaijan Province: Arasbaran, Horand, on P. lanceolata, Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1095). West Azerbaijan Province: Khoy, Firouragh, on P. lanceolata, Sep. 2012, M. Arzanlou (IRAN 17077F, CCTU 1179 = IRAN 2716C). Cercospora uwebrauniana M. Bakhshi & Crous, sp. nov. MycoBank MB827521 (Fig. 4)
Fig. 4.

Cercospora uwebrauniana (CBS 138581). A. Leaf spots. B–C. Fasciculate conidiophores. D–I. Conidia. Bars = 10 μm.

Etymology: Named in honour of Uwe Braun, who has published extensively on the genus Cercospora, and also provided a modern treatment for allied genera of Mycosphaerellaceae. Diagnosis: Differs from C. taurica in the cylindrical conidia with truncate or subtruncate bases and somewhat shorter and wider conidia, (23−)38–48(−70) × 4.5–8 μm vs 40–110 × (2.5−)4–6(−7) μm in C. taurica. Type: Iran: Ardabil Province: Moghan, on Heliotropium europaeum (Boraginaceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 16864F – holotype; CCTU 1200 = CBS 138581 – ex-type culture). Description: Leaf spots distinct, circular to irregular, 3–10 mm, grey-brown to dark brown, surrounded by brown margin. Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores in moderately dense fascicles, arising from the upper cells of a moderately developed, intraepidermal and substomatal, brown stroma, to 40 μm wide; conidiophores straight to slightly geniculate, pale brown to brown, unbranched, regular in width, (60−)115–145(−230) × 3.5–5.5 μm, 2–9-septate. Conidiogenous cells integrated, terminal, brown, proliferating sympodially, 15–35 × 3.5–5.5 μm, mostly mono-local, sometimes multi-local; loci distinctly thickened, darkened, refractive, apical or formed on the shoulders caused by geniculation, 2–3.5 μm. Conidia solitary, hyaline, subcylindrical to cylindrical, straight or slightly curved, truncate to subtruncate at the base, obtuse to rounded at the apex, (23−)38–48(−70) × 4.5–8 μm, (0−)3–4(−9)-septate; hila thickened, darkened, refractive, 1.5–3 μm diam. Notes: Two isolates, obtained from H. europaeum in different provinces in Iran, clustered in a small clade within C. apii s. str. (Fig. 1, part 2). This independent clade is supported by tef1, his3 and tub2 from C. apii s. str. Morphologically, these two strains are completely distinct from their most closely related species in the phylogenetic tree, namely C. apii (conidia acicular, subacute or subobtusely rounded at the apex, (30−)65–80(−115) × 3–5 μm), C. beticola (conidia subacute to acute apex, (40−)90–140(−300) × 2–5 μm), C. gamsiana (conidia subobtuse at the apex, (27−)49–62(−100) × 2–4 μm) and C. plantaginis (conidia subobtuse to subacute apices, (40−)60–70(−105) × 2–3.5 μm), by the obtuse to rounded apex, wider and shorter conidia ((23−)38–48(−70) × 4.5–8 μm), and are regarded as a separate species, appearing to be confined to H. europaeum. Presently, three species of Cercospora have been described from Heliotropium, C. apii, C. heliotropiicola, and C. taurica (Crous & Braun 2003, https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/). Cercospora uwebrauniana differs from C. taurica in the cylindrical conidia with truncate or subtruncate bases and somewhat shorter and wider conidia, (23−)38–48(−70) × 4.5–8 μm vs 40–110 × (2.5−)4–6(−7) μm in C. taurica (Braun 2002). In addition, C. taurica has obclavate-cylindrical conidia with obconically truncate bases and rather wider conidiophores, 4–9 μm diam (Braun 2002). Cercospora heliotropiicola is morphologically quite distinct from C. uwebrauniana in having acicular or subulate, much thinner (2–3 μm wide) and longer (to 300 μm long) conidia with subobtuse or acute apex (Pons & Sutton 1996). Additional specimen examined: Iran: Guilan Province: Astara, on H. europaeum, Jun. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17096F, CCTU 1134).

Cercospora armoraciae complex

The 10 isolates previously recognised as C. armoraciae based on a five-gene phylogenetic tree (Groenewald, Bakhshi) are assigned to two lineages here, based on the eight-gene phylogenetic tree, including C. armoraciae s. str. and C. bizzozeriana (Fig. 1, part 1). The results of allele group designation for the isolates in this complex revealed one, three, one, two, seven, three, three and two allele groups for the ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, his3, tub2, rpb2 and gapdh sequences, respectively (Table 6).
Table 6.

Results from allele group designation per locus for Cercospora armoraciae s. lat. isolates in this study. Abbreviations of loci and collection accession numbers follow Table 1.

SpeciesCulture accession numberHostAllele group per locus
ITStef1actAcmdAhis3tub2rpb2gapdh
C. armoraciae s. str.CBS 250.67; CPC 5088 (TYPE)Armoracia rusticana (= A. lapathifolia)IIIIII_II
C. bizzozerianaCCTU 1013?IIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1022; CBS 136028?IIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1040; CBS 136131Tanacetum balsamitaIIIIIIIVIIIII
CCTU 1107?IIIIIVIIIII
CCTU 1117; CBS 136132Cardaria drabaIIIIIVIII
CCTU 1234Cardaria drabaIIIIIVIIIII
CCTU 1127; CBS 136133Capparis spinosaIIIIIIVIIIIII
CBS 540.71; CPC 5060Cardaria drabaIIIIIIII_I
CBS 258.67; CPC 5061 (TYPE)Cardaria drabaIIIIIIII_I
Cercospora armoraciae Sacc., Nuovo Giorn. Bot. Ital. 8: 188 (1876). Note: This clade includes the ex-type culture of C. armoraciae (CBS 250.67). Cercospora bizzozeriana Sacc. & Berl., Malpighia 2: 248 (1888). (Fig. 5)
Fig. 5.

Cercospora bizzozeriana (CBS 136132). A–B. Leaf spots. C. Fasciculate conidiophores. D–J. Conidia. Bars = 10 μm.

Type: Italy: Padova, on Lepidium latifolium (Brassicaceae), (Berlese, Malpighia 1: tab. XIV, fig. 23, 1887 – lectotype, designated here, MBT 383343); Romania: Fundulea, on Cardaria draba, isol. by O. Constantinescu [deposited in the CBS culture collection in 1967] (CBS 258.67 – , MBT 383154, preserved as a metabolically inactive culture). Notes: Type material of C. bizzozeriana is not preserved in Saccardo's herbarium (see Gola 1930). Therefore, the original illustration published by Saccardo & Berlese (in Berlese 1888) is designated as lectotype (according to Art. 9.3 and 9.4). Berlese's article “Fungi veneti novi vel critici” was split into several parts published in Malpighia 1 (1887) and 2 (1888). The description of C. bizzozeriana was published in vol 2, but with reference to tab. XIV, fig. 23 already issued in vol. 1. Description: Leaf spots amphigenous, circular, 1–5 mm, white to white-grey with grey to black dots (stroma with conidiophores) and definite brown border. Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores aggregated in dense fascicles, arising from a well-developed, brown stroma, to 75 μm diam; conidiophores brown, 1–5-septate, straight to geniculate-sinuous due to sympodial proliferation, simple, sometimes branched, uniform in width, sometimes constricted at the proliferating point, (30−)50–60(−80) × 4–7 μm. Conidiogenous cells integrated, terminal or lateral, pale brown to brown, proliferating sympodially, 10–25 × 3–6 μm, multi-local; loci distinctly thickened, darkened and somewhat refractive, apical, lateral or formed on shoulders caused by geniculation, 1.5–3 μm diam. Conidia solitary, obclavate-cylindrical, straight to slightly curved, hyaline, (20−)60–80(−125) × 3–6 μm, 2–10-septate, with obtuse apices and subtruncate or obconically truncate bases; hila thickened, darkened, refractive, 1.5–3 μm diam. Notes: Isolates obtained from different host species including Tanacetum balsamita, Capparis spinosa and Cardaria draba clustered in a clade distinct from the ex-type isolate of C. armoraciae, and are regarded as a separate taxon. In addition, five isolates obtained from Car. draba (three from Iran and two from Romania) all cluster in this clade. Until now, three species of Cercospora are known from these host species, including C. bizzozeriana, C. chrysanthemi and C. capparis (Crous & Braun 2003, https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/). Cercospora chrysanthemi is in the C. apii s. lat. complex (Crous & Braun 2003). Cercospora capparis differs from this species by the narrower (4–5.5 μm diam) conidiophores and 3–5 μm diam conidia (Chupp 1954). The species is morphologically close to C. bizzozeriana which was described from Italy on Car. draba (Chupp 1954). Since two European isolates from Car. draba in Romania also reside in this clade, we designate an epitype here (ex-epitype culture CBS 258.67 = CPC 5061) for this species, and fix the application of C. bizzozeriana to this clade. Additional specimens examined: Iran: West Azerbaijan Province: Khoy, Firouragh, on leaves of Car. draba, Nov. 2011, M. Arzanlou (CCTU 1117 = CBS 136132); Khoy, Firouragh, on leaves of Car. draba, Oct. 2012, M. Arzanlou (IRAN 17027F, CCTU 1234). Zanjan Province: Tarom, Haroun Abad, on leaves of Tanacetum balsamita (Asteraceae), Sep. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17029F, CCTU 1040 = CBS 136131); Tarom, Mamalan, Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17028F, CCTU 1107); Mianeh, Oct. 2012, M. Torbati (IRAN 17025F, IRAN 17026F, CCTU 1013, CCTU 1022 = CBS 136028). Khuzestan Province: Ahvaz, on leaves of Capparis spinosa (Capparidaceae), Dec. 2011, E. Mohammadian (CCTU 1127 = CBS 136133). – Romania: Hagieni, on Car. draba, O. Constantinescu (CBS 540.71 = IMI 161110 = CPC 5060).

Cercospora beticola complex

The 16 isolates previously recognised as C based on a five-gene phylogenetic analysis (Groenewald, Bakhshi), are assigned to two lineages based on the eight-gene phylogenetic analysis (Fig. 1, part 2). One, one, one, one, one, two, three and four allele groups were distinguished for the ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, his3, tub2, rpb2 and gapdh sequences, respectively (Table 7).
Table 7.

Results from allele group designation per locus for Cercospora beticola s. lat. isolates in this study. Abbreviations of loci and collection accession numbers follow Table 1.

SpeciesCulture accession numberHostAllele group per locus
ITStef1actAcmdAhis3tub2rpb2gapdh
C. beticolaCCTU 1057; IRAN 2651CChenopodium sp.IIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1065Chenopodium sp.IIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1087Chenopodium sp.IIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1088; CBS 138582Sonchus asperIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1089; CPC 24911Plantago lanceolataIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1108Plantago lanceolataIIIIIIIIII
CBS 116456; CPC 11557 (TYPE)Beta vulgarisIIIIIIII
CCTU 1135Beta vulgarisIIIIIIIIIII
CPC 12028Beta vulgarisIIIIIIIIIII
CPC 12029Beta vulgarisIIIIIIIIIII
C. gamsianaCCTU 1035Malva sylvestrisIIIIIIIIIIV
CBS 144962; CCTU 1074; CPC 24909 (TYPE)Malva neglectaIIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1109Malva sylvestrisIIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1199; CBS 136128; IRAN 2675CRumex crispusIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1205; CBS 136127; IRAN 2677CSesamum indicumIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1208; IRAN 2678CSonchus sp.IIIIIIIIIV
Cercospora beticolaSacc., Nuovo Giorn. Bot. Ital. 8: 189 (1876). Sensu Groenewald et al., Phytopathology 95: 954 (2005). (Fig. 6)
Fig. 6.

Cercospora beticola (CCTU 1135). A. Leaf spots. B. Fasciculate conidiophores. C–G. Conidia. Bars = 10 μm.

Type: Italy: Vittorio (Treviso), on Beta vulgaris (Chenopodiaceae), Sep. 1897, P.A. Saccardo, Fungi ital. no. 197 (PAD – neotype designated by Groenewald ); Ravenna, on B. vulgaris, 10 Jul. 2003, V. Rossi (CBS 116456 = CPC 11557 – epitype designated by Groenewald). Description: Leaf spots amphigenous, distinct, circular to subcircular, 1–7 mm diam, white-grey, with grey dots (stroma with conidiophores), surrounded by distinct brown border. Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores aggregated in loose to dense fascicles, emerging through stomatal openings or erumpent through the cuticle, arising from the upper cells of a moderately to well-developed brown stroma, to 110 μm diam; conidiophores brown, becoming paler towards apex, 2–8-septate, thick-walled, straight to geniculate-sinuous, unbranched, uniform in width, (30−)80–110(−185) × 4–5(−6) μm. Conidiogenous cells integrated, terminal or lateral, unbranched, brown, smooth, proliferating sympodially, 10–30 × 3.5–5.5 μm, mostly multi-local, sometimes mono-local; loci apical or formed on shoulders caused by geniculation, thickened, darkened, refractive, 1.5–2 μm diam. Conidia solitary, subcylindrical, filiform to acicular, straight to variously curved, hyaline, 3–15(−29)-septate, apex subacute to acute, base truncate to subtruncate, (40−)90–140(−300) × 2–5 μm; hila thickened, darkened, refractive, 1.5–2.5 μm diam. Note: This clade includes the ex-epitype culture of C. beticola (CBS 116456 = CPC 11557), therefore we fixed the application of the name C. beticola s. str. to this clade. Additional specimens examined: Egypt, on B. vulgaris, 15 Apr. 2004, M. Hasem (CPC 12028, CPC 12029). – Iran: Guilan Province: Talesh, Khotbeh Sara, on leaves of B. vulgaris, Jun. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17020F, CCTU 1135). Zanjan Province: Tarom, Mamalan, on P. lanceolata, Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17023F, CCTU 1108). Ardabil Province: Moghan, on P. lanceolata, Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1089 = CPC 24911); Moghan, on Chenopodium sp. (Chenopodiaceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17021F, IRAN 17022F, CCTU 1057 = IRAN 2651C, CCTU 1065, CCTU 1087); Moghan, on Sonchus asper (Asteraceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17024F, CCTU 1088 = CBS 138582). Cercospora gamsiana M. Bakhshi & Crous, sp. nov. MycoBank MB827522 (Fig. 7)
Fig. 7.

Cercospora gamsiana (CPC 24909 = CBS 144962). A. Leaf spots. B–C. Fasciculate conidiophores. D–H. Conidia. Bars = 10 μm.

Etymology: Dedicated to the recently deceased Walter Gams to honour his contribution to mycology. Diagnosis: Morphologically distinct from species of the C. apii complex in the irregularly constricted, often conical and attenuated at the apex conidiophores, and conidia with long obconically truncate bases; sporulation is restricted to the terminal part of conidiophores. Type: Iran: Ardabil Province: Moghan, on leaves of Malva neglecta (Malvaceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17011F – holotype; CBS 144962 = CCTU 1074 = CPC 24909– ex-type culture). Description: Leaf spots amphigenous, circular to irregular, 3–8 mm diam, grey to brown. Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores aggregated in moderately dense fascicles, arising from a well-developed, intraepidermal and substomatal, brown stroma, to 45 μm diam; conidiophores pale brown, 1–5-septate, geniculate-sinuous, irregularly constricted, unbranched, moderately thin-walled, irregular in width, often conical and attenuated at the apex, sporulation is restricted at the terminal part of conidiophores, 45–60(−110) × 4–5 μm. Conidiogenous cells integrated, terminal, pale brown to olivaceous-brown, proliferating sympodially, 10–25 × 3.5–5 μm, uni- or multi-local; loci distinctly thickened, darkened and somewhat refractive, apical, circumspersed, 1.5–2 μm diam. Conidia solitary, subcylindrical to obclavate or somewhat narrowed towards the tip, straight to slightly curved, hyaline, thin-walled, (27−)49–62(−100) × 2–4 μm, distinctly 3–10-septate, subobtuse at the apex and long obconically truncate at the base; hila distinctly thickened, darkened, refractive, 1.5–2.5 μm diam. Notes: Until now, 14 species names in Cercospora have been introduced from these host species, including C. apii, C. althaeina, C. beticola, C. hyalospora (C. apii s. lat. complex), C. malvarum (C. apii s. lat. complex), C. malvicola, C. sigesbeckiae, C. peckiana (C. apii s. lat. complex), C. rumicis, C. sonchi (C. apii s. lat. complex), C. sonchicola (C. apii s. lat. complex), C. sonchifolia, C. sesami (C. apii s. lat. complex), and C. sesamigena (Crous & Braun 2003, https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/). Cercospora gamsiana is phylogenetically clearly distinguishable from C. apii, C. althaeina, C. beticola, C. sigesbeckiae and C. rumicis (Bakhshi) (Fig. 1, part 2). It is morphologically well distinguished from species of the C. apii complex and other species of Cercospora by its irregularly constricted, thin-walled, often conical and attenuated at the apex conidiophores and, conidia with long obconically truncate bases; sporulation is restricted at the terminal part of conidiophores. Additional specimens examined: Iran: Zanjan Province: Tarom, Zehtar Abad, on leaves of Malva sylvestris, Sep. 2011, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1035); Tarom, Mamalan, on leaves of M. sylvestris, Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1109). Ardabil Province: Moghan, on leaves of Sonchus sp., Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17072F, CCTU 1208 = IRAN 2678C); Moghan, on leaves of Sesamum indicum (Pedaliaceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1205 = IRAN 2677C = CBS 136127). Guilan Province: Ramsar, on leaves of Rumex crispus (Polygonaceae), Sep. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1199 = IRAN 2675C = CBS 136128).

Cercospora cf. flagellaris complex

The 61 isolates previously recognised as C. cf. flagellaris based on a five-gene phylogenetic tree (Groenewald, Bakhshi) cluster into at least four distinct phylogenetic clades based on the eight-gene phylogenetic tree including C. cf. gossypii, C. cf. flagellaris clades 1, 2 and 3 (Fig. 1, part 3). Three, four, six, seven, seven, seven, two and nine allele groups were distinguished for the ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, his3, tub2, rpb2 and gapdh sequences, respectively (Table 8).
Table 8.

Results from allele group designation per locus for Cercospora cf. flagellaris isolates in this study. Abbreviations of loci and collection accession numbers follow Table 1.

SpeciesCulture accession numberHostAllele group per locus
ITStef1actAcmdAhis3tub2rpb2gapdh
Cercospora cf. gossypiiCCTU 1055; IRAN 2650CHibiscus trionumIIIIIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1070; CBS 136137Gossypium herbaceumIIIIIIIIIIIIIV
Cercospora cf. flagellaris clade 1CCTU 1007; CBS 136031Hydrangea sp.IIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1027; CBS 136034Lepidium sativumIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1031; CBS 136036; IRAN 2648CUrtica dioicaIIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1120Raphanus sativusIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1128; CBS 136141; IRAN 2661CPhaseolus vulgarisIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1159; CBS 136148Arachis hypogaeaIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1162; IRAN 2670CCitrullus lanatusIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1168Phaseolus vulgarisIIIIIIIIIV
CCTU 1171Raphanus sativusIIIIIIIIIV
CPC 1051Populus deltoidesIIIIIIIIIIIIV
CBS 132653; CPC 10884Dysphania ambrosioidesIIIIIIIVIIVIIIVII
CPC 5441Amaranthus sp.IIIIVIIIIVIIIIVI
Cercospora cf. flagellaris clade 2CCTU 1059; CBS 136136Ecballium elateriumIIIIIIIIVIII
CCTU 1068Xanthium spinosumIIIVIIIIIIIIIIIIVIII
CCTU 1085Xanthium strumariumIIIIIIIVVIIVIII
CCTU 1115; CBS 136139; IRAN 2659CCercis siliquastrumIIIIIIIIVIII
CCTU 1195Datura stramoniumIIIIIIIIIX
CCTU 1198; CBS 136151Acer velutinumIIIIIIIIIIIX
CCTU 1204Abutilon theophrasti IIIIIIIIIIX
CCTU 1216Ecballium elateriumIIIIIIIIIVIII
CCTU 1223; CBS 136154; IRAN 2683CEclipta prostrataIIIIIIIIIVIII
CBS 132667; CPC 11643Celosia argentea var. cristata (≡ C. cristata)IIIIVIIIIIIIIIIVIII
Cercospora cf. flagellaris clade 3CCTU 1005; IRAN 2644CXanthium strumariumIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1006; CBS 136030Impatiens balsaminaIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1010; CBS 136032Pelargonium hortorumIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1021; CBS 136033Amaranthus retroflexusIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1029; CBS 136035; IRAN 2647CCucurbita maximaIIIVIIIIIII
CCTU 1048; CBS 136029Xanthium strumariumIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1064Amaranthus retroflexusIIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1072; IRAN 2653CAmaranthus blitoidesIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1075Raphanus sativusIIIVIIIIIIII
CCTU 1084; CBS 136156Amaranthus sp.IIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1118; CBS 136140; IRAN 2660CPopulus deltoides IIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1130; CBS 136142Olea europaeaIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1136Cucurbita pepoIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1138; IRAN 2664CPhaseolus vulgarisIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1139; IRAN 2665CPhaseolus vulgarisIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1140; CBS 136143; IRAN 2666CCalendula officinalisIIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1141; CBS 136144Tagetes patulaIIIIIIVIIIIII
CCTU 1142; IRAN 2667CPhaseolus vulgarisIIIIIIIIVIIIII
CCTU 1143; CBS 136145Datura stramoniumIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1147Urtica dioicaIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1150Buxus microphyllaIIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1154; CBS 136147Abutilon theophrastiIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1155.11Phaseolus vulgarisIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1156Xanthium strumariumIIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1158; IRAN 2668CXanthium strumariumIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1160; CBS 136149Vicia fabaIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1161; IRAN 2669CPhaseolus vulgarisIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1167; CBS 136150Anubias sp.IIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1172Oenothera biennisIIIVIIII
CCTU 1175; IRAN 2673CPhaseolus vulgarisIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1209; CBS 136152Glycine maxIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1210; IRAN 2679CGlycine maxIIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1211Glycine maxIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1212; CBS 136153; IRAN 2680CSilybum marianumIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1218; IRAN 2682CHibiscus trionumIIIIIIII
CBS 115482; CPC 4410Citrus sp.IIIIVIIIVIIVIIII
CBS 143.51; CPC 5055Bromus sp.IIIIIIIVIII
Cercospora cf. gossypiiLall et al., Indian Phytopath. 14: 116 (1962) [“1961”].(Fig. 8)
Fig. 8.

Cercospora cf. gossypii (CBS 136137). A. Leaf spots. B–C. Fasciculate conidiophores. D–F. Conidia. Bars = 10 μm.

Description: Leaf spots amphigenous, circular to subcircular, 1–4 mm diam, with grey-brown centre and purple-brown margins. Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores aggregated in dense fascicles, arising from the upper cells of a well-developed, intraepidermal and substomatal, brown stroma, to 65 μm diam; conidiophores pale brown to brown, simple, rarely branched, 1–4-septate, straight or flexuous caused by sympodial proliferation, almost uniform in width, often constricted at proliferating point, (35−)60–75(−110) × 4–5 μm. Conidiogenous cells terminal or integrated, pale brown, smooth, proliferating sympodially, 10–45 × 3.5–5 μm, multi-local; loci thickened, darkened, refractive, apical, lateral, circumspersed, 1.5–2.5 μm diam. Conidia solitary, smooth, subcylindrical to obclavate, straight or mildly curved, successively tapering towards the apex, hyaline, 1–7-septate, apex subacute to subobtuse, base truncate to short obconically truncate, (30−)65–90(−160) × 2–4 μm; hila distinctly thickened, darkened, refractive, 1–2 μm diam. Notes: This clade includes two isolates obtained from G. herbaceum and Hib. trionum, both in the Malvaceae (Fig. 1, part 3). Cercospora althaeina, C. fagopyri, C. malayensis (C. apii s. lat.), C. gossypii, C. gossypiicola, C. gossypina and C. lhuillieri (C. apii s. lat.) are six Cercospora species which have been reported until now on Gossypium and Hibiscus host genera (Crous & Braun 2003, https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/). This species is phylogenetically distinct from C. althaeina (Fig. 1) and C. fagopyri (Groenewald, Bakhshi). Cercospora gossypina is distinguished from this species in that it induces wider leaf spots (0.5–10 mm), and has unbranched, longer and wider conidiophores (75–250 × 4–6.5 μm) (Hsieh & Goh 1990). Cercospora malayensis is distinguished from C. cf. gossypii in that it has elliptical, yellow to tan leaf spots; unbranched, 1–8-septate conidiophores and mostly terminal conidiogenous cells and somewhat longer conidia (50–270 × 2.5–4 μm) (Little 1987). Cercospora gossypiicola (Narayan ) and C. lhuillieri (Montegut 1967) resemble C. apii (with acicular conidia), but are different. They do not have stromata, and form less conidiophores per fascicle. The description of C. gossypii (Lall ) is rather close to this taxon. The type of C. gossypii is from India. Thus, fresh material is needed from India to resolve the application of the name C. gossypii. Specimens examined: Iran: Ardabil Province: Moghan, on Gossypium herbaceum (Malvaceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17073F, CCTU 1070 = CBS 136137); Moghan, on Hibiscus trionum (Malvaceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17074F, CCTU 1055 = IRAN 2650C). Cercospora cf. flagellarisEllis & G. Martin, Am. Nat. 16: 1003 (1882).

Clade 1; Clade 2; Clade 3

In view of the overlap between the morphological characters of these three clades, we provide a single over-arching description here. Description: Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores aggregated in loose to dense fascicles, arising from a weakly to well-developed, intraepidermal and substomatal, brown stroma; conidiophores pale brown to brown, 2–18-septate, straight, sinuous to distinctly geniculate, flexuous, simple, unbranched or rarely branched, uniform or irregular in width, sometimes constricted at septa and proliferating point, (75–)130–165(–300) × 4–5.5 μm in clade 1; (30–)80–120(–210) × 3.5–5.5 μm in clade 2; (25–)60–95(–230) × 3.5–5.5 μm in clade 3. Conidiogenous cells integrated, terminal, proliferating sympodially, mono- or multi-local; loci thickened, darkened, apical, lateral or circumspersed, 1.5–2.5 μm diam. Conidia solitary, hyaline, subcylindrical, filiform to obclavate, straight to slightly curved, with truncate to obconically truncate base and subacute to subobtuse apices, (60–)125–170(–300) × 3–5 μm, 5–20-septate in clade 1; (25–)60–95(–260) × 2.5–4.5 μm, (2–)8–11(–25)-septate in clade 2; (30–)100–155(–320) × 2–5 μm, (2–)10–14(–28)-septate in clade 3; hila distinctly thickened, darkened, refractive, 1–2 μm diam. Notes: Screening the remaining isolates of C. cf. flagellaris, with three more genomic loci in this study (tub2, rpb2 and gapdh), clusters them into at least three distinct clades in the eight-gene phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1, part 3); clade 1 is sister to C. cf. gossypii; clade 3 is sister to C. convolvulicola and clade 2 is sister to the clade including C. cf. flagellaris clade 3 and C. convolvulicola. However, there is a high level of variation in morphological characteristics between different isolates of these three clades. In addition, several isolates originating from diverse hosts and families reside in these three clades and there is also overlap between host ranges among them. Different names can therefore be applied to these clades, and therefore we prefer to simply regard them as distinct phylogenetic species for now. To resolve their taxonomy, fresh collections authentic for the names (based on host and country) need to be recollected and included in future studies.

Cercospora cf. flagellaris Clade 1

Specimens examined: Fiji: on Amaranthus sp. (Amaranthaceae), C.F. Hill (CPC 5441). – Iran: Guilan Province: Talesh, Khotbeh Sara, on leaves of Phaseolus vulgaris (Fabaceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1128 = IRAN 2661C = CBS 136141); Talesh, Jamakuh, on leaves of Raphanus sativus (Brassicaceae), Nov. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17042F, CCTU 1120); Talesh, Dulbin, on Hydrangea sp. (Hydrangeaceae), Jul. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17039F, CCTU 1007 = CBS 136031). Guilan Province: Kiashahr, on leaves of Ph. vulgaris, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1168 = IRAN 2715C); Kiashahr, on leaves of R. sativus, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17041F, CCTU 1171); Kiashahr, on leaves of Arachis hypogea (Fabaceae), Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1159 = CBS 136148); Sowme`eh Sara, Dowgur, on leaves of Urtica dioica (Urticaceae), Jun. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17043F, CCTU 1031 = IRAN 2648C = CBS 136036); Chamkhaleh, on leaves of Lepidium sativum (Brassicaceae), Jun. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17040F, CCTU 1027 = CBS 136034); Lahijan, Rudboneh, on leaves of Citrullus lanatus (Cucurbitaceae), Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17038F, CCTU 1162 = IRAN 2670C). – South Africa: Limpopo Province: Messina, 30 Apr. 1995, on Populus deltoides (Salicaceae), P.W. Crous (CPC 1051). – South Korea: Jeju, on Dysphania ambrosioides (syn. Chenopodium ambrosioides) (Chenopodiaceae), 12 Nov. 2003, H.D. Shin (CBS 132653 = CPC 10884) (as C. chenopodii-ambrosioidis).

Cercospora cf. flagellaris Clade 2

Specimens examined: Iran: Ardabil Province: Moghan, on leaves of Xanthium spinosum (Astraceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17049F, CCTU 1068); Moghan, on leaves of Xanthium strumarium (Asteraceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17050F, CCTU 1085); Moghan, on leaves of Ecballium elaterium (Cucurbitaceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17047F, CCTU 1059 = CBS 136136); Moghan, on leaves of E. elaterium, Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17048F, CCTU 1216 = IRAN 2717C); Moghan, on leaves of Abutilon theophrasti (Malvaceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17044F, CCTU 1204). Guilan Province: Astara, on leaves of Cercis siliquastrum (Caesalpinaceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1115 = IRAN 2659C = CBS 136139); Talesh, Khotbeh Sara, on leaves of Eclipta prostrata (Astraceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1223 = IRAN 2683C = CBS 136154); Talesh, on leaves of Datura stramonium (Solanaceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17046F, CCTU 1195). Mazandaran Province: Ramsar, on leaves of Acer velutinum (Aceraceae), Sep. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17045F, CCTU 1198 = CBS 136151). – South Korea: Hoengseong, on Celosia argentea var. cristata (syn. C. cristata) (Amaranthaceae), 11 Oct. 2004, H.D. Shin (CBS 132667 = CPC 11643).

Cercospora cf. flagellaris Clade 3

Specimens examined: Iran: Guilan Province: Rudsar, on leaves of Cucurbita maxima (Cucurbitaceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1029 = IRAN 2647C = CBS 136035); Rudsar, Korjehposht, on leaves of Tagetes patula (Asteraceae), Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17065F, CCTU 1141 = CBS 136144); Talesh, Khotbeh Sara, on leaves of Cucurbita pepo (Cucurbitaceae), Jun. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1136); Khotbeh Sara, on leaves of Vicia faba (Fabaceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17067F, CCTU 1160 = CBS 136149); Khotbeh Sara, on leaves of Calendula officinalis (Asteraceae), Jun. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17058F, CCTU 1140 = IRAN 2666C = CBS 136143); Talesh, Khalif Abad, on Ph. vulgaris, Jul. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1142 = IRAN 2667C); Talesh, Dulbin, on leaves of X. strumarium, Jul. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17069F, CCTU 1005 = IRAN 2644C); Dulbin, on leaves of Impatiens balsamina (Balsaminaceae), Jul. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17062F, CCTU 1006 = CBS 136030); Dulbin, on leaves of Pelargonium hortorum (Geraniaceae), Aug. 2011, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1010 = CBS 136032); Talesh, Jowkandan, on leaves of Po. deltoides, Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1118 = IRAN 2660C = CBS 136140); Talesh, Jowkandan, on leaves of Oenothera biennis (Onagraceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17051F, CCTU 1172); Talesh, on leaves of D. stramonium, Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17059F, CCTU 1143 = CBS 136145); Guilan Province: Astara, Chubar, on leaves of Ph. vulgaris, Jun. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1138 = IRAN 2664C, CCTU 1139 = IRAN 2665C); Rasht, Khomam, on leaves of X. strumarium, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17068F, CCTU 1156); Khomam, on leaves of Ab. theophrasti, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17052F, CCTU 1154 = CBS 136147); Langarud, Otaqvar, on leaves of X. strumarium, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1158 = IRAN 2668C); Lahijan, Rudboneh, on leaves of Ph. vulgaris, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1161 = IRAN 2669C); Guilan Province: Fuman, on leaves of Ph. vulgaris, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1155.11); Fuman, on leaves of Buxus microphylla (Buxaceae), Jul. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17057F, CCTU 1150); Fuman, on leaves of Amaranthus retroflexus, Sep. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17054F, CCTU 1021 = CBS 136033); Sowme`eh Sara, Dowgur, on leaves of Ph. vulgaris, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1175 = IRAN 2673C); Sowme`eh Sara, Bahambar, on leaves of R. sativus, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17063F, CCTU 1075); Kiashahr, on leaves of Anubias sp. (Araceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17056F, CCTU 1167 = CBS 136150); Masal, on leaves of U. dioica, Aug. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17066F, CCTU 1147). Zanjan Province: Tarom, Pasar, on leaves of X. strumarium, Sep. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17070F, CCTU 1048 = CBS 136029); Tarom, on leaves of Olea europaea (Oleaceae), Nov. 2011, M. Torbati (CCTU 1130 = CBS 136142). Ardabil Province: Moghan, on leaves of Silybum marianum (Astraceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17064F, CCTU 1212 = IRAN 2680C = CBS 136153); Moghan, on leaves of A. retroflexus, Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17053F, CCTU 1064); Moghan, on leaves of Amaranthus sp., Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17055F, CCTU 1084 = CBS 136156); Moghan, on leaves of Amaranthus blitoides, Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1072 = IRAN 2653C); Moghan, on leaves of Glycine max (Fabaceae), Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17060F, CCTU 1209 = CBS 136152, CCTU 1210 = IRAN 2679C, CCTU 1211); Moghan, on leaves of Hib. trionum, Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17061F, CCTU 1218 = IRAN 2682C). – South Africa: Limpopo Province: Messina, on Citrus sp. (Rutaceae), M.C. Pretorius (CBS 115482 = CPC 4410). Unknown, on Bromus sp. (Poaceae), M.D. Whitehead (CBS 143.51 = CPC 5055).

Cercospora sp. G complex

The 16 isolates previously recognised as Cercospora sp. G based on a five-gene phylogenetic tree (Groenewald, Bakhshi) cluster into two distinct phylogenetic clades based on the eight-gene phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1, part 1). One, four, one, two, two, two, three and two allele groups were detected for the ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, his3, tub2, rpb2 and gapdh sequences, respectively (Table 9).
Table 9.

Results from allele group designation per locus for Cercospora sp. G isolates in this study. Abbreviations of loci and collection accession numbers follow Table 1.

SpeciesCulture accession numberHostAllele group per locus
ITStef1actAcmdAhis3tub2rpb2gapdh
Cercospora sp. G clade 1CCTU 1015; CBS 136024; IRAN 2645CPlantago majorIVIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1197Bidens tripartitaIIVIIIIIII
CPC 5438Salvia viscosaIIIIIIIII_II
Cercospora sp. G clade 2CCTU 1002Celosia cristata IIIIIIII
CCTU 1020; CBS 136023Sorghum halepenseIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1030; CBS 136026Bidens tripartitaIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1046Plantago majorIIIIIIII
CCTU 1053; CBS 136027Cichorium intybusIIIIIIIIIII
CCTU 1054Amaranthus sp.IIIIIIII
CCTU 1058Helminthotheca echioidesIIIIIIII
CCTU 1079; CBS 136025Amaranthus retroflexus IIIIIIII
CCTU 1090Abutilon theophrastiIIIIIIII
CCTU 1116Plantago majorIIIIIIII
CCTU 1122Amaranthus sp.IIIIIIII
CCTU 1144; CBS 136130Cucurbita maximaIIIIIIIII
CBS 115518; CPC 5360Bidens frondosaIIVIIII_I

Cercospora sp. G Clade 1

Description: Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores aggregated in loose fascicles, arising from a moderately developed, intraepidermal and substomatal, brown stroma, to 35 μm diam; conidiophores pale brown to brown, 2–11-septate, straight to flexuous, simple, unbranched, uniform in width, (55–)110–150(–260) × 3.5–5 μm. Conidiogenous cells integrated, terminal, proliferating sympodially, mono- and multi-local; loci thickened, darkened, apical or formed on shoulders caused by sympodial proliferation, 1.5–2.5 μm diam. Conidia solitary, hyaline, subcylindrical, filiform to obclavate, straight to slightly curved, with truncate to obconically truncate base and subacute to subobtuse apices, (40–)75–100(–165) × 2–4 μm, 4–15-septate; hila distinctly thickened, darkened, refractive, 1–2 μm diam. Specimens examined: Iran: Guilan Province: Talesh, Dulbin, on leaves of Plantago major, Jul. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17085F, CCTU 1015 = IRAN 2645C = CBS 136024); Talesh, Kishonben, on leaves of Bidens tripartita (Asteraceae), Sept. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17084F, CCTU 1197). – New Zealand: Manurewa, on Salvia viscosa (Lamiaceae), C.F. Hill (CPC 5438) (as C. salviicola).

Cercospora sp. G Clade 2

Description: Mycelium internal. Caespituli amphigenous, brown. Conidiophores aggregated in loose to dense fascicles, arising from a weakly to well-developed, intraepidermal and substomatal, brown stroma, to 50 μm diam; conidiophores pale brown to brown, 3–11-septate, straight to flexuous, simple, unbranched, uniform in width, (30–)65–105(–240) × 2.5–5 μm. Conidiogenous cells integrated, terminal, proliferating sympodially, 10–30 × 2.5–5 μm, mono- or multi-local; loci distinctly thickened, darkened and somewhat refractive, apical or formed on shoulders caused by sympodial proliferation, 1.5–2.5 μm diam. Conidia solitary, subcylindrical, filiform to obclavate, straight to slightly curved, hyaline, (25–)75–110(–200) × 3.5–5.5 μm, (3–)8–15(–20)-septate, with subacute to subobtuse apices and truncate to obconically truncate bases; hila thickened, darkened, refractive, 1–2 μm diam. Notes: Isolates of Cercospora sp. G clustered in two distinct clades with high posterior probability in the eight-gene phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1, part 1). However, several isolates from diverse host families cluster in these two clades, to which different names can be applied. Moreover, there is also overlap between host ranges of the two clades. On the other hand, there is no morphological basis to divide them into two distinct species. Based on the gene loci screened in the present study, we were unable to resolve the taxonomy of these isolates and for now prefer to treat them as unresolved phylogenetic species. As with C. cf. flagellaris, in order to resolve their taxonomy, fresh collections from the same host and country as the original material need to be recollected and included in future studies. Specimens examined: Iran: Zanjan Province: Tarom, Pasar, on leaves of P. major, Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1046); Tarom, Pasar, on leaves of P. major, Nov. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17093F, CCTU 1116). Guilan Province: Talesh, Kishonben, on leaves of Bi. tripartita, Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17091F, CCTU 1030 = CBS 136026); Talesh, on leaves of Sorghum halepense (Poaceae), Sep. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17094F, CCTU 1020 = CBS 136023); Talesh, Dolbin, on leaves of Celosia cristata, Jul. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17092F, CCTU 1002). Ardabil Province: Moghan, on leaves of A. retroflexus, Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17088F, CCTU 1079 = CBS 136025); Moghan, on leaves of Amaranthus sp., Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17089F, CCTU 1054); Moghan, on leaves of Helminthotheca echioides (Asteraceae), Oct. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17086F, CCTU 1058); Moghan, on leaves of Ab. theophrasti, Oct. 2012, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17087F, CCTU 1090). Guilan Province: Talesh, Jamakuh, on leaves of Amaranthus sp., Nov. 2011, M. Bakhshi (IRAN 17090F, CCTU 1122); Masal, on leaves of Cu. maxima, Jul. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1144 = CBS 136130); Sowme`eh Sara, Dowgur, on leaves of Cichorium intybus (Asteraceae), Jun. 2012, M. Bakhshi (CCTU 1053 = CBS 136027). – New Zealand: Kopuku, on Bidens frondosa (Asteraceae), C.F. Hill (CBS 115518 = CPC 5360).

Kimura-2-parameter values

The Kimura-2-parameter distribution graphs (Fig. 9) visualise the inter- and intraspecific distances per locus corresponding to the barcoding gap (Hebert, Schoch). A useful barcoding locus should have no overlap between the inter- and intraspecific K2P distances and generally should have an average interspecific distance that is at least ten times as high as the average intraspecific distance of that locus (Quaedvlieg, Verkley, Stielow).
Fig. 9.

Frequency distributions of the Kimura-2-parameter distance (barcoding gap) for the eight loci.

The eight tested loci showed varying degrees of overlap in their K2P distribution between inter- and intraspecific variation graphs (Fig. 9). In this dataset, the average interspecific variation in ITS dataset was very low (0.002) compared to its intraspecific variation (0.0005), leading to a very low inter- to intraspecific variation ratios of 4:1 for this locus (Fig. 9, Table 4). This low ratio is far below the recommended 10:1 ratio, indicating a general lack of natural variation within the ITS locus, making it ill-suited for effective identification of the individual species of Cercospora. Due to the presence of introns in the seven protein coding loci, these genes provide much higher interspecific variation than the more conserved ITS locus. These protein coding genes had K2P inter- to intraspecific variation ratios of 127:1 for tef1, 76:1 for cmdA, 74:1 for rpb2, 71:1 for tub2, 44:1 for gapdh, 15:1 for actA and 13:1 for his3 (Table 4), making them all suitable for reliable species resolution of Cercospora spp. As the tef1, cmdA, rpb2, tub2 and gapdh have the largest barcoding gap, these loci should give the highest species resolution. However, all of these genes do have overlap between the inter- and intraspecific K2P distances (as is evident in the graphs of Fig. 9), suggesting that no one of them can serve as a single ideal barcoding locus for Cercospora spp.

Molecular phylogenetic resolution (clade recovery)

Based on the results of the individual gene tree assessments, no single gene region was found which could reliably distinguish all species, and occurrences of the same sequence(s) shared between multiple species were observed in each locus. The ITS phylogeny had low resolution and was only able to distinguish C. chenopodii, C. solani and C. sorghicola from the other included species. The remaining loci had different levels of resolution. The gapdh region was more effective and could resolve 61 % of 28 lineages, whereas his3, tub2, actA, tef1, cmdA and rpb2 had respectively 48, 43, 43, 39, 32 and 32 % clade recovery. Based on the gapdh region, we were able to distinguish 17 of the 28 species clades, including C. althaeina, C. armoraciae, C. bizzozeriana, C. chenopodii, C. conyzae-canadensis, C. cf. flagellaris clade 1, C. cf. flagellaris clade 2, C. cf. gossypii, C. pseudochenopodii, C. cf. richardiicola, C. rumicis, C. solani, C. sorghicola, Cercospora sp. G clade 1, Cercospora sp. G clade 2, C. violae and C. cf. zinnia; whereas, 13 species clades including C. althaeina, C. chenopodii, C. conyzae-canadensis, C. cylindracea, C. pseudochenopodii, C. cf. richardiicola, C. rumicis, C. solani, C. sorghicola, C. uwebrauniana, C. violae, C. zebrina and C. cf. zinniae were distinguished in the his3 phylogeny; 12 species clades including C. althaeina, C. chenopodii, C. conyzae-canadensis, C. cylindracea, C. iranica, C. pseudochenopodii, C. cf. richardiicola, C. solani, C. sorghicola, Cercospora sp. T, C. uwebrauniana and C. cf. zinniae were distinguished in the tub2 phylogeny; 12 species clades including C. althaeina, C. chenopodii, C. convolvulicola, C. conyzae-canadensis, C. cylindracea, C. pseudochenopodii, C. cf. richardiicola, C. solani, C. sorghicola, C. violae, C. zebrina and C. cf. zinniae were distinguished in the actA phylogeny; 11 species clades including C. bizzozeriana, C. chenopodii, C. conyzae-canadensis, C. pseudochenopodii, C. cf. richardiicola, C. rumicis, C. solani, C. sorghicola, C. uwebrauniana, C. violae and C. cf. zinniae were distinguished in the tef1 phylogeny; nine species clades including C. convolvulicola, C. conyzae-canadensis, C. iranica, C. cf. richardiicola, C. solani, C. sorghicola, Cercospora sp. T, C. violae and C. cf. zinniae were distinguished in the cmdA phylogeny; and nine species clades including C. bizzozeriana, C. chenopodii, C. conyzae-canadensis, C. pseudochenopodii, C. cf. richardiicola, C. solani, C. sorghicola, C. zebrina and C. cf. zinniae were distinguished in the rpb2 phylogeny. Therefore, the gapdh phylogeny displayed a high resolution and had the highest clade recovery and was responsible for resolving most of the cryptic taxa within C. apii, C. armoraciae, C. beticola, Cercospora sp. G, and C. cf. flagellaris.

DISCUSSION

In this study, we re-assessed species of the genus Cercospora using a combined approach based on the evaluation of an eight-gene molecular DNA sequence dataset, host, and morphological data (in those cases where morphological variation was present). In recent years, the rapid advance of molecular techniques has brought about the possibility of a more precise species delimitation and a better consideration of the evolution of fungi. It is well-known that many fungal taxa based on morphology or on sequence data of the commonly used fungal barcode ITS region of the nrDNA operon (Schoch) hide cryptic species complexes when molecular data from multiple gene regions are considered (Lombard , Cabral , Crous , Groenewald , Quaedvlieg , Woudenberg ). This is most likely an underestimation for many fungal taxa. For instance, the Colletotrichum acutatum species complex, once considered to be a single species, has been shown to include at least 31 cryptic taxa (Damm). In the present study, phylogenetic inference also revealed cryptic species complexes that could not be distinguished based on geography, host association, morphology, or ITS sequence data alone. Before this study, Groenewald and Bakhshi inferred phylogenies of Cercospora based on sequence data of five genomic loci (ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA and his3). Their results showed the importance of all five loci in a combined analysis for Cercospora taxonomy (Groenewald , Bakhshi ). Despite this, the sequences of these five loci were too conserved in Cercospora, and it was not possible to identify a single gene as the best DNA barcoding locus. In addition, several species complexes remained unresolved (Groenewald , Bakhshi ). To overcome these deficiencies, three more potential candidate gene regions, tub2, rpb2, and gapdh, were amplified and sequenced for Cercospora isolates previously investigated by Bakhshi and some related reference isolates investigated by Groenewald . Phylogenetic performance of the eight loci (ITS, tef1, actA, cmdA, his3, tub2, rpb2 and gapdh) were assessed based on the inter-/intraspecific distance ratio and clade recovery. With the final classification presented here, none of the genes we analysed provides an effective barcode on its own across the entire genus. However, gapdh emerged as a strong candidate for improved species delimitation in Cercospora and provides better insight, especially into species complexes. Groenewald evaluated this gene in the Cercospora sp. Q species complex and their results also showed high variation in this gene. The performance of gapdh in species delimitation has been also reported in other fungal groups, including Alternaria (Woudenberg) and the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex (Weir). Additionally, when using the gapdh gene, cmdA sequences are crucial to distinguish some species of Cercospora. We therefore recommend gapdh as the gene for species delimitation in Cercospora. However, it needs to be combined with cmdA, tef1 and tub2 to obtain a robust species identification. In addition, data from the ITS, actA, rpb2, and his3, have been useful, and were at times necessary, to provide clear evidence of multi-gene phylogenetic concordance to separate cryptic species. The amplification of gapdh with the available primers was not, however, easy, and we need to design new primer sets for gapdh in Cercospora derived from the sequences generated. On the other hand, lack of ex-type or reliable sequences in public databases is a serious problem in the accurate molecular identification of Cercospora species, and it is essential to also amplify at least the gapdh and tub2 genes for all of the reference isolates used by Groenewald in the future. One of the main goals of this project was to generate an eight-gene DNA dataset for species of the genus Cercospora. In this regard, one of the achievements of this research was that the sequencing of additional loci revealed new clades within some taxa which were found to actually represented a species complex (in the eight-gene phylogenetic tree) rather than a single species, while the five-gene phylogenetic tree (Bakhshi ) was unable to resolve them. The phylogenetic tree based on the combined eight-gene dataset resolved at least four, three, two, two and two well-supported clades respectively within the species complexes C. cf. flagellaris, C. apii, C. beticola, C. armoraciae, and Cercospora sp. G. Some of the species revealed by the eight-gene phylogeny in this study can be distinguished based on their morphology or host range. For example, as explained in the notes for C. uwebrauniana, characteristics of the conidia in this species, which clustered in the C. apii complex based on the five-gene phylogenetic tree (see Bakhshi ), are clearly distinguishable from those of C. apii. However, some species cannot be separated using morphological characters. For instance, the C. cf. flagellaris species complex included at least three distinct clades and there is considerable overlap between morphological features and host ranges of the clades 1, 2, and 3. In addition, pursuant to high levels of intraspecific variation in these three clades, the distinction between these clades is only possible based on molecular data. It is conceivable that some members of these three clades represent new species, yet to be described. This is also true for the Cercospora sp. G species complex. Another problem arises because many morphological features change according to the host plant and different weather conditions. Such differences in morphological characters under different conditions have also been seen in other groups of fungi, such as Colletotrichum species (Weir ). Because we do not yet have access to sequence data of most species of the Cercospora, we have chosen to consider these clades as different clades of C. cf. flagellaris and Cercospora sp. G rather than introduce new species names. Recent molecular studies on the Cercospora species associated with Cercospora leaf blight and purple seed stain on soybean, have revealed several Cercospora species, including C. cf. flagellaris as one of the most important agents (Bakhshi , Soares , Albu ). In this regard, Guillin studied the genetic entanglement between Cercospora species infecting soybean and provided evidence that revealed interspecific gene flow played a significant role in the evolutionary dynamics of Cercospora species. Taking into consideration the shared host range that exists between different clades of C. cf. flagellaris, our data also provide more support for this hypothesis. Furthermore, we found that all of the isolates of C. apii obtained from Plantago lanceolata from different localities clustered in clade 2 of this species in the eight-gene phylogenetic tree. Additionally, isolates of C. beticola and C. apii which intermix with P. lanceolata, had a common allele in gapdh. Thus, it seems that the gapdh gene might play a role in pathogenicity or host range, and has the potential to reflect this phylogenetically; however, that remains to be tested. This study emphasises the complex nature of the evolutionary pathways that have been traversed within the genus Cercospora. Speciation has taken place much more prolifically than had previously been suspected in this genus, and it seems likely that the C. apii sensu Crous & Braun (2003) species complex is still rapidly evolving. The emergence of new species is doubtlessly encouraged by the opportunities for mixing gene pools that are provided by modern global agricultural practices, and indiscriminate use of fungicides combined with imperfect phytosanitary regulation. The present study provides the first eight-gene phylogenetic overview of Cercospora species. We hope that this dataset will provide a stable platform to accommodate the numerous undescribed species that still await description, and the recollection and epitypification of already named species. Moreover, it seems that Cercospora should still be subjected to a more detailed analysis based on yet additional gene loci to provide a more vigorous phylogenetic basis for species delimitation.
  39 in total

1.  Phylogenetic relationships among ascomycetes: evidence from an RNA polymerse II subunit.

Authors:  Y J Liu; S Whelen; B D Hall
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 16.240

2.  Biological identifications through DNA barcodes.

Authors:  Paul D N Hebert; Alina Cywinska; Shelley L Ball; Jeremy R deWaard
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2003-02-07       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Host range of Cercospora apii and C. beticola and description of C. apiicola, a novel species from celery.

Authors:  Marizeth Groenewald; Johannes Z Groenewald; Uwe Braun; Pedro W Crous
Journal:  Mycologia       Date:  2006 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.696

4.  Unravelling Mycosphaerella: do you believe in genera?

Authors:  P W Crous; B A Summerell; A J Carnegie; M J Wingfield; G C Hunter; T I Burgess; V Andjic; P A Barber; J Z Groenewald
Journal:  Persoonia       Date:  2009-10-29       Impact factor: 11.051

5.  Phylogenetic lineages in the Capnodiales.

Authors:  P W Crous; C L Schoch; K D Hyde; A R Wood; C Gueidan; G S de Hoog; J Z Groenewald
Journal:  Stud Mycol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 16.097

6.  Species concepts in Calonectria (Cylindrocladium).

Authors:  L Lombard; P W Crous; B D Wingfield; M J Wingfield
Journal:  Stud Mycol       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 16.097

7.  Phylogenetic analysis of cercospora and mycosphaerella based on the internal transcribed spacer region of ribosomal DNA.

Authors:  S B Goodwin; L D Dunkle; V L Zismann
Journal:  Phytopathology       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 4.025

8.  Distinct Species Exist Within the Cercospora apii Morphotype.

Authors:  Marizeth Groenewald; Johannes Z Groenewald; Pedro W Crous
Journal:  Phytopathology       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.025

9.  Zymoseptoria gen. nov.: a new genus to accommodate Septoria-like species occurring on graminicolous hosts.

Authors:  W Quaedvlieg; G H J Kema; J Z Groenewald; G J M Verkley; S Seifbarghi; M Razavi; A Mirzadi Gohari; R Mehrabi; P W Crous
Journal:  Persoonia       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 11.051

10.  Phylogenetic reassessment of Mycosphaerella spp. and their anamorphs occurring on Eucalyptus. II.

Authors:  Pedro W Crous; Michael J Wingfield; J Pedro Mansilla; Acelino C Alfenas; Johannes Z Groenewald
Journal:  Stud Mycol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 16.097

View more
  7 in total

1.  Development of a Novel Diagnostic Tool for Cercospora Species Based on BOX-PCR System.

Authors:  Mounes Bakhshi; Leila Ebrahimi; Rasoul Zare; Mahdi Arzanlou; Milad Kermanian
Journal:  Curr Microbiol       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 2.343

2.  Genera of phytopathogenic fungi: GOPHY 4.

Authors:  Q Chen; M Bakhshi; Y Balci; K D Broders; R Cheewangkoon; S F Chen; X L Fan; D Gramaje; F Halleen; M Horta Jung; N Jiang; T Jung; T Májek; S Marincowitz; I Milenković; L Mostert; C Nakashima; I Nurul Faziha; M Pan; M Raza; B Scanu; C F J Spies; L Suhaizan; H Suzuki; C M Tian; M Tomšovský; J R Úrbez-Torres; W Wang; B D Wingfield; M J Wingfield; Q Yang; X Yang; R Zare; P Zhao; J Z Groenewald; L Cai; P W Crous
Journal:  Stud Mycol       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 25.731

3.  Unravelling unexplored diversity of cercosporoid fungi (Mycosphaerellaceae, Mycosphaerellales, Ascomycota) in tropical Africa.

Authors:  Yalemwork Meswaet; Ralph Mangelsdorff; Nourou S Yorou; Meike Piepenbring
Journal:  MycoKeys       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 2.984

4.  Draft genome sequence data of Cercospora kikuchii, a causal agent of Cercospora leaf blight and purple seed stain of soybeans.

Authors:  Francisco J Sautua; Sergio A Gonzalez; Vinson P Doyle; Marcelo F Berretta; Manuela Gordó; Mercedes M Scandiani; Maximo L Rivarola; Paula Fernandez; Marcelo A Carmona
Journal:  Data Brief       Date:  2019-10-21

5.  Occurrence of Cercospora Leaf Spot Caused by Cercospora cf. flagellaris on Melon in Korea.

Authors:  Mi-Jeong Park; Chang-Gi Back; Jong-Han Park
Journal:  Mycobiology       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 1.858

Review 6.  Phytopathogenic Cercosporoid Fungi-From Taxonomy to Modern Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

Authors:  Urszula Świderska-Burek; Margaret E Daub; Elizabeth Thomas; Magdalena Jaszek; Anna Pawlik; Grzegorz Janusz
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-11-13       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 7.  Current Insight into Traditional and Modern Methods in Fungal Diversity Estimates.

Authors:  Ajay Kumar Gautam; Rajnish Kumar Verma; Shubhi Avasthi; Yogita Bohra; Bandarupalli Devadatha; Mekala Niranjan; Nakarin Suwannarach
Journal:  J Fungi (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-24
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.