Phylogenetic and taxonomic revision of Lopadostoma

Abstract

The genus Lopadostoma (Xylariaceae, Xylariales) is revised. Most species formerly assigned to Lopadostoma do not belong to the genus. Twelve species are herein recognised, of which two are only known from morphology. Ten species, of which six (L. americanum, L. fagi, L. insulare, L. lechatii, L. meridionale and L. quercicola) are newly described, are characterised by both morphology and DNA phylogeny using LSU, ITS and rpb2 sequences. Morphologically, ecologically and phylogenetically Lopadostoma is a well-defined genus comprising exclusively species with pustular pseudostroma development in bark of angiospermous trees. Phaeosperma ailanthi, Phaeosperma dryophilum and Sphaeria linosperma are combined in Lopadostoma. Lopadostoma gastrinum is neotypified and L. turgidum is lecto- and epitypified. Species with asci and ascospores similar to those of Lopadostoma but having perithecia immersed in wood, particularly those of Lopadostoma subg. Anthostomopsis have been determined to be unrelated to the genus. DNA data confirm that Anthostoma is unrelated to Lopadostoma. Its type and currently only confirmed species Anthostoma decipiens belongs to Diatrypaceae. DNA data also show that L. pouzarii and Barrmaelia macrospora are unrelated to Lopadostoma. A commentary is provided for names in Lopadostoma and those names in Anthostoma that may be putative species of Lopadostoma based on their protologues. Anthostoma insidiosum is an older name for Anthostomella (Diatrype) adusta.

Towards unraveling relationships in Xylariomycetidae (Sordariomycetes)

“…Clade L represents a newly introduced family Lopadostomaceae. Generally the obtained data indicate a close relationship between Lopadostoma and Creosphaeria and is in agreement with Jaklitsch et al (2014). All Coniocessia LSU sequence data in GenBank are short and clade M represents the family Coniocessiaceae.…”

A multiple gene genealogy reveals phylogenetic placement of Rhopalostroma lekae

“…Even with the inclusion of more taxa, due to high length variations in ITS regions, they still depict out a poor reflection (Jaklitsch et al 2014) thus the molecular taxonomy, based solely on the ITS region are presently considered to be inappropriate and additional markers are therefore needed for a better resolution of xylariaceous taxa and a different gene is necessary to establish a genetic bar-coding of Xylariaceae (Pažoutová et al 2013. This study presents a multigene approach to clarify the taxonomic position of Rhopalostroma lekae within the family Xylariaceae.…”

“…To reveal the phylogenetic position of Rhopalostroma lekae, 95 sequences from representative Xylariaceae species from what we consider to be reliable studies (Sanchez-Ballesteros et al 2000, Triebel et al 2005, Bitzer et al 2008, Peršoh et al 2009, Tang et al 2009, Hsieh et al 2010, Stadler et al 2010a, Jaklitsch and Voglmayr 2012, Jaklitsch et al 2014 were downloaded from GenBank and included in the analysis, with Diatrype disciformis (Hoffm.) Fr.…”

Resurrection and emendation of the Hypoxylaceae, recognised from a multigene phylogeny of the Xylariales

“…Ju et al 1993 for Creosphaeria; Rogers et al 1997 for Jumillera and Whalleya), revealing affinities to the Diatrypaceae. Jaklitsch et al (2014) provided a comprehensive polythetic study on the genus Lopadostoma based on rDNA and RPB2 data, revealing that these fungi appear rather distantly related to the core of Xylariaceae. Accordingly, Senanayake et al (2015) placed Lopadostoma and Creosphaeria in the new family Lopadostomataceae, which was confirmed in a subsequent study by Jaklitsch et al (2016).…”