Research Article |
Corresponding author: Ting-Chi Wen ( tingchiwen@yahoo.com ) Academic editor: Alfredo Vizzini
© 2018 Chada Norphanphoun, Olivier Raspé, Rajesh Jeewon, Ting-Chi Wen, Kevin D. Hyde.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Norphanphoun C, Raspé O, Jeewon R, Wen T-C, Hyde KD (2018) Morphological and phylogenetic characterisation of novel Cytospora species associated with mangroves. MycoKeys 38: 93-120. https://doi.org/10.3897/mycokeys.38.28011
|
Mangroves are relatively unexplored habitats and have been shown to harbour a number of novel species of fungi. In this study, samples of microfungi were collected from symptomatic branches, stem and leaves of the mangrove species Xylocarpus granatum, X. moluccensis and Lumnitzera racemosa and examined morphologically. The phylogeny recovered supports our morphological data to introduce three new species, Cytospora lumnitzericola, C. thailandica and C. xylocarpi. In addition, a combined multi-gene DNA sequence dataset (ITS, LSU, ACT and RPB2) was analysed to investigate phylogenetic relationships of isolates and help in a more reliable species identification.
3 new species, Cytosporaceae , Lumnitzera racemosa , Mangroves, Phylogeny, Taxonomy, Xylocarpus granatum , Xylocarpus moluccensis
Mangroves are forests established in tropical and subtropical backwaters, estuaries, deltas and lagoons. These forests play a major role in the ecology of coastal tropical/subtropical waters, as they serve as hatchery and nursery habitats for marine organisms and protect coastlines from catastrophic events such as storms and tidal surges (
Reports of fungi associated with mangroves are relatively few and data on diseases of mangroves are uncommon (
Cytospora was introduced by
Samples collected were dead branches of Xylocarpus granatum K.D. Koenig, X. moluccensis (Lam.) M. Roem. and leaf spots of Lumnitzera racemosa Willd. from Phetchaburi and Ranong provinces, Thailand in 2016. Specimens were returned to the laboratory in paper bags, examined and described following Norphanphoun et al. (2017). Morphological characters of ascomata and conidiomata were examined using a Motic SMZ 168 dissecting microscope. Hand sections were mounted in water and examined for morphological details. Micro-morphology was studied using a Nikon Ni compound microscope and photographed with a Canon EOS 600D digital camera fitted to the microscope. Photo-plates were made using Adobe Photoshop CS6 Extended version 13.0 × 64 (Adobe Systems, USA), while Tarosoft (R) Image Frame Work programme v. 0.9.7 was used for measurements.
Cultures were obtained by single spore isolation method outlined in
Genomic DNA was extracted from fresh fungal mycelia growing on MEA at room temperature (18−25 °C) for three weeks using a E.Z.N.A.TM Fungal DNA MiniKit (Omega Biotech, CA, USA) following the manufacturer’s protocols. Polymerase chain reactions (PCR) were carried out using primer pairs of ITS1 (5'-TCCGTAGGTGAACCTGCGG-3') and ITS4 (5'-TCCTCCGCTTATTGATATGC-3') to amplify the ITS region (
The amplification reactions were carried out with the following protocol: 50 μl reaction volume containing 2 µl of DNA template, 2 µl of each forward and reverse primers, 25 µl of 2 × Bench TopTMTaq Master Mix (mixture of Taq DNA Polymerase (recombinant): 0.05 units/µl, MgCl2: 4 mM and dNTPs (dATP, dCTP, dGTP, dTTP): 0.4 mM) and 19 µl of double-distilled water (ddH2O) (sterilised water) using the thermal cycle programme in
The sequences were assembled by GENEIOUS Pro v. 11.0.5 (Biomatters) and BLAST searches were made to retrieve the closest matches in GenBank and multiple alignment also included recently published sequences (
Maximum Parsimony (MP) analysis was performed using PAUP (Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony) v. 4.0b10* (
For both Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian analyses, a partitioned analysis was performed with the following six partitions: ITS1+ITS2, 5.8S, LSU, ACT-exons, ACT-introns and RPB2. Maximum-likelihood (ML) analysis was performed with RAxML (
Bayesian Inference (BI) analysis was performed using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method with MrBayes 3.2.2 (
The phylogram was visualised in FigTree v1.4.0 (http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/;
GenBank accession numbers of the sequences used in phylogenetic analyses.
No | Taxon | Straina | Host | Origin | GenBank accession numbers | References | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITS | LSU | RPB2 | ACT | ||||||
1 | Cytospora abyssinica | CMW 10181T | Eucalyptus globulus | Wondo Genet, Ethiopia | AY347353 | – | – | – |
|
2 | C. acaciae | CBS 468.69 | Ceratonia siliqua | Spain, Mallorca | DQ243804 | – | – | – |
|
3 | C. ampulliformis |
|
Sorbus intermedia | Russia | KY417726 | KY417760 | KY417794 | KY417692 |
|
4 | C. atrocirrhata | HMBF156 | KF225610 | KF225624 | – | KF498673 |
|
||
5 | C. austromontana | CMW 6735T | Eucalyptus pauciflora | Australia | AY347361 | – | – | – |
|
6 | C. berberidis | CFCC 89927T | Berberis dasystachya | China | KR045620 | KR045702 | KU710948 | KU710990 |
|
7 | C. berkeleyi | StanfordT3T | Eucalyptus globulus | California, USA | AY347350 | – | – | – |
|
8 | C. brevispora | CBS 116829 | Eucalyptus grandis | Venezuela | AF192321 | – | – | – |
|
9 | C. carbonacea | CFCC 89947 | Ulmus pumila | Qinghai, China | KR045622 | KP310812 | KU710950 | KP310842 |
|
10 | C. centravillosa |
|
Sorbus domestica | Italy | MF190122 | MF190068 | MF377600 | – |
|
11 | C. ceratosperma |
|
Acer platanoides | Russia | KY563246 | KY563248 | KY563244 | KY563242 |
|
12 | C. chrysosperma | HMBF151 | KF225605 | KF225619 | – | KF498668 |
|
||
13 | C. cinereostroma | CMW 5700T | Eucalyptus globulus | Chile | AY347377 | – | – | – |
|
14 | C. cotini |
|
Cotinus coggygria | Russia | KX430142 | KX430143 | KX430144 | – |
|
15 | C. curvata |
|
Salix alba | Russia | KY417728 | – | – | KY417694 |
|
16 | C. cypri | CBS 201.42T | Syringa sp. | Switzerland | DQ243801 | – | – | – |
|
17 | C. diatrypelloidea | CMW 8549T | Eucalyptus globulus | Orbost, Australia | AY347368 | – | – | – |
|
18 | C. disciformis | CMW6509 | AY347374 | – | – | – |
|
||
19 | C. donetzica |
|
Rosa sp. | Russia | KY417731 | KY417765 | KY417799 | KY417697 |
|
20 | C. elaeagni | CFCC 89632 | Elaeagnus angustifolia | Ningxia, China | KR045626 | KR045706 | KU710955 | KU710995 |
|
21 | C. erumpens |
|
Salix × fragilis | Russia | KY417733 | KY417767 | KY417801 | KY417699 |
|
22 | C. eriobotryae | IMI136523 T | Eriobotrya japonica | India | AY347327 | – | – | – |
|
23 | C. eucalypti | LSEQ | Sequoia sempervirens | California, USA | AY347340 | – | – | – |
|
24 | C. eucalyptina | CMW 5882 | Eucalyptus grandis | Cali, Columbia | AY347375 | – | – | – |
|
25 | C. fabianae | Dunnii | Eucalyptus | AY347360 | – | – | – |
|
|
26 | C. friesii | CBS 113.81 | Picea abies | Norway | AY347318 | – | – | – |
|
27 | C. gelida |
|
Cotinus coggygria | Russia | KY563245 | KY563247 | KY563243 | KY563241 |
|
28 | C. germanica | CXY1322 | Elaeagnus oxycarpa | China | JQ086563 | JX524617 | – | – |
|
29 | C. gigalocus | HMBF154 | KF225608 | KF225622 | – | KF498671 |
|
||
30 | C. gigaspora | CFCC 89634T | Salix psammophila | China | KF765671 | KF765687 | KU710960 | KU711000 |
|
31 | C. hippophaes | CFCC 89636 | KF76567878 | KF765694 | KF765710 | – |
|
||
32 | C. japonica | CBS375.29 | Prunus persica | Japan | AF191185 | – | – | – |
|
33 | C. junipericola |
|
Juniperus communis | Italy | MF190125 | MF190072 | – | – |
|
34 | C. kantschavelii | 287-2 | Populus deltoides | Iran | EF447367 | – | – | – |
|
35 | C. kunzei | CBS 118556 | Pinus radiata | Eastern Cape, SA | DQ243791 | – | – | – |
|
36 | C. leucostoma | CFCC 50015 | Sorbus pohuashanensis | China | KR045634 | KR045714 | – | KU711002 |
|
37 | C. longiostiolata |
|
Salix × fragilis | Russia | KY417734 | KY417768 | KY417802 | KY417700 |
|
38 | C. lumnitzericola |
|
Lumnitzera racernosa | Phetchaburi, Thailand | MG975778 | MH253461 | MH253453 | MH253457 | In this study |
39 | C. mali | CFCC 50044 | Malus baccata | Haidong, Qinghai | KR045637 | KR045717 | KU710966 | KU711005 |
|
40 | C. malicola | 167 | EF447414 | – | – | – |
|
||
41 | C. mali-sylvestris |
|
Malus sylvestris | Russia | KY885017 | KY885018 | KY885020 | KY885019 |
|
42 | C. melnikii |
|
Malus domestica | Russia | KY417735 | KY417769 | KY417803 | KY417701 |
|
43 | C. multicollis | CBS 105.89T | Quercus ilex subsp. rotundifolia | Spain | DQ243803 | – | – | – |
|
44 | C. myrtagena | HiloTib1T | Tibouchiina urvilleana | Hilo, Hawaii | AY347363 | – | – | – |
|
45 | C. nitschkii | CMW10180T | Eucalyptus globulus | Wondo Genet, Ethiopia | AY347356 | – | – | – |
|
46 | C. nivea |
|
Salix acutifolia | Russia | KY417737 | KY417771 | KY417805 | KY417703 |
|
47 | C. palmae | CXY1280T | Cotinus coggygria | Beijing, China | JN411939 | – | – | – |
|
48 | C. parakantschavelii |
|
Populus × sibirica | Russia | KY417738 | KY417772 | KY417806 | KY417704 |
|
49 | C. parapersoonii | T28.1T | Prunus persicae | Michigan, USA | AF191181 | – | – | – |
|
50 | C. paratranslucens |
|
Populus alba var. bolleana | Russia | KY417741 | KY417775 | KY417809 | KY417707 |
|
51 | C. parasitica |
|
Malus domestica | Russia | KY417740 | KY417774 | KY417808 | KY417706 |
|
52 | C. pini | CBS224.52T | Pinus strobus | New York | AY347316 | – | – | – | Adams (2005) |
53 | C. populina | CFCC 89644 | Salix psammophila | Shaanxi, China | KF765686 | KF765702 | KF765718 | – |
|
54 | C. predappioensis |
|
Platanus hybrida | Italy | MH253451 | MH253452 | MH253450 | MH253449 |
|
55 | C. prunicola |
|
Prunus sp. | Italy | MG742350 | MG742351 | MG742352 | MG742353 |
|
56 | C. pruinopsis | CFCC 50034T | Ulmus pumila | Shaanxi, China | KP281259 | KP310806 | KU710970 | KP310836 |
|
57 | C. pruinosa | CFCC 50036 | Syzygium aromaticum | Qinghai, China | KP310800 | KP310802 | – | KP310832 |
|
58 | C. quercicola |
|
Quercus sp. | Italy | MF190129 | MF190073 | – | – |
|
59 | C. rhizophorae | ATCC38475 | Rhizophora mangle | LA, USA | DQ996040 | – | – | – |
|
60 | C. rhizophorae | ATCC66924 | Haliclona caerulea | HI, USA | DQ092502 | – | – | – | Unpublished |
61 | C. ribis | CFCC 50026 | Ulmus pumila | Qinghai, China | KP281267 | KP310813 | KU710972 | KP310843 |
|
62 | C. rosae |
|
Rosa canina | Italy | MF190131 | MF190075 | – | – |
|
63 | C. rosarum | 218 | EF447387 | – | – | – |
|
||
64 | C. rostrata | CFCC 89909T | Salix cupularis | Gansu, China | KR045643 | KR045722 | KU710974 | KU711009 | Unpublished |
65 | C. rusanovii |
|
Salix babylonica | Russia | KY417744 | KY417778 | KY417812 | KY417710 |
|
66 | C. sacculus | HMBF281 | KF225615 | KF225629 | – | KF498678 |
|
||
67 | C. salicacearum |
|
Salix alba | Russia | KY417746 | KY417780 | KY417814 | KY417712 |
|
68 | C. salicicola |
|
Salix alba | Russia | KU982636 | KU982635 | – | KU982637 | Li et al. (2016) |
69 | C. salicina |
|
Salix alba | Russia | KY417750 | KY417784 | KY417818 | KY417716 |
|
70 | C. schulzeri | CFCC 50040 | Malus domestica | Ningxia, China | KR045649 | KR045728 | KU710980 | KU711013 | Unpublished |
71 | C. sibiraeae | CFCC 50045T | Sibiraea angustata | Gansu, China | KR045651 | KR045730 | KU710982 | KU711015 |
|
72 | C. sorbi |
|
Sorbus aucuparia | Russia | KY417752 | KY417786 | KY417820 | KY417718 |
|
73 | C. sorbicola |
|
Acer pseudoplatanus | Russia | KY417755 | KY417789 | KY417823 | KY417721 |
|
74 | C. sordida | HMBF159 | KF225613 | KF225627 | – | KF498676 |
|
||
75 | C. sophorae | CFCC 50047 | Styphnolobium japonicum | Shanxi, China | KR045653 | KR045732 | KU710984 | KU711017 | Fan et al. (2014) |
76 | C. sophoricola | CFCC 89596 | Styphnolobium japonicum | Gansu, China | KR045656 | KR045735 | KU710987 | KU711020 | Unpublished |
77 | C. tanaitica |
|
Betula pubescens | Russia | KT459411 | KT459412 | – | KT459413 |
|
78 | C. thailandica |
|
Xylocarpus moluccensis | Ranong, Thailand | MG975776 | MH253463 | MH253455 | MH253459 | In this study |
79 | C. thailandica |
|
Xylocarpus moluccensis | Ranong, Thailand | MG975777 | MH253464 | MH253456 | MH253460 | In this study |
80 | C. tibouchinae | CPC 26333T | Tibouchina semidecandra | La Reunion, France | KX228284 | KX228335 | – | – | Unpublished |
81 | C. translucens | 35 | EF447403 | – | – | – |
|
||
82 | C. ulmi |
|
Ulmus minor | Russia | KY417759 | KY417793 | KY417827 | KY417725 |
|
83 | C. valsoidea | CMW 4309T | Eucalyptus grandis | Sibisa, North Sumatra | AF192312 | – | – | – |
|
84 | C. variostromatica | CMW 6766T | Eucalyptus globulus | Australia | AY347366 | – | – | – |
|
85 | C. vinacea | CBS 141585T | Vitis sp. | New Hampshire, USA | KX256256 | – | – | – |
|
86 | C. xylocarpi |
|
Xylocarpus granatum | Ranong, Thailand | MG975775 | MH253462 | MH253454 | MH253458 | In this study |
87 | Diaporthe eres | AFTOL-ID 935 | DQ491514 | – | DQ470919 | – |
|
||
88 | C. “rhizophorae” | A761 | Morinda officinalis | China | KU529867 | – | – | – | Unpublished |
89 | C. “rhizophorae” | HAB16R13 | Cinnamomum porrectum | Malaysia | HQ336045 | – | – | – |
|
90 | C. “rhizophorae” | M225 | Rhizophora mucronata | Philippines | KR056292 | – | – | – | Unpublished |
91 | C. “rhizophorae” | MUCC302 | Eucalyptus grandis | Australia | EU301057 | – | – | – | Unpublished |
The combined alignment of ITS, LSU, ACT and RPB2 sequences comprised 86 taxa, including our strains, with Diaporthe eres (CBS 183.5) as the outgroup taxon. The total length of the dataset was 2037 characters including alignment gaps (1–199, 200–357, 358–518, 519–1056, 1057–1296 and 1297–2037 corresponding to ITS1, 5.8S, ITS2, LSU, ACT and RPB2, respectively). The combined dataset contained 1426 constant, 144 parsimony uninformative and 467 parsimony informative characters. The result from the partition homogeneity test (PHT) was not significant (level 95%), indicating that the individual datasets were congruent and could be combined. The combined dataset was analysed using MP, ML and Bayesian analyses. The trees generated under different optimality criteria were essentially similar in topology and did not differ significantly (data not shown). The descriptive statistics of the phylogram generated from MP analysis based on the combined dataset of ITS, LSU, ACT and RPB2 (Fig.
Phylogram generated from maximum parsimony analyses based on analysis of combined ITS, LSU, ACT and RPB2 sequence data. The tree is rooted to Diaporthe eres (AFTOL-ID 935). Maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood bootstrap values ≥50%, Bayesian posterior probabilities ≥0.90 (MPBS/MLBS/PP) are given at the nodes. The species obtained in this study are in blue font. Ex-type taxa from other studies are in black bold.
Maximum parsimony phylogenetic tree inferred from ITS1 and ITS2 sequence data. Maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood bootstrap values ≥50%, Bayesian posterior probabilities ≥0.90 (MPBS/MLBS/BIPP) are given at the nodes. The species obtained in this study are in blue font. Ex-type taxa from other studies are in black bold.
refers to the host where the fungus was isolated.
Isolated from leaf spot of Lumnitzera racemosa. Culture characteristic: Colonies on MEA reaching 5–6 cm diameter after 2 days at room temperature, colonies circular to irregular, medium dense, flat or effuse, slightly raised, with edge fimbriate, fluffy to fairly fluffy, white to grey from above, light yellow to green from below; not producing pigments in agar. Asexual morph: Conidiogenous cells (8–)8.5–14 × 0.6–1.4(–1.6) μm (x‒ = 8.4 × 1.4, n = 15), blastic, enteroblastic, flask-shaped, phialidic, hyaline and smooth-walled. Conidia (3.7–)4–4.5 × 1–1.3(–1.5) µm (x‒ = 4 × 1.2 µm, n = 30), unicellular, subcylindrical, hyaline, smooth-walled.
THAILAND, Phetchaburi Province, the Sirindhorn International Environmental Park, on leaf spot of Lumnitzera racemosa, 30 November 2016, Norphanphoun Chada NNS23-2a (
Based on the multigene phylogeny, Cytospora lumnitzericola is closely related to Cytospora thailandica (Fig.
Cytospora lumnitzericola (
refers to the country where the fungus was collected.
Associated with twigs and branches of Xylocarpus moluccensis. Sexual morph: Stromata immersed in bark. Ascostromata 400–1000 × 70–250 µm diameter, semi-immersed in host tissue, scattered, erumpent, uni- or multi-loculate, with ostiolar neck. Ostiole 70–150 µm diameter, numerous, dark brown to black, at the same level as the disc, occasionally area below disc a lighter entostroma. Peridium comprising several layers of cell of textura angularis, with innermost layer thick, brown, outer layer dark brown. Hamathecium comprising long cylindrical, cellular, anastomosed paraphyses. Asci (21–)23–25 × 4.1–4.7(–5) μm (x‒ = 22 × 4.3 μm, n = 15), 6–8-spored, unitunicate, clavate to elongate obovoid, with a J-, refractive apical ring. Ascospores (5.6–)6–6.8 × 1.3–1.5(–2) μm (x‒ = 6.6 × 1.5 μm, n = 20), biseriate, elongate-allantoid, unicellular, hyaline, smooth-walled. Asexual morph: Conidiomata 400–1200 × 180–380 µm diameter, semi-immersed in host tissue, solitary, erumpent, scattered, discoid, circular to ovoid, with multi-loculate, pycnidial, embedded in stromatic tissue, with ostiole. Ostioles 230–300 µm long, with an ostiolar neck. Peridium comprising few layers of cells of textura angularis, with innermost layer thin, pale brown, outer layer brown to dark brown. Conidiophores unbranched or occasionally branched at the bases, formed from the innermost layer of pycnidial wall, with conidiogenous cells. Conidiogenous cells (3.3–)6–9.1 × 1–1.3(–1.7) μm (x‒ = 6 × 1.3 μm, n = 15), blastic, enteroblastic, flask-shaped, phialidic, hyaline and smooth-walled. Conidia (3.3–)3.8–4 × 1–1.3(–1.5) µm (x‒ = 3.8 × 1.3 µm, n = 30), unicellular, subcylindrical, hyaline, smooth-walled.
THAILAND, Ranong Province, Ngao Mangrove Forest, on branches of Xylocarpus moluccensis, 6 December 2016, Norphanphoun Chada NG02a (
Cytospora thailandica was collected from branches of Xylocarpus moluccensis. The new species resembles some other Cytospora species, but is characterised by uni- or multi-loculate ascomata/conidiomata with unicellular, subcylindrical and hyaline spores in both morphs. Cytospora species associated with Xylocarpus granatum is also reported in this study as C. xylocarpi (
Cytospora thailandica (
Taxon | Sexual morph | Asexual morph | References | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ascostoma | Ostiolar neck | Asci | Ascospores | Conidiomata | Ostiolar neck | Conidiogenous cell | Conidia | ||
C. lumnitzericola | – | – | – | – | – | – | 8.4 × 1.4 | 4 × 1.2 | In this study |
C. rhizophorae | – | – | – | – | 370–500 × 100–310 | 30 × 10–25 | 13–20 × 1–1.8 | 3–6 × 1.1–1.5 | Kohlm. and Kohlm. (1971) |
C. thailandica | 400–1000 × 70–250 | 70–150 | 22 × 4.3 | 6.6 × 1.5 | 400–1200 × 180–380 | 230–300 | 6 × 1.3 | 3.8 × 1.3 | In this study |
C. xylocarpi | 230–600 × 90–250 | 160–200 | 26 × 4 | 5.7 × 1.8 | 700–1200 × 400–480 | 200–250 | 8.5× 1.4 | 3 × 1 | In this study |
refers to the host genus that fungus was collected.
Associated with Xylocarpus granatum branches. Sexual morph: Stromata immersed in bark. Ascostromata 230–600 × 90–250 µm diameter, semi-immersed in host tissue, scattered, erumpent, multi-loculate, with ostiolar neck. Ostiole 160–200 µm diameter, numerous, dark brown to black, at the same level as the disc, occasionally area surrounded with white hyphae. Peridium comprising several layers of cells of textura angularis, with innermost layer thick, pale brown, outer layer dark brown to black. Hamathecium comprising long cylindrical, cellular, anastomosed paraphyses. Asci (22–)24–28.8 × 3.6–4.8(–5.1) μm (x‒ = 26 × 4 μm, n = 15), 6–8-spored, unitunicate, clavate to elongate obovoid, with a refractive, J-, apical ring. Ascospores (5.5–)6–6.5 × 1.7–1.8(–2) μm (x‒ = 5.7 × 1.8 μm, n = 20), biseriate, elongate-allantoid, unicellular hyaline, smooth-walled. Asexual morph: Conidiomata 700–1200 × 400–480 µm diameter, semi-immersed in host tissue, solitary, erumpent, scattered, multi-loculate, with ostiole. Ostioles 200–250 µm long, with 1–2 ostiolar necks. Peridium comprising several layers of cells of textura angularis, with innermost layer brown, outer layer dark brown to black. Conidiophores unbranched or occasionally branched at the bases, formed from the innermost layer of pycnidial wall, with conidiogenous cells. Conidiogenous cells (6.3–)7.9–10 × 0.9–1.4(–1.6) μm (x‒ = 8.5× 1.4 μm, n = 15), blastic, enteroblastic, flask-shaped, phialidic, hyaline and smooth-walled. Conidia (2.4–)3–3.1 × 0.8–1(–1.2) µm (x‒ = 3 × 1 µm, n = 30), unicellular, subcylindrical, hyaline, smooth-walled.
THAILAND, Ranong Province, Ngao Mangrove Forest, on branches of Xylocarpus granatum, 6 December 2016, Norphanphoun Chada NG09b (
The asexual morph of C. xylocarpi, studied here, is most similar to C. rhizophorae from dead roots of Rhizophora mangle L. in Guatemala, in having multi-loculate conidiomata and allantoid, slightly curved, hyaline and 3–6 × 1.1–1.5 μm conidia (
Our phylogeny also indicates a close relationship to unpublished sequences from GenBank (Figs
Cytospora xylocarpi (
GenBank BLAST search from ITS1 and ITS2 of Cytospora xylocarpi (
Toxon | Strain | Host | Country | Accessions | ITS1 | ITS2 | ITS1+ITS2 | Identities (I), Query cover (QC) | References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C. “rhizophorae” | HAB16R13 | Cinnamomum porrectum | Malaysia | HQ336045 | 213/215 | 167/169 | 380/384 | I=98.9%, QC=99% |
|
C. “rhizophorae” | M225 | Rhizophora mucronata | Philippines | KR056292 | 213/217 | 167/169 | 380/386 | I=98.4%, QC=100% | Unpublished |
C. “rhizophorae” | A761 | Morinda officinalis | China | KU529867 | 213/217 | 166/169 | 379/386 | I=98.2%, QC=100% | Unpublished |
C. “rhizophorae” | MUCC302 | Eucalyptus grandis | Australia | EU301057 | 213/217 | 164/169 | 377/386 | I=97.7%, QC=100% | Unpublished |
C. rhizophorae | ATCC38475 | Rhizophora mangle | LA, USA | DQ996040 | 187/202 | 156/166 | 343/368 | I=93.2%, QC=100% |
|
Nucleotide differences in the ITS1+ITS2 of Cytospora xylocarpi (
Taxon | Strain | ITS1 | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
14 | 16 | 18 | 30 | 92 | 93 | 96 | 99 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 113 | 115 | 118 | 119 | 135 | 154 | ||
C. xylocarpi |
|
- | G | A | C | C | C | C | G | G | G | C | G | C | T | T | C | A | G |
C. rhizophorae | ATCC38475 | G | A | C | T | G | A | T | A | T | T | T | A | T | - | C | T | - | T |
C. “rhizophorae” | HAB16R13 | ? | G | A | C | C | C | C | G | G | G | C | G | C | T | T | C | A | T |
C. “rhizophorae” | M225 | ? | G | A | T | C | C | C | G | G | G | C | G | C | T | T | C | A | T |
C. “rhizophorae” | A761 | ? | G | A | T | C | C | C | G | G | G | C | G | C | T | T | C | A | T |
C. “rhizophorae” | MUCC302 | ? | G | A | T | C | C | C | G | G | G | C | G | C | - | T | C | A | T |
Taxon | Strain | ITS2 | |||||||||||||||||
13 | 24 | 40 | 46 | 47 | 50 | 51 | 75 | 111 | 112 | 115 | 123 | ||||||||
C. xylocarpi |
|
C | C | A | T | - | T | T | C | A | A | C | T | ||||||
C. rhizophorae | ATCC38475 | T | T | - | T | - | - | T | C | G | T | A | T | ||||||
C. “rhizophorae” | HAB16R13 | C | T | A | T | - | T | T | C | A | A | C | C | ||||||
C. “rhizophorae” | M225 | C | T | A | T | - | T | T | C | A | A | C | T | ||||||
C. “rhizophorae” | A761 | C | T | A | T | T | - | T | C | A | A | C | T | ||||||
C. “rhizophorae” | MUCC302 | C | T | A | - | - | - | - | T | A | A | C | T |
Nucleotides differences in the ITS, ACT and RPB2 sequences of Cytospora lumnitzericola, C. thailandica and C. xylocarpi.
Taxon | Strain | ITS | |||||||||||||||||
29 | 88 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 96 | 97 | 99 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 111 | ||
C. lumnitzericola |
|
T | C | T | T | T | T | C | T | C | G | G | A | C | T | A | T | A | G |
C. thailandica |
|
T | - | T | - | - | - | T | C | T | C | A | G | - | - | A | C | G | C |
C. thailandica |
|
T | - | T | - | - | - | T | C | T | C | A | G | - | - | A | C | G | C |
C. xylocarpi |
|
C | C | C | - | - | C | C | C | C | G | G | G | - | - | G | C | G | G |
Taxon | Strain | ITS | |||||||||||||||||
119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 134 | 157 | 389 | 396 | 404 | 405 | 412 | 413 | 414 | 415 | 420 | ||
C. lumnitzericola |
|
T | T | C | - | - | - | - | - | T | T | A | A | - | - | - | - | T | G |
C. thailandica |
|
C | T | T | C | - | G | G | - | T | T | G | T | T | - | - | - | - | A |
C. thailandica |
|
C | T | T | C | - | G | G | - | T | T | G | T | T | - | - | - | - | A |
C. xylocarpi |
|
T | C | T | C | C | G | G | A | G | C | A | A | A | C | T | T | T | G |
Taxon | Strain | ITS | ACT | ||||||||||||||||
439 | 468 | 485 | 487 | 488 | 74 | 78 | 80 | 92 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 107 | 122 | 125 | 129 | 136 | 137 | ||
C. lumnitzericola |
|
T | T | C | T | A | G | C | A | T | T | - | - | C | T | A | G | A | A |
C. thailandica |
|
T | T | T | C | T | T | G | A | A | T | - | - | T | C | T | G | A | G |
C. thailandica |
|
T | T | T | C | T | T | G | A | A | T | - | - | T | C | T | G | A | G |
C. xylocarpi |
|
C | C | C | T | T | G | C | T | A | C | C | C | T | C | A | A | G | A |
Taxon | Strain | ACT | |||||||||||||||||
139 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | 150 | 152 | 159 | 165 | 198 | 209 | 210 | 212 | 215 | 216 | 217 | 218 | 223 | ||
C. lumnitzericola |
|
A | A | G | C | T | C | C | G | T | C | T | C | G | A | A | A | C | A |
C. thailandica |
|
A | G | - | - | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | C | A | A | A | - | C | A |
C. thailandica |
|
A | G | - | - | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | C | A | A | A | - | C | A |
C. xylocarpi |
|
G | G | - | - | A | A | C | T | C | C | A | T | A | T | G | - | A | - |
Taxon | Strain | ACT | RPB2 | ||||||||||||||||
224 | 225 | 231 | 234 | 242 | 245 | 246 | 4 | 18 | 33 | 42 | 57 | 84 | 85 | 96 | 102 | 108 | 120 | ||
C. lumnitzericola |
|
C | G | C | - | - | A | A | T | T | C | T | C | C | T | T | C | G | A |
C. thailandica |
|
T | T | C | T | G | T | G | T | C | A | T | C | T | C | T | C | A | G |
C. thailandica |
|
T | T | C | T | G | T | G | T | C | A | T | C | T | C | T | C | A | G |
C. xylocarpi |
|
T | T | A | C | G | T | A | C | T | C | C | T | T | C | C | A | A | G |
Taxon | Strain | RPB2 | |||||||||||||||||
123 | 126 | 129 | 144 | 153 | 171 | 174 | 177 | 204 | 210 | 213 | 216 | 222 | 231 | 237 | 243 | 246 | 279 | ||
C. lumnitzericola |
|
C | G | C | G | T | G | C | C | G | C | T | C | T | T | C | T | C | T |
C. thailandica |
|
T | A | T | A | C | G | T | C | G | T | C | C | C | T | T | T | T | C |
C. thailandica |
|
T | A | T | A | C | G | T | C | G | T | C | C | C | T | T | T | T | C |
C. xylocarpi |
|
C | A | C | A | T | A | T | T | C | C | C | T | C | G | C | C | C | T |
Taxon | Strain | RPB2 | |||||||||||||||||
282 | 294 | 306 | 309 | 336 | 339 | 342 | 351 | 352 | 357 | 378 | 390 | 393 | 396 | 402 | 405 | 435 | 441 | ||
C. lumnitzericola |
|
C | A | T | C | T | C | G | T | C | G | A | C | C | G | T | T | C | T |
C. thailandica |
|
T | G | C | T | C | A | A | C | T | C | G | C | T | A | T | C | C | T |
C. thailandica |
|
T | G | C | T | C | A | A | C | T | C | G | C | T | A | T | C | C | T |
C. xylocarpi |
|
T | A | C | C | T | C | G | T | C | C | A | T | T | A | C | T | T | G |
Taxon | Strain | RPB2 | |||||||||||||||||
456 | 465 | 468 | 492 | 498 | 510 | 516 | 517 | 543 | 561 | 570 | 576 | 603 | 612 | 613 | 615 | 627 | 633 | ||
C. lumnitzericola |
|
C | T | C | G | T | T | A | T | T | A | A | G | T | T | C | C | C | G |
C. thailandica |
|
C | C | G | C | C | C | A | T | C | A | G | A | C | C | T | G | C | G |
C. thailandica |
|
C | C | G | C | C | C | A | T | C | A | G | A | C | C | T | G | C | G |
C. xylocarpi |
|
T | T | T | G | T | C | G | C | C | G | G | G | T | C | T | G | G | A |
Taxon | Strain | RPB2 | |||||||||||||||||
651 | 663 | 675 | 678 | 690 | 693 | 699 | 702 | 711 | 732 | ||||||||||
C. lumnitzericola |
|
T | A | C | T | T | G | T | C | C | T | ||||||||
C. thailandica |
|
C | G | T | C | G | A | C | T | C | C | ||||||||
C. thailandica |
|
C | G | T | C | G | A | C | T | C | C | ||||||||
C. xylocarpi |
|
C | A | T | C | T | A | C | C | T | T |
Chada Norphanphoun would like to thank the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31760014) and the Science and Technology Foundation of Guizhou Province (No. [2017]5788); the Mushroom Research Foundation (MRF), Chiang Rai, Thailand, the Thailand Research Fund grant no RSA5980068 entitled “Biodiversity, Phylogeny and role of fungal endophytes on above parts of Rhizophora apiculata and Nypa fruticans” and Mae Fah Luang University for a grant “Diseases of mangrove trees and maintenance of good forestry practice” (Grant number: 60201000201) for support. We would like to thank Dr. Wijarn Meepol from the Ranong Mangrove Forest Research Center, Ranong and the Sirindhorn International Environmental Park, Cha-am, Cha-am District, Phetchaburi, Thailand. R Jeewon thanks Mae Fah Luang University and University of Mauritius for research support.