Emmanuelia, a new genus of lobarioid lichen-forming fungi (Ascomycota: Peltigerales): phylogeny and synopsis of accepted species

Simon, Antoine; Lücking, Robert; Moncada, Bibiana; Mercado‐Díaz, Joel A.; Bungartz, Frank; Cáceres, Marcela Eugenia da Silva; Gumboski, Emerson Luiz; Martins, Suzana Maria de Azevedo; Spielmann, Adriano Afonso; Parker, Dinah; Goffinet, Bernard

doi:10.35535/pfsyst-2020-0004

Cited by 5 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 46 publications

(55 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…propuestos por Yoshimura (1998bYoshimura ( , 2002. Años más tarde, Simon et al (2020) proponen un nuevo género, Emmanuelia Ant. Simon, Lücking & Goffinet.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…Este nuevo linaje, fue tratado en un principio como miembro de Lobaria y, posteriormente, dentro de Ricasolia (Moncada et al, 2013). Emmanuelia es muy similar morfológicamente a Ricasolia, sin embargo, se encuentra más relacionado filogenéticamente con Dendriscosticta B. Moncada & Lücking, Lobariella y Yoshimuriella (Simon et al, 2020). Este grupo de líquenes se encontraba dentro de la familia Lobariaceae, sin embargo, estudios recientes proponen a esta familia como sinónimo de Peltigeraceae, dentro de la subfamilia Lobarioideae (Kraichak et al, 2018;Lumbsch & Leavitt, 2019;Lücking, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…Se diferencia de Lobaria s. str. por el tomento inferior (continuo vs. discontinuo), y el tipo de ascosporas, (aciculares vs. fusiformes) (Yoshimura, 1998a;Moncada et al, 2013;Simon et al, 2020). Las especies de Emmanuelia son similares a las de Ricasolia, aunque se las puede diferenciar por características morfológicas y anatómicas de los márgenes de los apotecios, como así también en la forma de las ascosporas.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…1E), además la estructura del ápice del paratecio es paraplectenquimático, y las ascosporas son aciculares (Fig. 1F); mientras que en Ricasolia los apotecios son más o menos enteros y lisos, el paratecio y el anfitecio se encuentran unidos, la estructura del ápice del paratecio es prosoplectenquimática, y las ascosporas son de tipo fusiformes (Simon et al, 2020). Además, ambos géneros presentan una distribución geográfica y ecológica diferente: Emmanuelia se distribuye en zonas tropicales a subtropicales, desde el sureste de América del Norte hasta el sur de América del Sur (Simon et al, 2020), mientras que Ricasolia es un género que se encuentra en zonas templadas del hemisferio norte (Cornejo et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

See 3 more Smart Citations

Nuevas citas del género Emmanuelia (Ascomycetes Liquenizados, Peltigerales) para el norte de Argentina

Rodríguez,

Michlig,

Popoff

2024

Bol. Soc. Argent. Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introducción y Objetivos: En este trabajo se presenta una revisión del género Emmanuelia en el Norte de Argentina, con el fin de incrementar el conocimiento de este grupo de líquenes en el país. Las especies pertenecientes a este género, descripto recientemente, se encontraban previamente dentro de Lobaria. M&M: Se estudiaron muestras depositadas en el herbario CTES coleccionadas en las selvas del Norte argentino. Se realizó un análisis morfológico y anatómico, mediante microscopio estereoscópico y óptico, y análisis químico del material, mediante reacciones puntuales de color, con hidróxido de potasio al 10% (K), hipoclorito de sodio (C) y K seguido de C (KC), y cromatografía en capa delgada (CCD) con solventes A y C. Resultados: Mediante el estudio del material, se determinó la presencia de tres especies en las selvas del Norte argentino, para las cuales se amplía el rango de distribución: Emmanuelia elaeodes y E. erosa representan nuevas citas para el país, y E. tenuis amplía su distribución para la provincia de Corrientes. Cada especie es descrita e ilustrada, y se presenta una clave dicotómica de las especies presentes en Argentina. Conclusiones: Este trabajo permitió ampliar y actualizar el conocimiento acerca de este grupo de líquenes en Argentina, con la adición de especies previamente no conocidas para el país. Además, se pudo confirmar la presencia de E. tenuis y determinar que E. patinifera no se encontraría en Argentina.

show abstract

“…propuestos por Yoshimura (1998bYoshimura ( , 2002. Años más tarde, Simon et al (2020) proponen un nuevo género, Emmanuelia Ant. Simon, Lücking & Goffinet.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

See 2 more Smart Citations

Nuevas citas del género Emmanuelia (Ascomycetes Liquenizados, Peltigerales) para el norte de Argentina

Rodríguez,

Michlig,

Popoff

2024

Bol. Soc. Argent. Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, recent phylogenetic analyses resulted in a reclassification of the Lobariaceae as Lobarioideae within the Peltigeraceae (Kraichak & al., 2018; Lücking, 2019). Furthermore, its three long‐established genera (i.e., Lobaria , Pseudocyphellaria and Sticta ) were split in 13 genera based on a correlation between the phylogeny and phenotypes (Galloway & Elix, 2013; Moncada & al., 2013b; Cornejo & Scheidegger, 2015; Galloway, 2015; Widhelm & al., 2019; Simon & al., 2020). In addition, multiple instances of semi‐cryptic speciation were uncovered in many genera (Moncada & al., 2014; Magain & Sérusiaux, 2015; Lücking & al., 2017b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global phylogeny and taxonomic reassessment of the lichen genus Dendriscosticta (Ascomycota: Peltigerales)

Simon

Goffinet

Wang

et al. 2021

TAXON

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The genus Dendriscosticta (Ascomycota: Peltigerales) encompasses several distinctive lichen-forming fungal species restricted to the Northern Hemisphere. Most are flagship species of old-growth forests with good air quality. A global phylogeny of the genus based on multilocus sequence data (ITS, RPB1, EF-1α, MCM7), model-based phylogenetic methods, and morphological and chemical assessments, reveals a high level of cryptic speciation often associated with restricted geographical distribution and/or chemical characters. Using sequence-based species delimitation approaches, we circumscribe two main clades referred to as the D. wrightii clade, with five unequivocal species, including D. gelida sp. nov., and the D. praetextata clade, with eight putative species, including D. phyllidiata sp. nov. The absence of recently collected material of D. hookeri comb. nov. from the type locality unfortunately prevents assignment of this epithet to one of the five supported lineages sharing this morphotype. Three new combinations are proposed: D. hookeri, D. insinuans comb. nov. and D. yatabeana comb. nov. Epitypes are designated for D. wrightii and D. yatabeana. Species diversity within the genus increased from four to nine. Our morphological assessment confirmed that Sticta and Dendriscosticta can be readily distinguished by the presence of excipular algae whereas the structure of the lower surface pores is not a reliable diagnostic feature.

show abstract

TheSticta filix - Sticta laceraconundrum (lichenized Ascomycota: Peltigeraceae subfamily Lobarioideae): unresolved lineage sorting or developmental switch?

Lücking

Moncada

Widhelm

et al. 2021

Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assessed the status of two New Zealand endemic morphodemes in the genus Sticta, currently treated as two separate taxa, Sticta filix and Sticta lacera. Both are green-algal lichens with a distinct stipe that grow in forested habitats and are suitable indicators of the indigenous vegetation health in forest ecosystems in New Zealand. They exhibit different morphologies and substrate ecologies: S. filix forms rather robust thalli, often on exposed trunks of phorophytes, with erect stems distinctly emerging from the substrate, whereas S. lacera is a more delicate lichen growing near the base of trees, usually among bryophyte mats or sheltered in the exposed portions of the phorophyte root-plate, with a prostrate, branched, stolon-like stem barely emerging from the substrate. Throughout their range, both taxa grow sympatrically and often in close proximity (syntopically). Despite the differences, ITS barcoding does not support the two morphodemes as separate species. In this study we assessed two possible explanations: (1) S. filix and S. lacera are discrete phenotypes of a single species, caused by developmental switching triggered by a discrete environmental variable, the propagules developing either on bare substrate or between bryophytes; and (2) the two morphodemes represent separate lineages, but ITS does not provide sufficient resolution to reflect this. We performed a quantitative analysis of morphological and ecological parameters, based on vouchered herbarium collections and field observations on iNaturalist NZ (https://inaturalist.nz), to assess the level of discreteness of the growth forms and to test for a correlation with the presence of a bryophyte mat. We further took advantage of an existing molecular data set from a target capture approach, comprised of 205 protein markers. This data set was used to establish a framework of percentage identities between pairs of the same and of different species among lobarioid Peltigeraceae and then to test whether the S. filix/lacera pairing fell closer to a within-species or a between-species pairing. The morphometric analysis of herbarium material resolved S. filix and S. lacera as two discrete morphs with little overlap, supported by numerous observations on iNaturalist NZ. However, whereas herbarium material suggested a significant association of the lacera morph with bryophyte mats, no such pattern was evident from field images on iNaturalist NZ, in which both morphs frequently associated with bryophyte mats. This highlights the limitations of herbarium material to correctly assess substrate ecology, whereas iNaturalist NZ postings had issues with correct identifications, given that especially S. lacera is easily confused with Pseudocyphellaria multifida. Based on the target capture data, the percentage identity of the S. filix/lacera pairing (99.43%) was significantly higher than that of all 12 between-species pairings (93.20–98.01%); it was at the same time lower than that of all within-species pairings (99.63–99.99%) but significantly so only in comparison with five out of the eight within-species pairings. The target capture approach is thus inconclusive, but the combination of all data suggests that S. filix and S. lacera are not discrete morphodemes of a single species but represent two separate lineages which emerged recently and hence cannot be resolved using the ITS barcoding marker or even a deeper phylogenomic approach based on protein-coding markers. We propose transplantation experiments and the application of RADseq to further assess this situation.

show abstract

Emmanuelia, a new genus of lobarioid lichen-forming fungi (Ascomycota: Peltigerales): phylogeny and synopsis of accepted species

Cited by 5 publications

References 46 publications

Nuevas citas del género Emmanuelia (Ascomycetes Liquenizados, Peltigerales) para el norte de Argentina

Nuevas citas del género Emmanuelia (Ascomycetes Liquenizados, Peltigerales) para el norte de Argentina

Global phylogeny and taxonomic reassessment of the lichen genus Dendriscosticta (Ascomycota: Peltigerales)

TheSticta filix - Sticta laceraconundrum (lichenized Ascomycota: Peltigeraceae subfamily Lobarioideae): unresolved lineage sorting or developmental switch?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About