4.7 Article

Phylogenetic relationships between members of the crucifer pathogenic Leptosphaeria maculans species complex as shown by mating type (MAT1-2), actin, and β-tubulin sequences

期刊

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
卷 37, 期 2, 页码 541-557

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2005.07.006

关键词

mating type; Leptosphaeria maculans; phylogeny; pleosporales; uORFs; sliding window analyses

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dothideomycetous fungus Leptosphaeria maculans comprises a complex of species differing in specificity and pathogenicity on Brassica napus. Twenty-eight isolates were investigated and compared to 20 other species of the Pleosporales order. Sequences of the mating type MATI-2 (23), fragments of actin (48) and beta-tubulin (45) genes were determined and used for phylogenetic analyses inferred by maximum parsimony, distance, maximum likelihood, and Bayesian approaches. These different approaches using single genes essentially confirmed findings using concatanated sequences. L. maculans formed a monophyletic group separate from Leptosphaeria biglobosa. The L. biglobosa clade encompasses five sub-clades; this finding is consistent with classification made previously on the basis of internal-transcribed sequences of the ribosomal DNA repeat. The propensity for purifying and neutral evolution of the three genes was determined using sliding window analysis, a technique not previously applied to genes of filamentous fungi. For members of the L. maculans species complex, this approach showed that in comparison to actin and P-tubulin, exonic sequences of MATI-2 were more diverse and appeared to evolve at a faster rate. However, different regions of MATI-2 displayed different degrees of sequence conservation. The more conserved upstream region (including the High Mobility Group domain) may be better suited for interspecies differentiation, while the more diverse downstream region is more appropriate for intraspecies comparisons. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据