Corresponding author: Lei Cai (
Academic editor: I. Schmitt
Liang J, Li G, Zhou S, Zhao M, Cai L (2019) Myrothecium-like new species from turfgrasses and associated rhizosphere. MycoKeys 51: 29–53.
Most myrothecium-like species are saprobes in soils (
In a survey of turfgrass diseases from 2017, a number of myrothecium-like strains were collected from leaves and roots of turfgrasses and their rhizosphere. The aim of this study was to characterize these strains based on morphology and molecular phylogenetic analyses.
From May 2017 to March 2018, turfgrass diseases were investigated on cold-season species in Beijing and on warm-season species in Hainan Province. Atotal of 130 samples were collected. Each sample was treated as an underground part of soil sample and a ground part of diseased grasses. Soil samples were isolated following the modified dilution plate method (
Strains and NCBI GenBank accessions used in the phylogenetic analyses.
Species | Isolate no. a | Host/Substrate | Country | NCBI accession numbers | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Decaying agaric | Japan |
|
|
|
– | |
|
Japan |
|
|
|
– | ||
|
|
England |
|
|
|
– | |
Agaric | Canada |
|
|
|
– | ||
|
CBS117712T | Unknown | USA |
|
|
|
|
|
Soil in mopane woodlands | Namibia |
|
|
|
|
|
Dead hardwood | USA |
|
|
|
|
||
Soil | Namibia |
|
|
|
|
||
LC12196 | rhizosphere soils of |
China |
|
|
|
– | |
|
deteriorated baled cotton | USA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cyprus |
|
|
|
|
||
LC12191 | Rhizosphere soils of |
China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12192 | Rhizosphere soils of |
China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12193 | Rhizosphere soils of |
China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12194 | Rhizosphere soils of |
China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12195 | Rhizosphere soils of |
China |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unknown | India |
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | USA |
|
|
|
|
||
|
Prairie soil | USA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CGMCC3.19213T = LC12143 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
LC12144 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CGMCC3.19198T = LC12140 | Leaves of |
Hainan, China |
|
|
|
|
LC12141 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Hainan, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12142 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Hainan, China |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rotten leaf | Brazil | – |
|
|
|
|
Rotten leaf | Brazil | – |
|
|
|
||
|
Soil | Turkey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Netherlands |
|
|
|
– | |
|
Decaying leaf | Brazil |
|
|
|
|
|
Bark | Zimbabwe | – |
|
|
|
||
|
Soil collected in |
USA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CGMCC3.19208T = LC12122 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
– |
|
LC12123 | Leaves of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12124 | Leaves of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
|
LC12125 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
LC12126 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12127 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CGMCC3.19206T = LC12128 |
|
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
LC12129 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12130 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12131 | rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
– | |
LC12132 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12133 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12134 | Roots of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
– | |
LC12135 | Roots of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
– | |
|
Soil | Papua New Guinea |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dead twig | India | – |
|
|
|
|
Dead twig | Nepal | – |
|
|
|
||
|
Forest soil | Malaysia |
|
|
|
|
|
rhizoplane and roots of plants | Ecuador | – |
|
|
|
||
|
Leaves of |
England |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decaying grass leaf | USA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leaf litter | China |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Madagascar | – |
|
|
|
||
CPC 25150 | Tarspot lesion | South Africa |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dead twig | Japan |
|
|
|
|
|
Pyrenomycete | Hawaii |
|
|
|
|
||
|
Soil collected in tallgrass prairie | USA | – |
|
|
|
|
|
United Kingdom | – |
|
|
|
||
Dune sand | France |
|
|
|
|
||
|
The Netherlands | – |
|
|
|
||
|
Soil | Spain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rhizosphere soils of |
China |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Surface soil in desert | Namibia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | Turkey |
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | USA |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
Canada | – |
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | Turkey |
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | Turkey |
|
|
|
|
||
|
Soil | Turkey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decaying leaf | Brazil |
|
|
|
– | |
Air | Cuba |
|
|
|
|
||
|
Unknown | India |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Italy |
|
|
|
|
||
Water | The Netherlands |
|
|
|
|
||
Colombia |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Guiyang, China |
|
|
|
– | |
|
Guiyang, China |
|
|
|
– | ||
|
|||||||
|
Guizhou, China |
|
|
|
– | ||
|
CGMCC3.19212T = LC12136 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
LC12137 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12138 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12139 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soil in virgin forest | Brazil |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | Papua New Guinea |
|
|
– |
|
|
|
Soi | Papua New Guinea |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | Spain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Malawi |
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | Namibia |
|
|
|
|
||
|
Soil | India |
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | Colombia |
|
|
|
|
||
|
Rotten bark | India |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dune sand | Iran |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | Ukrain |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12189 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
LC12190 | Rhizosphere soils of |
Beijing, China |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Palm leaf | Japan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | The Netherlands |
|
|
|
|
|
Soil | New Zealand |
|
|
|
|
||
|
Soil | Papua New Guinea |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UK |
|
|
|
– | |
|
Tonga |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
Ecuador |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nepal | – |
|
|
|
||
|
|
UK |
|
|
|
|
†
Descriptions of macromorphological features are based on 7-d old materials incubated in the dark at room temperature (20–25 °C) and grown on potato dextrose agar (2% w/w;
Genomic DNA was extracted from 1–2 weeks’ old cultures grown on potato dextrose agar (2% w/w;
The purified PCR products were sequenced in both forward and reverse directions on an ABI-3730 XL DNA Analyzer (Applied Biosystems, California, USA). The sequences were checked and manually corrected where necessary. A consensus contig was assembled with BioEdit v. 7.0.9 (
Phylogenetic analyses were based on Bayesian inference (
In this study, 603 fungal strains were isolated. Based on colony morphologies and preliminary sequence comparison of
The ML consensus tree inferred from a four-locus concatenated alignment (
Characteristics of the different datasets and statistics of phylogenetic analyses used in this study.
Locus† | Number of sites* | Evolutionary model‡ | Number of tree sampled in B | Maximum-likelihood statistics | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total | Conserved | Phylogenetically informative | B unique patterns | Best tree optimised likelihood | Tree length | |||
|
569 | 334 | 193 | 247 | 7501 | -32666.73 | 5.36 | |
|
318 | 168 | 140 | 159 | ||||
|
732 | 258 | 381 | 490 | ||||
|
724 | 360 | 367 | 367 |
†
China, Beijing, isolated from rhizosphere soils of
China.
Name refers to the setae with tapered and sharp apices.
China, Beijing, from leaves of
The multi-locus phylogenetic analyses indicated that
China, Beijing, isolated from rhizosphere soils of
China.
Named refers the setae with obtuse apices.
China, Beijing, from rhizosphere soils of
China, Beijing, Olympic Park, from rhizosphere soil of
China.
Name refers the substrate, soil, from which this fungus was isolated.
China, Beijing, Olympic Park, from rhizosphere soil of
China, Hainan Province, Haikou, isolated from leaves of
China.
Name refers the host,
China, Hainan, from leaves of
China, Beijing, Olympic Park, from rhizosphere soil of
China.
Named after the country of collection, China.
China, Beijing, Olympic Park, from rhizosphere soils of
The
By comparing the topologies of the four single-locus trees, incomplete lineage sorting was discovered in
In the multi-locus sequence analysis of
This study was financially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC 31600405).
Figure S1. The ML consensus tree inferred based on
phylogenetic data
The type strains were labeled with “T”. Strains obtained from this study are in red.
Figure S2. The ML consensus tree inferred based on
phylogenetic data
The type strains were labeled with “T”. Strains obtained from this study are in red.
Figure S3. The ML consensus tree inferred based on
phylogenetic data
The type strains were labeled with “T”. Strains obtained from this study are in red.
Figure S4. The ML consensus tree inferred based on
phylogenetic data
The type strains were labeled with “T”. Strains obtained from this study are in red.
Figure S5. The ML consensus tree inferred based on LSU and
phylogenetic data
The type strains were labeled with “T”. Strains obtained from this study are in red.
Table S1. NCBI GenBank accessions of
phylogenetic data