Revisiting the genus Cytospora and allied species

Abstract

Cytospora species are important plant pathogens causing dieback and canker diseases on a wide range of hosts, worldwide. However, species level identification is difficult due to poor phylogenetic understanding and lack of sequenced type species. ITS sequence data are only available for most Cytospora strains in GenBank. In this study, samples of Cytospora were collected from symptomatic twigs and branches in European Russia. A combination of morphological characters and multi-gene phylogenetic analysis (ITS, LSU, RPB2, ACT) were used to identify taxa. A total of 34 collections, representing 17 fungal species of Cytospora were studied. Of these, 14 new species are described and illustrated. Three species were known taxa and identified as C. nivea, C. parasitica, and C. salicicola. Newly introduced species are C. ampulliformis, C. curvata, C. donetzica, C. erumpens, C. longiostiolata, C. melnikii, C. parakantschavelii, C. paratranslucens, C. rusanovii, C. salicacearum, C. salicina, C. sorbi, C. sorbicola and C. ulmi. Descriptions, illustrations and notes are provided for all studied taxa in this study. The distribution patterns of Cytospora species on different hosts are discussed. The study represents a preliminary study of Cytospora species from a small region and provides an initial contribution to the understanding of the genus.

Morphological and phylogenetic characterisation of novel Cytospora species associated with mangroves

“…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 Top TM Taq Master Mix (mixture of Taq DNA Polymerase (recombinant): 0.05 units/µl, MgCl 2 : 4 mM and dNTPs (dATP, dCTP, dGTP, dTTP): 0.4 mM) and 19 µl of double-distilled water (ddH 2 O) (sterilised water) using the thermal cycle programme in Norphanphoun et al (2017). Purification and sequencing of PCR products with the same primers mentioned above were carried out at Life Biotechnology Co., Shanghai, China.…”

“…Currently, there are 614 epithets for Cytospora (Index Fungorum 2018, 14 June 2018) with an estimated 110 species in Kirk et al (2008). Recently, fourteen new species were introduced to this genus by Norphanphoun et al (2017). In this study, we report on three novel species of Cytospora associated with mangroves in Thailand.…”

“…Cytospora species are phytopathogens or saprobes (Wehmeyer 1975, Barr 1978, Eriksson 2001, Castlebury et al 2002, Wijayawardene et al 2018). Cytospora has a worldwide distribution and is an important pathogenic genus, causing canker and dieback disease on branches of a wide range of plants (Adams et al 2005, 2006, Hyde et al 2017, Norphanphoun et al 2017). Currently, there are 614 epithets for Cytospora (Index Fungorum 2018, 14 June 2018) with an estimated 110 species in Kirk et al (2008).…”

Multigene phylogeny and morphology reveal Cytospora spiraeae sp. nov. (Diaporthales, Ascomycota) in China

“…1). In the past five years alone, the polyphasic approach (morphological identification and phylogenetic species recognition concept) has led to the descriptions of additional new species of Cytospora in China (Wang et al 2013;Zhang et al 2014;Fan et al 2014aFan et al , 2014bFan et al , 2015aFan et al , 2015bYang et al 2015;Lawrence et al 2017;Norphanphoun et al 2017), which were included here. The current study indicated that the Cytospora spiraeae represents a novel species with high support value (MP/ML/BI = 100/100/1) (Fig.…”

“…More than 600 species epithets named Cytospora have been recorded in Index Fungorum (2017) with an estimated 110 species in Kirk et al (2008). Recent studies have subsequently emphasized on part of Cytospora species using multiphase approaches to solve the confused frame (Fan et al 2014a(Fan et al , 2014b(Fan et al , 2015a(Fan et al , 2015bYang et al 2015;Lawrence et al 2017;Norphanphoun et al 2017). However, only ITS gene are available for most known Cytospora species, and extype sequence data are available for only a very few species and many taxa need epitypifying (Adams et al 2005).…”