TreeBASE Search-Matrices for study 27596

@ARTICLE{TreeBASE2Ref31676, author = {Wu Zhang and Johannes (Ewald) Zacharias Groenewald and Lorenzo Lombard and Rene K. Schumacher and Alan John Lander Phillips and Pedro W. Crous}, title = {Evaluating species in Botryosphaeriales}, year = {2021}, keywords = {Multi-Locus Sequence Typing (MLST); canker and leaf spot pathogens; new taxa; systematics}, doi = {10.3767/persoonia.2021.46.03}, url = {http://doi.org/10.3767/persoonia.2021.46.03}, pmid = {}, journal = {Persoonia}, volume = {46}, number = {}, pages = {63--115}, abstract = {The Botryosphaeriales (Dothideomycetes) includes numerous endophytic, saprobic, and plant pathogenic species associated with a wide range of symptoms, most commonly on woody plants. In a recent phylogenetic treatment of 499 isolates in the culture collection (CBS) of the Westerdijk Institute, we evaluated the families and genera accommodated in this order of important fungi. The present study presents multigene phylogenetic analyses for an additional 230 isolates, using ITS, tef1, tub2, LSU and rpb2 loci, in combination with morphological data. Based on these data, 58 species are reduced to synonymy, and eight novel species are described. They include Diplodia afrocarpi (Afrocarpus, South Africa), Dothiorella diospyricola (Diospyros, South Africa), Lasiodiplodia acaciae (Acacia, Indonesia), Neofusicoccum podocarpi (Podocarpus, South Africa), N. rapaneae (Rapanea, South Africa), Phaeobotryon ulmi (Ulmus, Germany), Saccharata grevilleae (Grevillea, Australia) and S. hakeiphila (Hakea, Australia). The results have clarified the identity of numerous isolates that lacked Latin binomials or had been deposited under incorrect names in the CBS collection in the past. They also provide a solid foundation for more in-depth future studies on taxa in the order. Sequences of the tef1, tub2 and rpb2 genes proved to be the most reliable markers. At the species level, results showed that the most informative genes were inconsistent, but that a combination of four candidate barcodes (ITS, tef1, tub2 and rpb2) provided reliable resolution. Furthermore, given the large number of additional isolates included in this study, and newly generated multigene DNA datasets, several species could also be reduced to synonymy. The study illustrates the value of reassessing the identity of older collections in culture collections utilising modern taxonomic frameworks and methods.} }

Delicious

Connotea

Matrices for Study 27596

Citation title: "Evaluating species in Botryosphaeriales".

Study name: "Evaluating species in Botryosphaeriales".

This study is part of submission 27596 (Status: Published).

Matrices

ID	Matrix Title	Data type	NTAX	NCHAR	Taxa
M57825	Fig. S2A Diplodia ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	179	522	View Taxa
M57886	Fig. S8A Phaeobotryon ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	54	500	View Taxa
M57876	Fig. S5D Neofusicoccum TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	203	381	View Taxa
M57813	Fig. 2. Diplodia ITS TEF1 TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	180	1291	View Taxa
M57896	Fig. S10C Saccharata TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	39	302	View Taxa
M57821	Fig. 10 Saccharata ITS TEF1 RPB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	41	1529	View Taxa
M57872	Fig. S5A Neofusicoccum ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	208	510	View Taxa
M57864	Fig. S3B Dothiorella TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	121	269	View Taxa
M57815	Fig. 4 Lasiodiplodia ITS TEF1 TUB2 RPB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	148	1612	View Taxa
M57875	Fig. S5C Neofusicoccum TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	200	275	View Taxa
M57885	Fig. S7C Neoscytalidium TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	65	358	View Taxa
M57889	Fig. S9A Pseudofusicoccum ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	30	493	View Taxa
M57820	Fig. 9 Pseudofusicoccum TEF1 TUB2 ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	30	1256	View Taxa
M57877	Fig. S6A Neofusicoccum parvum complex ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	75	481	View Taxa
M57880	Fig. S6C Neofusicoccum parvum complex TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	71	281	View Taxa
M57890	Fig. S9B Pseudofusicoccum TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	30	295	View Taxa
M57883	Fig. S7A Neoscytalidium ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	66	499	View Taxa
M57892	Fig. S10A Saccharata ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	41	550	View Taxa
M57869	Fig. S4C Lasiodiplodia TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	146	258	View Taxa
M57817	Fig. 6 Neofusicoccum parvum ITS TEF1 TUB2 RPB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	75	1805	View Taxa
M57879	Fig. S6B Neofusicoccum parvum complex RPB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	61	535	View Taxa
M57884	Fig. S7B Neoscytalidium TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	65	187	View Taxa
M57862	Fig. S2C Diplodia TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	167	389	View Taxa
M57812	Fig. 1. Botryosphaeria ITS TEF1 TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	51	1206	View Taxa
M57891	Fig. S9C Pseudofusicoccum TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	23	427	View Taxa
M57822	Fig. S1A Botryosphaeria ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	51	461	View Taxa
M57888	Fig. S8C Phaeobotryon TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	45	339	View Taxa
M57868	Fig. S4B Lasiodiplodia RPB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	112	520	View Taxa
M57887	Fig. S8B Phaeobotryon LSU alignment	Nucleic Acid	44	556	View Taxa
M57819	Fig. 8 Phaeobotryon ITS LSU TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	54	1726	View Taxa
M57824	Fig. S1C Botryosphaeria TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	44	387	View Taxa
M57871	Fig. S4D Lasiodiplodia TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	130	402	View Taxa
M57816	Fig. 5 Neofusicoccum ITS TEF1 TUB2 RPB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	208	1840	View Taxa
M57818	Fig. 7 Neoscytalidium ITS TEF1 TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	66	1133	View Taxa
M57865	Fig. S3C Dothiorella TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	109	415	View Taxa
M57823	Fig. S1B Botryosphaeria TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	50	263	View Taxa
M57881	Fig. S6D Neofusicoccum parvum complex TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	72	394	View Taxa
M57893	Fig. S10B Saccharata RPB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	32	627	View Taxa
M57866	Fig. S4A Lasiodiplodia ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	147	368	View Taxa
M57826	Fig. S2B Diplodia TEF1 alignment	Nucleic Acid	174	276	View Taxa
M57874	Fig. S5B Neofusicoccum RPB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	176	539	View Taxa
M57863	Fig. S3A Dothiorella ITS alignment	Nucleic Acid	123	479	View Taxa
M57814	Fig. 3 Dothiorella ITS TEF1 TUB2 alignment	Nucleic Acid	123	1272	View Taxa