I Viner1, F Bortnikov2, L Ryvarden3, O Miettinen1. 1. Botanical Museum, Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 7, 00014, Finland. 2. Faculty of Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Leninskie Gory 1/12, 119234 Moscow, Russia. 3. Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1066, Blindern, N.0316 Oslo, Finland.
Abstract
We studied a number of sub-Saharan collections of corticioid Xylodon and Lyomyces species, including several types. Morphological descriptions and molecular analyses based on the ribosomal DNA loci nuc rDNA ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 and when possible nuc 28S rDNA, allow us to introduce four new species: L. densiusculus, X. angustisporus, X. dissiliens, and X. laxiusculus. DNA barcodes for X. submucronatus and X. pruniaceus are published for the first time and X. pruniaceus is re-described.
We studied a number of sub-Saharan collections of corticioid Xylodon and Lyomyces species, including several types. Morphological descriptions and molecular analyses based on the ribosomal DNA loci nuc rDNA ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 and when possible nuc 28S rDNA, allow us to introduce four new species: L. densiusculus, X. angustisporus, X. dissiliens, and X. laxiusculus. DNA barcodes for X. submucronatus and X. pruniaceus are published for the first time and X. pruniaceus is re-described.
Sub-Saharan Africa remains poorly explored for fungi due to the lack of taxonomists and scientific infrastructure. Yet, the region is a hotspot for discovering new species (Cheek ). In this situation, local and global extinction events caused by habitat loss or climate change may occur unnoticed simply because science has not recorded the existence of species (Cheek ). Consequently, nature conservation strategies cannot consider fungal diversity. Other than fungal inventories based on the morphological identification of sporocarps, an ample source of species records to work with is DNA sequences from environmental samples. Those have an advantage of spotting fungi in stages other than morphologically identifiable sporocarps. Inconveniently, such DNA fragments often cannot be precisely attributed to species names. They may represent already described taxa without DNA barcodes or truly undescribed species known only from environmental sequences. Environmental sequences cannot be given taxonomic names because of the lack of a physical voucher specimen deposited in a fungarium (Lücking & Hawksworth 2018). For these reasons, we find it important to work towards filling the gaps in our knowledge of African mycota.Lyomyces and Xylodon are two closely related genera with unclear molecular and morphological borders. These genera had been treated in Hyphodontia for a couple of decades until Hjortstam & Ryvarden (2007, 2009) re-introduced them. Together they are the most species-rich and abundant group in the family Schizoporaceae (Hymenochaetales, Basidiomycota) worldwide. Despite their great abundance, we are aware of only six currently recognised species described from Africa including Réunion. We describe here four new species in this group and provide molecular data for two already existing taxa, which previously lacked DNA barcodes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Morphological methods
Type material and specimens from fungaria H, O, and GB were studied. Fungarium abbreviations are given according to Index Herbariorum (Thiers). Microscopic methods were described in Miettinen . All measurements were made in Cotton Blue (CB, Merck 1275; Kenilworth, New Jersey) with phase contrast illumination (1 250 ×), which allowed reporting them with 0.1 μm precision. The benefits of phase contrast illumination over bright-field microscopy are explained by Stein (1969). The following abbreviations were used in microscopic descriptions: L – mean spore length; W – mean spore width; Q – mean L/W ratio; n – number of elements (basidiospores, basidia, cystidia, and hyphae) measured, which are followed by the number of specimens studied. We excluded 5 % of measurements from each end of the range representing variation of basidiospores and cystidia. Excluded extreme values were indicated in parentheses when they strongly differed from the lower or higher 95 % percentile.
DNA extraction and sequencing
Total genomic DNA was extracted from herbarium specimens using a CTAB-chloroform extraction protocol (Kutuzova ). We used standard as well as self-designed primers (Table 1) to amplify complete nuc rDNA ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 (ITS) and in some cases nuc 28S rDNA (28S) for all focal taxa. After amplification PCR products were run on a 1.5 % agarose gel stained with Gel Red staining (Biotium, Fremont, California) and visualized under UV light. PCR products were purified from agarose gels using a Fermentas Genomic DNA Purification Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts). Sequencing reactions were performed on an ABI 3730XL DNA analyzer (Applied Biosystems) by Macrogen (Amsterdam, the Netherlands).
Table 1
Primers used in this study.
Primer name
Sequence
Target DNA locus
Binding site
Direction
Reference
ITS5
GGAAGTAAAAGTCGTAACAAGG
ITS, ITS1
18S
fwd
White et al. (1990)
ITS2
GCTGCGTTCTTCATCGATGC
ITS1
5.8S
fwd
White et al. (1990)
58A1F
GCATCGATGAAGAACGC
ITS2
5.8S
fwd
Martin & Rygiewicz (2005)
ITS2.2rXyl
TTATCACACCGCATATATGC
ITS2
ITS2
rev
this study
ITS2.2fXyl
CTTCYCTTGAATGYATTA
ITS2
ITS2
fwd
this study
ALR0.2
GATATGCTTAAGTTCAGCGGG
ITS, ITS2
28S
rev
Riebesehl & Langer (2017)
LR22
CCTCACGGTACTTGTTCGCT
ITS
28S
rev
Vilgalys lab, Duke University (https://sites.duke.edu/vilgalyslab/files/2017/08/rDNA-primers-for-fungi.pdf)
JS1
CGCTGAACTTAAGCATAT
28S
28S
fwd
Landvik (1996)
LR7
TACTACCACCAAGATCT
28S
28S
rev
Hopple & Vilgalys (1994)
A number of additional 28S sequences used in the analyses came from partial genomes. The corresponding DNA extractions were sequenced with the aid of NextSeq 550 sequencing using the Nextera kit at Biomedicum Functional Genomics Unit (Helsinki, Finland). The assessment of read quality and their cleaning was performed using the FastQC and FastP tools (Chen ). For the identification of 28S from the fungal genomes, the cleaned reads were mapped to nrDNA and 28S sequences and then were assembled using the SPADES (Bankevich ) and MEGAHIT assemblers (Li ). Additionally, to check the homology of the predicted genes, nrDNA and 28S were aligned to the assembled genomes using LASTz (Harris 2007). Sequences with the identity of at least 50 % and the coverage of 70 % were extracted. All newly produced sequences used in this study have been deposited in GenBank (Table 2).
Table 2
Sequences used in this study. Sequences marked with * were produced for this study.
Species
Specimen
ITS
28S
Fasciodontia bugellensis
Larsson 8195
OK273855*
OK273855*
Fasciodontia sp.
Zhao 6280
–
MZ146327
Hastodontia hastata
Larsson 14646
MH638232
MH638232
Lyomyces aff. orientalis
Boidin 383
MH857295
–
Lyomyces bambusinus
Zhao 4831
–
MW264919
Lyomyces crustosus
Spirin 12603
OK273832*
OK273832*
Lyomyces densiusculus
Ryvarden 44818
OK273853*
OK273853*
Lyomyces elaeidicola
He 6360
–
MW507035
He 6378
–
MW507036
Lyomyces fimbriatus
Wu 910620-7
MK575209
–
Wu 911204-4
MK575210
–
Lyomyces griseliniae
Larsson 5289
OK273851*
OK273851*
Lyomyces leptocystidiatus
Zhao 20170815-30
MT319427
–
Zhao 20170815-43
MT319428
–
Zhao 20170814-14
MT319429
–
Zhao 20170815-2
MT319430
–
Zhao 20170818-1
MT319431
–
Zhao 20170814-8
MT319432
–
Zhao 20170818-8
MT319433
–
Zhao 20170908-14
MT319434
–
Zhao 20170818-9
MT319435
–
Lyomyces macrosporus
He 6179
–
MW507034
Zhao 4516
–
MW264920
Lyomyces microfasciculatus
He 2651
–
MW507027
Zhao 5109
–
MW264921
Lyomyces orientalis
He 3616
–
MW507030
He 3686
–
MW507031
Lyomyces pruni
Spirin 12682
OK273833*
OK273833*
Lyomyces sambuci
Miettinen 11705
OK273852*
OK273852*
He 6108
–
MW507033
He 6576
–
MW507037
Lyomyces sp.
Zhao 8188
MW713744
–
Zhao 17855
MW713745
–
Burdsall HHB-19410
MW740296
–
Burdsall HHB-19323
MW740297
–
Zhao 10474
–
MZ262525
Zhao 4299
–
MW713731
Zhao 4352
–
MW713732
Zhao 4385
–
MZ262521
Zhao 4394
–
MW713733
Zhao 4725
–
MZ262522
Zhao 6224
–
MZ262523
Zhao 6431
–
MZ262526
Zhao 6442
–
MZ262527
Zhao 6474
–
MZ262528
Zhao 6483
–
MZ262529
Zhao 6565
–
MZ262531
Zhao 8188
–
MW713736
Zhao 9784
–
MW713735
Lyomyces vietnamensis
He 3260
–
MW507028
Lyomyces wuliangshanensis
He 3498
–
MW507029
He 4765
–
MW507032
Xylodon aff. borealis
UC2022850
KP814307
–
Xylodon angustisporus
Ryvarden 50691b
OK273831*
OK273831*
Xylodon apacheriensis
Miettinen 16686
OK273835*
OK273835*
Xylodon asperus
clone BF-OTU19
AM902054
–
Nilsson 2004b
DQ873606
DQ873607
Langer 3257
EU583424
–
NFLI 2000-112/1
JQ358805
–
UC2023164
KP814364
–
UC2023169
KP814365
–
UC2023187
KP814366
–
Dai 14824
KY290980
–
NIBIO 2016-0924/1
MF511090
–
Zhao 1035
MG231619
–
Zhao 1068
MG231620
–
Zhao 1070
MG231621
–
Zhao 1076
MG231622
–
Zhao 1078
MG231623
–
Zhao 1154
MG231624
–
Zhao 1168
MG231625
–
Zhao 1169
MG231626
–
Zhao SWFU 006420
MK809500
–
Zhao 6543
MW940726
–
Spirin 11923
OK273838*
OK273838*
Xylodon attenuatus
Spirin 8775
MH324476
–
Spirin 8714
OK273839*
OK273839*
Xylodon bambusinus
Zhao 11211
MW394658
MW394651
Zhao 11219
MW394659
MW394653
Zhao 11310
MW394660
MW394655
Zhao 11215
MW394661
MW394652
Zhao 11224
MW394662
MW394654
Xylodon borealis
Spirin 10911
OK273846*
OK273846*
Xylodon crystalliger
KUN3347
OK273842*
OK273842*
Xylodon cystidiatus
Savchenko AS171128/1625B
OK273850*
OK273850*
Xylodon detriticus
Miettinen 22106
OK273844*
OK273844*
Xylodon dissiliens
Ryvarden 44817
OK273856*
OK273856*
Xylodon flaviporus
MA Fungi 79440
MH260071
MH260066
Xylodon hyphodontinus
Savchenko AS171124/1235
OK273848*
OK273848*
Xylodon laurentianus
DLL2009-049
JQ673187
–
DLL2009-082
JQ673188
–
DLL2009-087
JQ673189
–
clone CMH177
KF800268
–
DLL2011-142
KJ140643
–
HHB_719
KY962845
–
Zhao 140
MG231647
–
Russell 8118
MK575271
–
Xylodon laxiusculus
Ryvarden 44877
OK273827*
–
Xylodon nespori
Nordon 030915
DQ873622
DQ873622
Viner 2019_59
OK273834*
OK273834*
Xylodon niemelaei
Savchenko TU114922
OK273836*
OK273836*
GC 1508-146
–
KX857816
Xylodon nongravis
Spirin 5615
OK273849*
OK273849*
Xylodon nothofagi
ICMP 13839
AF145582
MH260064
Xylodon ovisporus
ICMP 13835
AF145586
MH260063
KUC8140
JGI
JGI
Xylodon paradoxus
Oivanen PO109
OK273843*
OK273843*
Xylodon patagonicus
strain P.CH-4
KF562013
–
MA-Fungi 90705
KY962835
–
MA-Fungi 90702
KY962836
–
MA-Fungi 90707
KY962837
–
MA-Fungi 90704
KY962840
–
MA-Fungi 90703
KY962841
–
Smith MES-2446
MH930325
–
Xylodon pruinosus
Viner 2019_21
OK273845*
OK273845*
Nilsson 990902
DQ677507
DQ677507
Xylodon pruniaceus
Ryvarden 11251
OK273828*
–
Xylodon pseudolanatus
HHB-10703-Sp
OK273847*
OK273847*
Xylodon pseudotropicus
Otto Miettinen 16558.2
OK273854*
OK273854*
Xylodon quercinus
Miettinen 15050.1
KT361632
–
Larsson 11076
KT361633
–
Boidin 4014
MH858169
–
MA-Fungi 91815
MT158722
–
MA-Fungi 91816
MT158723
–
clone 4248_520
MT236714
–
Spirin 12030
OK273841*
OK273841*
Xylodon raduloides
Dai 12631
KT203307
–
MA-Fungi 12864
KY962820
–
MA-Fungi 12877
KY962821
–
MA-Fungi 22499
KY962822
–
MA-Fungi 22513
KY962823
–
MA-Fungi 75310
KY962825
–
MA-Fungi 70457
KY962827
–
MA-Fungi 78658
KY962828
–
MA-Fungi 75272
KY962829
–
MA-Fungi 79314
KY962830
–
MA-Fungi 35643
KY962831
–
MA-Fungi 12778
KY962832
–
MA-Fungi 75244
KY962833
–
MA-Fungi 608
KY962838
–
NY s.n.
KY962843
–
MA-Fungi 90709
KY962844
–
Riebesehl KAS-JR03
MH880222
–
Riebesehl KAS-JR09
MH880223
–
Riebesehl KAS-JR26
MH880225
–
clone 4248_300
MT236523
–
Polemis EP.18-A1543
MT458537
–
Dai 12631
–
KT203328
Xylodon ramicida
Spirin 7664
NR138013
–
Xylodon rimosissimus
Ryberg 021031
DQ873627
–
plB4D
HM136630
–
clone 201
KC785580
–
Lindner 2011-081
KJ140600
–
UC2023147
KP814193
–
UC2023148
KP814194
–
UC2022842
KP814311
–
UC2023109
KP814414
–
Zhao 1487
MG231649
–
Russell 8120
MK575252
–
Dirks PUL F24614
MW448610
–
Miettinen 12026.1
OK273840*
OK273840*
Xylodon sp.
Langer 3365
DQ340324
–
Larsson 12386
DQ873612
DQ873612
Berglund 1117
DQ873633
DQ873634
clone F126
JX981881
–
Larsson 6686
LN714553
–
Zhao SWFU 006465
MK809410
–
LWZ 20180904-28
MT319674
–
Zhao 16090
MW566132
–
Zhao 18342
–
MW980779
Zhao 18379
–
MW980780
Zhao 18394
–
MW980781
Zhao 210
–
MN654918
Zhao 214
–
MN654919
Zhao 215
–
MN654920
Xylodon spathulatus
Spirin 12007
OK273837*
OK273837*
Wu 1307-42
–
KX857810
Xylodon subclavatus
TUB-FO 42167
MH880232
–
Xylodon submucronatus
Ryvarden 9322b
OK273829*
–
Renvall 1602
OK273830*
–
Xylodon subtropicus
Wu 1508-2
KX857806
–
Zhao 20180512-15
MT319539
–
Xylodon verecundus
Larsson 12261
–
DQ873643
Xylodon xinpingensis
Zhao 9125
–
MW394649
Zhao 9174
–
MW394650
Xylodon yarraensis
LWZ 20180510-4
MT319635
–
LWZ 20180510-16
MT319637
–
LWZ 20180510-19
MT319638
–
LWZ 20180510-5
MT319639
–
LWZ 20180509-7
MT319640
–
LWZ 20180512-21
MT319641
–
LWZ 20180512-22
MT319642
–
LWZ 20180512-23
MT319643
–
LWZ 20180512-29
MT319644
–
LWZ 20180512-19
MT319645
–
Phylogenetic analyses
Extremely high diversity of ITS sequences in the focal genera precluded attempts to construct a reliable all-encompassing alignment for this locus, even if Lyomyces and Xylodon are analysed separately. Phylogenies produced based on such alignments became highly sensitive to the taxon sampling and the selected alignment algorithm. Therefore, we produced a reliably aligned dataset based on more conservative locus 28S (D1–D4) to show the phylogenetic placement of focal taxa with available nuclear LSU sequences. Then we constructed three additional ITS alignments for L. densiusculus, X. laxiusculus, and X. submucronatus, which belonged to lineages abundant in GenBank (Benson ) as of 1 July 2021. Only sequences that could be reliably aligned were used in the ITS analyses. This corresponded to 89–93 % threshold of pairwise similarity to our newly produced sequences. As ITS of X. angustisporus, X. dessiliens, and X. pruniaceus had no close matches in public databases, these sequences were not used for building the ITS-based phylogenies.Alignments were calculated through the MAFFT v. 7.429 online server (https://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server/) using the L-INS-I strategy (Katoh ). After removing unalignable fragments, the length of the alignment and the number of parsimony informative characters were correspondingly 1 280 and 235 bp for the 28S alignment; 570 and 54 bp for the L. densiusculus alignment; 660 and 51 bp for the X. laxiusculus alignment; 550 and 85 bp for the X. submucronatus alignment. The full alignments with annotation of the excluded characters were deposited at TreeBASE (study 28841).We inferred rooted phylogenetic trees with maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian Inference (BI). Nucleotide substitution models for BI were chosen with TOPALI v. 2.5 (Milne ) based on the Bayesian information criterion (BIC). We performed BI using MrBayes v. 3.2 (Ronquist ). In these analyses three parallel runs with four chains each and other default parameters were run for one million generations. A burn-in of 25 % was used in the final analyses, ensuring the average standard deviation of split frequencies had reached < 0.01 for all data sets. Support at nodes was indicated when posterior probabilities were ≥ 0.8. For ML analyses, IQ-TREE v. 1.2.2 (Nguyen ) with the best-fitted model option was used. Bootstrapping was performed using the standard nonparametric bootstrap algorithm with the number of replicates set to 1 000. Support at nodes was indicated with bootstrap values ≥ 70 %.
RESULTS
Bayesian Inference and ML returned similar topologies and relevant support values from these analyses were indicated at nodes in Figs 1–4. The 28S analysis returned a tree with a clade consisting of Xylodon and Lyomyces distinct from Hastodontia and Fasciodontia (Fig. 1). All Lyomyces taxa were confined to one clade supported only by BI. Basal relationships within the Xylodon/Lyomyces cluster were not resolved. Newly described X. angustisporus occupied a place at the deepest split of the Xylodon/Lyomyces cluster.
Fig. 1.
Phylogenetic relationships of Xylodon and Lyomyces inferred from 28S sequences using BI analysis. Bayesian posterior probabilities followed by ML bootstrap values are shown at nodes; branch lengths reflect estimated number of changes per site.
Fig. 4.
Phylogenetic relationships of Xylodon laxiusculus and allied taxa inferred from ITS sequences using BI analysis. Bayesian posterior probabilities followed by ML bootstrap values are shown at nodes; branch lengths reflect estimated number of changes per site.
Our ITS analyses showed that X. submucronatus occurred as a sister taxon to X. rimosissimus (Fig. 2), L. densiusculus ended up in the same clade with L. fimbriatus (Fig. 3), while X. laxiusculus formed a subclade with X. subclavatus (Fig. 4). As blasting ITS of newly described X. angustisporus and X. dissiliens returned no close hits that would have allowed building a reliable ITS alignment, we included these species only in the 28S analysis (Fig. 1). X. pruniaceus – sequenced for the first time in this study – turned out to be the single close relative of X. angustisporus in our dataset, with a 96.4 % ITS similarity, or only 22 bp difference.
Fig. 2.
Phylogenetic relationships of Xylodon submucronatus and allied taxa inferred from ITS sequences using BI analysis. Bayesian posterior probabilities followed by ML bootstrap values are shown at nodes; branch lengths reflect estimated number of changes per site.
Fig. 3.
Phylogenetic relationships of Lyomyces densiusculus and allied taxa inferred from ITS sequences using BI analysis. Bayesian posterior probabilities followed by ML bootstrap values are shown at nodes; branch lengths reflect estimated number of changes per site.
There were three 28S sequences with questionable species assignment. Zhao 210 (GenBank MN654918), Zhao 214 (GenBank MN654919), and Zhao 215 (GenBank MN654920) belong to one of the Xylodon clades despite being published as Trechispora yunnanensis (Trechisporales, Basidiomycota). The X. submucronatus tree also contained two similarly problematic ITS sequences. MA-Fungi 91816 (GenBank MT158723) and MA-Fungi 91815 (GenBank MT158722) clearly belong to X. quercinus despite being published as X. magallanesii.Morphological differences between species in Xylodon and Lyomyces complex are often small, but we have found reliable characters to separate all newly described species from other African material we are aware of. We introduce four new species supported by the results of our molecular and morphological analyses.
TAXONOMY
Viner & Ryvarden, . MycoBank MB 841943. Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.
Lyomyces densiusculus (holotype). A. Subiculum. B. Section of the sporocarp through hymenophoral projection and subhymenium. C. Sterile hymenophoral elements including cystidia of different shapes. D. Spores.
Etymology: Densiusculus (Lat., adj.), a bit dense, refers to the dense and obscure hyphal system.Basidiocarp effused, up to 6 cm in the widest dimension. Margin indistinct, hymenial surface cream to almost white, smooth to tuberculate; hymenophoral projections barely visible with an unaided eye, up to 70 μm high, 50–80 μm broad at base, 1–3 per mm. Hyphal system monomitic; hyphae clamped, thin- to thick-walled especially in subiculum (up to 1 μm). While being mostly obscure and densely packed, hyphal fragments of 4–5 cells may be observed at some places in subiculum and subhymenium. Large clusters of crystalline matter sprinkled throughout the fruit-body obscure the hyphal structure even further. Subhymenial hyphae mostly obscure but those which can be seen, slightly cyanophilic, 1.8–3.3(–3.8) μm wide (n = 20/1). Subicular hyphae not cyanophilic, branched mostly at right angles, 1.8–4.7 μm wide (n = 19/1). Cystidial elements from capitate to tapering, 13–21(–25) × 4–7 μm (n = 23/1), evenly distributed in and between hymenophoral projections. Basidia suburniform, 4-spored, 13–20 × 4.2–6 μm (n = 16/1). Basidiospores thin-walled, narrowly ellipsoid to subcylindrical, slightly cyanophilic, 5.3–6.9(–7.2) × 3.1–4(–4.2) μm (n = 30/1), L = 6.165, W = 3.62, Q = 1.7.Distribution and ecology: Western Uganda, on bark of angiosperm branch. So far known only from the type locality.Typus: Uganda, Western Uganda, Kabarole district, Kibale National Park, Makerere University Field Station, on bark of angiosperm branch, 20 Apr. 2002, L. Ryvarden, 44818 (holotype O, isotype in H) – ITS and 28S sequence, GenBank OK273853.Notes: Lyomyces densiusculus resembles the L. sambuci species complex. Despite being recently addressed by Yurchenko and Wang , some taxonomic problems in the L. sambuci complex still linger. According to the published data and our own observations, it contains several true species – undescribed or with existing old names – separated by DNA, morphology (at least in some cases), and ecological preferences. While making the decision to introduce L. densiusculus as a new species, we were guided by the following considerations. Morphologically, the combination of densely packed hyphae and subcylindrical spores allows separating this species from European or African collections of L. sambuci s.l. we are aware of. According to our molecular analyses, L. densiusculus is distant enough (the closest match is 94.6 %, or 40 bp difference in ITS) from any sequences in public databases, as well as our unpublished sequences, to not belong to some recently described Lyomyces. We also studied the type of its closest relative L. fimbriatus, Wu 880729-13, described from Taiwan. It has grandinioid basidiocarps with fimbriate projections, more loose hyphal structure, well-differentiated long cystidia, and ellipsoid to broadly ellipsoid spores, altogether making distinguishing these two species easy.Viner & Ryvarden, . MycoBank MB 841321. Fig. 6.
Fig. 6.
Xylodon angustisporus (holotype). A. Section of the sporocarp through hymenophoral projection. B. Capitate cystidia. C. Moniliform cystidia.
Etymology: Angustisporus (Lat., adj.), narrow-spored, refers to the narrow spores.Basidiocarp effused, up to 5 cm in the widest dimension. Margin indistinct, hymenial surface cream to almost light ochraceous, grandinioid; hymenophoral projections up to 200 μm high, 150–200 μm broad at base, 8–11 per mm. Hyphal system monomitic; hyphae clamped, distinct, thin- to thick-walled especially in subiculum (up to 1 μm). Subhymenial hyphae cyanophilic, 1.5–3.5 μm wide (n = 29/2). Subicular hyphae slightly cyanophilic, branched mostly at right angles, (1.2–)2.1–4.6(–5) μm wide (n = 22/2). A few subicular hyphae have large intercalary inflations, 7–10 μm wide. Characteristic rounded crystals scattered through basidiocarp, 3–6 μm in diam. Hymenial elements cyanophilic to strongly cyanophilic. Cystidia are of different shapes: from capitate and spathulate to obtuse and moniliform, 12–21.4(–35) × (3.2–)3.5–5.5(–6.2) μm (n = 73/2). Moniliform cystidia are mostly confined to the base of hymenophoral projections. Cystidia of all shapes sometimes have strongly cyanophilic contents and (or) thickened-walls (up to 0.8 μm). Thick- to thin walled hyphidia make up the core of hymenophoral projections. Some thin walled hyphidia moderately to strongly flexuous. Basidia suburniform, 4-spored, 13–22 × 3.9–5 μm (n = 21/2). Basidiospores thin-walled, narrowly ellipsoid to subcylindrical, slightly cyanophilic, (4.3–)4.8–6.2 × 2.4–3.2 μm (n = 63/2), L = 5.2, W = 2.4, Q = 1.84.Distribution and ecology: So far known only from Cameroon, on bark of angiosperms.Typus: Cameroon, the East Region, Upper Nyong Division, Dja Biosphere Reserve, NW Dja sector, 3 km south of Somalomo, on bark of angiosperm branch, 12 Sep. 2019, L. Ryvarden, 50691B (holotype O, isotype in H) – ITS and 28S sequence, GenBank OK273831.Additional materials examined: Cameroon, the Southwest Region, Ndian Division, Korup National Park, on trail to transect P, lowland rain forest, on liana hanging down from high canopy, 2 Mar. 1991, L. Ryvarden, 22729 (O).Notes: Xylodon angustisporus is a sister taxon of X. pruniaceus (see below) described from eastern Africa, which differs only in the spore morphology and slightly more robust basidiocarps. Xylodon angustisporus might be confused with X. nespori, a species (or probably a species complex) with a wide intercontinental distribution. Xylodon nespori specimen Ryvarden 22729 reported from Cameroon (Hjortstam ), turned out to be X. angustisporus, thus further underlining the morphological similarity between the two species. Generally, X. nespori differs in spore morphology but, in our experience, some individuals of X. nespori from the Holarctic give spore measurements overlapping with X. angustisporus. Therefore, spores alone might not be characteristic enough. We find moniliform cystidia, flexuous hyphidia, slightly more dense hyphal structure, and hymenium with abundant strongly cyanophilic elements in X. angustisporus to be good distinguishing features between the two species.Viner & Ryvarden, MycoBank MB 841330. Fig. 7.
Fig. 7.
Xylodon dissiliens (holotype). A. Section of the sporocarp through hymenophoral projection. B. Spores. C. Leptocystidia. D. Sterile hymenophoral elements.
Etymology: Dissiliens (Lat., adj.), bursting, refers to the cystidia, which easily collapse.Basidiocarp effused, up to 5 cm in the widest dimension. Margin pruinose, grayish, while the rest of hymenial surface white, grandinioid; hymenophoral projections rather irregularly arranged, barely visible for the unaided eye, up to 100 μm high, 80–100 μm broad at base, 9–11(–13) per mm. Hyphal structure monomitic, hyphae clamped. Subhymenial hyphae thin-walled, slightly cyanophilic, (2.9–)3.4–5 μm wide (n = 20/1). Subicular hyphae slightly thick-walled, branched mostly at right angles 2.8–5 μm wide (n = 20/1). Large stellate crystals scattered throughout the basidiocarp. Cystidia of two types: a) large, thin-walled leptocystidia of subhymenial origin, from cylindrical to almost globose, sometimes with protuberances close to the apex, 20–43(–50) × 5–20(–25) μm (n = 21/1); b) capitate cystidia in hymenium, often bearing a stellate crystalline cap, 14–26×4–10 μm (n = 20/1). Basidia suburniform, 4-spored, 14–17.5 × 4–5.5 μm (n = 11/1). Basidiospores thin-walled, ellipsoid, slightly cyanophilic, 5–6.3(–6.7) × 3.7–4.8 μm (n = 30/1), L = 5.5, W = 4.16, Q = 1.32. The whole basidiocarp structure is very delicate: most elements easily collapse if pressed too hard while mounting the slide. This is especially relevant for large leptocystidia, which burst first even when basidia and capitate cystidia are still intact.Distribution and ecology: Western Uganda, on bark of angiosperm branch. So far known only from the type locality.Typus: Uganda, Western Uganda, Kabarole district, Kibale National Park, Makerere University Field Station, on bark of angiosperm branch, 20 Apr. 2002, L. Ryvarden, 44817 (holotype O, isotype in H) – ITS and 28S sequence, GenBank OK273856.Notes: Despite that the holotype Ryvarden 44817 was previously identified as L. sambuci s.l. (Ryvarden & Spirin 2019), the combination of readily collapsing lepto- and capitate cystidia with stellate crystalline cap makes X. dissiliens an easily distinguishable element in Xylodon. The presence of similar capitate cystidia resembles X. detriticus, X. pruinosus, and X. ussuriensis, another morphologically outlined group in the genus (the former Lagarobasidium Jülich).Viner & Ryvarden, MycoBank MB 841331. Fig. 8.
Fig. 8.
Xylodon laxiusculus (holotype). A. Section of the sporocarp through hymenophoral projection. B. Clusters of sterile hymenophoral elements. C. Sterile hymenophoral elements. D. Cystidia. E. Spores.
Etymology: Laxiusculus (Lat., adj.), a bit loose, refers to the loose hyphal structure.Basidiocarp effused, up to 4.5 cm in the widest dimension. Margin pruinose, white, while the rest of hymenial surface cream-coloured, grandinioid; hymenophoral projections rather irregularly arranged, hardly visible with an unaided eye, up to 50 μm high, 50–70 μm broad at base, 8–11 per mm. Hyphal structure monomitic, rather loose, hyphae clamped. Subhymenial hyphae thin-walled, slightly cyanophilic, 2.8–4.5 μm wide (n = 21/1). Subicular hyphae slightly thick-walled, branched mostly at right angles, (2.2–)2.8–4.5 μm wide (n = 20/1), rarely short-celled. Hyphae mostly naked, but loose clusters of rod-shaped crystals present on some subicular hyphae and more rarely in hymenium. Rare hyphal ends bear globose thin-walled swollen apex up to 6 μm in diam. Cystidia irregular in shape, sometimes with several constrictions and (or) swollen apex 9–23.5(–28) × (3–)3.7–6.2) μm (n = 31/1); some cystidia have protuberances close to the apex. A few cystidia have one clamped septum. Basidia suburniform, 4-spored, 17–21 × 4.1–5 μm (n = 13/1). Basidiospores thin-walled, ellipsoid, slightly cyanophilic, (4.2–) 4.8–5.4 × (3–)3.8–4.3 μm (n = 31/1), L = 5.01, W = 3.95, Q = 1.27.Distribution and ecology: Western Uganda, on angiosperm wood (fallen decorticated logs). So far known only from the type locality.Typus: Uganda, Western Uganda, Kabarole district, Kibale National Park, Makerere University Field Station, on dead angiosperm wood, 20 Apr. 2002, L. Ryvarden 44877, (holotype O, isotype in H) – ITS sequence, GenBank OK273827.Notes: We compared X. laxiusculus with collections of its closest match (93.8 % similarity or 41 bp difference in ITS), the Taiwanese species X. subclavatus (Wu 880310-1, 880510-2, 880516). Xylodon laxiusculus lacks most distinguishing features of the former. Those are odontioid hymenium, well-pronounced moniliform cystidia, and capitate hyphal ends with resinous cap. Macroscopically, X. laxiusculus is distinguished by loose (at margin almost porulose) fruit-body with hymenial projections visible only under the lens. Xylodon laxiusculus slightly resembles the conifer-dwelling X. brevisetus, but lacks its characteristic crystals and gloeocystidia. That was the reason why X. laxiusculus was initially reported as X. brevisetus s.l. (Ryvarden & Spirin 2019).(Hjortstam & Ryvarden) Hjortstam & Ryvarden, Syn. Fung. (Oslo) 26: 39. 2009.Basionym: Hyphodontia pruniacea Hjortstam & Ryvarden, Syn. Fung. (Oslo) 18: 25. 2004.Basidiocarp effused, up to 5 cm in the widest dimension. Margin indistinct, hymenial surface cream to almost light ochraceous, grandinioid to odontioid; aculei up to 400 μm high, 150–250 μm broad at base, 5–7 per mm. Hyphal system monomitic; hyphae clamped, distinct, thin- to thick-walled especially in subiculum (up to 1,5 μm). Subhymenial hyphae cyanophilic, 1.7–4(–4.8) μm wide (n = 71/6). Subicular hyphae, slightly cyanophilic, branched mostly at right angles, 2–4.9 μm wide (n = 69/6). A few subicular hyphae have large intercalary inflations, 6–9 μm wide. Characteristic rounded crystals are scattered throughout the basidiocarp, 3–6 μm in diam. Hymenial elements cyanophilic to strongly cyanophilic. Cystidia are of different shapes: from capitate and spathulate to obtuse and moniliform, 11–25(–30) × 3–6 μm (n = 184/6). Moniliform cystidia are mostly confined to the base of hymenophoral projections. Cystidia of all shapes sometimes have strongly cyanophilic contents and (or) thickened-walls (up to 0.8 μm). Thick- to thin-walled hyphidia make up the core of hymenophoral projections. Some thin-walled hyphidia moderately to strongly flexuous. Basidia suburniform, 4-spored, 12–21 × 3.9–6 μm (n = 68/6). Basidiospores thin-walled, narrowly ellipsoid to subcylindrical, slightly cyanophilic, (3.5–)4.6–5.8(–6.9) × 2.8–3.8(–4.1) μm (n = 176/6), L = 5.14, W = 3.29, Q = 1.57.Distribution and ecology: Previously reported only from the type locality in Tanzania, but several additional specimens from Tanzania and Malawi have been identified by us. The species grows on angiosperm wood.Typus: Tanzania, Kilimanjaro Province, Mt. Kilimanjaro west slope, W. Kilimanjaro Forest Sta., alt. ca. 1 800 m, on angiosperm wood, 10–11 Feb. 1973, L. Ryvarden, 10223 (holotype K, isotype in O, studied).Additional materials examined: Malawi, Southern Province, Zomba district, Zomba plateau, alt. ca. 1 500–1 700 m, on dead angiosperm wood, 7 Mar. 1973, L. Ryvarden, 11251 (H, O). Tanzania, Kilimanjaro Province, Mt. Kilimanjaro south slope above Mweka, alt. ca. 1 800–2 300 m, on angiosperm wood, 12 Feb. 1973, L. Ryvarden, 10286 (paratype in K, O); L. Ryvarden, 10301b (H, O); Mt. Kilimanjaro west slope, W. Kilimanjaro Forest Sta., alt. ca. 1 800 m, on angiosperm wood, 10 Feb. 1973, L. Ryvarden, 10216 (H, O); 11 Feb. 1973, L. Ryvarden, 10283 (H, O).Notes: The species is very similar in almost all respects to its Western African relative X. angustisporus described above and resembles the widely distributed X. nespori. The spore morphology of X. pruniaceus allows separating it from those two species.(Hjortstam & Renvall) Hjortstam & Ryvarden, Syn. Fung. (Oslo) 26: 40. 2009.Basionym: Hyphodontia submucronata Hjortstam & Renvall, Edinb. J. Bot.
55: 481. 1998.Typus: Tanzania, Arusha (Northern) Province, Arusha District, western side of Mt. Meru above Laikinoi, ridge between the streams Engare Olmotonyi and Engare Narok, in Hagenia abyssinica forest, alt. 2 800 m, fallen branch of H. abyssinica, 14 Dec. 1988, Renvall, 1602 (holotype H, isotypi in K, KUO, GB) – ITS sequence, GenBank OK273830.Additional materials examined: Kenya, Central Province, Trans-Nzoia county, Mt. Elgon, south of the Suam River valley to Kapcalwa Gate, on dead angiosperm wood, 24 Jan. 1973, Ryvarden, 9322b (H, O).Notes: The second collection of X. submucronatus reported in this study fits well with the description and illustration given by Niemelä . Its identity was further reaffirmed by our ITS analyses. This finding extends the known distribution of this species north up to Eastern Kenya. Despite its morphological similarity to X. spathulatus indicated by Niemelä , the closest match to X. submucronatus is X. rimosissimus (96 % similarity or 25 bp difference in ITS; Fig. 2). Thus, X. submucronatus appears to be a well-defined morphological species among known taxa allied to X. rimosissimus. On the other hand, sequences of X. spathulatus did not even pass the similarity threshold of 93 %.
DISCUSSION
All published results suggest that the relationships within Xylodon and allied genera (including Lyomyces) are not well resolved when the ribosomal DNA loci are the sole source for genetic information. There has been a recent attempt to establish a reliable phylogeny of this group based on a comprehensive taxon sampling and multiple DNA loci by Wang . Their analysis of a concatenated dataset consisting of ITS, 28S, and mitochondrial small subunit (mtSSU) resolved Lyomyces and Xylodon as monophyletic genera. However, the analysis could suffer from a “gappy” alignment approach. Their large collection of partial gene sequences was assembled in a multiple sequence alignment containing a lot of missing data: a number of species were represented by just one or two loci while missing the remaining ones. Such a pattern of missing data could pose a major problem for the phylogenetic analysis (Hartmann & Vision 2008). Considering that Wang have not mentioned any statistical methods compensating for the missing data, the existence of Xylodon and Lyomyces as two separate genera requires further investigation.The addition of our four new species brings the number of currently recognized Xylodon and Lyomyces described from sub-Saharan Africa (including Réunion) to 10. Obviously, that number is not even close to the true diversity of this group on the continent. Considering that tropical Africa remains poorly explored for wood-inhabiting fungi, it is likely that many more Xylodon species will be found.
Authors: Anton Bankevich; Sergey Nurk; Dmitry Antipov; Alexey A Gurevich; Mikhail Dvorkin; Alexander S Kulikov; Valery M Lesin; Sergey I Nikolenko; Son Pham; Andrey D Prjibelski; Alexey V Pyshkin; Alexander V Sirotkin; Nikolay Vyahhi; Glenn Tesler; Max A Alekseyev; Pavel A Pevzner Journal: J Comput Biol Date: 2012-04-16 Impact factor: 1.479
Authors: Dennis A Benson; Mark Cavanaugh; Karen Clark; Ilene Karsch-Mizrachi; James Ostell; Kim D Pruitt; Eric W Sayers Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 16.971