4.3 Article

Evaluation of partial tef1, rpb2, and nLSU sequences for identification of isolates representing Armillaria calvescens and Armillaria gallica from northeastern North America

期刊

FUNGAL BIOLOGY
卷 115, 期 8, 页码 741-749

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.funbio.2011.05.008

关键词

Butt rot; Decay fungi; Northern hardwoods

类别

资金

  1. National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture
  2. Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station
  3. Department of Plant, Soil, and Insect Sciences [MAS00099]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Armillaria calvescens and Armillaria gallica are two of the most closely-related species of Armiliaria in North America and have been difficult to distinguish from one another using morphological and molecular techniques. In an attempt to better distinguish these two species, partial sequences of the elongation factor-1 alpha (tef1), RNA polymerase II (rpb2), and nuclear large subunit (nLSU) genes were generated for 32 total isolates; 12 isolates each for A. calvescens and A. gallica, along with two isolates each of Armillaria gemina, Armillaria mellea, Armillaria sinapina, and Armillaria solidipes. Within the tef1 amplicon, five single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were present between A. calvescens and A. gallica. Phylogenetic reconstruction using the maximum likelihood (ML) and maximum parsimony (MP) methods showed that tef1 was the only gene capable of distinguishing A. calvescens from A. gallica, and additionally, all isolates representing the six northeastern North American species. Partial tef1 sequences grouped A. calvescens into a strongly-supported, monophyletic clade with bootstrap support (BS) values of 98/98 % (ML/MP), while A. gallica was grouped into a monophyletic clade with lower BS support (76/59 %). The results illustrate the utility of partial tell sequences for the identification of field isolates of Armillaria from northeastern North America. (C) 2011 The British Mycological Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.3
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