@ARTICLE{TreeBASE2Ref23173,
author = {Akira Hashimoto and Genki Sato and Takahiro Matsuda and Misato Matsumura and Satoshi Hatakeyama and Yukio Harada and Kazuaki Tanaka},
title = {Taxonomic revision of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella, and establishment of Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium genera nova},
year = {2015},
keywords = {Ascomycota, Chaetosphaeriaceae, coelomycetes, systematics, taxonomy},
doi = {10.3852/14-171},
url = {http://},
pmid = {25572100},
journal = {Mycologia},
volume = {107},
number = {2},
pages = {383--408},
abstract = {The taxonomy of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella is controversial. Some authors have regarded them as congeneric, whereas others have considered them to be distinct genera differentiated merely on the number of conidial septa. A total of 26 isolates of Pseudolachnea-like fungi were subjected to morphological examination and phylogenetic analyses of nuc rDNA internal transcribed spacers 1 and 2 and partial 28S sequences and partial sequence of the translation elongation factor 1α gene. The results indicated that our materials should be classified in four genera: Pseudolachnea, Pseudolachnella, and two new genera, Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium. Although the monophyly of both Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella was confirmed, it was concluded that differences observed in the conidiomatal structure, such as thickness of basal stroma and the excipulum, were more reliable for their circumscription, instead of conidial septation. Neopseudolachnella was similar to Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella in conidial morphology but was characterized by the conidiomata lacking an excipulum, unlike members of the latter two genera. Pseudodinemasporium bore conidia morphologically similar to those of Dinemasporium but was differentiated from the latter by the conidiomata, which was composed of a well developed peridial structure. A total of 12 new species, namely three in Neopseudolachnella (N. acutispora, N. magnispora, N. uniseptata), one in Pseudodinemasporium (P. fabiforme) and eight in Pseudolachnella (P. asymmetrica, P. botulispora, P. brevicoronata, P. campylospora, P. complanata, P. falcatispora, P. fusiformis and P. pachyderma) are described and illustrated.}
}
Citation for Study 15770
Citation title:
"Taxonomic revision of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella, and establishment of Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium genera nova".
Study name:
"Taxonomic revision of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella, and establishment of Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium genera nova".
This study is part of submission 15770
(Status: Published).
Citation
Hashimoto A., Sato G., Matsuda T., Matsumura M., Hatakeyama S., Harada Y., & Tanaka K. 2015. Taxonomic revision of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella, and establishment of Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium genera nova. Mycologia, 107(2): 383-408.
Authors
-
Hashimoto A.
-
Sato G.
-
Matsuda T.
-
Matsumura M.
-
Hatakeyama S.
-
Harada Y.
-
Tanaka K.
+81-172-39-3816
Abstract
The taxonomy of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella is controversial. Some authors have regarded them as congeneric, whereas others have considered them to be distinct genera differentiated merely on the number of conidial septa. A total of 26 isolates of Pseudolachnea-like fungi were subjected to morphological examination and phylogenetic analyses of nuc rDNA internal transcribed spacers 1 and 2 and partial 28S sequences and partial sequence of the translation elongation factor 1α gene. The results indicated that our materials should be classified in four genera: Pseudolachnea, Pseudolachnella, and two new genera, Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium. Although the monophyly of both Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella was confirmed, it was concluded that differences observed in the conidiomatal structure, such as thickness of basal stroma and the excipulum, were more reliable for their circumscription, instead of conidial septation. Neopseudolachnella was similar to Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella in conidial morphology but was characterized by the conidiomata lacking an excipulum, unlike members of the latter two genera. Pseudodinemasporium bore conidia morphologically similar to those of Dinemasporium but was differentiated from the latter by the conidiomata, which was composed of a well developed peridial structure. A total of 12 new species, namely three in Neopseudolachnella (N. acutispora, N. magnispora, N. uniseptata), one in Pseudodinemasporium (P. fabiforme) and eight in Pseudolachnella (P. asymmetrica, P. botulispora, P. brevicoronata, P. campylospora, P. complanata, P. falcatispora, P. fusiformis and P. pachyderma) are described and illustrated.
Keywords
Ascomycota, Chaetosphaeriaceae, coelomycetes, systematics, taxonomy
External links
About this resource
- Canonical resource URI:
http://purl.org/phylo/treebase/phylows/study/TB2:S15770
- Other versions:
Nexus
NeXML
- Show BibTeX reference
@ARTICLE{TreeBASE2Ref23173,
author = {Akira Hashimoto and Genki Sato and Takahiro Matsuda and Misato Matsumura and Satoshi Hatakeyama and Yukio Harada and Kazuaki Tanaka},
title = {Taxonomic revision of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella, and establishment of Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium genera nova},
year = {2015},
keywords = {Ascomycota, Chaetosphaeriaceae, coelomycetes, systematics, taxonomy},
doi = {10.3852/14-171},
url = {http://},
pmid = {25572100},
journal = {Mycologia},
volume = {107},
number = {2},
pages = {383--408},
abstract = {The taxonomy of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella is controversial. Some authors have regarded them as congeneric, whereas others have considered them to be distinct genera differentiated merely on the number of conidial septa. A total of 26 isolates of Pseudolachnea-like fungi were subjected to morphological examination and phylogenetic analyses of nuc rDNA internal transcribed spacers 1 and 2 and partial 28S sequences and partial sequence of the translation elongation factor 1α gene. The results indicated that our materials should be classified in four genera: Pseudolachnea, Pseudolachnella, and two new genera, Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium. Although the monophyly of both Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella was confirmed, it was concluded that differences observed in the conidiomatal structure, such as thickness of basal stroma and the excipulum, were more reliable for their circumscription, instead of conidial septation. Neopseudolachnella was similar to Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella in conidial morphology but was characterized by the conidiomata lacking an excipulum, unlike members of the latter two genera. Pseudodinemasporium bore conidia morphologically similar to those of Dinemasporium but was differentiated from the latter by the conidiomata, which was composed of a well developed peridial structure. A total of 12 new species, namely three in Neopseudolachnella (N. acutispora, N. magnispora, N. uniseptata), one in Pseudodinemasporium (P. fabiforme) and eight in Pseudolachnella (P. asymmetrica, P. botulispora, P. brevicoronata, P. campylospora, P. complanata, P. falcatispora, P. fusiformis and P. pachyderma) are described and illustrated.}
}
- Show RIS reference
TY - JOUR
ID - 23173
AU - Hashimoto,Akira
AU - Sato,Genki
AU - Matsuda,Takahiro
AU - Matsumura,Misato
AU - Hatakeyama,Satoshi
AU - Harada,Yukio
AU - Tanaka,Kazuaki
T1 - Taxonomic revision of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella, and establishment of Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium genera nova
PY - 2015
KW - Ascomycota
KW - Chaetosphaeriaceae
KW - coelomycetes
KW - systematics
KW - taxonomy
UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.3852/14-171
N2 - The taxonomy of Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella is controversial. Some authors have regarded them as congeneric, whereas others have considered them to be distinct genera differentiated merely on the number of conidial septa. A total of 26 isolates of Pseudolachnea-like fungi were subjected to morphological examination and phylogenetic analyses of nuc rDNA internal transcribed spacers 1 and 2 and partial 28S sequences and partial sequence of the translation elongation factor 1α gene. The results indicated that our materials should be classified in four genera: Pseudolachnea, Pseudolachnella, and two new genera, Neopseudolachnella and Pseudodinemasporium. Although the monophyly of both Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella was confirmed, it was concluded that differences observed in the conidiomatal structure, such as thickness of basal stroma and the excipulum, were more reliable for their circumscription, instead of conidial septation. Neopseudolachnella was similar to Pseudolachnea and Pseudolachnella in conidial morphology but was characterized by the conidiomata lacking an excipulum, unlike members of the latter two genera. Pseudodinemasporium bore conidia morphologically similar to those of Dinemasporium but was differentiated from the latter by the conidiomata, which was composed of a well developed peridial structure. A total of 12 new species, namely three in Neopseudolachnella (N. acutispora, N. magnispora, N. uniseptata), one in Pseudodinemasporium (P. fabiforme) and eight in Pseudolachnella (P. asymmetrica, P. botulispora, P. brevicoronata, P. campylospora, P. complanata, P. falcatispora, P. fusiformis and P. pachyderma) are described and illustrated.
L3 - 10.3852/14-171
JF - Mycologia
VL - 107
IS - 2
SP - 383
EP - 408
ER -