Spread and effects of Armillaria luteobubalina sp. nov. in an Australian Eucalyptus regnans plantation

Podger, F. D.; Kile, G. A.; Watling, Roy; Fryer, Jeanette

doi:10.1016/s0007-1536(78)80009-6

Cited by 46 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rhizomorphs were applanate in section, with a crêpe-like (accordion-like) morphology, similar to that described for A. luteobubalina (Podger et al 1978). Branching of the rhizomorphs was irregular and distant, with a wide, surrounding mycelial sheath.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 58%

“…We herein designate specimen BAFC51662 as the neotype for A. montagnei; other than presenting the typical morphological features of the species, its culture is kept in the CIEFAP and CMW culture collection and its ITS and LSU rDNA regions were incorporated in phylogenetic studies (Pildain et al 2009). Specimens of A. luteobubalina from New Zealand and Australia (Podger et al 1978) differed from A. montagnei in this study by having smaller spores, 6.5-7.5 3 4.5-5.5 mm (A. montagnei: 9.5-11 3 5.5-7 mm).…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 55%

“…Also field observations and unpublished experimental data have shown that the Patagonian A. montagnei is not typically recovered from hosts showing severe symptoms of root disease as is known for A. luteobubalina (Podger et al 1978). It is relevant that the description of A. montagnei predates that of A. luteobubalina; A. montagnei thus would have priority if all isolates in the clade were to be treated as a single species (Singer 1956, Podger et al 1978. Basidiome flavor strongly sharp and acidic, small to medium size, 15-50 mm diam.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…montagnei has pilei with an olive tinge, larger spores and a more conspicuous annulus than those found in A. luteobubalina. These features together with the lack of rhizomorphs in nature, a diagnostic characteristic for A. luteobubalina (Podger et al 1978), warrant their separation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…montagnei as separate from A. luteobubalina. Although A montagnei and A. luteobubalina share pileus features and an unpleasant flavor (Singer 1956, Podger et al 1978, Armillaria montagnei var. montagnei has pilei with an olive tinge, larger spores and a more conspicuous annulus than those found in A. luteobubalina.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Taxonomy ofArmillariain the Patagonian forests of Argentina

Pildain

Coetzee²,

Wingfield³

et al. 2010

Mycologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The taxonomy of Armillaria in southern South America has received little attention since the work of Singer and others. In this study we examine the morphological traits and cultural features for taxa representing the lineages revealed based on molecular phylogeny, and we link them to previously described taxa based on morphology. Lineages I-IV were identified as Armillaria novae-zelandiae, A. montagnei, A. umbrinobrunnea comb. nov. and A. sparrei respectively. They could be differentiated morphologically based on dimension, features of the epicutis, annulus, stipe, hymenophoral trama and flavor and characteristics in culture. Furthermore there was no evidence of host preference for the species recognized. This is the first study integrating the phylogeny and morphology of Armillaria species from Patagonia, and it provides a foundation for future research on these fungi in South America.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 58%

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 55%