Research Article
Print
Research Article
Identification and pathogenicity of Aurifilum species (Cryphonectriaceae, Diaporthales) on Terminalia species in Southern China
expand article infoWen Wang§, ShuaiFei Chen
‡ Chinese Academy of Forestry, Zhanjiang, China
§ Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
Open Access

Abstract

The family of Cryphonectriaceae (Diaporthales) contains many important tree pathogens and the hosts are wide-ranging. Tree species of Terminalia were widely planted as ornamental trees alongside city roads and villages in southern China. Recently, stem canker and cracked bark were observed on 2–6 year old Terminalia neotaliala and T. mantaly in several nurseries in Zhanjiang City, Guangdong Province, China. Typical conidiomata of Cryphonectriaceae fungi were observed on the surface of the diseased tissue. In this study, we used DNA sequence data (ITS, BT2/BT1, TEF-1α, rpb2) and morphological characteristics to identify the strains from Terminalia trees. Our results showed that isolates obtained in this study represent two species of Aurifilum, one previously described species, A. terminali, and an unknown species, which we described as A. cerciana sp. nov. Pathogenicity tests demonstrated that both A. terminali and A. cerciana were able to infect T. neotaliala and two tested Eucalyptus clones, suggesting the potential for Aurifilum fungi to become new pathogens of Eucalyptus.

Key words

Cryphonectriaceae, fungal pathogen, Myrtle, pathogenicity, phylogenetic analysis

Introduction

Cryphonectriaceae is a fungal family within the order Diaporthales. This family is well-known for containing several species that are serious pathogens of trees, causing a wide range of diseases such as blight, die-back, and cankers (Gryzenhout et al. 2004, 2005, 2009; Begoude et al. 2010; Chen et al. 2010, 2011, 2013a, b, 2016, 2018; Wang et al. 2018, 2020; Roux et al. 2020). Most members of this family are easily recognizable based on the disease symptoms, as well as their distinctive yellow to orange or brown stromata and which can turn purple in 3% potassium hydroxide (KOH) and yellow in lactic acid (Gryzenhout et al. 2006, 2009; Jiang et al. 2020).

Twenty-four genera have been described in the Cryphonectriaceae (Gryzenhout et al. 2009, 2010; Begoude et al. 2010; Vermeulen et al. 2011, 2013; Crous et al. 2012; Chen et al. 2013a, b, 2016, 2018; Crane and Burgess 2013; Beier et al. 2015; Ali et al. 2018; Jiang et al. 2018, 2019, 2020; Ferreira et al. 2019; Wang et al. 2020; Huang et al. 2022). Some of the more well-known genera in this family include Cryphonectria parasitica, which caused chestnut blight, and is one of the best-known tree-killing pathogen (Fairchild 1913; Shear and Stevens 1913; Anagnostakis 1987; Heiniger and Rigling 1994; Gryzenhout et al. 2009); Chrysoporthe austroafricana causes a canker disease of Eucalyptus, Syzygium and Tibouchina species in Southern and Eastern Africa (Wingfield et al. 1989; Gryzenhout et al. 2004; Roux et al. 2005; Nakabonge et al. 2006; Gryzenhout et al. 2009); Chrysoporthe cubensis causes a canker disease of Eucalyptus species in West Africa and South America, and also causes diseases in Melastomataceae and Myrtaceae trees (Alfenas et al. 1983; Gryzenhout et al. 2004, 2009; Roux 2010); Chrysoporthe deuterocubensis, causes a canker disease of Eucalyptus species in Africa, Australia, China and Hawaii, and is also reported on native or non-native Melastomataceae and Myrtaceae trees (Davison and Coates 1991; Roux et al. 2005; Nakabonge et al. 2006; Zhou et al. 2008; Gryzenhout et al. 2009; Chen et al. 2010; Van der Merwe et al. 2010; Wang et al. 2020).

In China, various species of Cryphonectriaceae have been found to cause diseases in plants belonging to the Myrtales order. Some of the affected hosts include Eucalyptus hybrid (Chen et al. 2010, 2011; Wang et al. 2018, 2020), Lagerstroemia speciosa (Lythraceae, Myrtales) (Chen et al. 2018), Melastoma candidum, M. sanguineum (Melastomataceae, Myrtales), Psidium guajava (Myrtaceae) (Chen et al. 2016; Wang et 2018, 2020), Syzygium cumini, S. hancei, S. jambos, S. samarangense (Myrtaceae, Myrtales) (Chen et al. 2010, 2011; Van der Merwe et al. 2010; Wang et al. 2018, 2020), Terminalia neotaliala (Combretaceae) (Wang et al. 2020), Rhodomyrtus tomentosa (Myrtaceae, Myrtales) (Chen et al. 2016). Inoculation tests have confirmed that all the Cryphonectriaceae species from Combretaceae, Lythraceae, Melastomataceae, and Myrtaceae in China are pathogenic to their original hosts and Eucalyptus (Chen et al. 2010, 2011, 2016, 2018; Wang et al. 2018, 2020).

Seven of the nine families of Myrtales are commonly found in southern China, and Cryphonectriaceae has been identified as an important pathogen to Myrtales trees in previous studies (Chen et al. 2010, 2011, 2016, 2018; Wang et al. 2018, 2020). Given the diverse climate and host range in southern China, there is potential for the discovery of various Cryphonectriaceae species and potential pathogens on Myrtales trees.

Terminalia species are economically and ecologically important trees in southern China and are widely used for timber, medicine, and ornamental purposes (Editorial Committee of Flora of China 1988; Batawila et al. 2005; Kamtchouing et al. 2006; Angiosperm Phylogeny Group 2009). In 2019, cankers were observed on the stems of Terminalia trees during disease surveys on Myrtales trees in southern China, and fruiting structures of the fungi on the cankered stems exhibited typical Cryphonectriaceae morphological characteristics. The aims of this study were to identify the fungi isolated from these cankers based on DNA sequencing and morphological characteristics and to test their pathogenicity on Terminalia species and two widely planted E. grandis hybrid genotypes.

Materials and methods

Disease symptoms, samples and isolations

In May 2019, disease surveys on Terminalia trees were conducted in Zhanjiang City, Guangdong Province in southern China. Sporocarps with typical characteristics of Cryphonectriaceae were observed on the surfaces of cankers on the branches, stems, and roots of Terminalia trees. In order to identify the pathogens, five experimental sites were set every 30 to 50 kilometers. Diseased bark pieces, branches, twigs, and roots bearing fruiting structures were collected and transported to the laboratory. The fruiting structures were incised using a sterile scalpel blade under a stereoscopic microscope. The spore masses were then transferred to 2% (v/v) malt extract agar (MEA) and incubated at room temperature for three to five days until colonies developed. The pure cultures were obtained by transferring single hyphal tips from the colonies to 2% MEA plates and incubated at room temperature for 7–10 days. The pure cultures are stored in the culture collection (CSF) at the Research Institute of Fast-Growing Trees (RIFT) (previous institution: China Eucalypt Research Centre, CERC), Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAF) in Zhanjiang, Guangdong Province, China.

DNA extraction, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification and sequencing

Representative isolates were selected for DNA sequence analyses, and actively growing mycelium on MEA cultures grown for one week at room temperature was scraped using a sterilized scalpel and transferred into 2.0 mL Eppendorf tubes. Total genomic DNA was extracted using the cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) method described by Van Burik et al. (1998). The extracted DNA was dissolved in 30 μL TE buffer, and the concentration was measured using a Nano-Drop 2000 spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts).

Based on previous research four gene regions, including internal transcribed spacer regions (ITS), two segments of β-tubulin (BT2/BT1), a partial segment of the translation elongation factor 1-α (TEF-1α) and RNA polymerase II (rpb2), were amplified and sequenced as described by Chen et al. (2010, 2016), Liu et al. (1999) and Jiang et al. (2022).

All amplified products were sequenced in both directions using the same primers that were used for the PCR amplification. Sequence reactions were performed by the Beijing Genomics Institute of Guangzhou, China. The nucleotide sequences were edited using Geneious 7.1.8 software. The sequences obtained in this study were submitted to GenBank (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

Phylogenetic analysis

The preliminary identities of the isolates sequenced in this study were obtained by conducting a standard nucleotide BLAST search using the ITS, BT2, and BT1 sequences. The BLAST results showed that the isolates collected in this study were mainly grouped in the genus Aurifilum. Phylogenetic analyses for strains identification in the current study were conducted for both genetic and species identification.

To determine the placement of Aurifilum species, two represent strains in this study were first determined by conducting phylogenetic analyses within Cryphonectriaceae species (Table 1) on combined datasets for the ITS and BT2/BT1 regions. Then, the strains in the Aurifilum genus were further analyzed and identified using separate and combined datasets for the ITS, BT2/BT1, TEF-1α, and rpb2 regions. Sequences of the Aurifilum isolates collected in this study and those from NCBI were aligned using MAFFT 7 (http://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server) with the interactive refinement method (FFT-NS-i) setting (Katoh and Standley 2013). Then they were manually edited in MEGA X.

Table 1.

Isolates from previous studies used in the phylogenetic analyses in the current study.

Identity Isolate No.a,b Host Location GenBank accession no.
ITS BT2 BT1 TEF rpb2
Amphilogia gyrosa CMW10469T Elaeocarpus dentatus New Zealand AF452111 AF525714 AF525707 MN271818 MN271782
CMW10470 Ela. dentatus New Zealand AF452112 AF525715 AF525708 MN271819 MN271783
Aurantioporthe corni MES1001 N/A USA KF495039 N/A KF495069 N/A N/A
CTS1001 N/A USA KF495033 N/A KF495063 N/A N/A
CMW10526 N/A USA DQ120762 AH015163 AH015163 N/A N/A
Aurantiosacculus acutatus CBS 132181T Eucalyptus viminalis Australia JQ685514 N/A N/A MN271823 NA
Aurantiosacculus castaneae CFCC 52456 Castanea mollissima China MH514025 MH539688 MH539678 NA MN271786
Aurantiosacculus eucalyptorum CBS 130826T Euc. globulus Australia JQ685515 N/A N/A MN271824 MN271785
Aurapex penicillata CMW10030T Miconia theaezans Colombia AY214311 AY214275 AY214239 N/A N/A
CMW10035 Mic. theaezans Colombia AY214313 AY214277 AY214241 N/A N/A
Aurifilum marmelostoma CBS124928T Terminalia mantaly Cameroon FJ882855 FJ900590 FJ900585 MN271827 MN271788
CBS124929 Ter. ivorensis Cameroon FJ882856 FJ900591 FJ900586 MN271828 MN271789
Aurifilum terminali CSF10748 Ter. neotaliala China MN199834 MN258767 MN258772 MN258777 OQ942878
CSF10757T Ter. neotaliala China MN199837 MN258770 MN258775 MN258780 OQ942879
Capillaureum caryovora CBL02T Caryocar brasiliense Brazil MG192094 MG211808 MG211827 N/A N/A
CBL06 Car. brasiliense Brazil MG192096 MG211810 MG211829 N/A N/A
Celoporthe borbonica CMW44128T Tibouchina grandiflora La Réunion MG585741 N/A MG585725 N/A N/A
CMW44139 Tib. grandiflora La Réunion MG585742 N/A MG585726 N/A N/A
Celoporthe cerciana CERC 9128T Eucalyptus hybrid tree 4 China, GuangDong MH084352 MH084412 MH084382 MH084442 N/A
CERC 9125 Eucalyptus hybrid tree 1 China, GuangDong MH084349 MH084409 MH084379 MH084439 N/A
Celoporthe dispersa CMW 9976T Syzygium cordatum South Africa DQ267130 DQ267142 DQ267136 HQ730840 N/A
CMW 9978 S. cordatum South Africa AY214316 DQ267141 DQ267135 HQ730841 N/A
Celoporthe eucalypti CMW 26900 Eucalyptus clone EC48 China HQ730836 HQ730826 HQ730816 HQ730849 N/A
CMW 26908T Eucalyptus clone EC48 China HQ730837 HQ730827 HQ730817 HQ730850 N/A
Celoporthe fontana CMW 29375 S. guineense Zambia GU726940 GU726952 GU726952 JQ824073 N/A
CMW 29376T S. guineense Zambia GU726941 GU726953 GU726953 JQ824074 N/A
Celoporthe guangdongensis CMW 12750T Eucalyptus sp. China HQ730830 HQ730820 HQ730810 HQ730843 N/A
Celoporthe indonesiensis CMW 10781T S. aromaticum Indonesia AY084009 AY084021 AY084033 HQ730842 N/A
Celoporthe syzygii CMW 34023T S. cumini China HQ730831 HQ730821 HQ730811 HQ730844 N/A
CMW24912 S. cumini China HQ730833 HQ730823 HQ730813 HQ730846 N/A
Celoporthe tibouchineae CMW44126T Tib. grandiflora La Réunion MG585747 N/A MG585731 N/A N/A
CMW44127 Tib. grandiflora La Réunion MG585748 N/A MG585732 N/A N/A
Celoporthe woodiana CMW13936T Tib. granulosa South Africa DQ267131 DQ267143 DQ267137 JQ824071 N/A
CMW13937 Tib. granulosa South Africa DQ267132 DQ267144 DQ267138 JQ824072 N/A
Chrysomorbus lagerstroemiae CERC 8780 Lagerstroemia speciosa China KY929330 KY929340 KY929350 N/A N/A
CERC 8810T Lag. speciosa China KY929338 KY929348 KY929358 N/A N/A
Chrysoporthe austroafricana CMW 62 Euc. grandis South Africa AF292041 AF273458 AF273063 N/A N/A
CMW 9327 Tib. granulosa South Africa AF273473 AF273455 AF273060 N/A N/A
CMW 2113T Euc. grandis South Africa AF046892 AF273462 AF273067 N/A N/A
Chrysoporthe cubensis CMW 10453 Euc. saligna Democratic Republic of the Congo AY063476 AY063480 AY063478 N/A N/A
CMW 10669 = CRY864 Eucalyptus sp. Republic of the Congo AF535122 AF535126 AF535124 N/A N/A
Chrysoporthe deuterocubensis CMW 11290 Eucalyptus sp. Indonesia AY214304 AY214268 AY214232 N/A N/A
CMW 8651 S. aromaticum Indonesia AY084002 AY084014 AY084026 N/A N/A
Chrysoporthe doradensis CMW 11287T Euc. grandis Ecuador AY214289 AY214253 AY214217 N/A N/A
CMW 11286 Euc. grandis Ecuador AY214290 AY214254 AY214218 N/A N/A
Chrysoporthe hodgesiana CMW 10625 Mic. theaezans Colombia AY956970 AY956980 AY956979 N/A N/A
CMW 9995 Tib. semidecandra Colombia AY956969 AY956978 AY956977 N/A N/A
CMW 10641T Tib. semidecandra Colombia AY692322 AY692325 AY692326 N/A N/A
Chrysoporthe inopina CMW 12727T Tib. lepidota Colombia DQ368777 DQ368807 DQ368806 N/A N/A
CMW 12729 Tib. lepidota Colombia DQ368778 DQ368809 DQ368808 N/A N/A
Chrysoporthe syzygiicola CMW 29940T S. guineense Zambia FJ655005 FJ805236 FJ805230 N/A N/A
CMW 29942 S. guineense Zambia FJ655007 FJ805238 FJ805232 N/A N/A
Chrysoporthe zambiensis CMW29928T Euc. grandis Zambia FJ655002 FJ805233 FJ858709 N/A N/A
CMW29930 Euc. grandis Zambia FJ655004 FJ805235 FJ858711 N/A N/A
Corticimorbus sinomyrti CERC3629T Rhodomyrtus tomentosa China KT167169 KT167189 KT167189 N/A N/A
CERC3631 Rho. tomentosa China KT167170 KT167190 KT167190 N/A N/A
Cryphonectria citrina CBS 109758 Punica granatum USA MN172407 N/A N/A MN271843 EU219342
Cryphonectria decipiens CMW 10436 Quercus suber Portugal AF452117 AF525710 AF525703 N/A N/A
CMW 10484 Castanea sativa Italy AF368327 AF368349 AF368349 N/A N/A
Cryphonectria japonica CMW13742 Q. grosseserrata Japan AY697936 AY697962 AY697961 N/A N/A
Cryphonectria macrospora CMW10463 Cas. cuspidata Japan AF368331 AF368350 AF368351 N/A N/A
CMW10914 Cas. cuspidata Japan AY697942 AY697974 AY697973 N/A N/A
Cryphonectria naterciae C0612 Q. suber Portugal EU442657 N/A N/A MN271844 MN271796
Cryphonectria neoparasitica CFCC 52146 Cas. mollissima China MH514029 MH539692 MH539682 MH539693 N/A
Cryphonectria parasitica CMW 7048 Q. virginiana USA AF368330 AF273470 AF273076 MF442684 N/A
CMW 13749 Cas. mollisima Japan AY697927 AY697944 AY697943 N/A N/A
Cryphonectria quercicola CFCC 52140T Q. wutaishansea China, Shaanxi MG866026 MG896113 MG896117 N/A N/A
CFCC 52141 Q. wutaishansea China, Shaanxi MG866027 MG896114 MG896118 N/A N/A
Cryphonectria quercus CFCC 52138T Q. aliena var. acuteserrata China, Shaanxi MG866024 MG896111 MG896115 MN271849 N/A
CFCC 52139 Q. aliena var. acuteserrata China, Shaanxi MG866025 MG896112 MG896116 N/A N/A
Cryphonectria radicalis CMW10455 Q. suber Italy AF452113 AF525712 AF525705 N/A N/A
CMW 10477 Q. suber Italy AF368328 AF368347 AF368347 N/A N/A
CMW 13754 Fagus japonica Japan AY697932 AY697954 AY697953 N/A N/A
Cryptometrion aestuescens CMW18793 Euc. grandis Indonesia GQ369459 GQ369456 GQ369456 N/A N/A
CMW28535T Euc. grandis North Sumatra, Indonesia GQ369457 GQ369454 GQ369454 N/A N/A
Diversimorbus metrosiderotis CMW37321 Metrosideros angustifolia South Africa JQ862870 JQ862952 JQ862911 N/A N/A
CMW37322T Met. angustifolia South Africa JQ862871 JQ862953 JQ862912 N/A N/A
Endothia cerciana CSF 15398 Quercus sp. China OM801201 OM685050 OM685038 N/A N/A
CSF 15420 Quercus sp. China OM801208 OM685033 OM685045 N/A N/A
Endothia chinensis CFCC 52144 C. mollissima China MH514027 MH539690 MH539680 MN271860 N/A
CMW2091 Q. palustris USA AF368325 AF368336 AF368337 N/A N/A
CMW10442 Q. palustris USA AF368326 AF368338 AF368339 N/A N/A
Holocryphia capensis CMW37887T Met. angustifolia South Africa JQ862854 JQ862936 JQ862895 JQ863051 N/A
CMW37329 Met. angustifolia South Africa JQ862859 JQ862941 JQ862900 JQ863056 N/A
Holocryphia eucalypti CMW7033T Euc. grandis South Africa JQ862837 JQ862919 JQ862878 JQ863034 N/A
CMW7035 Euc. saligna South Africa JQ862838 JQ862920 JQ862879 JQ863035 N/A
Holocryphia gleniana CMW37334T Met. angustifolia South Africa JQ862834 JQ862916 JQ862875 JQ863031 N/A
CMW37335 Met. angustifolia South Africa JQ862835 JQ862917 JQ862876 JQ863032 N/A
Holocryphia mzansi CMW37337T Met. angustifolia South Africa JQ862841 JQ862923 JQ862882 JQ863038 N/A
CMW37338 Met. angustifolia South Africa JQ862842 JQ862924 JQ862883 JQ863039 N/A
Holocryphia sp. CMW6246 Tib. granulosa Australia JQ862845 JQ862927 JQ862886 JQ863042 N/A
Holocryphia sp. CMW10015 Euc. fastigata New Zealand JQ862849 JQ862931 JQ862890 JQ863046 N/A
Immersiporthe knoxdaviesiana CMW37314T Rapanea melanophloeos South Africa JQ862765 JQ862775 JQ862785 N/A N/A
CMW37315 Rap. melanophloeos South Africa JQ862766 JQ862776 JQ862786 N/A N/A
Latruncellus aurorae CMW28274 Galpinia transvaalica Swaziland GU726946 GU726958 GU726958 N/A N/A
CMW28276T G. transvaalica Swaziland GU726947 GU726959 GU726959 N/A N/A
Luteocirrhus shearii CBS130775 Banksia baxteri Australia KC197024 KC197009 KC197015 N/A N/A
CBS130776T B. baxteri Australia KC197021 KC197006 KC197012 N/A N/A
Microthia havanensis CMW11301 Myr. faya Azores AY214323 AY214287 AY214251 N/A N/A
CMW14550 E. saligna Mexico DQ368735 DQ368742 DQ368741 N/A N/A
Myrtonectria myrtacearum CMW46433T Heteropyxis natalensis South Africa MG585736 MG585734 MG585720 N/A N/A
CMW46435 S. cordatum South Africa MG585737 MG585735 MG585721 N/A N/A
Parvosmorbus eucalypti CERC2060 Eucalyptus hybrid clone China MN258787 MN258801 MN258815 MN258829 N/A
CERC2061T Eucalyptus hybrid clone China MN258788 MN258802 MN258816 MN258830 N/A
Parvosmorbus guangdongensis CERC10459 E. urophylla hybrid clone China MN258798 MN258812 MN258826 MN258840 N/A
CERC10460T E. urophylla hybrid clone China MN258799 MN258813 MN258827 MN258841 N/A
Pseudocryphonectria elaeocarpicola CFCC 57515 Elaeocarpus spp. China ON489048 N/A N/A ON456916 ON456918
CFCC 57516 Elaeocarpus spp. China ON489049 N/A N/A ON456917 ON456919
Rostraureum tropicale CMW9972 Ter. ivorensis Ecuador AY167436 AY167431 AY167426 N/A N/A
CMW10796T Ter. ivorensis Ecuador AY167438 AY167433 AY167428 N/A N/A
Ursicollum fallax CMW18119T Coccoloba uvifera USA DQ368755 DQ368759 DQ368758 N/A N/A
CMW18115 Coc. uvifera USA DQ368756 DQ368761 DQ368760 N/A N/A
Diaporthe ambigua CMW5587 Malus domestica South Africa AF543818 AF543822 AF543820 N/A N/A

The taxonomic positions of two methods were used for phylogenetic analyses. Maximum parsimony (MP) analyses were performed using PAUP v. 4.0 b10 (Swofford 2003) and maximum likelihood (ML) analyses were conducted with PhyML v. 3.0 (Guindon and Gascuel 2003).

For MP analyses, gaps were treated as a fifth character, and characters were unordered and of equal weight with 1,000 random addition replicates. A partition homogeneity test (PHT) using PAUP v. 4.0 b10 (Swofford 2003) was conducted to determine whether data for the four genes could be combined. The most parsimonious trees were obtained using the heuristic search option with stepwise addition, tree bisection, and reconstruction branch swapping. MAXTREES was set to 5,000 and zero-length branches collapsed. A bootstrap analysis (50% majority rule, 1,000 replicates) was carried out to determine statistical support for internal nodes in trees. Tree length (TL), consistency index (CI), retention index (RI) and homoplasy index (HI) were used to assess phylogenetic trees (Hillis and Huelsenbeck 1992).

For ML analyses, the best nucleotide substitution model for each dataset was established using jModeltest v. 2.1.5 (Posada 2008). In PhyML, the maximum number of retained trees was set to 1,000 and nodal support was determined by non-parametric bootstrapping with 1,000 replicates. For both MP and ML analyses, the phylogenetic trees were viewed using MEGA v. 6.0.

Morphology

The representative isolates identified as the new species by DNA sequence analysis were grown on 2% water ager (WA), to which sterilized freshly cut branch sections (0.5–1 cm diam. 4–5 cm length) of Eucalyptus urophylla × E. grandis (CEPT53) branch sections were added. These fungi with branch sections on 2% WA were incubated at room temperature for 6–8 wks until fruiting structures emerged. Representative cultures are maintained in the China General Microbiological Culture Collection Centre (CGMCC), Beijing, China. Isolates linked to the type specimens connected to representative isolates were deposited in the mycological fungarium of the Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (HMAS), Beijing, China, and the Collection of Central South Forestry Fungi of China (CSFF), Guangdong Province, China.

The structures that emerged on the surface of the Eucalyptus branches were mounted in one drop of 85% lactic acid on glass slides under a dissecting microscope and then embedded in Leica Bio-systems Tissue Freezing Medium (Leica Biosystems nussloch GmbH, Nussloch, Germany) and sectioned (6 μm thick) using a Microtome Cryostat Microm HM550 (Microm International GmbH, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Walldorf, Germany) at -20 °C. Conidiophores, conidiogenous cells, and conidia were measured after crushing the sporocarps on microscope slides in sterilized water. For the holotype specimens, 50 measurements were performed for each morphological feature, and 30 measurements per character were made for the remaining specimens.

Measurements were recorded using an Axio Imager A1 microscope (Carl Zeiss Ltd., Munchen, Germany) and an AxioCam ERc 5S digital camera with Zeiss Axio Vision Rel. 4.8 software (Carl Zeiss Ltd., Munchen, Germany). The results are presented as (minimum–) (mean – standard deviation) – (mean + standard deviation) (–maximum).

Isolates identified as new species were selected for studying culture characteristics. After the isolates were grown for 7 days on 2% MEA, a 5 mm plug was removed from each culture and transferred to the central of 90 mm MEA Petri dishes. The cultures were incubated in the dark under temperatures ranging from 5 °C to 35 °C at 5 °C intervals. Five replicate plates for each isolate at each temperature condition were prepared. Two diameter measurements, perpendicular to each other, were taken daily for each colony until the fastest-growing culture had covered the 90 mm Petri dishes. Averages of the diameter measurements at each of the seven temperatures were computed with Microsoft Excel 2016 (Microsoft Corporation, Albuquerque, NM, USA). Colony colors were determined by incubating the isolates on fresh 2% MEA at 25 °C in the dark after 7 days. The color descriptions of the sporocarps and colonies were according to the color charts of Rayner (1970).

Pathogenicity tests

In this study, inoculations were conducted on two different Eucalyptus hybrid genotypes (CEPT46 and CEPT53) and T. neotaliala to understand the pathogenicity on Eucalyptus plantations and to fulfill Koch’s postulates. The selected isolates were grown on 2% MEA at 25 °C for 10 days before inoculation. Each selected isolate was inoculated on 10 seedlings or branches of each inoculated tree, and 10 additional seedlings or branches were inoculated with sterile MEA plugs to serve as negative controls. The inoculations were conducted in August 2019, and the results were evaluated after 7 weeks by measuring the lengths of the lesions on the cambium.

Inoculations were conducted on T. mantaly and two widely planted E. grandis hybrid genotype (CEPT46, CEPT53) to fulfill Koch’s postulates and understand the pathogenicity on Eucalyptus plantations. The selected isolates were grown on 2% MEA at 25 °C for 10 d before inoculation. Each of the selected isolates was inoculated on 10 seedlings or branches of each selected tree variety, and 10 additional seedlings or branches were inoculated with sterile MEA plugs to serve as negative controls. The inoculations on seedlings of two 1-year-old Eucalyptus hybrid genotypes were conducted in the glasshouse, and the inoculations on branches of 10-year-old T. mantaly were conducted in the field. The inoculations method followed Chen et al. (2010, 2013b).

Inoculations were conducted in August 2019 and the results were evaluated after 7 weeks by measuring the lengths (mm) of the lesions on the cambium. For re-isolations, small pieces of discolored xylem from the edges of the resultant lesions were cut and placed on 2% MEA at room temperature. Re-isolations of all seedlings/branches inoculated as negative controls and from four randomly selected trees per isolate were conducted. The identities of the re-isolated fungi were confirmed by morphological comparisons. The inoculation results were analyzed using SPSS Statistics 26 software (BM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).

Results

Isolation

Diseased samples from 14 trees were collected from three sites (20190523-1, 20190525-2, 20190525-3) of T. neotaliala (Fig. 1A) nurseries, and two sites (20190525-1, 20190525-4) of T. mantaly (Fig. 1B) nurseries (Table 2). In the surveyed sites, 10%–25% of Terminalia trees were infected. Cankers with stromata on the main stem bark surface, which often resulted in tree death, were observed on two to five-year-old T. neotaliala trees (Fig. 1C). Obvious orange conidiomata were observed on the branches and twigs of three-year-old T. mantaly trees (Fig. 1D, E). Developing lesions were observed on the main stem of T. neotaliala and resulting in bark depression (Fig. 1F) and xylem necrosis (Fig. 1G). Orange fruiting structures even presented on the barks of the main stem base (Fig. 1H) and roots (Fig. 1I). The fruiting structures on T. neotaliala and T. mantaly displayed the typical morphological characteristics of Cryphonectriaceae (Gryzenhout et al. 2009; Wang et al. 2020). Isolates obtained from the asexual fruiting structures on MEA were white when young and turned yellow with age, and the isolates on MEA exhibited typical morphological characteristics of Cryphonectriaceae. Twenty isolates from both T. neotaliala and T. mantaly in the five sampled nurseries were isolated and sequenced for further studies (Table 2).

Figure 1. 

Disease symptoms on Terminalia trees associated with infection by Aurifilum spp. A Terminalia neotaliala in the field B Terminalia mantaly in a nursery C the main stems and branches of T. neotaliala infected by Aurifilum species and resulted in tree death D, E sporocarps of Aurifilum species on the main stem of T. neotaliala (D), and branch of T. mantaly (E) F, G lesions developing on the branches of T. neotaliala H, I Sporocarps of Aurifilum species on the base of main stem (H) and roots of T. neotaliala (I).

Table 2.

Isolates sequenced and used for phylogenetic analyses, morphological studies and pathogenicity tests in the current study.

Identity Isolate Number Genotypea Host Nursery No. Location GPS iformation Collector GenBank accession No. References
ITS tub2 tub1 tef1 rpb2
A. terminali CSF16295 AAAAA T. neotaliala 20190523-1 ChaTing, LingBei, SuiXi 21°16′06.97"N, 110°5′16.8432"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912905 OQ921705 OQ921623 OQ921643 OQ921663 This study
A. terminali CSF16309 AAAAA T. mantaly 20190525-1 DaJia, SuiCheng, SuiXi 21°18′44.19"N, 110°11′46.7268"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912906 OQ921706 OQ921624 OQ921644 OQ921664 This study
A. terminali CSF16310d AAAAA T. mantaly 20190525-1 DaJia, SuiCheng, SuiXi 21°18′44.19"N, 110°11′46.7268"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912907 OQ921707 OQ921625 OQ921645 OQ921665 This study
A. terminali CSF16356d AAAAA T. neotaliala 20190525-3 DiaoLou, LingBei, SuiXi 21°15′57.006"N, 110°12′26.5824"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912908 OQ921708 OQ921626 OQ921646 OQ921666 This study
A. terminali CSF16377 AAAAA T. mantaly 20190525-4 DiaoLou, LingBei, SuiXi 21°15′57.006"N, 110°12′26.5824"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912909 OQ921709 OQ921627 OQ921647 OQ921667 This study
A. terminali CSF16380 AAAAA T. mantaly 20190525-4 DiaoLou, LingBei, SuiXi 21°15′57.006"N, 110°12′26.5824"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912910 OQ921710 OQ921628 OQ921648 OQ921668 This study
A. terminali CSF16343d AABAA T. neotaliala 20190525-2 DuHao, MaZhang, MaZhang 21°14′16.4076"N, 110°17′23.9964"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912911 OQ921711 OQ921629 OQ921649 OQ921669 This study
A. terminali CSF16387 AABAA T. mantaly 20190525-4 DiaoLou, LingBei, SuiXi 21°15′57.006"N, 110°12′26.5824"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912912 OQ921712 OQ921630 OQ921650 OQ921670 This study
A. terminali CSF16388d AABAA T. mantaly 20190525-4 DiaoLou, LingBei, SuiXi 21°15′57.006"E 110°12′26.5824"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912913 OQ921713 OQ921631 OQ921651 OQ921671 This study
A. cerciana CSF16384c, d = CGMCC3.20108 BBCBB T. mantaly 20190525-4 DiaoLou, LingBei, SuiXi 21°15′57.006"N, 110°12′26.5824"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912914 OQ921714 OQ921632 OQ921652 OQ921672 This study
A. cerciana CSF16250 BBCBB T. neotaliala 20190523-1 ChaTing, LingBei, SuiXi 21°16′06.97"N, 110°5′16.8432"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912915 OQ921715 OQ921633 OQ921653 OQ921673 This study
A. cerciana CSF16251 BBCBB T. neotaliala 20190523-1 ChaTing, LingBei, SuiXi 21°16′06.97"N, 110°5′16.8432"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912916 OQ921716 OQ921634 OQ921654 OQ921674 This study
A. cerciana CSF16261b, c, d = CGMCC3.20107 BBCBB T. neotaliala 20190523-1 ChaTing, LingBei, SuiXi 21°16′06.97"N, 110°5′16.8432"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912917 OQ921717 OQ921635 OQ921655 OQ921675 This study
A. cerciana CSF16262 BBCBB T. neotaliala 20190523-1 ChaTing, LingBei, SuiXi 21°16′06.97"N, 110°5′16.8432"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912918 OQ921718 OQ921636 OQ921656 OQ921676 This study
A. cerciana CSF16267 BBCBB T. neotaliala 20190523-1 ChaTing, LingBei, SuiXi 21°16′06.97"N, 110°5′16.8432"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912919 OQ921719 OQ921637 OQ921657 OQ921677 This study
A. cerciana CSF16268 BBCBB T. neotaliala 20190523-1 ChaTing, LingBei, SuiXi 21°16′06.97"N, 110°5′16.8432"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912920 OQ921720 OQ921638 OQ921658 OQ921678 This study
A. cerciana CSF16273 BBCBB T. neotaliala 20190523-1 ChaTing, LingBei, SuiXi 21°16′06.97"N, 110°5′16.8432"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912921 OQ921721 OQ921639 OQ921659 OQ921679 This study
A. cerciana CSF16385 BBCBB T. mantaly 20190525-4 DiaoLou, LingBei, SuiXi 21°15′57.006"N, 110°12′26.5824"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912922 OQ921722 OQ921640 OQ921660 OQ921680 This study
A. cerciana CSF16351c, d BBCBC T. neotaliala 20190525-3 DiaoLou, LingBei, SuiXi 21°15′57.006"N, 110°12′26.5824"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912923 OQ921723 OQ921641 OQ921661 OQ921681 This study
A. cerciana CSF16352c, d BBCBC T. neotaliala 20190525-3 DiaoLou, LingBei, SuiXi 21°15′57.006"N, 110°12′26.5824"E S.F.Chen & W. Wang OQ912924 OQ921724 OQ921642 OQ921662 OQ921682 This study

Phylogenetic analysis

Phylogenetic analyses indicated that all of the Cryphonectriaceae genera formed independent phylogenetic clades with high bootstrap values (ML > 77%, MP > 100%) both in the ML and MP analyses, with the exception of Aurifilum, and strains sequenced in this study formed sub-clades (Fig. 2). The partition homogeneity test (PHT), comparing the combined ITS and BT2/BT1 loci dataset generated a value of P was 0.68, indicating some incongruence in the dataset of the four loci, and the accuracy of the combined data suffered relative to the individual partitions (Huelsenbeck et al. 1996; Cunningham 1997).

Figure 2. 

Phylogenetic trees based on maximum likelihood (ML) analyses of combined DNA sequence dataset of combination of ITS and BT2/BT1 regions for species in Cryphonectriaceae. combination of, TEF-1α and rpb2 regions. Bootstrap values ≥ 70% for ML and MP (maximum parsimony) analyses are presented at branches as ML/MP. Bootstrap value lower than 70% are marked with *, and absent analysis value are marked with –. Isolates representing Aurifilum cerciana are in shade, and isolates obtained in this study are in bold and blue. Diaporthe ambigua (CMW55887) was used as outgroup taxon.

Further species analyses selected twenty-four Aurifilum isolates (Table 2). Based on the sequences of ITS, BT2/BT1, TEF-1α, rpb2 sequences, four genotypes were generated for the 20 isolates sequenced in this study (Table 2). Sequences for two ex-type specimen strains and other of two Aurifilum species related to isolates obtained in this study were downloaded from GenBank (Table 1). Celoporthe cerciana (CERC9128) was used as an outgroup taxon. The partition homogeneity test (PHT), comparing the combined ITS, BT2/BT1, TEF-1α and rpb2 loci dataset generated a value of P was 1, indicating some incongruence in the dataset of the four loci, and the accuracy of the combined data suffered relative to the individual partitions (Huelsenbeck et al. 1996; Cunningham 1997). Although the P value was high, the sequence of four loci was combined and subjected to phylogenetic analyses. All sequences obtained for the isolates of Aurifilum in this study were deposited in GeneBank (Table 2). The number of taxa and characters in each of the datasets, and the summary of the most important parameters applied in the MP and ML analyses, are presented in Table 3. The six datasets were deposited in TreeBASE (http://purl.org/phylo/treebase/phylows/study/TB2:S30284?x-access-code=cf2a0ef843604b8fa4301eced72cec7f&format=html,30284).

Table 3.

Datasets used and statistics resulting from phylogenetic analyses.

Dataset No. of taxa No. of bp a Maximum parsimony
PIC b No. of trees Tree length CI c RI d RC e HI f
ITS+BT 116 1465 4 1 6 1.000 1.000 1.000 0
ITS 25 558 3 1 3 1.000 1.000 1.000 0
BT 25 907 12 1 12 1.000 1.000 1.000 0
TEF 23 266 1 1 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 0
rpb2 23 1058 6 1 6 1.000 1.000 1.000 0
ITS+BT+TEF+rpb2 25 2789 22 1 22 1.000 1.000 1.000 0
Dataset Maximum likelihood
Subst. model g NST h Rate matrix Ti/Tv ratio i p-inv Gamma Rates
ITS+BT TPM2uf+I+G 6 1.428 4.552 1.428 1.000 4.526 4.525 0.445 1.107 gamma
ITS TrNef 6 1.000 1.389 1.000 1.000 3.247 0 equal
BT TrN 6 1.000 2.380 1.000 1.000 5.893 0 equal
TEF TrN 6 1.000 1.989 1.000 1.000 4.887 0 equal
rpb2 TrN+G 6 1.000 4.377 1.000 1.000 233.189 0 0.055 gamma
ITS+BT+TEF+rpb2 TrN 6 1.000 2.257 1.000 1.000 7.842 0 equal

For each of the six datasets, the MP and ML analyses generated trees with generally consistent topologies and phylogenetic relationships among taxa. Among the trees generated by the Aurifilum spp. single loci dataset, the BT2/BT1, TEF-1α, rpb2 show that 20 isolates obtained in this study mainly grouped into two clades, one clade contained nine isolates cluster into a lineage with A. terminali, the other 11 isolates clade formed a novel monophyletic lineage that was distinct from any known Aurifilum sp., and was supported by high bootstrap values in these gene trees (Fig. 3B–D).

Figure 3. 

Phylogenetic trees based on maximum likelihood (ML) analyses for species in Aurifilum A ITS region B two regions of β-tublin (BT2/BT1) C TEF-1α gene region D rpb2 gene region E combination of ITS, BT2/BT1, TEF-1α and rpb2 regions. Bootstrap values ≥ 70% for ML and MP (maximum parsimony) analyses are presented at branches as ML/MP. Bootstrap value lower than 70% are marked with *, and absent analysis value are marked with –. Isolates representing A. cerciana are in shade, and isolates obtained in this study are numbered followed CSF. Celoporthe circiana (CERC9128) was used as outgroup taxon.

Among the BT2/BT1 trees, isolate CSF16343, CSF16387, CSF16388 grouped into the lineage with A. terminali, and among the rpb2 tree, isolates CSF16351, CSF16352 grouped into the novel lineage, formed a single independent branch but the bootstraps value within the clades were not significant (Fig. 3B, D), which suggests that these differences reflect intraspecific rather than interspecific variation. The combined ITS, BT2/BT1, TEF-1α and rpb2 tree (Fig. 3E) indicated that the isolates grouped into novel lineage are putative undescribed species of Aurifilum (bootstrap values of the combined dataset, ML and MP: 96 and 100%).

Morphology and taxonomy

Based on phylogenetic analyses and morphology characteristics, the isolates from Terminalia trees in southern China represent two distinct species in Aurifilum. Isolates CSF16295, CSF16309, CSF16310, CSF16343, CSF16356, CSF16377, CSF16380, CSF16387, CSF16388 in phylogenetic cluster with A. terminali (Fig. 3B–E), and isolates CSF16343, CSF16387, CSF16388 appear a branch in BT2/BT1, rpb2, and combine trees (Fig. 3B, D, E) in this cluster, was finally identified as A. terminali. The isolates in the other cluster present a novel species in Aurifilum, here named as Aurifilum cerciana sp. nov. (Fig. 3); this unknown species was described as follows:

Aurifilum cerciana W. Wang & S.F. Chen, sp. nov.

MycoBank No: MycoBank No: 848235
Fig. 4

Etymology

the name refers to China Eucalypt Research Centre (CERC), the former institution of the Research Institute of Fast-Growing Trees (RIFT), which served as the identification site for this study on Terminalia trees disease caused by Aurifilum spp.

Stromata

No ascostromata were observed on inoculated Eucalyptus branch tissue, the conidiomata on the inoculated Eucalyptus branch tissue were superficial to slightly immersed, pulvinate, globose pyriform to various shapes without necks, blight yellow when young, orange to brown when mature (Fig. 4A, B), unilocular, 46–236 μm (av. 142 μm) diameter (Fig. 4C). Stromatic tissue prosenchymatous (Fig. 4D). Stromatic conidiomatal base was 119 – 678 μm (av. 428 μm) high above the level of the bark and 58 – 269 μm (av. 158 μm) wide. Conidiomatal necks absent. Conidiomatal locules unilocular. Conidiophores, hyaline, branched irregularly at the base or above into cylindrical cells, with or without separating septa, (11.2–)23.8–28.6(–70.2) μm (av. 26.2 μm) long, (1.7–)2.3–3.7(–6.5) μm (av. 3 μm) wide (Fig. 4F). Conidiogenous cells phialidic, cylindrical, without attenuated apices, (0.8–)1.0 – 1.8(–2.6) μm (av. 1.4 μm) wide (Fig. 4F). Paraphyses or cylindrical sterile cells, occur among conidiophores, up to 99 μm (av. 51.4 μm) long (Fig. 4E). Conidia hyaline, non-septate, oblong to cylindrical, occasionally allantoid, extend through on opening at stromatal surface as orange droplets, (3.6–)4.3–4.5(–5.7) × (1.5–)1.8(–2.2) (av. 4.4 × 1.8 μm) (Fig. 4G).

Figure 4. 

Morphological characteristics of Aurifilum cerciana A, B conidiomata on the bark C longitudinal section through conidioma showing umber stroma D prosenchymatous stromatic tissue of the conidia E paraphyses F conidiophores and conidiogenous cells G conidia H, I colony of A. cerciana on MEA after 7 days at 25 °C H front I reverse. Scal bars: 200 µm (A); 100 µm (B, C); 10 µm (D, E, F); 5 µm (G); 1 cm (H, I).

Culture characteristics

Colonies on MEA are fluffy with an uneven margin, white when young, turning pale luteous to luteous after 10 days, and reverse yellow to orange-white. Optimal growth temperature 35 °C, reaching the edge of the 90 mm plates after 7 days. No growth at 5, 10 °C. After 7 days, colonies at 15, 20, 25, 30, and 35 °C reached 15.8, 45.9, 49, 50.5, and 74.4 mm, respectively.

Substrate

Bark of Terminalia neotaliala.

Distribution

Guangdong Province, China.

Additional materials examined

China, Guangdong Province, Zhanjiang Region, Suixi District, Chating Town (21°16′06.97″N, 110°5′16.8432″E) from branch bark of T. neotaliala tree, 23 May 2019, S. F. Chen & W. Wang, holotype, CSFF2078, HMAS350333, ex-type culture CSF16261 = CGMCC3.20107; Guangdong Province, Zhanjiang Region, Suixi District, Diaolou Town (21°15′57.006″N, 110°12′26.5824″E) from twigs of T. mantaly tree, 25 May 2019, S. F. Chen & W. Wang, CSFF2079, HMAS350334, culture CSF16384 = CGMCC3.20108.

Notes

Three species were described in the genus Aurifilum, including A. marmelostoma, A. terminali, A. cerciana. Aurifilum cerciana morphologically differs from A. terminali by the absence of conidiomatal necks (Wang et al. 2020), and differs from A. marmelostoma by longer paraphyses (Begoude et al. 2010). A. cerciana could also be distinguished from A. terminali and A. marmelostoma by growth characteristics in culture. The optimal growth temperature of A. cerciana is 35 °C, whereas A. terminali grows relatively slowly at this temperature and no growth is observed for A. marmelostoma (Begoude et al. 2010; Wang et al. 2020).

Pathogenicity tests

Eight isolates representing the two species of Aurifilum identified in this study were used to inoculate seedlings of two Eucalyptus hybrid genotypes, and branches of T. neotaliala. These include four isolates in A. terminali and A. cerciana, respectively (Table 2). Seedling stems or tree branches inoculated with Aurifilum isolates exhibited lesions, whereas the control group only showed wounds without any lesions. (Fig. 5). The lesions produced by Aurifilum species on T. neotaliala and Eucalyptus clones CEPT53 were significantly longer than the wounds on the controls (P < 0.05), whereas for the Eucalyptus clones CEPT46, the lesions produced by Aurifilum species were not significantly different (Fig. 5). The overall data revealed that A. cerciana and A. terminali have similar pathogenicity (Fig. 5). The overall data further showed that CEPT53 is more susceptible than CEPT46 to Aurifilum spp. (Fig. 5B). Yellow or orange fruiting structures and cankers were produced on the bark of inoculated trees within 7 weeks; these structures displayed similar characteristics of conidiomata on the Terminalia trees in the field and the re-isolated fungi from lesions share the same culture morphology with the Aurifilum fungi originally from the Terminalia trees in the nursery. The inoculated Aurifilum fungi were successfully re-isolated from the lesions but not from the control, indicating that the Koch’s postulates had been fulfilled.

Figure 5. 

Column chart showing average lesion lengths (mm) produced by each isolate of Aurifilum on the branches of T. neotaliala (left) and two Eucalyptus hybrid genotypes (right). Eight isolates of Aurifilum were used. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the means. Different letters above the bars indicate treatments that were statistically significantly different (P = 0.05).

Discussion

In this study, many Aurifilum isolates were obtained from diseased Terminalia trees in Southern China, and two species of four genotypes belonging to Aurifilum were identified from two species of Terminalia. Including the new taxon, A. cerciana sp. nov., there are fifty-seven taxa in the Cryphonectriaceae.

In the genus Aurifilum, A. marmelostoma was the first described species, which was isolated from the bark of native T. ivorensis and the dead branches of non-native T. mantaly in Cameroon (Begoude et al. 2010), and the A. terminali, the second identified species, was isolated from non-native T. neotaliala in southern China (Wang et al. 2020). In the present study, a new species, A. cerciana was isolated from non-native T. neotaliala and T. mantaly, and a previously known species, A. terminali was isolated from T. mantaly too. The species T. mantaly was a newly reported host for A. terminali. Our results indicated that the Aurifilum species are widely distributed on non-native Terminalia trees in southern China, which is consistent with the previous hypothesis of Wang et al. (2020).

Members of the Cryphonectriaceae are well known to occur on Myrtales in Southern China. Prior to this study, six genera, including Aurifilum, Celoporthe, Chrysoporthe, Chrysomorbus, Corticimorbus, Parvosmorbus were reported infecting trees in Combretaceae, Lythraceae, Melastomataceae and Myrtaceae (All Myrtales) in southern China (Chen et al. 2010, 2011, 2016, 2018; Wang et al. 2020). Although the diversity of Cryphonectriaceae in Myrtales has been extensively studied in recent years (Chen et al. 2010, 2011, 2013a, b, 2016a, b, 2018; Wang et al. 2018, 2020; Huang et al. 2022), there is still a need for further investigation into its diversity, geographical distribution, and host range in China (Wingfield et al. 2015).

Pathogenicity test showed that all tested Aurifilum isolates were pathogenic to mature T. neotaliala and E. grandis hybrid genotypes of CEPT53 and CEPT46 seedlings. To clarify the threat of these pathogens to Eucalyptus plantations, further inoculations on mature Eucalyptus in the field should be conducted. Variations in pathogenicity among different individuals of the same species have been observed, with some strains showing stronger pathogenicity in different hosts. This phenomenon has also been observed in previous studies (Chen et al. 2010, 2011, 2013a, b; 2016a, b, 2018; Wang et al. 2018, 2020), and further comparison of the genetic features of these individual exhibiting differences in pathogenicity may help reveal the pathogenic mechanisms of the pathogen.

Acknowledgements

We thank Mr. Yuxiong Zheng, Ms. Lingling Liu, Ms. Wenxia Wu, and Mr. Quanchao Wang for their assistance in collecting disease samples and in conducting inoculations. This study was initiated through the bilateral agreement between the Governments of South Africa and China and supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (China-South Africa Forestry Joint Research Centre Project; project No. 2018YFE0120900).

Additional information

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest was declared.

Ethical statement

No ethical statement was reported.

Funding

No funding was reported.

Author contributions

Conceptualization: SC, WW. Data curation: SC, WW. Formal analysis: WW. Funding acquisition: SC. Investigation: WW. Methodology: WW. Project administration: SC. Software: WW. Supervision: WW, SC. Writing - original draft: WW. Writing - review and editing: WW.

Author ORCIDs

ShuaiFei Chen https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3920-9982

Data availability

All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text or Supplementary Information.

References

  • Ali DB, Marincowitz S, Wingfield MJ, Roux J, Crous PW, McTaggart AR (2018) Novel Cryphonectriaceae from La Réunion and South Africa, and their pathogenicity on Eucalyptus. Mycological Progress 17(8): 953–966. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11557-018-1408-3
  • Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (2009) An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG III. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 161(2): 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.2009.00996.x
  • Batawila K, Kokou K, Koumaglo K, Gbéassor M, Foucault BD, Bouchet P, Akpagana K (2005) Antifungal activities of five Combretaceae used in togolese traditional medicine. Fitoterapia 76(2): 264–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fitote.2004.12.007
  • Begoude BAD, Gryzenhout M, Wingfield MJ, Roux J (2010) Aurifilum, a new fungal genus in the Cryphonectriaceae from Terminalia species in Cameroon. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 98(3): 263–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10482-010-9467-8
  • Beier GL, Hokanson SC, Bates ST, Blanchette RA (2015) Aurantioporthe corni gen. et comb. nov., an endophyte and pathogen of Cornus alternifolia. Mycologia 107(1): 66–79. https://doi.org/10.3852/14-004
  • Chen SF, Gryzenhout M, Roux J, Xie YJ, Wingfield MJ, Zhou XD (2010) Identification and pathogenicity of Chrysoporthe cubensis on Eucalyptus and Syzygium spp. in South China. Plant Disease 94(9): 1143–1150. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-94-9-1143
  • Chen SF, Gryzenhout M, Roux J, Xie YJ, Wingfield MJ, Zhou XD (2011) Novel species of Celoporthe from Eucalyptus and Syzygium trees in China and Indonesia. Mycologia 103(6): 1384–1410. https://doi.org/10.3852/11-006
  • Chen SF, Wingfield MJ, Roets F, Roux J (2013a) A serious canker caused by Immersiporthe knoxdaviesiana gen. et sp. nov. (Cryphonectriaceae) on native Rapanea melanophloeos in South Africa. Plant Pathology 62(3): 667–678. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.2012.02671.x
  • Chen SF, Wingfield MJ, Roux J (2013b) Diversimorbus metrosiderotis gen. et sp. nov. and three new species of Holocryphia (Cryphonectriaceae) associated with cankers on native Metrosideros angustifolia trees in South Africa. Fungal Biology 117(5): 289–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funbio.2013.02.005
  • Chen SF, van der Merwe NA, Wingfield MJ, Roux J (2016a) Population structure of Holocryphia capensis (Cryphonectriaceae) from Metrosideros angustifolia and its pathogenicity to Eucalyptus species. Australas. Plant Pathol. 45: 201–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13313-016-0399-2
  • Chen SF, Wingfield MJ, Li GQ, Liu FF (2016b) Corticimorbus sinomyrti gen. et sp. nov. (Cryphonectriaceae) pathogenic to native Rhodomyrtus tomentosa (Myrtaceae) in South China. Plant Pathology 65(8): 1254–1266. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.12507
  • Chen SF, Liu QL, Li GQ, Wingfield MJ, Roux J (2018) A new genus of Cryphonectriaceae causes stem canker on Lagerstroemia speciosa in South China. Plant Pathology 67: 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.12723
  • Crane C, Burgess TI (2013) Luteocirrhus shearii gen. sp. nov. (Diaporthales, Cryphonectriaceae) pathogenic to Proteaceae in the South Western Australian Floristic Region. IMA Fungus 4(1): 111–122. https://doi.org/10.5598/imafungus.2013.04.01.11
  • Crous PW, Summerell BA, Alfenas AC, Edwards J, Pascoe IG, Porter IJ, Groenewald JZ (2012) Genera of Diaporthalean coelomycetes associated with leaf spots of tree hosts. Persoonia 28(1): 66–75. https://doi.org/10.3767/003158512X642030
  • Davison EM, Coates DJ (1991) Identification of Cryphonectria cubensis and Endothia gyrosa from Eucalypts in Western Australia using isozyme analysis. Australasian Plant Pathology 20(4): 157–160. https://doi.org/10.1071/APP9910157
  • Editorial Committee of Flora of China (1988) Flora of China. Volume 53(1–2). Science Press, Beijing.
  • Ferreira MA, Soares de Oliveira ME, Silva GA, Mathioni SM, Mafia RG (2019) Capillaureum caryovora gen. sp. nov. (Cryphonectriaceae) pathogenic to pequi (Caryocar brasiliense) in Brazil. Mycological Progress 18(3): 385–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11557-018-01461-3
  • Gryzenhout M, Myburg H, Van der Merwe NA, Wingfield BD, Wingfield MJ (2004) Chrysoporthe, a new genus to accommodate Cryphonectria cubensis. Studies in Mycology 50: 119–142.
  • Gryzenhout M, Myburg H, Wingfield BD, Montenegro F, Wingfield MJ (2005) Chrysoporthe doradensis sp. nov. pathogenic to Eucalyptus in Ecuador. Fungal Diversity 20: 39–57.
  • Gryzenhout M, Myburg H, Wingfield BD, Wingfield MJ (2006) Cryphonectriaceae (Diaporthales), a new family including Cryphonectria, Chrysoporthe, Endothia and allied genera. Mycologia 98: 239–249. https://doi.org/10.3852/mycologia.98.2.239
  • Gryzenhout M, Wingfield BD, Wingfield MJ (2009) Taxonomy, phylogeny, and ecology of bark-inhabiting and tree pathogenic fungi in the Cryphonectriaceae. APS Press, St Paul, MN, USA.
  • Gryzenhout M, Tarigan M, Clegg PA, Wingfield MJ (2010) Cryptometrion aestuescens gen. sp. nov. (Cryphonectriaceae) pathogenic to Eucalyptus in Indonesia. Australasian Plant Pathology 39(2): 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1071/AP09077
  • Huang H-Y, Huang H-H, Zhao D-Y, Shan T-J, Hu L-L (2022) Pseudocryphonectria elaeocarpicola gen. et sp. nov. (Cryphonectriaceae, Diaporthales) causing stem blight of Elaeocarpus spp. in China. MycoKeys 91: 67–84. https://doi.org/10.3897/mycokeys.91.86693
  • Jiang N, Fan X, Tian CM (2019) Identification and pathogenicity of Cryphonectriaceae species associated with chestnut canker in China. Plant Pathology 68(6): 1132–1145. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.13033
  • Jiang N, Voglmayr H, Xue H, Piao CG, Li Y (2022) Morphology and Phylogeny of Pestalotiopsis (Sporocadaceae, Amphisphaeriales) from Fagaceae Leaves in China. Microbiology Spectrum 10(6): e0327222. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.03272-22
  • Kamtchouing P, Kahpui SM, Dzeufiet PD, Tédong L, Asongalem EA, Dimo T (2006) Anti-diabetic activity of methanol/methylene chloride stem bark extracts of Terminalia superba and Canarium schweinfurthii on streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 104(3): 306–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2005.08.075
  • Katoh K, Standley DM (2013) MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: Improvements in performance and usability. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30(4): 772–780. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst010
  • Nakabonge G, Gryzenhout M, Roux J, Wingfield BD, Wingfield MJ (2006) Celoporthe dispersa gen. et sp. nov. from native Myrtales in South Africa. Studies in Mycology 55: 255–267. https://doi.org/10.3114/sim.55.1.255
  • Rayner RW (1970) A Mycological Colour Chart. Kew, Commonwealth Mycological Institute.
  • Roux J, Meke G, Kanyi B, Mwangi L, Mbaga A, Hunter GC, Nakabonge G, Heath RN, Wingfield MJ (2005) Diseases of plantation forestry tree species in eastern and southern Africa. South African Journal of Science 101: 409–413.
  • Roux J, Kamgan Nkuekam G, Marincowitz S, van der Merwe NA, Uchida J, Wingfield MJ, Chen S (2020) Cryphonectriaceae associated with rust-infected Syzygium jambos in Hawaii. MycoKeys 76: 49–79. https://doi.org/10.3897/mycokeys.76.58406
  • Swofford DL (2003) PAUP*. Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4.0b10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, USA.
  • Van der Merwe NA, Gryzenhout M, Steenkamp ET, Wingfield BD, Wingfield MJ (2010) Multigene phylogenetic and population differentiation data confirm the existence of a cryptic species within Chrysoporthe cubensis. Fungal Biology 114(11–12): 966–979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funbio.2010.09.007
  • Vermeulen M, Gryzenhout M, Wingfield MJ, Roux J (2011) New records of Cryphonectriaceae from southern Africa including Latruncellus aurorae gen. sp. nov. Mycologia 103(3): 554–569. https://doi.org/10.3852/10-283
  • Vermeulen M, Gryzenhout M, Wingfield MJ, Roux J (2013) Species delineation in the tree pathogen genus Celoporthe (Cryphonectriaceae) in southern Africa. Mycologia 105(2): 297–311. https://doi.org/10.3852/12-206
  • Wang W, Liu QL, Li GQ, Chen SF (2018) Phylogeny and pathogenicity of Celoporthe species from plantation Eucalyptus in Southern China. Plant Disease 102(10): 1915–1927. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-12-17-2002-RE
  • Wingfield MJ, Swart WJ, Abear BJ (1989) First record of Cryphonectria canker of Eucalyptus in South Africa. Phytophylactica 21: 311–313.
  • Zhou X, Xie Y, Chen SF, Wingfield MJ (2008) Diseases of Eucalypt plantations in China: Challenges and opportunities. Fungal Diversity 32: 1–7.
login to comment