4.3 Article

Morphological and molecular characterisation of Geosmithia species on European elms

Journal

FUNGAL BIOLOGY
Volume 119, Issue 11, Pages 1063-1074

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.funbio.2015.08.003

Keywords

Geosmithia spp.; Geosmithia omnicola; Geosmithia ulmacea; Phylogenetic analysis; Ulmus

Categories

Funding

  1. Ministero Italiano dell'Universita e della Ricerca Scientifica (MIUR) [2009RZ94KA_003]
  2. Progetti di Ricerca di Interesse Nazionale

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Species of the genus Geosmithia are associated with insect species, mainly bark beetles. On Ulmus spp., the same beetles are also vectors of Ophiostoma ulmi s.l., the agent of Dutch elm disease (DED), a worldwide elm disease. Aim of this paper is to characterise Geosmithia species associated with elms and/or elm beetles in Europe. Seventy-two strains representative of all morphological taxonomic units were used to build a phylogenetic tree based on ITS, B-tubulin and elongation factor 1-alpha gene regions. On the basis of molecular and morphophysiological traits, seven taxonomic entities were identified. In addition to the species previously known our results assigned strains previously identified as Geosmithia pallida to two separate taxa: Geosmithia sp. 2 and Geosmithia sp. 5. Two new species, Geosmithia omnicola and Geosmithia ulmacea, are described. Two strains were assigned to the partially described species Geosmithia sp. 20. Geosmithia species living on Ulmus do not discriminate between elm species, but between different environments. The association between Ulrnus and Geosmithia is common, stable, and seems to be related to specific vectors. The relationship between Geosmithia and Ophiostoma would deserve further investigation, as these fungi share the same vectors and habitat for a significant part of their life cycles. (C) 2015 The British Mycological Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available