4.0 Article

Epitypification and molecular confirmation of Erysiphe cucurbitacearum as a synonym of Golovinomyces tabaci

Journal

MYCOSCIENCE
Volume 61, Issue 1, Pages 30-36

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.myc.2019.09.002

Keywords

Cucumis sativus; ITS; Powdery mildew; Rubia cordifolia; Trigonotis peduncularis; 28S rDNA

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31470153, 31670022]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recently published phylogenetic analyses of the Golovinomyces orontii complex revealed that three different species of the genus Golovinomyces may occur on cucurbitaceous hosts, viz., G. bolayi, G. orontii s. str., and G. tabaci. Owing to its morphological characteristics, Erysiphe cucurbitacearum ( G. cucurbitacearum) was tentatively reduced to synonym with G. tabaci. However, final conclusions on the identity and status of E. cucurbitacearum, described from China on Cucumis sativus, as putative synonym of G. tabaci required a phylogenetic confirmation and epitypification with ex-epitype sequences. Therefore, a sample of G. cucurbitacearum collected on C. sativus in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China, in 2014 (HMJAU-PM91862) has been sequenced and is designated as epitype of the latter species, since its holotype material (HMAS 40016, collected in 1954) turned out to be too old for molecular examinations. As a result of morphological examinations and phylogenetic analyses based on ex-epitype ITS and 28S rDNA sequences, the recently assumed synonymy of G. cucurbitacearum, found on C. sativus in China, with G. tabaci could be confirmed. In addition, two new host species of G. tabaci, viz., Trigonotis peduncularis (Boraginaceae) and Rubia cordifolia (Rubiaceae), were concurrently identified. Trigonotis peduncularis is the first verified boraginaceous host for G. tabaci. (C) 2019 The Mycological Society of Japan. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available