2010
DOI: 10.3852/10-002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Systematics of genus Gnomoniopsis (Gnomoniaceae, Diaporthales) based on a three gene phylogeny, host associations and morphology

Abstract: Species of Gnomoniopsis are leaf- and stem-inhabiting pyrenomycetes that infect plants in Fagaceae, Onagraceae and Rosaceae. Morphology and analyses of DNA sequences from three ribosomal DNA and protein coding regions, namely β-tubulin, translation elongation factor 1α (tef-1α) and the ITS region including ITS1, 5.8S rDNA and ITS2, were used to define species in Gnomoniopsis. Secondary structural alignment of the ITS region across four genera in Gnomoniaceae was used to increase the potential number of homolog… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
53
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(62 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
2
53
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Nevertheless, this fungus, like S. pseudotuberosa, was not reported in previous investigations on endophytism in chestnut shoots carried out in Switzerland (Bissegger & Sieber 1994). Other fungi belonging to the Gnomoniopsis genus were also described as endophytic on Fagacae (Walker et al 2010). It is worth noting that isolation of Gnomoniopsis was not related to bark alteration (cankers or necrosis) and that no fructification was observed on bark tissue in the present study, while pycnidia were found on galls instead.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 68%
“…Nevertheless, this fungus, like S. pseudotuberosa, was not reported in previous investigations on endophytism in chestnut shoots carried out in Switzerland (Bissegger & Sieber 1994). Other fungi belonging to the Gnomoniopsis genus were also described as endophytic on Fagacae (Walker et al 2010). It is worth noting that isolation of Gnomoniopsis was not related to bark alteration (cankers or necrosis) and that no fructification was observed on bark tissue in the present study, while pycnidia were found on galls instead.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 68%
“…Multi-gene phylogenetic analyses using β-tubulin, ITS, rpb2 and tef1-α genes showed G. smithogilvyi is most closely related to G. clavulata (CBS 121255) and G. paraclavulata (CBS 123202) (Shuttleworth 2012). Key morphological differences between G. smithogilvyi and the other two species include the aggregation of perithecia in host tissue ( G. smithogilvyi are single or in groups up to 25, G. clavulata and G. paraclavulata are recorded as single (Sogonov et al 2008)), perithecia of G. smithogilvyi are larger (mean) height and width than the other two species and perithecia of G. smithogilvyi have longer necks, ascospores of G. smithogilvyi are smaller than the other two species and the position of the septum in the ascospores is different ( G. smithogilvyi has a median septum, G. clavulata has a submedian septum (36 % of ascospore length), G. paraclavulata has a submedian septum (40 % of ascospore length); Walker et al 2010). The three species share the same host range, occurring on members of Fagaceae .…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The three Neurospora species served as the root for all trees created, just as they did in the Xylariaceae phylogenetic studies conducted by Peláez et al (2008). This outgroup method was also used in the study by Walker et al (2010). Neurospora serves as an ideal outgroup, because they always cluster independently of Xylaria species (because they do not belong to the Xylariaceae family), yet still have deep evolutionary relationships with them (Cai et al 2005).…”
Section: Phylogenetic Treesmentioning
confidence: 99%