Zhan-Bo Liu1, Jun-Li Zhang2, Viktor Papp3, Yu-Cheng Dai1. 1. School of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China. 2. Institute of Vegetable Research, Jinzu Road 147, Lhasa 850000, China. 3. Department of Botany, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 1118 Budapest, Hungary.
Abstract
Two new wood-inhabiting fungi Hermanssonia fimbriata sp. nov. and Phlebia austroasiana sp. nov. in the Meruliaceae family are described and illustrated from southwestern China based on molecular and morphological evidence. The characteristics of H. fimbriata include annual, resupinate basidiomata, the absence of cystidia and cystidioles, oblong ellipsoid basidiospores of 5-6 × 2.4-3 μm, and growth on rotten gymnosperm wood in the east Himalayas. Its basidiomata change drastically upon drying, from being a light-coloured, juicy, papillose-to-wrinkled hymenophore, to a dark-coloured, corky-to-gelatinous, and more or less smooth hymenophore. The characteristics of Ph. austroasiana include annual, resupinate basidiomata, a hydnoid hymenophore, 2-3 spines per mm, the presence of tubular cystidia of 20-25 × 3-3.5 µm, oblong ellipsoid basidiospores of 4.4-5.2 × 2.1-3 μm, and growth on angiosperm wood in tropical forests in the southern Yunnan Province. The phylogenetic analyses based on the combined 2-locus dataset (ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 (ITS) + nuclear large subunit RNA (nLSU)) confirm the placement of two new species, respectively, in Hermanssonia and Phlebia s. lato. Phylogenetically, the closely-related species to these two new species are discussed.
Two new wood-inhabiting fungi Hermanssonia fimbriata sp. nov. and Phlebia austroasiana sp. nov. in the Meruliaceae family are described and illustrated from southwestern China based on molecular and morphological evidence. The characteristics of H. fimbriata include annual, resupinate basidiomata, the absence of cystidia and cystidioles, oblong ellipsoid basidiospores of 5-6 × 2.4-3 μm, and growth on rotten gymnosperm wood in the east Himalayas. Its basidiomata change drastically upon drying, from being a light-coloured, juicy, papillose-to-wrinkled hymenophore, to a dark-coloured, corky-to-gelatinous, and more or less smooth hymenophore. The characteristics of Ph. austroasiana include annual, resupinate basidiomata, a hydnoid hymenophore, 2-3 spines per mm, the presence of tubular cystidia of 20-25 × 3-3.5 µm, oblong ellipsoid basidiospores of 4.4-5.2 × 2.1-3 μm, and growth on angiosperm wood in tropical forests in the southern Yunnan Province. The phylogenetic analyses based on the combined 2-locus dataset (ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 (ITS) + nuclear large subunit RNA (nLSU)) confirm the placement of two new species, respectively, in Hermanssonia and Phlebia s. lato. Phylogenetically, the closely-related species to these two new species are discussed.
Entities:
Keywords:
diversity; macrofungi; new taxa; phylogenetic analyses; wood-rotting fungi
The phlebioid clade within Polyporales includes three lineages at a family level, namely Phanerochaetaceae, Irpicaceae, and Meruliaceae [1,2]. The taxonomy of many of the genera belonging to these families is not currently settled, and a case in point example is the genus Phlebia. In a recent study, Chen et al. [3] concluded that Phlebia s.l. is still polyphyletic, with members addressed in all families of the phlebioid clade. Based on their multigene phylogenetic analysis, the core Phlebia clade belongs to the Meruliaceae with three additional clades: the Hydnophlebia clade, the Mycoacia clade, and the Sarcodontia clade. The core Phlebia clade included the genera Aurantiopileus Ginns et al., Aurantiporus Murrill, Pappia Zmitr., and Phlebia s.s., as well as some species of Ceriporiopsis Domański s.l. and Mycoacia s.l. [3].Phlebia Fr. was erected by Fries [4] and typified by Phlebia radiata Fr. As the delimitation of the genus Phlebia s. str. is not yet clarified, in the present paper, we treat Phlebia sensu in the same way as Chen et al. [3]. The genus is characterized by white-rot, resupinate or rarely pileate basidiocarps with a tuberculate, merulioid, folded, odontioid or hydnoid hymenophore, a monomitic hyphal system, generative hyphae with clamp connections, neither amyloid nor dextrinoid, and allantoid to ellipsoid, hyaline, thin-walled, smooth, neither amyloid nor dextrinoid, acyanophilous basidiospores [3,5]. Formerly, several genera have been proposed to accommodate different lineages of Phlebia s. lato, but still many of the species has no modern interpretation, e.g., [3,6]. The monotypic genus Hermanssonia Zmitr. (Meruliaceae, Polyporales) was erected by Zmitrovich [7], based on H. centrifuga (P. Karst.) Zmitr. (=Phlebia centrifuga P. Karst.). The genus is characterized by white-rot, resupinate to effuse-reflexed, ceraceous to cartilaginous basidiomata, a phlebioid (radially-costate) or tuberculate hymenophore, a monomitic hyphal system, generative hyphae with clamp connections, and cylindrical, hyaline, thin-walled, smooth, neither amyloid nor dextrinoid basidiospores [7].Four resupinate phlebioid specimens were collected from southwestern China (Tibet and Yunnan Province) during studies on wood-inhabiting fungi, and their morphology corresponded to concepts of Hermanssonia and Phlebia. Phylogenetic analyses based on the ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 (ITS) and nuclear large subunit RNA (nLSU) rDNA sequences were conducted to confirm their affinity. Both morphological and molecular evidence demonstrated that these four specimens represent two undescribed species of Meruliaceae. Thus, they are described in this paper.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Morphological Studies
Macro-morphological descriptions were based on voucher specimens and field notes. Microscopic structures were prepared from slide preparations of dried tissues stained with Cotton Blue and Melzer’s reagent as described by Wu et al. [8]. The following abbreviations are used in the description: CB = Cotton Blue; CB– = acyanophilous in Cotton Blue; IKI = Melzer’s reagent; IKI– = neither amyloid nor dextrinoid in Melzer’s reagent; KOH = 5% potassium hydroxide; L = mean spore length (arithmetic average of basidiospores); W = mean spore width (arithmetic average of basidiospores); and Q = variation in the L/W ratios between the specimens studied, (n = a/b) = number of spores (a) measured from given number of specimens (b). When the variation in spore size is shown, 5% of the measurements were excluded from each end of the range, and these values are shown in parentheses. Special colour terms follow Petersen [9] and herbarium abbreviations follow Thiers [10]. The voucher specimens for the present study are deposited in the herbarium of the Institute of Microbiology, Beijing Forestry University (BJFC), Beijing, China.
2.2. DNA Extraction, PCR, and Sequencing
Total genomic DNA was extracted from dried specimens using a CTAB Rapid Plant Genome Extraction Kit (Aidlab Biotechnologies Company, Ltd., Beijing, China) according to the manufacturer’s instructions with some modifications [11]. The ITS regions were amplified with primers ITS4 and ITS5 [12]. The nLSU regions were amplified with primers LR0R and LR7 [13].The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) procedure for the ITS was as follows: initial denaturation at 95 °C for 3 min, followed by 35 cycles at 94 °C for 40 s, 54 °C for 45 s, 72 °C for 1 min, and a final extension of 72 °C for 10 min. The PCR procedure for the nLSU was as follows: initial denaturation at 94 °C for 1 min, followed by 35 cycles at 94 °C for 30 s, 48 °C for 1 min, and 72 °C for 1.5 min, and a final extension of 72 °C for 10 min [14]. The purification and sequencing of the PCR products was conducted by the Beijing Genomics Institute, Beijing, China, with the same primers used in the PCR reactions. Species were identified by sequence comparison with accessions in the NCBI databases using the BLAST program.
2.3. Phylogenetic Analyses
Phylogenetic trees were constructed using ITS + nLSU rDNA sequences, and phylogenetic analyses were performed with the Maximum Likelihood (ML), Maximum Parsimony (MP), and Bayesian Inference (BI) methods. Sequences of the species and strains were primarily adopted from ITS-based and 28S-based tree topology, as described by Huang et al. [5] and Chen et al. [3]. New sequences generated in this study, along with reference sequences retrieved from GenBank (Table 1), were aligned by MAFFT 7 (Katoh et al. [15]; http://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server/, accessed on 18 April 2022) using the “G-INS-i” strategy and manually adjusted in BioEdit v. 7.2.5 [16]. Unreliably aligned sections were removed before the analyses, and efforts were made to manually inspect and improve the alignment. The data matrix was edited in Mesquite v3.70 (https://www.mesquiteproject.org/ (accessed on 18 April 2022). [17]. The sequence alignment was deposited at TreeBase. Sequences of Hyphoderma mutatum (Peck) Donk and H. setigerum (Fr.) Donk obtained from GenBank (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/ (accessed on 18 April 2022) were used as outgroups to root the trees in the ITS + nLSU analysis.
Table 1
Taxa information and GenBank accession numbers of the sequences used in this study.
Species
Sample
GenBank Accession No.
References
ITS
nLSU
Aurantiopileus mayaensi
JV 1504/128
KT156706
—
—
A. mayaensi
TJB10228
HM772140
HM772139
[18]
Aurantiporus croceus
Miettinen-16483
KY948745
KY948901
[2]
A. roseus
Dai 13573
KJ698635
KJ698639
[19]
Ceriporiopsis alboaurantia
Cui 4136
KF845955
KF845948
[20]
C. alboaurantia
Cui 2877
KF845954
KF845947
[20]
C. fimbriata
Cui 1671
KJ698634
KJ698638
[19]
C. fimbriata
Dai 11672
KJ698633
KJ698637
[19]
C. gilvescens
BRNM 710166
FJ496684
FJ496684
[21]
C. gilvescens
BRNM 667882
FJ496685
FJ496719
[21]
C. guidella
HUBO 7659
FJ496687
FJ496722
[21]
C. kunmingensis
CLZhao 152
KX081072
KX081074
[22]
C. kunmingensis
CLZhao 153
KX081073
KX081075
[22]
C. lagerheimii
58240
KX008365
KX081077
[23]
C. pseudoplacenta
PRM 899297
JN592497
JN592504
[24]
C. pseudoplacenta
PRM 899300
JN592498
JN592505
[24]
C. semisupina
Cui 10222
KF845956
KF845949
[20]
C. semisupina
Cui 7971
KF845957
KF845950
[20]
Climacodon septentrionalis
AFTOL-767
AY854082
AY684165
[25]
C. septentrionalis
RLG-6890-Sp
KP135344
—
[26]
Crustodontia chrysocreas
HHB-3946
KP135357
—
[26]
C. chrysocreas
HHB-6333-Sp
KP135358
KP135263
[26]
C. nigrodontea
CLZhao 2758
MT896824
—
[5]
C. nigrodontea
CLZhao 2445
MT896821
MT896818
[27]
C. sp.
KUC20121123-24
KJ668482
—
[28]
C. tongxiniana
CLZhao 2255
MT020773
MT020751
[27]
C. tongxiniana
CLZhao 2316
MT020774
MT020752
[27]
Geesterania carneola
MCW 388/12
KY174999
KY174999
[29]
G. davidii
MCW 396/12
KY174998
KY174998
[29]
Hermanssonia centrifuga
CBS 125890
MH864088
MH875547
[30]
H. centrifuga
HHB-9239-Sp
KP135380
KP135262
[26]
H. fimbriata
Dai 23266
ON135436
ON135440
Present study
H. fimbriata
Dai 23305
ON135437
ON135441
Present study
H. fimbriata
Dai 23306
ON135438
ON135442
Present study
Hydnophanerochaete odontoidea
CLZhao 3882
MH784919
MH784929
[31]
H. odontoidea
CLZhao 4036
MH784927
MH784937
[31]
Hydnophlebia chrysorhiza
FD-282
KP135338
KP135217
[26]
H. chrysorhiza
HHB-18767
KP135337
—
[26]
Hyphoderma mutatum
HHB-15479-Sp
KP135296
KP135221
[26]
H. setigerum
FD-312
KP135297
KP135222
[26]
Lilaceophlebia livida
FCUG 2189
AF141624
AF141624
[21]
L. livida
FCUG 1290
HQ153414
—
[32]
L. subserialis
FCUG 1434
AF141631
AF141631
—
Luteochaete subglobosa
CLZhao 3639
MK881898
MK881788
[33]
L. subglobosa
CLZhao 3475
MK881897
MK881787
[33]
Luteoporia albomarginata
Dai 15229
KU598873
KU598878
[34]
L. albomarginata
GC 1702-1
LC379003
LC379155
[35]
L. citriniporia
Dai 19507
MT872218
MT872216
[36]
L. citriniporia
Dai 19622
MT872219
MT872217
[36]
L. lutea
CHWC 1506-68
MZ636997
MZ637157
[3]
L. lutea
GC 1409-1
MZ636998
MZ637158
[3]
Mycoacia aurea
DLL 2011263
KJ140747
—
[1]
M. aurea
RLG-5075-Sp
KY948759
MZ637161
[2,3]
M. aurea
DLL2011_100
KJ140614
—
[37]
M. fuscoatra
HHB 15354T
KP135367
—
[26]
M. cf. kurilensis
WEI 18-312
MZ637001
MZ637162
[3]
M. cf. kurilensis
WEI 18-324
MZ637002
MZ637163
[3]
M. fuscoatra
KHL 13275
JN649352
JN649352
[21]
M. nothofagi
HHB 12067
KP135370
—
[26]
M. nothofagi
KHL 13750
GU480000
GU480000
[21]
Mycoaciella bispora
EL13_99
—
AY586692
[38]
M. efibulata
WEI 19-057
MZ637012
MZ637172
[3]
M. efibulata
WEI 16-172
MZ637011
MZ637171
[3]
Odoria alborubescens
BP106943
MG097864
MG097867
[39]
O. alborubescens
BRNU 627479
JQ821319
JQ821318
[40]
Pappia fissilis
814
HQ728291
HQ729001
[41]
P. fissilis
BRNM 699803
HQ728292
HQ729002
[41]
Phlebia acanthocystis
KUC20131001-33
KJ668484
KJ668337
[26]
P. acanthocystis
FP150571
KY948767
KY948844
[2]
P. acerina
FD 301
KP135378
—
[2]
P. acerina
HHB 11146
KP135372
—
[26]
P. austroasiana
Dai 17556
ON135439
ON135443
Present study
P. austroasiana
E8898A
KJ654590
—
[42]
P. brevispora
HHB 7030
KP135387
—
[26]
P. brevispora
FBCC1463
LN611135
LN611135
[43]
P. floridensis
HHB 7175
KP135384
—
[26]
P. floridensis
HHB-9905-Sp
KP135383
KP135264
[26]
P. fuscotuberculata
CLZhao 10227
MT020759
MT020737
[27]
P. fuscotuberculata
CLZhao 10239
MT020760
MT020738
[27]
P. hydnoidea
HHB-1993-Sp
KY948778
KY948853
[2]
P. lindtneri
GB-1027
AB210076
—
[44]
P. lindtneri
GB-501
KY948772
KY948847
[2]
P. ludoviciana
HHB-8715-Sp
KY948770
KY948846
[2]
P. ludoviciana
FD-427
KP135342
—
[26]
P. nantahaliensis
HHB-2816-Sp
KY948777
KY948852
[2]
P. radiata
CBS 285.56
MH857642
MH869187
[30]
P. radiata
AFTOL-484
AY854087
AF287885
[25]
P. radiata
UBC: F19726
HQ604797
HQ604797
[1]
P. rufa
FBCC297
LN611092
LN611092
[43]
P. rufa
HHB-14924
KP135374
—
[26]
P. serialis
FCUG 2868
HQ153429
—
[32]
P. serialis
UC2023146
KP814195
—
[33]
P. setulosa
PH 11749
GU461312
—
[1]
P. setulosa
HHB-6891-Sp
KP135382
KP135267
[26]
P. setulosa
AH31879
GQ259417
GQ259417
[45]
P. subochracea I
KGN 162/95
EU118656
EU118656
[46]
P. subochracea II
FBCC295
LN611116
LN611116
[43]
P. subochracea II
HHB-8494-Sp
KY948768
KY948845
[2]
P. tomentopileata
CLZhao 9563
MT020765
MT020743
[27]
P. tomentopileata
CLZhao 9515
MT020764
MT020742
[27]
P. tremellosa
ES 20082
JX109859
JX109859
[1]
P. tremellosa
CBS 217.56
MH857589
MH869138
[30]
Phlebiporia bubalina
Dai 13168
KC782526
KC782528
[47]
P. bubalina
Dai 15179
KY131843
KY131902
[48]
Sarcodontia uda
FP-101544-Sp
KP135361
KP135232
[26]
Sarcodontia uda
USDA Kropp 1
KY948764
—
[2]
Scopuloides hydnoides
FP-150473
KP135355
KP135284
[26]
S. hydnoides
WEI 17-569
MZ637085
MZ637283
[3]
Stereophlebia tuberculata
FCUG 3157
HQ153427
—
[32]
S. tuberculata
Wu 1708-107
MZ637089
MZ637286
[3]
New sequences are in bold.
Taxa information and GenBank accession numbers of the sequences used in this study.New sequences are in bold.Maximum Parsimony analysis was applied to the ITS + nLSU dataset sequences. The approaches to phylogenetic analysis utilized those conducted by Chen and Cui [47], and the tree was constructed using PAUP* version 4.0 beta 10 [49]. All the characters were equally weighted, and gaps were treated as missing data. Trees were inferred using the heuristic search option with tree bisection and reconnection (TBR) branch swapping, and 1000 random sequence addition maxtrees were set to 5000. Branches of zero length were collapsed, and all the parsimonious trees were saved. Clade robustness was assessed using a bootstrap (BT) analysis with 1000 replicates [50]. Descriptive tree statistics, including the Consistency Index (CI), Homoplasy Index (HI), Rescaled Consistency index (RC), Retention Index (RI), and tree length (TL), were calculated for each Maximum Parsimonious Tree (MPT) generated.The research using ML was conducted using RAxML-HPC v. 8.2.3 [51] and RAxML-HPC through the CIPRES Science Gateway ([52]; http://www.phylo.org, accessed on 18 April 2022). Statistical support values (BS) were obtained using nonparametric bootstrapping with 1000 replicates. The BI analysis was performed with MrBayes 3.2.7a [53]. Four Markov chains were run for two runs from random starting trees for 3 million generations until the split deviation frequency value < 0.01, and the trees were sampled at every 1000 generation. The first 25% of the sampled trees were discarded as burn-in, and the remaining ones were used to reconstruct a majority rule consensus tree and calculate the Bayesian Posterior Probabilities (BPP) of the clades.A total of 24 models of evolution were scored using PAUP* version 4.0 beta 10 [49]. Optimal substitution models for the combined dataset were then determined using the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) implemented in MrModeltest 2.3 [54,55]. The model GTR + I + G was selected for use in the Maximum Likelihood (ML) and Bayesian Inference (BI) analyses.Branches that received bootstrap support for Maximum Likelihood (BS), Maximum Parsimony (BP), and Bayesian Posterior Probabilities (BPP) > 75% (BS), 50% (BP), and 0.9 (BPP) were considered to be significantly supported. In addition, the ML analysis resulted in the best tree, and only the ML tree is shown along with the support values from the MP and BI analyses. FigTree v1.4.4 [56] was used to visualize the resulting tree.
3. Results
3.1. Phylogenetic Analyses
The combined ITS + nLSU dataset included sequences from 110 specimens representing 61 taxa (Table 1). The dataset had an aligned length of 2349 characters, of which 1503 were constant, 195 were variable but parsimony-uninformative, and 651 were parsimony-informative. MP analysis yielded nine equally parsimonious trees (TL = 3586, CI = 0.377, RI = 0.752, RC = 0.283, HI = 0.623). The best model for the ITS + nLSU dataset estimated and applied in the Bayesian analysis was GTR + I + G. Bayesian analysis and MP analysis resulted in a similar topology to the ML analysis, with an average standard deviation of split frequencies of 0.006112 (BI).The phylogeny (Figure 1) inferred from the ITS and nLSU sequences demonstrated that the new species, Hermanssonia fimbriata and Phlebia austroasiana, clustered into the genera Hermanssonia and Phlebia, respectively. Hermanssonia fimbriata grouped with H. centrifuga with strong support (100% BS, 100% BP, and 1.00 BPP, Figure 1) and Phlebia austroasiana grouped with Ph. brevispora Nakasone with strong support (92% BP, 97% BS, 1.00 BPP, Figure 1).
Figure 1
Phylogeny of Meruliaceae by MP analysis based on combined ITS and nLSU rDNA sequences. Branches are labelled with maximum likelihood bootstrap > 75%, parsimony bootstrap proportions > 50%, and Bayesian posterior probabilities > 0.9, respectively. New species are in bold.
Z.B. Liu & Y.C. Dai, sp. Nov. (Figure 2A,B and Figure 3)
Figure 2
Basidiomata of Hermanssonia fimbriata and Phlebia austroasiana. (A) Juvenile basidiomata of Hermanssonia fimbriata (Holotype, Dai 23266). (B) Mature basidiomata of H. fimbriata (Paratype, Dai 23305). (C) Basidiomata of Phlebia austroasiana (Holotype, Dai 17556). Scale bars = 1.0 cm (A,B); 0.5 cm (C). Photo by: Yu-Cheng Dai (A,B) and Zhan-Bo Liu (C).
Figure 3
Microscopic structures of Hermanssonia fimbriata (Holotype, Dai 23266). (a) Basidiospores. (b) Basidia and basidioles. (c) Hyphae from subiculum. (d) Hyphae from subhymenium. Drawings by: Zhan-Bo Liu.
3.2. Taxonomy
MycoBank number: MB 844038.Diagnosis—Hermanssonia fimbriata is characterized by annual, resupinate basidiomata, a monomitic hyphal system with clamp connections, the absence of cystidia and cystidioles, and basidiospores which are oblong ellipsoid, hyaline, thin-walled, smooth, IKI–, CB–, and 5–6 × 2.4–3 μm. Its basidiomata change drastically upon drying, from being a light-coloured, juicy, papillose-to-wrinkled hymenophore, to a dark-coloured, corky-to-gelatinous, and more or less smooth hymenophore.Etymology—Fimbriata (Lat.): refer to the species having fimbriate margin.Type—China. Tibet, Linzhi, Milin County, Nanyi Valley, ca. 94°22′E, 29°37′N, elev. 3000 m, on rotten wood of Picea, 22 October 2021, Dai 23266 (BJFC 037837).Basidiomata—Annual, resupinate, adnate, when fresh ceraceous and salmon (6A4) when juvenile, gelatinous, darkening to pale mouse grey (7C2) to light vinaceous grey (13B2/3) when mature, becoming corky, salmon (6A4) and reddish brown (8/9E7) upon drying, first as small colonies, later confluent up to 10 cm or more in the longest dimension, 4 cm in the widest dimension, and less than 0.1 mm thick at center when dry; hymenial surface irregularly papillose and partly radially or unevenly wrinkled; margin white and fimbriate; subiculum very thin to almost absent.Hyphal structure—Hyphal system monomitic; generative hyphae with clamp con-nections, IKI–, CB–; tissue unchanged in KOH.Subiculum—Generative hyphae hyaline, thin- to thick-walled, smooth, rarely branched, loosely interwoven, 2–4 μm in diam.Hymenium—Generative hyphae in subhymenium hyaline, thin-walled, smooth, oc-casionally branched, loosely interwoven, 1.5–3 μm in diam; cystidia and cystidioles ab-sent; basidia clavate, hyaline, bearing four sterigmata and a basal clamp connection, 25–30 × 5–6 μm; basidioles in shape similar to basidia, but slightly shorter.Basidiospores—Ellipsoid to oblong ellipsoid, hyaline, thin-walled, smooth, IKI–, CB–, (4.5–) 5–6 × (2.2–) 2.4–3 μm, L = 5.51 μm, W = 2.78 μm, Q = 1.88–2.04 (n = 60/2).Additional specimens (paratypes) examined—China. Tibet, Linzhi, Milin County, Nanyi Valley, ca. 94°22′E, 29°37′N, elev. 3000 m, on rotten wood of Picea, 22 October 2021, Dai 23305 (BJFC 037876), Dai 23306 (BJFC 037877).Phlebia austroasiana Z.B. Liu & Y.C. Dai, sp. Nov. Figure 2C and Figure 4
Figure 4
Microscopic structures of Phlebia austroasiana (Holotype, Dai 17556). (a) Basidiospores. (b) Basidia and basidioles. (c) Cystidia. (d) Hyphae from spine trama. Drawings by: Zhan-Bo Liu.
MycoBank number: MB 844039.Diagnosis—Phlebia austroasiana is characterized by annual, resupinate basidiomata, a hymenophore with spines, 2–3 spines per mm, a monomitic hyphal system with clamp connections, the presence of tubular cystidia of 20–25 × 3–3.5 µm, and basidiospores which are oblong ellipsoid, hyaline, thin-walled, smooth, IKI–, CB–, 4.4–5.2 × 2.1–3 μm.Etymology—Austroasiana (Lat.): refer to the species which is distributed in southeast Asia.Type—China. Yunnan Province, Jinghong, Primeval Forest Park, ca. 100°52′E, 22°01′N, elev. 763 m, on angiosperm stump, 17 June 2017, Dai 17556 (BJFC 025088).Basidiomata—Annual, resupinate, tightly adnate, gelatinous when dry, up to 5 cm long, 4 cm wide; hymenophore hydnoid, clay buff (6D4) when dry, not cracked; margin indistinct; spines crowded, clay buff (6D4), subulate, mostly separated, rarely fused, up to 2 mm long, 2–3 per mm at the base. Subiculum white, very thin to almost absent.Hyphal structure—Hyphal system monomitic; generative hyphae with clamp con-nections, IKI–, CB–; tissue unchanged in KOH.Spines—Generative hyphae in spine trama hyaline, thin-walled, smooth, frequently branched, loosely interwoven, 2–3.5 μm in diam; cystidia tubular, thin-walled, with a basal clamp connection, 20–25 × 3–3.5 µm; cystidioles absent; basidia clavate, hyaline, bearing four sterigmata and a basal clamp connection, 18–26 × 4–5 μm; basidioles in shape similar to basidia, but slightly shorter.Basidiospores—Ellipsoid to oblong ellipsoid, hyaline, thin-walled, smooth, IKI–, CB–, (4.1–)4.4–5.2 × (2–)2.1–3 μm, L = 4.86 μm, W = 2.53 μm, Q = 1.92 (n = 60/1).
4. Discussion
Chen et al. [3] divided the taxa of Meruliaceae into four clades: the core Phlebia clade, the Hydnophlebia clade, the Mycoacia clade, and the Sarcodontia clade. Two new species, Hermanssonia fimbriata and Phlebia austroasiana, are described in this study, based on morphological characters and phylogenetic analyses. Phylogenetically, they are nested in the core Phlebia clade, based on the ITS + nLSU sequence data (Figure 1).Phylogenetically, three specimens of Hermanssonia fimbriata formed a lineage with strong support (100% BS, 100% BP, and 1.00 BPP, Figure 1) and grouped with H. centrifuga with strong support (100% BS, 100% BP, and 1.00 BPP). Both species share annual, resupinate basidiomata, a monomitic hyphal system, generative hyphae with clamp connections, thin-walled, IKI–, CB– basidiospores, and growth on rotten gymnosperm wood [57]. Hermanssonia fimbriata can be distinguished from H. centrifuga by its shorter basidiospores (5–6 × 2.4–3 µm vs. 6.5–9 × 2.5–3 µm, [57]). Hermanssonia centrifuga was described as Phlebia centrifuga P. Karst. from Finland [58], and an Asian taxon, Phlebia macra Litsch., was described from Siberia [59]. The latter was treated as a synonym of Ph. centrifuga [60]. Phlebia macra differs from Hermanssonia fimbriata by larger basidiospores (6–7.5 × 3–3.2 µm vs. 5–6 × 2.4–3 µm, [59]). Morphologically, H. fimbriata is similar to Phlebia coccineofulva Schwein., Ph. femsjoeensis (Litsch. & S. Lundell) J. Erikss. & Hjortstam, and Ph. radiata. These four species share the phlebioid hymenophore, but the last three species have cystidia, while cystidia are absent in Hermanssonia fimbriata. Above all, basidiospores of H. fimbriata are larger than that of Phlebia femsjoeensis (4–5 × 2–2.5 µm, [61]) and Ph. radiata (4–5 × 1.8–2 µm, [61]), but thinner than that of Ph. coccineofulva (2.8–3.5 µm in width, [61]). Hermanssonia fimbriata also resembles Phlebia subserialis (Bourdot & Galzin) Donk and Luteochaete subglobosa (Sheng H. Wu) C.C. Chen & Sheng H. Wu (=Phlebia wuliangshanensis C.L. Zhao) by the resupinate and ceraceous basidiomata when fresh, a monomitic hyphal system, and generative hyphae with clamp connections; however, cystidia are abundant in L. subglobosa and Phlebia subserialis, while cystidia are absent in Hermanssonia fimbriata. In addition, basidiospores of H. fimbriata are wider than that of Phlebia subserialis (2.4–3 µm vs. 2–2.5 µm, [61]), but thinner than that of Luteochaete subglobosa (2.4–3 µm vs. 3–3.7 µm, [5]). Hermanssonia remained a monotypic genus until the present paper which contributes the second species in the genus.An ITS sequence KJ654590 of sample E8898A, named Phlebia sp. from GenBank, is almost identical to Dai 17556 in the ITS regions and the similarity between them is up to 99.65%. Hence, we believe the sample E8898A collected from Indonesia [42] represents the same species as our specimen (Dai 17556) collected from the Yunnan Province, China. Both samples were collected in tropical Asia, and formed a lineage with strong support (100% BS, 100% BP, and 1.00 BPP, Figure 1) in our phylogeny. Hence, Phlebia austroasiana is described based on these two samples. Ph. austroasiana is closely related to Ph. brevispora (92% BP, 97% BS, 1.00 BPP, Figure 1), however, morphologically, Ph. brevispora differs from Ph. austroasiana by its tuberculate hymenophore [62], while Ph. austroasiana has a hydnoid hymenophore. In addition, Ph. austroasiana is distinguished from Ph. brevispora by its larger basidiospores (4.4–5.2 × 2.1–3 µm vs. 4–4.5 × 2–2.5 µm, [62]). Morphologically, Ph. austroasiana is similar to Ph. capitata Bernicchia & Gorjón. in macromorphology, but the cystidia in Ph. capitata are capitate [61], while the cystidia in Ph. austroasiana are tubular. In addition, Ph. austroasiana is distinguished from Ph. capitata by its smaller basidiospores (4.4–5.2 × 2.1–3 µm vs. 5–5.5 × 2.5–3 μm, [61]).
Authors: Fredrik Ronquist; Maxim Teslenko; Paul van der Mark; Daniel L Ayres; Aaron Darling; Sebastian Höhna; Bret Larget; Liang Liu; Marc A Suchard; John P Huelsenbeck Journal: Syst Biol Date: 2012-02-22 Impact factor: 15.683