Asha J Dissanayake1, Ya-Ya Chen2,3, Jian-Kui Jack Liu1. 1. Fungal Research Laboratory, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 611731, China. 2. Institute of Crop Germplasm Resources, Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guiyang 550006, China. 3. Guizhou Key Laboratory of Agricultural Biotechnology, Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guiyang 550006, China.
Abstract
Though several Diaporthe species have been reported in China, little is known about the species associated with nature reserves in Guizhou province. During a survey of fungi in six nature reserves in Guizhou province of China, thirty-one Diaporthe isolates were collected from different woody hosts. Based on morphology, culture characteristics and molecular phylogenetic analysis, these isolates were characterized and identified. Phylogenetic analysis of internal transcribed spacer region (ITS), combined with translation elongation factor 1-alpha (tef), β-tubulin (tub), calmodulin (cal) and histone H3 (his) gene regions identified five known Diaporthe species and seven distinct lineages representing novel Diaporthe species. The details of five known species: Diaporthe cercidis, D. cinnamomi, D. conica, D. nobilis and D. sackstonii are given and the seven new species D. constrictospora, D. ellipsospora, D. guttulata, D. irregularis, D. lenispora, D. minima, and D. minusculata are introduced with detailed descriptions and illustrations. This study revealed a high diversity of previously undescribed Diaporthe species associated with woody hosts in various nature reserves of Guizhou province, indicating that there is a potential of Diaporthe species remains to be discovered in this unique landform (Karst formations) in China. Interestingly, the five known Diaporthe species have been reported as pathogens of various hosts, and this could indicate that those newly introduced species in this study could be potentially pathogenic pending further studies to confirm.
Though several Diaporthe species have been reported in China, little is known about the species associated with nature reserves in Guizhou province. During a survey of fungi in six nature reserves in Guizhou province of China, thirty-one Diaporthe isolates were collected from different woody hosts. Based on morphology, culture characteristics and molecular phylogenetic analysis, these isolates were characterized and identified. Phylogenetic analysis of internal transcribed spacer region (ITS), combined with translation elongation factor 1-alpha (tef), β-tubulin (tub), calmodulin (cal) and histone H3 (his) gene regions identified five known Diaporthe species and seven distinct lineages representing novel Diaporthe species. The details of five known species: Diaporthe cercidis, D. cinnamomi, D. conica, D. nobilis and D. sackstonii are given and the seven new species D. constrictospora, D. ellipsospora, D. guttulata, D. irregularis, D. lenispora, D. minima, and D. minusculata are introduced with detailed descriptions and illustrations. This study revealed a high diversity of previously undescribed Diaporthe species associated with woody hosts in various nature reserves of Guizhou province, indicating that there is a potential of Diaporthe species remains to be discovered in this unique landform (Karst formations) in China. Interestingly, the five known Diaporthe species have been reported as pathogens of various hosts, and this could indicate that those newly introduced species in this study could be potentially pathogenic pending further studies to confirm.
Entities:
Keywords:
Diaporthaceae; asexual morph; phylogeny; seven new taxa; taxonomy
Diaporthe Nitschke (including the Phomopsis asexual morph) belongs to family Diaporthaceae, order Diaporthales and class Sordariomycetes [1,2,3] and its species are found worldwide on a diverse range of host plants as endophytes, pathogens and saprobes [4]. Rossman et al. [5] proposed the name Diaporthe over Phomopsis, as both names are well known amongst plant pathologists and subsequent studies have adopted the latter generic name [4,6,7,8,9,10]. More than 1100 epithets for Diaporthe and 986 for Phomopsis are listed in Index Fungorum (2020) (http://www.indexfungorum.org/, accessed August 2020) with names often based on host association. Many Diaporthe species that are morphologically similar have proven to be genetically distinct [11,12], and several isolates formerly identified based on their hosts were shown to represent different taxa [1]. Diaporthe represents a highly complex genus containing numerous cryptic species. In recent studies, Diaporthe species have been distinguished mainly by their molecular phylogenies, and the best five gene regions to conduct a multi-gene phylogenetic analysis are ITS, tef, tub, cal and his [4,13,14,15,16,17,18,19].A nature reserve is a protected area of importance for flora, fauna or landscapes of geological or other special interest, which is reserved and managed for purposes of conservation and to provide special opportunities for study or research [20]. The Karst region of Guizhou province is comprised of abundant nature reserves that provide a wide range of ecosystem services such as water supply, soil fertility, ecotourism, recreation, biodiversity conservation and carbon sequestration [20]. However, there are few scientific evaluations made for fungi in national nature reserves and national forest parks in Guizhou province, China [21,22]. During the investigation carried out in 2017 to 2019, several isolates of Diaporthe species were collected from six nature reserves in Guizhou province including Fanjing mountain, Guiyang Huaxi wetland park, Guiyang Xiaochehe wetland park, Maolan nature reserve, Suiyang broad water nature reserve and Xingyi Wanfenglin. Fungi isolated from forest trees in China were recorded in old fungal literature, however, most of them lack living culture and molecular data [23,24]. Although several species of Diaporthe have been previously recorded from Guizhou province with details of culture and molecular data [25,26], little is known to associate these with hosts in nature reserves. Thus, the aim of this study is to describe and illustrate Diaporthe taxa from nature reserves in the Karst region of Guizhou province based on morphological characters and phylogenies derived from combined ITS, tef, tub, cal and his gene sequences.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Isolation of Fungal Material, Morphology and Culture Characteristics
From 2017 to 2019, thirty-one Diaporthe specimens were collected in field surveys of decaying saprobic woody hosts in different nature reserves including Fanjing mountain, Guiyang Huaxi wetland park, Guiyang Xiaochehe wetland park, Maolan nature reserve, Suiyang broad water nature reserve and Xingyi Wanfenglin in Karst region of Guizhou province (Table 1). Collected samples were taken to the laboratory for isolation and photographed, documented and then kept at 4 °C for further study.
Table 1
Diaporthe species studied in this study (Figure 1). Details of ex-type species introduced in this study are in bold.
Species
Isolate
Locality
ITS
tef
tub
cal
his
Diaporthe cercidis
GZCC 19-0079
Guiyang Xiaochehe Wetland Park
MT385942
MT424677
MT424698
MW022466
MW022482
D. cercidis
GZCC 19-0124
Maolan Nature Reserve
MT385943
MT424678
MT424699
MW022467
MW022483
D. cercidis
GZCC 19-0217
Xingyi Wanfenglin
MT385944
MT424679
MT424700
MW022468
MW022484
D. cinnamomi
GZCC 19-0274
Maolan Nature Reserve
MT385945
MT424680
N/A
MT424717
MW022485
D. conica
GZCC 19-0242
Maolan NatureReserve
MT385946
MT424681
MT424701
MW022469
MW022486
D. constrictospora
CGMCC 3.20096
Maolan Nature Reserve
MT385947
MT424682
MT424702
MT424718
MW022487
D. constrictospora
GZCC 19-0065
Guiyang Huaxi Wetland Park
MT385948
MT424683
MT424703
MT424719
N/A
D. ellipsospora
CGMCC 3.20099
Xingyi Wanfenglin
MT385949
MT424684
MT424704
MT424720
MW022488
D. ellipsospora
GZCC 19-0342
Xingyi Wanfenglin
MT797176
MT793019
MT793030
MT786247
MW022489
D. ellipsospora
GZCC 19-0357
Maolan Nature Reserve
MT797177
MT793020
MT793031
MT786248
MW022490
D. guttulata
CGMCC 3.20100
Maolan Nature Reserve
MT385950
MT424685
MT424705
MW022470
MW022491
D. guttulata
GZCC 19-0371
Suiyang water nature reserve
MT797178
MT793021
MT793032
MW022471
MW022492
D. irregularis
CGMCC 3.20092
Suiyang water nature reserve
MT385951
MT424686
MT424706
MT424721
N/A
D. irregularis
GZCC 19-0344
Suiyang water nature reserve
MT797179
MT793022
MT793033
MT786249
N/A
D. irregularis
GZCC 19-0362
Suiyang water nature reserve
MT797180
MT793023
MT793034
MT786250
N/A
D. irregularis
GZCC 19-0352
Suiyang water nature reserve
MT797181
MT793024
MT793035
MT786251
N/A
D. lenispora
CGMCC 3.20101
Suiyang water nature reserve
MT385952
MT424687
MT424707
MW022472
MW022493
D. lenispora
GZCC 19-0343
Xingyi Wanfenglin
MT797182
MT793025
MT793036
MW022473
MW022494
D. lenispora
GZCC 19-0351
Xingyi Wanfenglin
MT797183
MT793026
MT793037
MW022474
MW022495
D. minima
CGMCC 3.20097
Guiyang Huaxi Wetland Park
MT385953
MT424688
MT424708
MT424722
MW022496
D. minima
GZCC 19-0070
Guiyang Huaxi Wetland Park
MT385954
MT424689
MT424709
MT424723
MW022497
D. minima
GZCC 19-0061
Guiyang Huaxi Wetland Park
MT385955
MT424690
MT424710
MT424724
MW022498
D. minima
GZCC 19-0207
Guiyang Huaxi Wetland Park
MT385956
MT424691
MT424711
MT424725
N/A
D. minusculata
CGMCC 3.20098
Xingyi Wanfenglin
MT385957
MT424692
MT424712
MW022475
MW022499
D. minusculata
GZCC 19-0345
Suiyang water nature reserve
MT797184
MT793027
MT793038
MW022476
MW022500
D. minusculata
GZCC 19-0366
Suiyang water nature reserve
MT797185
MT793028
MT793039
MW022477
MW022501
D. minusculata
GZCC 19-0372
Xingyi Wanfenglin
MT797186
MT793029
MT793040
MW022478
MW022502
D. nobilis
GZCC 19-0213
Fanjing mountain
MT385958
MT424693
MT424713
MT424726
MW022503
D. nobilis
GZCC 19-0220
Xingyi Wanfenglin
MT385959
MT424694
MT424714
MW022479
MW022504
D. nobilis
GZCC 19-0214
Fanjing mountain
MT385960
MT424695
MT424715
MW022480
MW022505
D. sackstonii
GZCC 19-0129
Maolan Nature Reserve
MT385962
MT424697
MT424716
MT424727
MW022507
Species identification was primarily based on morphological observation of the conidiomata or ascomata from host materials and micromorphology supplemented by culture characteristics. Morphological observations were made using a Motic SMZ (Stereoscopic Zoom Microscope) 168 series stereomicroscope and photographed by a Nikon E80i microscope-camera system. Measurements were made with the Tarosoft (R) Image FrameWork [27] and images used for figures were processed with Adobe Photoshop CS v. 5. Single spore isolations were prepared following the method of Chomnunti et al. [28]. Spore germination on 2% water agar (WA) was examined after 24 h and germinating spores were transferred to potato dextrose agar (PDA) media. Cultures were incubated at 25 °C in the dark and colony morphology and conidial characteristics were examined for a total of 31 isolates. Colony color was determined according to Rayner [29] after 5 d to 10 d on PDA at 25 °C in the dark. More than 20 conidiomata/ascomata, 30 asci, and 50 conidia/ascospores were measured to calculate the mean size/length and respective standard deviations (SD). Conidial shape, color and guttulation were also recorded.Herbarium specimens were deposited at the Herbarium of Cryptogams, Kunming Institute of Botany Academia Sinica (KUN-HKAS), Kunming, China and herbaria of Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Sciences (GZAAS), Guiyang, China. The living cultures were deposited in the China General Microbiological Culture Collection Center (CGMCC) in Beijing, China and Guizhou Culture Collection (GZCC) in Guiyang, China and (Table 1).
2.2. Molecular Based Amplification
Fungal mycelium of 7 d old cultures was scraped for the extraction of genomic DNA using Biospin Fungus Genomic DNA Extraction Kit (BioFlux®) following the manufacturer’s protocol (Hangzhou, China). For the identification of Diaporthe specimens, the internal transcribed spacer region (ITS) was sequenced for all isolates and BLAST search (basic local alignment search tool) at GenBank was used to reveal the closest matching taxa. Besides ITS gene sequence data, translation elongation factor 1-alpha (tef), β-tubulin (tub), calmodulin (cal) and histone H3 (his) gene regions were also employed to support the species identification. The ITS region was amplified using universal primers ITS1 and ITS4 [30]. The target region of the tef gene was amplified using primer pairs EF-728F and EF-986R [31]. A portion of the tub gene was amplified using the primers BT2a and BT2b [32], while the primer pair CAL228F and CAL737R was used to amplify the cal gene region [31]. The primers CYLH3F [33] and H3-1b [32] were used to amplify part of the his gene. The PCR reactions were accomplished in a Bio Rad C1000 thermal cycler. The amplification procedure was performed in a 50 μL reaction volume containing 5–10 ng DNA, 0.8 units Taq polymerase, 1X PCR buffer, 0.2 mM dNTP, 0.3 μm of each primer with 1.5 mM MgCl2. Following the PCR amplification, products were visualized on 1% agarose gel under UV light using a Gel DocTM XR Molecular Imager following ethidium bromide staining. PCR products were purified using minicolumns, purification resin and buffer according to the manufacturer’s protocols (Amersham product code: 27–9602–01). Sequence analysis was carried out by Shanghai Sangon Biological Engineering Technology and Services Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China).
2.3. Sequence Alignment and Phylogenetic Analyses
To assure the sequence quality, the resulting sequence chromatograms were checked using BioEdit v.5 [34]. An overview phylogenetic tree (provided as a Supplementary Figure S1) for the genus Diaporthe was constructed from ITS sequence data of all type/ex-type/neo-type Diaporthe species from previous studies [10,13,14,15,33,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45]. Considering this ITS tree, another phylogenetic analysis was conducted including all the isolates obtained in this study (Table 1) together with several closely associated Diaporthe species (Table 2). Diaporthella corylina (CBS 121124) was selected as the outgroup taxon. The sequences were retrieved from GenBank and aligned with the sequences obtained in this study using MAFFT [46] (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/msa/mafft/) and manually edited with BioEdit [34] for a maximum alignment. Phylogenetic analysis was performed by using PAUP (Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony) v.4.0b10 for maximum parsimony (MP) method [47], RAxML for maximum likelihood (ML) method [48] and MrBayes v.3.1.2 for Bayesian Inference (BI) method [49]. The best model of evolution was determined by MrModeltest v. 2.3 [50]. Maximum likelihood analyses was accomplished using RAxML GUI v. 0.9b2 [51] with 1000 non-parametric bootstrapping iterations, using the general time-reversible model (GTR) with a discrete gamma distribution. The best scoring trees were chosen with final likelihood values.
Table 2
GenBank accession numbers of species included in the phylogenetic analysis (Figure 1). Ex-type/ex-epitype/ex-isotype/ex-neotype isolates are in bold.
Species Name
Isolate Number
ITS
tub
tef
cal
his
Reference
Diaporthella corylina
CBS 121124
KC343004
KC343972
KC343730
KC343246
KC343488
Vasilyeva et al. [54]
Diaporthe acaciarum
CBS 138862
KP004460
KP004509
N/A
N/A
KP004504
Crous et al. [55]
Diaporthe acuta
PSCG 047
MK626957
MK691225
MK654802
MK691125
MK726161
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe acuta
PSCG 046
MK626958
MK691224
MK654803
MK691124
MK726162
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe albosinensis
CFCC 53066
MK432659
MK578059
MK578133
MK442979
MK443004
Yang et al. [14]
Diaporthe albosinensis
CFCC 53067
MK432660
MK578060
MK578134
MK442980
MK443005
Yang et al. [14]
Diaporthe ampelina
CBS 114016
AF230751
JX275452
AY745056
AY230751
N/A
Mostert et al. [56]
Diaporthe ampelina
CBS 267.80
KC343018
KC343986
KC343744
KC343260
KC343502
Mostert et al. [56]
Diaporthe angelicae
CBS 111592
KC343027
KC343995
KC343753
KC343269
KC343511
Castlebury et al. [57]
Diaporthe angelicae
CBS 100871
KC343025
KC343993
KC343751
KC343267
KC343509
Castlebury et al. [57]
Diaporthe aquatica
IFRDCC 3015
JQ797438
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Hu et al. [58]
Diaporthe aquatica
IFRDCC 3051
JQ797437
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Hu et al. [58]
Diaporthe araucanorum
CBS 145285
MN509711
MN509722
MN509733
N/A
N/A
Zapata et al. [45]
Diaporthe araucanorum
CBS 145284
MN509710
MN509721
MN509732
N/A
N/A
Zapata et al. [45]
Diaporthe asheicola
CBS 136967
KJ160562
KJ160518
KJ160594
KJ160542
N/A
Lombard et al. [59]
Diaporthe asheicola
CBS 136968
KJ160563
KJ160519
KJ160595
KJ160543
N/A
Lombard et al. [59]
Diaporthe aspalathi
CBS 117168
KC343035
KC344003
KC343761
KC343277
KC343519
van Rensburg et al. [11]
Diaporthe aspalathi
CBS 117169
KC343036
KC344004
KC343762
KC343278
KC343520
van Rensburg et al. [11]
Diaporthe australafricana
CBS 111886
KC343038
KC344006
KC343764
KC343280
KC343522
Mostert et al. [56]
Diaporthe australafricana
CBS 113487
KC343039
KC344007
KC343765
KC343281
KC343523
Mostert et al. [56]
Diaporthe biconispora
ZJUD61
KJ490596
KJ490417
KJ490475
N/A
KJ490538
Huang et al. [60]
Diaporthe biconispora
ZJUD62
KJ490597
KJ490418
KJ490476
KJ490539
KJ490539
Huang et al. [60]
Diaporthe bohemiae
CBS 143347
MG281015
MG281188
MG281536
MG281710
MG281361
Guarnaccia et al. [19]
Diaporthe caryae
CFCC 52563
MH121498
MH121580
MH121540
MH121422
MH121458
Yang et al. [13]
Diaporthe caryae
CFCC 52564
MH121499
MH121581
MH121541
MH121423
MH121459
Yang et al. [13]
Diaporthe cercidis
CFCC 52565
MH121500
MH121582
MH121542
MH121424
MH121460
Yang et al. [13]
Diaporthe cercidis
CFCC 52566
MH121501
MH121583
MH121543
MH121425
MH121461
Yang et al. [13]
Diaporthe chongqingensis
PSCG 435
MK626916
MK691321
MK654866
MK691209
MK726257
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe chongqingensis
PSCG 436
MK626917
MK691322
MK654867
MK691208
MK726256
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe cichorii
MFLUCC 17-1023
KY964220
KY964104
KY964176
KY964133
N/A
Dissanayake et al. [9]
Diaporthe cinnamomi
CFCC 52569
MH121504
MH121586
MH121546
N/A
MH121464
Yang et al. [13]
Diaporthe cinnamomi
CFCC 52570
MH121505
MH121587
MH121547
N/A
MH121465
Yang et al. [13]
Diaporthe cissampeli
CPC 27302
KX228273
KX228384
N/A
N/A
KX228366
Crous et al. [61]
Diaporthe citri
CBS 135422
KC843311
KC843187
KC843071
KC843157
MF418281
Udayanga et al. [6]
Diaporthe citri
AR 4469
KC843321
KC843197
KC843081
KC843167
N/A
Udayanga et al. [6]
Diaporthe conica
CFCC 52571
MH121506
MH121588
MH121548
MH121428
MH121466
Yang et al. [13]
Diaporthe conica
CFCC 52572
MH121507
MH121589
MH121549
MH121429
MH121467
Yang et al. [13]
Diaporthe coryli
CFCC 53083
MK432661
MK578061
MK578135
MK442981
MK443006
Yang et al. [14]
Diaporthe coryli
CFCC 53084
MK432662
MK578062
MK578136
MK442982
MK443007
Yang et al. [14]
Diaporthe discoidispora
ZJUD89
KJ490624
KJ490445
KJ490503
N/A
KJ490566
Huang et al. [60]
Diaporthe discoidispora
ZJUD87
KJ490622
KJ490443
KJ490501
N/A
KJ490564
Huang et al. [60]
Diaporthe eres
AR 5193
KJ210529
KJ420799
KJ210550
KJ434999
KJ420850
Udayanga et al. [7]
Diaporthe eres
CBS 138598
KJ210521
KJ420787
KJ210545
KJ435027
KJ420837
Udayanga et al. [7]
Diaporthe foikelawen
CBS 145289
MN509714
MN509725
MN509736
N/A
N/A
Zapata et al. [45]
Diaporthe foikelawen
CBS 145287
MN509713
MN509724
MN509735
N/A
N/A
Zapata et al. [45]
Diaporthe fulvicolor
PSCG 051
MK626859
MK691236
MK654806
MK691132
MK726163
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe fulvicolor
PSCG 057
MK626858
MK691233
MK654810
MK691131
MK726164
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe gulyae
BRIP 53158
JF431284
KJ197271
N645799
N/A
N/A
Thompson et al. [62]
Diaporthe gulyae
BRIP 54025
JF431299
KJ197272
JN645803
N/A
N/A
Thompson et al. [62]
Diaporthe helicis
AR 5211
KJ210538
KJ420828
KJ210559
KJ435043
KJ420875
Udayanga et al. [7]
Diaporthe hungariae
CBS 143353
MG281126
MG281299
MG281647
MG281823
MG281474
Guarnaccia et al. [19]
Diaporthe hungariae
CBS 143354
MG281127
MG281300
MG281648
MG281824
MG281475
Guarnaccia et al. [19]
Diaporthe juglandicola
CFCC 51134
KU985101
KX024634
KX024628
KX024616
KX024622
Yang et al. [18]
Diaporthe mahothocarpus
CGMCC 3.15181
KC153096
KF576312
KC153087
N/A
N/A
Gao et al. [63]
Diaporthe mahothocarpus
CGMCC 3.15182
KC153097
N/A
KC153088
N/A
N/A
Gao et al. [63]
Diaporthe malorum
CAA734
KY435638
KY435668
KY435627
KY435658
KY435648
Santos et al. [16]
Diaporthe millettia
GUCC 9167
MK398674
MK502089
MK480609
MK502086
N/A
Long et al. [26]
Diaporthe nobilis
CBS 587.79
KC343153
KC344121
KC343879
KC343395
KC343637
Li et al. [25]
Diaporthe novem
CBS 127270
KC343155
KC344123
KC343881
KC343397
KC343640
Santos et al. [64]
Diaporthe novem
CBS 127271
KC343157
KC344125
KC343883
KC343399
KC343641
Santos et al. [64]
Diaporthe oraccinii
LC 3166
KP267863
KP293443
KP267937
N/A
KP293517
Gao et al. [63]
Diaporthe osmanthusis
GUCC 9165
MK398675
MK502090
MK480610
MK502087
N/A
Long et al. [26]
Diaporthe paranensis
CBS 133184
KC343171
KC344139
KC343897
KC343413
KC343655
Gomes et al. [4]
Diaporthe parvae
PSCG 034
MK626919
MK691248
MK654858
N/A
MK726210
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe parvae
PSCG 035
MK626920
MK691249
MK654859
MK691169
MK726211
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe pascoei
BRIP 54847
JX862532
KF170924
JX862538
N/A
N/A
Tan et al. [65]
Diaporthe passiflorae
CPC 19183
JX069860
KY435674
KY435633
KY435664
KY435654
Crous et al. [66]
Diaporthe patagonica
CBS 145291
MN509717
MN509728
MN509739
N/A
N/A
Zapata et al. [45]
Diaporthe patagonica
CBS 145755
MN509718
MN509729
MN509740
N/A
N/A
Zapata et al. [45]
Diaporthe perjuncta
CBS 109745
KC343172
KC344140
KC343898
KC343414
KC343656
van Niekerk et al. [67]
Diaporthe phragmitis
CBS 138897
KP004445
KP004507
N/A
N/A
KP004503
Crous et al. [55]
Diaporthe psoraleae
CBS 136412
KF777158
KF777251
KF777245
N/A
N/A
Crous et al. [68]
Diaporthe psoraleae-pinnatae
CBS 136413
KF777159
KF777252
N/A
N/A
N/A
Crous et al. [68]
Diaporthe pterocarpicola
MFLUCC 10-0580a
JQ619887
JX275441
JX275403
JX197433
N/A
Udayanga et al. [69]
Diaporthe pterocarpicola
MFLUCC 10-0580b
JQ619887
JX275441
JX275403
JX197433
N/A
Udayanga et al. [69]
Diaporthe pterocarpi
MFLUCC 10-0571
JX197433
JX275460
JX275416
JX197451
N/A
Udayanga et al. [69]
Diaporthe pterocarpi
MFLUCC 10-0575
JQ619901
JX275462
JX275418
JX197453
N/A
Udayanga et al. [69]
Diaporthe rostrata
CFCC 50062
KP208847
KP208855
KP208853
KP208849
KP208851
Fan et al. [17]
Diaporthe rostrata
CFCC 50063
KP208848
KP208856
KP208854
KP208850
KP208852
Fan et al. [17]
Diaporthe rudis
AR 3422
KC843331
KC843177
KC843090
KC843146
N/A
Udayanga et al. [6]
Diaporthe rudis
AR 3654
KC843338
KC843184
KC843097
KC843153
N/A
Udayanga et al. [6]
Diaporthe sackstonii
BRIP 54669b
KJ197287
KJ197267
KJ197249
N/A
N/A
Thompson et al. [70]
Diaporthe sennae
CFCC 51636
KY203724
KY228891
KY228885
KY228875
N/A
Yang et al. [18]
Diaporthe sennae
CFCC 51637
KY203725
KY228892
KY228886
KY228876
N/A
Yang et al. [18]
Diaporthe sennicola
CFCC 51634
KY203722
KY228889
KY228883
KY228873
KY228879
Yang et al. [18]
Diaporthe sennicola
CFCC 51635
KY203723
KY228890
KY228884
KY228874
KY228880
Yang et al. [18]
Diaporthe shaanxiensis
CFCC 53106
MK432654
N/A
MK578130
MK442976
MK443001
Yang et al. [14]
Diaporthe shaanxiensis
CFCC 53107
MK432655
N/A
MK578131
MK442977
MK443002
Yang et al. [14]
Diaporthe sojae
BRIP 54033
JF431295
N/A
KC343901
N/A
N/A
Udayanga et al. [71]
Diaporthe sojae
CBS 116019
KC343175
KC344143
KC343901
KC343417
KC343659
Udayanga et al. [71]
Diaporthe sojae
FAU 455
KJ590712
KJ610868
KJ590755
KJ612109
KJ659201
Udayanga et al. [71]
Diaporthe sojae
FAU 635
KJ590719
KJ610875
KJ590762
KJ612116
KJ659208
Udayanga et al. [71]
Diaporthe spartinicola
CPC 24951
KR611879
KR857695
N/A
N/A
KR857696
Crous et al. [71]
Diaporthe spinosa
PSCG 383
MK626849
MK691234
MK654811
MK691129
MK726156
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe spinosa
PSCG 279
MK626925
MK691235
MK654801
MK691126
MK726155
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe subordinaria
CBS 464.90
KC343214
KC344182
KC343940
KC343456
KC343698
Gomes et al. [4]
Diaporthe subordinaria
CBS 101711
KC343213
KC344182
KC343939
KC343455
KC343697
Gomes et al. [4]
Diaporthe taoicola
MFLUCC 16-0117
KU557567
KU557591
KU557635
N/A
N/A
Dissanayake et al. [9]
Diaporthe torilicola
MFLUCC 17-1051
KY964212
KY964096
KY964168
KY964127
N/A
Dissanayake et al. [9]
Diaporthe toxica
CBS 534.93
KC343220
KC344188
KC343946
KC343462
KC343704
Williamson et al. [72]
Diaporthe toxica
CBS 546.93
KC343222
KC344190
KC343948
KC343464
KC343706
Williamson et al. [72]
Diaporthe vangueriae
CPC 22703
KJ869137
KJ869247
N/A
N/A
N/A
Crous et al. [55]
Diaporthe vawdreyi
BRIP 57887a
KR936126
KR936128
KR936129
N/A
N/A
Crous et al. [73]
Diaporthe zaobaisu
PSCG 031
MK626922
MK691245
MK654855
N/A
MK726207
Guo et al. [15]
Diaporthe zaobaisu
PSCG 032
MK626923
MK691246
MK654856
N/A
MK726208
Guo et al. [15]
AR: Collection of A.Y. Rossman; BRIP: Queensland Plant Pathology herbarium/culture collection, Australia; CBS: Culture collection of the Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, Fungal Biodiversity Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands; CFCC: China Forestry Culture Collection Center, China; CGMCC: China General Microbiological Culture Collection; CPC: Collection Pedro Crous, housed at CBS; FAU: Isolates in culture collection of Systematic Mycology and Microbiology Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD, USA; GUCC: Guizhou culture collection, Guizhou, China; IFRDCC: International Fungal Research and Development Centre Culture Collection, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Kunming, China; LC: Corresponding author’s personal collection (deposited in laboratory State Key Laboratory of Mycology, Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences); MFLUCC: Mae Fah Luang University Culture Collection, Chiang Rai, Thailand; ZJUD: Zhejiang University. ITS, internal transcribed spacers 1 and 2 together with 5.8S nrDNA; tub, partial beta-tubulin gene; cal, partial calmodulin gene and tef, partial translation elongation factor 1-a gene, his, histone H3 gene.
Ambiguous regions in the MP alignment were excluded, and gaps were treated as missing data. The stability of the trees was evaluated by 1000 bootstrap replications. Branches of zero length were collapsed, and all multiple parsimonious trees saved. Statistics including tree length (TL), consistency index (CI), retention index (RI), relative consistency index (RC) and homoplasy index (HI) were calculated. Differences between the trees inferred under different optimality criteria were evaluated using Kishino–Hasegawa tests (KHT) [52].Bayesian analyses were performed in MrBayes v.3.0b4 [49] and posterior probabilities (PP) were determined by Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling (MCMC). MrModeltest v. 2.3 [50] was used for the statistical selection of the best-fit model of nucleotide substitutions and was integrated into the analysis. Six simultaneous Markov chains were run for 106 generations; sampling the trees at every 100th generation. From the 10,000 trees obtained, the first 2000 representing the burn-in phase were discarded. The remaining 8000 trees were used for calculating posterior probabilities in the majority rule consensus tree.The details of the fungal strains obtained in this study are listed in Table 1 with information of the type cultures and sequence data. Sequences generated in this study were deposited in GenBank (Table 1); alignments and trees were deposited in TreeBASE (www.treebase.org, study ID S27013). Reviewer access URL: http://purl.org/phylo/treebase/phylows/study/TB2:S27013?x-access-code=1369710211c386567d8b43ba36f49adf&format=html. Taxonomic novelties were submitted to the Faces of Fungi database [53], Index Fungorum (Index Fungorum 2020) and MycoBank (www.mycobank.org) [33].
3. Results
3.1. Phylogenetic Analyses
Saprobic specimens sampled from numerous woody hosts in six nature reserves in the Karst region of Guizhou province, China resulted in the isolation of thirty-one isolates of Diaporthe (Table 1, Figure 1). The ITS gene was employed for the identification of all isolates to the genus level. The ITS, tef, tub, cal and his alignments (including the gaps) were determined to be approximately 570, 470, 450, 610 and 500 bp (base pair) in size, respectively. The combined ITS, tef, tub, cal and his sequences of Diaporthe contained data for 136 isolates, including the outgroup taxon Diaporthella corylina (CBS 121124). The analyses consisted of 31 isolates from this study (Table 1) and 105 sequences (62 type species) originating from GenBank (Table 2). Out of a total of 2594 characters in the MP analyses, 1079 were constant, and 269 were variable and parsimony uninformative. Ten most parsimonious trees resulted from the remaining 1246 parsimony-informative characters (TL = 7439, CI = 0.384, RI = 0.804, RC = 0.309, HI = 0.616). In the ML analyses, the best scoring RAxML tree (Figure 1) with a final likelihood value of −37549.830874 is presented. The matrix had 1675 distinct alignment patterns, with 31.29% of undetermined characters or gaps. Estimated base frequencies were as follows: A = 0.212875, C = 0.328600, G = 0.237362, T = 0.221162; substitution rates AC = 1.075393, AG = 2.704248, AT = 1.155000, CG = 0.851430, CT = 3.774119, GT = 1.000000; gamma distribution shape parameter alpha = 0.464825. The Maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian methods (BI) for phylogenetic analyses performed trees with similar topologies.
Figure 1
Phylogram generated from maximum likelihood analysis of Diaporthe species isolated in this study and their phylogenetically closely related species based on combined internal transcribed spacer region (ITS), tef, tub, cal and his sequence data. Bootstrap support values for ML ≥ 70%, MP ≥ 70%, are indicated above the nodes and the branches are in bold indicate Bayesian posterior probabilities ≥0.9. The tree is rooted with Diaporthella corylina (CBS 121124). Isolate numbers of ex-types and reference strains are in bold. Taxa isolated in this study are in blue.
GenBank accession numbers of species included in the phylogenetic analysis (Figure 1). Ex-type/ex-epitype/ex-isotype/ex-neotype isolates are in bold.AR: Collection of A.Y. Rossman; BRIP: Queensland Plant Pathology herbarium/culture collection, Australia; CBS: Culture collection of the Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, Fungal Biodiversity Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands; CFCC: China Forestry Culture Collection Center, China; CGMCC: China General Microbiological Culture Collection; CPC: Collection Pedro Crous, housed at CBS; FAU: Isolates in culture collection of Systematic Mycology and Microbiology Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD, USA; GUCC: Guizhou culture collection, Guizhou, China; IFRDCC: International Fungal Research and Development Centre Culture Collection, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Kunming, China; LC: Corresponding author’s personal collection (deposited in laboratory State Key Laboratory of Mycology, Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences); MFLUCC: Mae Fah Luang University Culture Collection, Chiang Rai, Thailand; ZJUD: Zhejiang University. ITS, internal transcribed spacers 1 and 2 together with 5.8S nrDNA; tub, partial beta-tubulin gene; cal, partial calmodulin gene and tef, partial translation elongation factor 1-a gene, his, histone H3 gene.The isolates obtained in this study were grouped into twelve clades. Three isolates were grouped with the ex-type of Diaporthe cercidis (CFCC 52565) while another three isolates were clustered with the ex-type of D. nobilis (CBS 587.79). In addition one isolate with D. cinnamomi (CFCC 52569), D. conica (CFCC 52571) and D. sackstonii (BRIP 54669b) respectively. Twenty-two isolates did not cluster with any known Diaporthe species; thus, seven novel species, Diaporthe constrictospora (2 isolates, Figure 2), Diaporthe ellipsospora (3 isolates, Figure 3), Diaporthe guttulata (2 isolates, Figure 4), Diaporthe irregularis (4 isolates, Figure 5), Diaporthe lenispora (3 isolates, Figure 6), Diaporthe minima (4 isolates, Figure 7) and Diaporthe minusculata (4 isolates, Figure 8) are determined to be new species based on the morphological and phylogenetic evidence (Figure 1).
Figure 2
(HKAS 107534, holotype). (a,b) Ascomata on host surface. (c,d) Section ofascomata (e) 10 days old culture on potato dextrose agar (-) from above. (f) 10 days old culture on PDA from reverse. (g–j) Asci. (k,l) Ascospores. (m) Germinating ascospore. Scale bars: (c,d) = 100 μm, (g–m) = 10 μm.
Figure 3
(HKAS 107535, holotype). (a,b) Ascomata on host surface. (c) Section of an ascoma. (d) 8 days old culture on PDA from above. (e) 8 days old culture on PDA from reverse. (f) Immature ascus. (g–k) Mature asci. (l–p) Ascospores. (q) Paraphyses. Scale bars: (c) = 100 μm, (f–k) = 10 μm, (l–q) = 5 μm.
Figure 4
(HKAS 107536, holotype). (a,b) Ascomata on host surface. (c) Section of an ascoma. (d) 7 days old culture on PDA from above. (e) 7 days old culture on PDA from reverse. (f) Immature ascus. (g–j) Mature asci. (k,l) Ascospores. Scale bars: (c) = 100 μm, (f–l) = 10 μm.
Figure 5
(HKAS 107537, holotype). (a,b) Ascomata on host surface. (c) 10 days old culture on PDA from above. (d) 10 days old culture on PDA from reverse. (e) Immature ascus. (f,g) Mature asci. (h,i) Ascospores. Scale bars: (e–g) = 10 μm, (h,i) = 5 μm.
Figure 6
(HKAS 107538, holotype). (a,b) Ascomata on host surface. (c) Ostiole. (d,e) Section of ascomata. (f) Immature ascus. (g–i) Mature asci. (j,k) Ascospores. (l) 10 days old culture on PDA from above. (m) 10 days old culture on PDA from reverse. Scale bars: (c) = 100 μm, (d,e) = 50 μm, (f–j) = 10 μm, (k) = 5 μm.
(HKAS 107540, holotype). (a,b) Conidiomata on host surface. (c–e) Section of conidiomata. (f,g) Alpha conidia attached to conidiogenous cells. (h–m) Alpha conidia. (n) 5 days old culture on PDA from above. (o) 5 days old culture on PDA from reverse. Scale bars: (c) = 100 μm, (d) = 50 μm, (e–g) = 10 μm, (h–m) = 5 μm.
3.2. Morphology and Culture Characteristics
In this study, thirty-one Diaporthe isolates were obtained from decaying woody hosts from six nature reserves in Guizhou province, China (Table 1). The Diaporthe isolates obtained in this study were further categorized based on morphological characteristics. Growth was rapid for all isolates grown on PDA, with mycelia covering the whole surface of the Petri dishes. Aerial mycelium was initially white and turned greyish after incubation in the dark at 25 °C for several days. All species exhibited phenotypic characteristics typical of the genus. The seven new species of Diaporthe described here are phylogenetically distinct from all previously described species for which sequence data are available.
Taxonomy
Y.Y. Chen, A.J. Dissanayake and Jian K. Liu (Figure 2)Index Fungorum number: IF557388; Facesoffungi Number: FoF07853; MycoBank Number: MB836211Etymology: The epithet from the Latin words constrictus and spora, refers to the slight central constriction often present in the ascospores.Holotype: HKAS 107534Saprobic on decaying wood. Sexual morph: Ascomata 190–240 μm diam, black, globose to subglobose or irregular, clustered or solitary, deeply immersed in host tissue. Asci 40–48 μm × 9–11 μm ( = 43 × 8, n = 30), 8-spored, unitunicate, sessile, elongate to clavate. Ascospores 10–12 × 3–4 μm ( = 11 × 4, n = 50), hyaline, elongated to elliptical, two-celled, often 4-guttulate, with larger guttules at center and smaller ones at the ends. Asexual morph: Not observed.Culture characteristics: Colonies covering entire PDA Petri dishes after 10 d at 25 °C producing abundant white aerial mycelium, reverse fuscous black.Material examined: China, Guizhou Province, Maolan Nature Reserve, saprobic on decaying woody host, April 2017, Y. Y. Chen (HKAS 107534, holotype); ex-type living culture CGMCC 3.20096 = GZCC19-0084; ibid, Guiyang District, Huaxi Wetland Park, saprobic on decaying woody host, July 2017, Y. Y. Chen (GZAAS 19-1784, paratype), living culture GZCC 19-0065.Notes: Two strains representing Diaporthe
constrictospora cluster in a well-supported basal clade (ML/MP/BI = 100/100/1.0) and appear to be distinct from other Diaporthe species, and can be easily recognized by their distinctive phylogenetic placement (Figure 1). Since this species is not closely related to any Diaporthe species and we were unable to compare the nucleotide differences in the alignment. Diaporthe constrictospora is introduced as a phylogenetically distinct species (Figure 1).Y.Y. Chen, A.J. Dissanayake and Jian K. Liu (Figure 3)Index Fungorum number: IF557389; Facesoffungi Number: FoF07854; MycoBank Number: MB836175Etymology: The specific epithet ellipsospora refers to the shape of the ascospores.Holotype: HKAS 107535Saprobic on decaying branch. Sexual morph:
Ascomata 380–430 μm diam, black, globose to irregular, scattered on dead twigs, immersed in host tissue, protruding through substrata. Paraphyses up to 100 μm long, rarely present, hyaline, smooth, 1–3-septate, cylindrical with obtuse ends, extending above conidiophores. Asci 40–47 ×7–8.5 μm ( = 43 × 7.5, n = 30), 8-spored, unitunicate, sessile, elongate to clavate. Ascospores 8.5–13 × 2.5–3.5 μm ( = 10.1 × 3.3, n = 50), hyaline, elongated to elliptical, two-celled, often 4-guttulate, with larger guttules at center and smaller ones at ends. Asexual morph: Not observed.Culture characteristics: Colonies on PDA fast growing, covering entire PDA Petri dish after 8 d at 25 °C. White, aerial mycelium turning grey at edges of plate, reverse yellowish pigmentation developing in centre.Material examined: China, Guizhou Province, Xingyi Wanfenglin, Saprobic on decaying branch, June 2019, Y.Y. Chen (HKAS 107535, holotype), ex-type living culture CGMCC 3.20099 = GZCC 19-0231; ibid, (GZAAS 19-2061, paratype), living culture GZCC 19-0342; ibid, Maolan Nature Reserve, saprobic on decaying woody host, June 2019, Y. Y. Chen, GZAAS 19-2080, living culture GZCC 19-0357.Notes:Diaporthe ellipsospora formed an independent clade (Figure 1) and is phylogenetically distinct from D. aquatica in a well-supported clade (ML/MP/BI = 96/100/1.0). Diaporthe ellipsospora can be distinguished from D. aquatica (IFRDCC 3051) only based on ITS locus (17/539) since other gene sequences (tef, tub, cal and his) are unavailable for D. aquatica. Diaporthe ellipsospora can be morphologically differentiated from D. aquatica as the latter has long necks up to 2250 μm [58].Y.Y. Chen, A.J. Dissanayake and Jian K. Liu (Figure 4)Index Fungorum number: IF557390; Facesoffungi Number: FoF07855; MycoBank Number: MB836212Etymology: Referring to the ascospores with large guttules.Holotype: HKAS 107536Saprobic on decaying branch. Sexual morph: Ascomata 560–630 μm diam, black, globose to conical, scattered irregularly, immersed in host tissue with elongated, 300–400 μm long necks protruding through substrata. Asci 45–57 μm × 7–9 μm ( = 50 × 8, n = 30), unitunicate, 8-spored, sessile, elongate to clavate. Ascospores 12–15 × 3–4 μm ( = 13 × 3.1, n = 50), elongated to elliptical, hyaline, two-celled, often 4-guttulate, with larger guttules at centre and smaller one at ends. Asexual morph: Not observed.Culture characteristics: Colonies covering entire PDA Petri dishes after 7 d at 25 °C producing abundant white aerial mycelium. Reverse white, turning to grey in centre and no conidia produced.Material examined: China, Guizhou Province, Maolan Nature Reserve, saprobic on decaying branch, July 2017, Y.Y. Chen (HKAS 107536, holotype), ex-type living culture CGMCC 3.20100 = GZCC 19-0140; ibid, Guiyang District, Suiyang broad water nature reserve, saprobic on decaying woody host, June 2018, Y. Y. Chen (GZAAS 19-2067, paratype), living culture GZCC 19-0371.Notes:Diaporthe guttulata formed a distinct clade with high support (ML/BI = 88/1.0), and differed with the closely related species D. angelicae, D. cichorii, D. gulyae and D. subordinaria. Diaporthe guttulata can be distinguished from D. angelicae (7/539 in ITS, 8/467 in tef, 7/453 in tub, 9/606 in cal and 10/513 in his); D. cichorii (8/539 in ITS, 13/467 in tef and 7/453 in tub and 21/606 in cal); from D. gulyae (11/539 in ITS, 8/467 in tef and 13/453 in tub) and from D. subordinaria (6/539 in ITS, 5/467 in tef, 15/453 in tub, 13/606 in cal and 11/513 in his). Morphologically, D. guttulata differs from D. cichorii in having larger asci (50–8 vs. 45–6 μm) and ascospores (13–3 vs. 10–3 μm) [57]. The morphological characters of Diaporthe guttulata cannot be compared with D. gulyae and D. subordinaria as these two species have no reported sexual morphs.Y.Y. Chen, A.J. Dissanayake and Jian K. Liu (Figure 5)Index Fungorum number: IF557391; Facesoffungi Number: FoF07856; MycoBank Number: MB836213Etymology: Refers to the irregular shape of the ascomata.Holotype: HKAS 107537Saprobic on decaying woody branch. Sexual morph: Ascomata 390–460 μm diam, black, globose to irregular, scattered evenly on dead branches, immersed in host tissue. Asci 52–66 × 7–9 μm ( = 58 × 8, n = 30), 8-spored, unitunicate, sessile, elongate to clavate. Ascospores (10–12 × 3–4 μm ( = 11 × 3.5, n = 50), hyaline, two-celled, often 4-guttulate, with larger guttules at center and smaller ones at ends, elongated to elliptical. Asexual morph: Not observed.Culture characteristics: Colonies covering entire PDA Petri dishes after 10 d at 25 °C producing abundant white aerial mycelium, reverse fuscous black.Material examined: China, Guizhou Province, Suiyang broad water nature reserve, saprobic on decaying branch, April 2018. Y.Y. Chen (HKAS 107537, holotype), ex-type living culture CGMCC 3.20092 = GZCC 19-0147; ibid., (GZAAS 19-2064, paratype), living culture GZCC 19-0344; ibid., GZAAS 19-2069, living culture GZCC 19-0362; ibid., GZAAS19-2077, living culture GZCC 19-0352.Notes: Four isolates, representing Diaporthe irregularis, are retrieved in a well-supported clade (ML/MP/BI = 100/100/1.0) and appear to be distinct from other Diaporthe species phylogenetically (Figure 1). Since this species does not closely related to any particular Diaporthe species, we were unable to compare the nucleotide differences in the concatenated alignment. In addition, Diaporthe irregularis can be morphologically distinguished from other Diaporthe species based on the shape and the position of the ascomata.Y.Y. Chen, A.J. Dissanayake and Jian K. Liu (Figure 6)Index Fungorum number: IF IF557392; Facesoffungi Number: FoF07857; MycoBank Number: MB836214Etymology: Name reflects the ascospores being smooth-walled, from the Latin lenis referring to smooth and spora.Holotype: HKAS 107538Saprobic on decaying woody branch. Sexual morph: Ascomata 435–510 μm diam, black, globose to conical, scattered irregularly, immersed in host tissue with elongated, long necks protruding through substrata. Asci 44–53 μm × 9–10 μm ( = 48 × 9, n = 30), 8-spored, unitunicate, sessile, elongate to clavate. Ascospores 10–12 × 2–3 μm ( = 11 × 2.5, n = 50), hyaline, two-celled, often 4-guttulate, with larger guttules at centre and smaller one at ends, elongated to elliptical. Asexual morph: Not observed.Culture characteristics: Colonies covering entire PDA Petri dishes after 10 d at 25 °C producing abundant white aerial mycelium, reverse early yellow and turned to fuscous black.Material examined: China, Guizhou Province, Guizhou Province, Suiyang broad water nature reserve, on decaying branch, April 2018. Y.Y. Chen (HKAS 107538, holotype), ex-type living culture CGMCC 3.20101 = GZCC 19-0145; ibid., Xingyi Wanfenglin, saprobic on decaying woody host, June 2019, Y. Y. Chen (GZAAS 19-2066, paratype), living culture GZCC 19-0343; ibid., saprobic on decaying branch, June 2018. Y.Y. Chen, GZAAS 19-2075, living culture GZCC19-0351.Notes: In the combined phylogenetic tree, Diaporthe lenispora groups in a distinct clade with maximum support (ML/MP/BI = 100/100/1.0) and it appears to be most closely related to D. vawdreyi (Figure 1). Diaporthe lenispora can be distinguished from D. vawdreyi based on ITS, tef and tub loci (19/539 in ITS, 56/467 in tef and 23/453 in tub), cal and his gene regions are unavailable for D. vawdreyi. We are not able to compare the morphology of D. lenispora and D. vawdreyi as the latter has no reported sexual morph [74].Y.Y. Chen, A.J. Dissanayake and Jian K. Liu (Figure 7)Index Fungorum number: IF557393; Facesoffungi Number: FoF07858; MycoBank Number: MB836215Etymology: Named for the small conidia.Holotype: HKAS 107539Saprobic on decaying woody branch. Sexual morph: Not observed. Asexual morph: Conidiomata up to 230 μm in diam., immersed, scattered on PDA, dark brown to black, globose, solitary or clustered in groups of 3–5 conidiomata. Conidiophores 9–13 × 1–2 μm ( = 11 × 1.5 μm) aseptate, cylindrical, straight or sinuous, densely aggregated, terminal, slightly tapered towards the apex. Alpha conidia 6.5–8.5 × 2–3 μm ( = 7 × 2 μm), biguttulate, hyaline, fusiform or oval, both ends obtuse. Beta conidia not observed.Culture characteristics: Cultures incubated on PDA at 25 °C in darkness. Colony at first flat with white felty mycelium, becoming black in the center and black at the marginal area with 8 d, pycnidia not observed.Material examined: China, Guizhou Province, Guiyang District, Huaxi Wetland Park, Saprobic on decaying branch, April 2017, Y.Y. Chen (HKAS 107539, holotype), ex-type living culture CGMCC 3.20097 = GZCC 19-0066; ibid., (GZAAS 19-1786, paratype), living culture GZCC19-0070; ibid., GZAAS 19-1787, living culture GZCC19-0061; ibid., GZAAS 19-1788, living culture GZCC19-0207.Notes: The phylogenetic result showed that isolates of Diaporthe minima clustered closer to D. bohemiae, D. juglandicola and D. rostrata, and formed a distinct lineage (Figure 1) with maximum support (ML/MP/BI = 100/100/1.0). Diaporthe minima can be distinguished from the above closely related species based on ITS, tef, tub, cal and his loci for D. bohemiae (11/539 in ITS, 45/467 in tef, 14/453 in tub, 37/606 in cal, 34/513 in his), D. juglandicola (24/539 in ITS, 19/467 in tef, 12/453 in tub, 27/606 in cal and 47/513 in his) and D. rostrata (19/539 in ITS, 48/467 in tef, 13/453 in tub 17/606 in cal and 49/513 in his). Morphologically, Diaporthe minima differs from D. bohemiae, D. juglandicola and D. rostrata in having smaller alpha conidia (7 × 2 vs. 9 × 3 μm) (7 × 2 vs. 11 × 13 μm) [17,18].Y.Y. Chen, A.J. Dissanayake and Jian K. Liu (Figure 8)Index Fungorum number: IF557394; Facesoffungi Number: FoF07859; MycoBank Number: MB836216Etymology: Name based on a Latin adjective minusculus, meaning rather small conidiomata.Holotype: HKAS 107540Saprobic on decaying branch. Sexual morph: Not observed. Asexual morph: Conidiomata up to 430 μm in diam., superficial, erumpent, scattered on PDA, dark brown to black, globose, solitary or clustered in groups of 3–5 pycnidia, with prominent necks 130–320 μm long. Conidiophores 11–18 × 1.5–2.5 μm ( = 14 × 2 μm), aseptate, cylindrical, straight or sinuous, densely aggregated, terminal, slightly tapered towards the apex. Alpha conidia 7–10 × 2–3 μm ( = 9 × 2 μm), biguttulate, hyaline, fusiform or oval, both ends obtuse. Beta conidia not observed.Culture characteristics: Cultures incubated on PDA at 25 °C in darkness showed colony at first white, becoming pale brown with yellowish dots within 10 d, with dense and felted mycelium, visible solitary or aggregated pycnidia at maturity.Material examined: China, Guizhou Province, Xingyi Wanfenglin, Saprobic on decaying branch, June 2019, Y.Y. Chen (HKAS 107540, holotype), ex-type living culture CGMCC 3.20098 = GZCC 19-0215; ibid., GZAAS 19-2072, living culture GZCC 19-0372; ibid., Suiyang broad water nature reserve, saprobic on decaying woody host, April 2018, Y. Y. Chen (GZAAS19-2062, paratype), living culture GZAAS19-2062; ibid., GZAAS19-2070, living culture GZCC 19-0366.Notes: The phylogenetic results showe that Diaporthe minusculata clustered close to D. malorum and D. passiflorae, and formed a distinct lineage (Figure 1) with maximum support (ML/MP/BI = 100/100/1.0). Diaporthe minusculata can be distinguished from D. malorum (23/539 in ITS, 41/467 in tef, 29/453 in tub, 52/606 in cal and 35/513 in his) and from D. passiflorae (25/539 in ITS, 13/467 in tef, 11/453 in tub, 22/606 in cal and 17/513 in his). Morphologically, Diaporthe minusculata differs from D. malorum in having conidiomata with a long neck and differs from D. passiflorae in shorter conidiophores (14 × 2 vs. 26 × 4 μm) [16,17,18,66,74].
4. Discussion
Based on the phenotypic characters and the multi-locus phylogeny, the 31 isolates obtained in this study can be recognized as twelve species. Among the five species are previously known and seven species are new to science. These newly discovered species are Diaporthe constrictospora, D. ellipsospora, D. guttulata, D. irregularis, D. lenispora, D. minima and D. minusculata. The other taxa are identified as Diaporthe cercidis [42], D. cinnamomi [42], D. conica [42], D. nobilis [4] and D. sackstonii [70]. Morphological characters of the known species isolated in this study were compared with their original descriptions. Phylogenetically, there were no significant base pair differences between these and their type based combined gene alignments.A phylogenetic tree derived from an alignment of ITS sequences is beneficial as a guide for the identification of isolates of Diaporthe species [65,75]. ITS sequences offer convincing proof for species demarcation where a limited number of taxa are analyzed, such as species associated with the same host [62,64,76]. However, confusion arises when a large number of species from an extensive range of host species are examined. Santos et al. [77] proposed that tef is a superior phylogenetic marker in Diaporthe than ITS, and has been commonly used as the secondary locus for phylogenetic studies [8,10,64,75]. Gomes et al. [4] studied five loci from 95 species and stated that tef poorly distinguished species, and recommended that his and tub were suitable possibilities as subordinate phylogenetic markers to accompany the authorized fungi barcode: the internal transcribed spacer region (ITS). Dissanayake et al. [10] reviewed the genus Diaporthe and provided a checklist for 171 species with available molecular data (from culture and fruiting body) and a phylogenetic tree using four gene regions (ITS, tef, tub and cal). According to Santos et al. [16], incorporation of a five-loci dataset (ITS, cal, his, tef, tub) was recommended as the best combination for species identification within the genus and recent studies seems to favor the selection of four or five genes [13,14,15,33,38,39,40,41,42,43,44]. Hence, the present study is conducted combining the five gene regions analyses of ITS, tef, tub, cal and his to reveal five known Diaporthe species and to assist in the introduction of seven new Diaporthe species.Several studies have been conducted to reveal the association of Diaporthe species with various hosts in China. Huang et al. [60] revealed seven apparently undescribed endophytic Diaporthe species (Diaporthe biconispora, D. biguttulata, D. discoidispora, D. multigutullata, D. ovalispora, D. subclavata and D. unshiuensis) on Citrus. Gao et al. [63] identified four novel species (D. apiculata, D. compacta, D. oraccinii, D. penetriteum) and three known species (D. discoidispora, D. hongkongensis, D. ueckerae) associated with Camellia (tea). Gao et al. [78] showed eight new species of Diaporthe (Diaporthe acutispora, D. elaeagni-glabrae, D. incompleta, D. podocarpi-macrophylli, D. undulata, D. velutina, D. xishuangbanica and D. yunnanensis) from leaves of several hosts while Yang et al. [42] introduced twelve new Diaporthe species (Diaporthe acerigena, D. alangii, D. betulina, D. caryae, D. cercidis, D. chensiensis, D. cinnamomi, D. conica, D. fraxinicola, D. kadsurae, D. padina and D. ukurunduensis) from infected forest trees in Beijing, Heilongjiang, Jiangsu, Jiangxi, Shaanxi and Zhejiang Provinces. Three new Diaporthe species: Diaporthe anhuiensis, D. huangshanensis, D. shennongjiaensis and two other known species: D. citrichinensis and D. eres were described as endophytes by Zhou et al. [44]. Yang et al. [14] established three new species: D. albosinensis, D. coryli and D. shaanxiensis isolated from symptomatic twigs and branches at the Huoditang Forest Farm in Shaanxi Province, China. High diversity of Diaporthe species associated with pear shoot canker in China was observed by Guo et al. [15] representing thirteen known species (Diaporthe caryae, D. cercidis, D. citrichinensis, D. eres, D. fusicola, D. ganjae, D. hongkongensis, D. padina, D. pescicola, D. sojae, D. taoicola, D. unshiuensis and D. velutina) and six new species (Diaporthe acuta, D. chongqingensis, D. fulvicolor, D. parvae, D. spinosa and D. zaobaisu). However, the identification of Diaporthe species associated with hosts in nature reserves in China has rarely been studied. Thus, an investigation of Diaporthe species was conducted and this provides the first molecular phylogenetic frame of Diaporthe diversity in six nature reserves in the Karst region of Guizhou province, combined with morphological descriptions.Among the twelve species identified in this study, four species have been previously isolated from China. Yang et al. [42] introduced Diaporthe cercidis from twigs and branches of Cercis chinensis in Jiangsu Province, D. cinnamomi from symptomatic twigs of Cinnamomum sp. in Zhejiang Province and D. conica from symptomatic branches of Alangium chinense in Zhejiang Province. Diaporthe nobilis has been isolated from Camellia sinensis in Guizhou Province [25]. The other known species: D. sackstonii [70] has been isolated from petioles of sunflower plants (Helianthus annuus) inAustralia. Based on the percentage of occurrence, Diaporthe irregularis sp. nov (13%), D. minima sp. nov (13%), and D. minusculata sp. nov (13%) were categorized as being frequent. Diaporthe cinnamomi, D. conica and D. sackstonii were ranked as infrequent, since only one isolate has been isolated for each species. Interestingly, the type species of the genus, D. eres Nitschke [79] was not observed in our survey. This species is one of the frequent species in most of the studies and appears with 365 Fungus–Host combinations [80].The discovery of these species of Diaporthe from different nature reserves in Guizhou province as well as worldwide occurrence shows the polyphagous and cosmopolitan behavior of species in this genus. Certainly, it is obvious that performing complementary studies based on sequencing five gene regions of Diaporthe species is essential in order to support reliable species identification. The descriptions and molecular data of Diaporthe species provided in this study would serve as a resource for plant pathologists, plant quarantine officials and taxonomists for better identification of Diaporthe and its species boundaries. Such studies are necessary to investigate this group of fungi in different unexploited biomes, to reveal the degree of diversity and to support more suitable control measures to prevent their dissemination. Importantly, based on the Diaporthe taxa identification in this study coupled with previous studies, it could be concluded that almost all the known species isolated (Diaporthe cercidis, D. cinnamomi, D. conica, D. nobilis and D. sackstonii) as saprobes in this study were pathogenic on various host plants [25,42,70]. This could indicate that the seven newly introducing species could potentially be pathogens even though they were isolated from decaying woody hosts, and their pathogenicity should be evaluated in further studies with more samples (from other kinds of habitats and hosts, as well as the different distributions and substrates). In the meantime, we provided the culture details and deposited them in publicly accessible culture collections for further evaluation or comparison of the life modes of these taxa.
5. Conclusions
We carried out fungal diversity investigations with large-scale sampling in the Karst region of southwestern China and this is the first report of Diaporthe species isolated from nature reserves in Karst region of Guizhou province, China. The identification of twelve Diaporthe species (five known species and seven new species) associated with saprobic woody hosts is documented.
Authors: P W Crous; M J Wingfield; J Guarro; R Cheewangkoon; M van der Bank; W J Swart; A M Stchigel; J F Cano-Lira; J Roux; H Madrid; U Damm; A R Wood; L A Shuttleworth; C S Hodges; M Munster; M de Jesús Yáñez-Morales; L Zúñiga-Estrada; E M Cruywagen; G S de Hoog; C Silvera; J Najafzadeh; E M Davison; P J N Davison; M D Barrett; R L Barrett; D S Manamgoda; A M Minnis; N M Kleczewski; S L Flory; L A Castlebury; K Clay; K D Hyde; S N D Maússe-Sitoe; Shuaifei Chen; C Lechat; M Hairaud; L Lesage-Meessen; J Pawłowska; M Wilk; A Sliwińska-Wyrzychowska; M Mętrak; M Wrzosek; D Pavlic-Zupanc; H M Maleme; B Slippers; W P Mac Cormack; D I Archuby; N J Grünwald; M T Tellería; M Dueñas; M P Martín; S Marincowitz; Z W de Beer; C A Perez; J Gené; Y Marin-Felix; J Z Groenewald Journal: Persoonia Date: 2013-11-26 Impact factor: 11.051
Authors: P W Crous; J J Luangsa-Ard; M J Wingfield; A J Carnegie; M Hernández-Restrepo; L Lombard; J Roux; R W Barreto; I G Baseia; J F Cano-Lira; M P Martín; O V Morozova; A M Stchigel; B A Summerell; T E Brandrud; B Dima; D García; A Giraldo; J Guarro; L F P Gusmão; P Khamsuntorn; M E Noordeloos; S Nuankaew; U Pinruan; E Rodríguez-Andrade; C M Souza-Motta; R Thangavel; A L van Iperen; V P Abreu; T Accioly; J L Alves; J P Andrade; M Bahram; H-O Baral; E Barbier; C W Barnes; E Bendiksen; E Bernard; J D P Bezerra; J L Bezerra; E Bizio; J E Blair; T M Bulyonkova; T S Cabral; M V Caiafa; T Cantillo; A A Colmán; L B Conceição; S Cruz; A O B Cunha; B A Darveaux; A L da Silva; G A da Silva; G M da Silva; R M F da Silva; R J V de Oliveira; R L Oliveira; J T De Souza; M Dueñas; H C Evans; F Epifani; M T C Felipe; J Fernández-López; B W Ferreira; C N Figueiredo; N V Filippova; J A Flores; J Gené; G Ghorbani; T B Gibertoni; A M Glushakova; R Healy; S M Huhndorf; I Iturrieta-González; M Javan-Nikkhah; R F Juciano; Ž Jurjević; A V Kachalkin; K Keochanpheng; I Krisai-Greilhuber; Y-C Li; A A Lima; A R Machado; H Madrid; O M C Magalhães; P A S Marbach; G C S Melanda; A N Miller; S Mongkolsamrit; R P Nascimento; T G L Oliveira; M E Ordoñez; R Orzes; M A Palma; C J Pearce; O L Pereira; G Perrone; S W Peterson; T H G Pham; E Piontelli; A Pordel; L Quijada; H A Raja; E Rosas de Paz; L Ryvarden; A Saitta; S S Salcedo; M Sandoval-Denis; T A B Santos; K A Seifert; B D B Silva; M E Smith; A M Soares; S Sommai; J O Sousa; S Suetrong; A Susca; L Tedersoo; M T Telleria; D Thanakitpipattana; N Valenzuela-Lopez; C M Visagie; M Zapata; J Z Groenewald Journal: Persoonia Date: 2018-12-14 Impact factor: 11.051
Authors: P W Crous; M J Wingfield; D M Richardson; J J Le Roux; D Strasberg; J Edwards; F Roets; V Hubka; P W J Taylor; M Heykoop; M P Martín; G Moreno; D A Sutton; N P Wiederhold; C W Barnes; J R Carlavilla; J Gené; A Giraldo; V Guarnaccia; J Guarro; M Hernández-Restrepo; M Kolařík; J L Manjón; I G Pascoe; E S Popov; M Sandoval-Denis; J H C Woudenberg; K Acharya; A V Alexandrova; P Alvarado; R N Barbosa; I G Baseia; R A Blanchette; T Boekhout; T I Burgess; J F Cano-Lira; A Čmoková; R A Dimitrov; M Yu Dyakov; M Dueñas; A K Dutta; F Esteve-Raventós; A G Fedosova; J Fournier; P Gamboa; D E Gouliamova; T Grebenc; M Groenewald; B Hanse; G E St J Hardy; B W Held; Ž Jurjević; T Kaewgrajang; K P D Latha; L Lombard; J J Luangsa-Ard; P Lysková; N Mallátová; P Manimohan; A N Miller; M Mirabolfathy; O V Morozova; M Obodai; N T Oliveira; M E Ordóñez; E C Otto; S Paloi; S W Peterson; C Phosri; J Roux; W A Salazar; A Sánchez; G A Sarria; H-D Shin; B D B Silva; G A Silva; M Th Smith; C M Souza-Motta; A M Stchigel; M M Stoilova-Disheva; M A Sulzbacher; M T Telleria; C Toapanta; J M Traba; N Valenzuela-Lopez; R Watling; J Z Groenewald Journal: Persoonia Date: 2016-07-04 Impact factor: 11.051
Authors: Amy Y Rossman; Gerard C Adams; Paul F Cannon; Lisa A Castlebury; Pedro W Crous; Marieka Gryzenhout; Walter M Jaklitsch; Luis C Mejia; Dmitar Stoykov; Dhanushka Udayanga; Hermann Voglmayr; Donald M Walker Journal: IMA Fungus Date: 2015-06-04 Impact factor: 3.515