4.2 Article

A phylogenetic assessment and taxonomic revision of the thermotolerant hyphomycete genera Acrophialophora and Taifanglania

Journal

MYCOLOGIA
Volume 107, Issue 4, Pages 768-779

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3852/14-173

Keywords

molecular phylogeny; morphology; thermotolerant fungi

Categories

Funding

  1. NSFC [31322001]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [2014FY120100]
  3. Fundamental Research on Science and Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We assessed the phylogenetic relationships of 19 isolates belonging to Acrophialophora and Taifanglania based on internal transcribed spacer (ITS), nuclear 18S subunit (nuc 18S) rDNA and beta-tubulin sequences. Phylogenetic data showed that Acrophialophora and Taifanglania comprise a monophyletic clade, but did not support the distinction of two genera. Being the older and more frequently used name, Acrophialophora is adopted as the generic name and Taifanglania is treated as a synonym. The generic concept of Acrophialophora is emended to include the morphological characters formerly used to distinguish Taifanglania. Three new thermotolerant species isolated from soil samples in China are described and illustrated, (1) A. ellipsoidea, with solitary phialides tapering into thin necks and long chains of ellipsoidal to fusiform conidia, (ii) A. angustiphialis with single phialides terminal or lateral on hyphae, and long chains of ellipsoidal or fusiform conidia and, (iii) A. acuticonidiata with single phialides and fusiform conidia with acute ends. Phylogenetic analyses show that A. acuticonidiata, A. angustiphialis and A. ellipsoidea are most closely related to A. curticatenata, A. hechuanensis and A. major, respectively. Growth tests showed that the three new species are thermotolerant, with optimal growth temperatures of 37-40 C, and maximum growth temperatures near 50 C. A key to the accepted species of Acrophialophora is provided.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available