Europe PMC

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

Abstract 


Anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum species is a serious disease of more than 30 plant genera. Several Colletotrichum species have been reported to infect chili in different countries. Although China is the largest chili-producing country, little is known about the species that have been infecting chili locally. Therefore, we collected samples of diseased chili from 29 provinces of China, from which 1285 strains were isolated. The morphological characters of all strains were observed and compared, and multi-locus phylogenetic analyses (ITS, ACT, CAL, CHS-1, GAPDH, TUB2, and HIS3) were performed on selected representative strains. Fifteen Colletotrichum species were identified, with C. fioriniae, C. fructicola, C. gloeosporioides, C. scovillei, and C. truncatum being prevalent. Three new species, C. conoides, C. grossum, and C. liaoningense, were recognised and described in this paper. Colletotrichum aenigma, C. cliviae, C. endophytica, C. hymenocallidis, C. incanum, C. karstii, and C. viniferum were reported for the first time from chili. Pathogenicity of all species isolated from chili was confirmed, except for C. endophytica. The current study improves the understanding of species causing anthracnose on chili and provides useful information for the effective control of the disease in China.

Free full text 


Logo of persooniaLink to Publisher's site
Persoonia. 2017 Jun; 38: 20–37.
Published online 2016 Aug 2. https://doi.org/10.3767/003158517X692788
PMCID: PMC5645185
PMID: 29151625

Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose disease of chili in China

Abstract

Anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum species is a serious disease of more than 30 plant genera. Several Colletotrichum species have been reported to infect chili in different countries. Although China is the largest chili-producing country, little is known about the species that have been infecting chili locally. Therefore, we collected samples of diseased chili from 29 provinces of China, from which 1285 strains were isolated. The morphological characters of all strains were observed and compared, and multi-locus phylogenetic analyses (ITS, ACT, CAL, CHS-1, GAPDH, TUB2, and HIS3) were performed on selected representative strains. Fifteen Colletotrichum species were identified, with C. fioriniae, C. fructicola, C. gloeosporioides, C. scovillei, and C. truncatum being prevalent. Three new species, C. conoides, C. grossum, and C. liaoningense, were recognised and described in this paper. Colletotrichum aenigma, C. cliviae, C. endophytica, C. hymenocallidis, C. incanum, C. karstii, and C. viniferum were reported for the first time from chili. Pathogenicity of all species isolated from chili was confirmed, except for C. endophytica. The current study improves the understanding of species causing anthracnose on chili and provides useful information for the effective control of the disease in China.

Keywords: DNA phylogeny, multi-gene analysis, plant pathogen, systematics

INTRODUCTION

Chili (Capsicum spp.) is an important vegetable crop worldwide. China maintains the largest planted area of chili, producing more than 28 M tons per year for domestic consumption and export (Li et al. 2009). One of the most destructive diseases restricting chili production is anthracnose, caused by Colletotrichum spp. (Bailey & Jeger 1992, Poonpolgul & Kumphai 2007, Than et al. 2008), resulting in up to 40 % yield loss in China (Lin et al. 2004).

Colletotrichum species can infect more than 30 plant genera (Perfect et al. 1999, Dean et al. 2012, Farr & Rossman 2016). More than 10 Colletotrichum species have been reported from chili, with different distributions among countries (Than et al. 2008, Liao et al. 2012, Kanto et al. 2014, Sharma et al. 2014, Diao et al. 2015). For example, anthracnose on chili is caused by C. coccodes, C. fructicola, C. siamense, and C. truncatum in India (Sharma & Shenoy 2014); by C. acutatum, C. coccodes, and C. gloeosporioides in the USA; by C. acutatum, C. dematium, C. gloeosporioides, and C. truncatum in Australia; by C. acutatum, C. coccodes, C. dematium, C. gloeosporioides, and C. panacicola in Korea (Than et al. 2008); and by C. acutatum, C. gloeosporioides, C. truncatum, and C. coccodes in China (Shin et al. 1999, Liao et al. 2012). Most of these reports, however, were based on morphology and ITS sequences or a combination of ITS and TUB2 sequences, which have been shown to be insufficient in distinguishing closely related taxa in several species complexes. In addition, these records were mostly based on a small sampling from restricted areas, and, thus, may underestimate the species diversity.

The current study aimed to investigate the Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose on chili in China, by employing large-scale sampling and isolation, and via morphological characterisation and multi-locus phylogeny of the obtained strains.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sample collection and isolation

From 2008 to 2014, fruits and leaves of chili (Capsicum spp.) with anthracnose symptoms were collected from 50 locations in 29 provinces of China (Fig. 1). In each location, a hierarchical sampling method was used as previously described (Kohli et al. 1995). Five fields were chosen at each sampling location, and 25 chili fruits and also leaves in some cases were collected from each field along a diagonal transect. Colletotrichum species were isolated as described by Cai et al. (2009). All isolates were grown at 28 °C for further study. Type specimens of new species from this study were deposited in the Mycological Herbarium, Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China (HMAS), and ex-type living cultures were deposited in the China General Microbiological Culture Collection Centre (CGMCC), Beijing, China.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g001.jpg

Map showing locations in China where chili was sampled for Colletotrichum species. Each coloured circle represents one species by preliminary identification, and the size of the circle indicates the number of isolates collected from that location.

Morphological characterisation

Mycelial plugs (5 mm) were transferred from the edge of actively growing cultures to fresh potato dextrose agar (PDA, 1.5 %, Difco) plates. Cultures were kept at 28 °C with a 12/12 h fluorescent light/dark cycle. The morphological characters for all isolates, including colony and conidial characteristics, were observed. Microscopic characters were examined with the Carl Zeiss Imager A2 microscope after 1 mo of cultivation. Among the 1 285 obtained isolates (Table 1), 121 representative isolates were selected for further multilocus phylogenetic analyses based on geographical location, morphology (colony shape and colour and characteristics of aerial mycelia and conidia), and ITS sequences. Different morphological types were selected from each location, and the number of representative isolates selected depended on the number of isolates with different morphologies. Furthermore, if the number of isolates with high morphological and ITS sequence similarities was less than 10 in one location, then one isolate was randomly selected as a representative. If the number was more than 10, on the other hand, then an additional isolate (one from each of the 10 isolates) was selected for multi-locus phylogenetic analyses. The length and width of 30 conidia for each isolate were measured in lactic acid, and mean values calculated. The formation of appressoria was induced as described by Cai et al. (2009).

Table 1

A list of all Colletotrichum isolates collected from chili in China based on preliminary identification.

SpeciesLocationHost tissueYearNumber of isolatesLongitudeLatitude
C. aenigmaYangliuqing, TianjinFruit2012139.4117.01
C. cliviaeXingcheng, LiaoningFruit2012140.63120.74
C.conoidesNanjing, JiangsuFruit2010332.06118.79
C. endophyticaMile, YunnanFruit2011124.41103.41
C. fioriniaeFengxiang, ShanxiFruit20111734.55107.4
ChangchunFruit20114743.81125.32
Xining, QinghaiFruit20114236.61101.78
Sanya, HainanFruit2012218.25109.51
Guiyang, GuizhouFruit2012326.64106.63
Xingcheng, LiaoningFruit20122940.63120.74
Yinchuan, NingxiaFruit2012438.48106.23
Guyuan, NingxiaFruit2012836.01106.24
Fengxian, ShanghaiFruit20121630.91121.47
Harbin, HeilongjiangFruit2012945.8126.53
C. fructicolaFuzhou, FujianFruit2011226.07119.29
Guilin, GuangxiFruit20111025.27110.29
Hengyang, HunanFruit2012429.03111.69
Changsha, HunanFruit20122028.23112.94
Laiyang, ShandongFruit20113236.99120.74
Wucheng, ShandongFruit20121537.16116.08
Zhangzhou, FujianFruit2008524.51117.64
Quanzhou, FujianFruit20092324.87118.67
Fengxiang, ShanxiFruit2011534.55107.4
Xinxiang, HenanFruit2011535.3113.93
Yichun, JiangxiFruit2011627.81114.41
Jianyang, SichuanFruit2011830.41104.55
Mile, YunnanFruit20111024.41103.41
Yangliuqing, TianjinFruit2012439.4117.01
Wuhan, HubeiFruit2012430.28114.29
Xingcheng, LiaoningFruit2012440.63120.74
Shizhu, ChongqingFruit2013430.6108.29
C. gloeosporioidesGuilin, GuangxiFruit2011125.27110.29
Qingyuan, GuangdongFruit20132123.28112.48
Qingyuan, GuangdongFruit2014123.28112.48
Laiyang, ShandongFruit20116436.99120.74
Wucheng, ShandongFruit20113037.16116.08
Fengxiang, ShanxiFruit20111034.55107.4
Xinxiang, HenanFruit20111035.3113.93
Taizhou, ZhejiangFruit2011828.65121.42
Changsha, HunanFruit20122028.23112.94
Mile, YunnanFruit2011524.41103.41
Jianyang, SichuanFruit2011430.41104.55
Guyuan, NingxiaFruit2012236.01106.24
Wuqing, TianjinFruit2012139.38117.04
Xingcheng, LiaoningFruit2012440.63120.74
C. grossumHaikou, HainanFruit2011320.04110.19
C. hymenocallidisChangsha, HunanFruit20123528.23112.94
C. incanumHelingeer, Inner MongoliaFruit2012640.37111.82
C. karstiiSanya, HainanFruit2012318.25109.51
Jianyang, SichuanFruit2011530.41104.55
Mile, YunnanFruit2011124.41103.41
C. liaoningenseXingcheng, LiaoningFruit20121140.63120.74
Shapingba, ChongqingFruit2012129.54106.46
C. scovilleYanqing, BeijingFruit2011440.45115.97
Changping, BeijingFruit2013840.22116.23
Fuzhou, FujianFruit20116826.07119.29
Gangu, GansuFruit20122134.73105.33
Jida, JilinFruit20133343.88125.31
Changzhi, ShanxiFruit20118436.19113.11
Shuozhou, ShanxiFruit20121439.33112.43
Sanya, HainanFruit2012118.25109.51
Zhijiang, HunanFruit2011127.44109.68
Zhanjiang, GuangdongFruit20111821.27110.35
Qingyuan, GuangdongFruit20122023.28112.48
C. truncatumQingyuan, GuangdongFruit20138023.28112.48
Qingyuan, GuangdongFruit20141023.28112.48
Maoming, GuangdongFruit20131321.55110.88
Yichun, JiangxiLeave20112027.81114.41
Shizhu, ChongqingFruit20132330.6108.29
Wuhan, HubeiFruit20132530.28114.29
Fengxiang, ShanxiFruit20111234.55107.4
Wucheng, ShandongFruit201112537.16116.08
Laiyang, ShandongFruit20111036.99120.74
Yangliuqing, TianjinFruit20121139.4117.01
Langfang, HebeiFruit20112039.52116.61
Chengde, HebeiFruit2013540.95117.96
Daxing, BeijingFruit2011939.73116.34
Shunyi, BeijingFruit20111040.13116.65
Xingcheng, LiaoningFruit20121640.63120.74
Changchun, JilinFruit2012743.71125.54
Chengdu, SichuanFruit2011330.57104.07
Hefei, AnhuiFruit2011231.82117.23
Fuzhou, FujianFruit2011226.07119.29
Luoyang, HenanFruit2011134.62112.45
Xinxiang, HenanFruit2011235.3113.93
Changsha, HunanFruit2012128.23112.94
Hengyang, HunanFruit2012126.89112.57
Changde, HunanFruit2012329.03111.69
Mile, YunnanFruit2011424.41103.41
Zhanjiang, GuangdongFruit2011521.27110.36
Xining, QinghaiFruit2011136.61101.78
Shuozhou, ShanxiFruit2012139.33112.43
C. viniferumMile, YunnanFruit2011124.41103.41
Total1285

DNA extraction, PCR amplification, and sequencing

Genomic DNA was extracted from 121 representative isolates as previously described (Murray & Thompson 1980, Diao et al. 2015). The following loci were amplified with the indicated primers: the internal transcribed spacer regions and intervening 5.8S nrRNA gene (ITS) with primers ITS4/ITS5 (White et al. 1990); partial sequences of the glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) with primers GDF1/GDR1 (Templeton et al. 1992); actin gene (ACT) with primers ACT512F/ACT783R (Carbone & Kohn 1999); beta-tubulin (TUB2) with primers T1/Bt2b (Glass & Donaldson 1995, O’Donnell & Cigelnik 1997); calmodulin (CAL) with primers CL1/CL2A (O’Donnell et al. 2000); chitin synthase 1 (CHS-1) with primers CHS-79F/CHS-345R (Carbone & Kohn 1999); and histone3 (HIS3) with primers CYLH3F/CYLH3R (Crous et al. 2004b). PCR reactions were performed as described by Damm et al. (2009). DNA sequencing was conducted by Sunbiotech, Beijing, China with a 3730 DNA Analyzer (Applied Biosystems, USA). The sequences obtained from forward and reverse primers were used to obtain consensus sequences with DNAMAN v. 6.0 (Lynnon Biosoft, USA). Sequences were aligned using MAFFT v. 6 (Katoh & Toh 2010).

Phylogenetic analysis

All sequences of the 121 representative isolates were blasted in GenBank. Sequences with high similarities were selected and included in the analyses (Table 2a, ,2b,2b, ,2c).2c). Concatenated analyses of ITS, GAPDH, CHS-1, HIS3, ACT, and TUB2 were conducted for the C. acutatum species complex and Colletotrichum species with curved conidia, while ITS, GAPDH, CAL, ACT, CHS-1, and TUB2 were concatenated for the analysis of the C. gloeosporioides species complex and other species. Maximum parsimony (MP) analyses based on the combined datasets were conducted using PAUP v. 4.0b10 (Swofford 2002). Phylogenetic trees were generated using the heuristic search option with TBR branch swapping and 1 000 random sequence additions. Maxtrees were unlimited, with branches of zero length collapsed, and all multiple parsimonious trees were saved. Clade stability was assessed using a bootstrap analysis with 1 000 replicates. Afterward, tree length (TL), consistency index (CI), retention index (RI), rescaled consistency index (RC), and homoplasy index (HI) were calculated. Bayesian inference (BI) was used to reconstruct the phylogenetic tree using MrBayes v. 3.2.1 (Ronquist & Huelsenbeck 2003). Best-fit models of nucleotide substitution were selected using MrModelTest v. 2.3 (Nylander 2004). Two analyses of four MCMC chains were run from random trees for 1 000 000 generations, and trees were sampled every 100 generations resulting in 20 000 total trees. The first 25 % of the trees were discarded as the burn-in phase of each analysis, and the remaining trees were used to calculate posterior probabilities (Cai et al. 2006, Liu et al. 2012, 2013). An additional Maximum likelihood (ML) analysis was implemented in the C. gloeosporioides species complex using the CIPRES Science Gateway v. 3.3 (www.phylo.org), and the RAxML-HPC BlackBox was selected with default parameters. Sequences derived in this study were deposited in GenBank (Table 2), and the concatenated alignments were deposited in TreeBASE (http://treebase.org/treebase-web/home.html; study S17061), and the descriptions and nomenclature in MycoBank (Crous et al. 2004a).

Table 2a

Strains used for the phylogenetic analysis of the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex and other species with details about host, location, and GenBank accession numbers.

SpeciesIsolateHostLocationGenBank accessions
ITSGAPDHCALACTCHS-1TUB2
C. aenigmaICMP 18686Pyrus pyrifoliaJapanJX010243JX009913JX009684JX009519JX009789JX010390
ICMP 18608*Persea americanaIsraelJX010244JX010044JX009683JX009443JX009774JX010389
C. aeschynomenesICMP 17673*Aeschynomene virginicaUSAJX010176JX009930JX009721JX009483JX009799JX010392
C. alataeCBS 304.67*Dioscorea alataIndiaJX010190JX009990JX009738JX009471JX009837JX010383
ICMP 18122Dioscorea alataNigeriaJX010191JX010011JX009739JX009470JX009846JX010449
C. alienumICMP 12071*Malus domesticaNew ZealandJX010251JX010028JX009654JX009572JX009882JX010411
ICMP 18621Persea americanaNew ZealandJX010246JX009959JX009657JX009552JX009755JX010386
C. aotearoaICMP 18537*Coprosma sp.New ZealandJX010205JX010005JX009611JX009564JX009853JX010420
C. asianumICMP 18580*Coffea arabicaThailandFJ972612JX010053FJ917506JX009584JX009867JX010406
ICMP 18696Mangifera indicaAustraliaJX010192JX009915JX009723JX009576JX009753JX010384
C. boninenseMAFF 305972*Crinum asiaticum var. sinicumJapanJX010292JX009905JQ005674JX009583JX009827JQ005588
CBS 128547Camellia sp.New ZealandJQ005159JQ005246JQ005680JQ005507JQ005333JQ005593
C. brevisporumBCC 38876*Neoregalia sp.ThailandJN050238JN050238JN050222JN050216KF687760JN050244
MFLUCC100182Pandanus pygmaeusThailandJN050239JN050228JN050217JN050245
C. clidemiaeICMP 18706Clidemia hirtaUSAJX010274JX009909JX009639JX009476JX009777JX010439
C. cliviaeCBS 125375*Clivia miniataChinaJX519223JX546611JX519240JX519232JX519249
CSSS1Clivia miniataChinaGU109479GU085867GU085861GU085869
CSSS2Clivia miniataChinaGU109480GU085868GU085862GU085870
CAUOS6Capsicum annuumChinaKP890123KP890100KP890131KP890115
C. conoidesCAUG17*Capsicum annuumChinaKP890168KP890162KP890150KP890144KP890156KP890174
CAUG33Capsicum annuumChinaKP890169KP890163KP890151KP890145KP890157KP890175
CAUG34Capsicum annuumChinaKP890170KP890164KP890152KP890146KP890158KP890176
C. cordylinicolaICMP 18579Cordyline fruticosaThailandJX010226JX009975HM470238HM470235JX009864JX010440
C. dracaenophilumCBS 118199*Dracaena sp.ChinaJX519222JX546707JX519238JX519230JX519247
C. endophyticaCAUG28Capsicum annuumChinaKP145441KP145413KP145357KP145329KP145385KP145469
LC0324*Pennisetu purpureumThailandKC633854KC832854KC810018KF306258
MFLUCC 100676Pennisetu purpureumThailandKF242123KF242181KF254846KF157827
C. fructicolaCAUG1Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145416KP145388KP145332KP145304KP145360KP145444
CAUG5Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145420KP145392KP145336KP145308KP145364KP145448
CAUG6Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145421KP145393KP145337KP145309KP145365KP145449
CAUG8Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145422KP145394KP145338KP145310KP145366KP145450
CAUG10Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145424KP145396KP145340KP145312KP145368KP145452
CAUG11Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145425KP145397KP145341KP145313KP145369KP145453
CAUG16Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145430KP145402KP145346KP145318KP145374KP145458
CAUG18Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145431KP145403KP145347KP145319KP145375KP145459
CBS 125395Theobroma cacaoPanamaJX010172JX009992JX009666JX009543JX009873JX010408
ICMP 17789Malus domesticaUSAJX010178JX009914JX009665JX009451JX009809
ICMP 12568Persea americanaAustraliaJX010166JX009946JX009680JX009529JX009762
ICMP 18581*Coffea arabicaThailandJX010165JX010033FJ917508FJ907426JX009866JX010405
ICMP 18613Limonium sinuatumIsraelJX010167JX009998JX009675JX009491JX009772JX010388
ICMP 18727Fragaria ananassaUSAJX010179JX010035JX009682JX009565JX009812JX010394
CBS 238.49*Ficus edulisGermanyJX010181JX009923JX009671JX009495JX009839JX010400
CBS 125397*Tetragastris panamensisPanamaJX010173JX010032JX009674JX009581JX009874JX010409
C. gloeosporiodesCAUG2Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145417KP145389KP145333KP145305KP145361KP145445
CAUG3Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145418KP145390KP145334KP145306KP145362KP145446
CAUG12Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145426KP145398KP145342KP145314KP145370KP145454
CAUG13Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145427KP145399KP145343KP145315KP145371KP145455
CAUG14Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145428KP145400KP145344KP145316KP145372KP145456
CAUG15Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145429KP145401KP145345KP145317KP145373KP145457
CAUG19Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145432KP145404KP145348KP145320KP145376KP145460
CAUG20Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145433KP145405KP145349KP145321KP145377KP145461
CAUG22Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145435KP145407KP145351KP145323KP145379KP145463
CAUG23Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145436KP145408KP145352KP145324KP145380KP145464
CAUG24Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145437KP145409KP145353KP145325KP145381KP145465
CAUG25Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145438KP145410KP145354KP145326KP145382KP145466
CAUG26Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145439KP145411KP145355KP145327KP145383KP145467
CAUG29Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145442KP145414KP145358KP145330KP145386KP145470
IMI 356878*Citrus sinensisItalyJX010152JX010056JX009731JX009531JX009818JX010445
CORCG4Vanda sp.ThailandHM034808HM034806HM034802HM034800
CORCG5Vanda sp.ThailandHM034809HM034807HM034803HM034801HM034805HM034811
C. grevilleaCBS 132879*Grevillea sp.ItalyKC297078KC297010KC296963KC296941KC296987KC297102
C. grossumCAUG7*Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890165KP890159KP890147KP890141KP890153KP890171
CAU31Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890166KP890160KP890148KP890142KP890154KP890172
CAUG32Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890167KP890161KP890149KP890143KP890155KP890173
C. hebeienseJZB330024Vitis vinifera cv. Cabernet SauvignonChinaKF156873KF377505KF377542
JZB330028*Vitis vinifera cv. Cabernet SauvignonChinaKF156863KF377495KF377532KF289008KF288975
C. hymenocallidisCAUG9Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145423KP145395KP145339KP145311KP145367KP145451
ICMP 18642*Hymenocallis americanaChinaJX010278JX010019JX009709GQ856775GQ856730JX010410
C. kahawae subsp. ciggaroICMP 12952Persea americanaNew ZealandJX010214JX009971JX009648JX009431JX009757JX010426
ICMP 18539*Olea europaeaAustraliaJX010230JX009966JX009635JX009523JX009800JX010434
C. karstiiCGMCC 3.14194*Vanda sp.ChinaHM585409HM585391HM581995HM585428
CAUOS1Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890103KP890134KP890118KP890096KP890126KP890110
CAUOS7Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890108KP890139KP890124KP890101KP890132KP890116
CAUOS8Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890109KP890140KP890125KP890102KP890133KP890117
C. liaoningenseCAUOS2*Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890104KP890135KP890119KP890097KP890127KP890111
CAUOS3Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890105KP890136KP890120KP890098KP890128KP890112
CAUOS4Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890106KP890137KP890121KP890099KP890129KP890113
CAUOS5Capsicum sp.ChinaKP890107KP890138KP890122KP890130KP890114
C. musaeICMP 19119*Musa sp.USAJX010146JX010050JX009742JX009433JX009896HQ596280
IMI 52264Musa sapientumKenyaJX010142JX010015JX009689JX009432JX009815JX010395
C. nupharicolaICMP 17938Nuphar lutea subsp. polysepalaUSAJX010189JX009936JX009661JX009486JX009834JX010397
ICMP 17940Nymphaea ordorataUSAJX010188JX010031JX009662JX009582JX009836JX010399
ICMP 18187*Nuphar lutea subsp. polysepalaUSAJX010187JX009972JX009663JX009437JX009835JX010398
C. psidiiICMP 19120*Psidium sp.ItalyJX010219JX009967JX009743JX009515JX009901JX010443
C. queenslandicumICMP 1778*Carica papayaAustraliaJX010276JX009934JX009691JX009447JX009899JX010414
C. salsolaeICMP 19051Salsola tragusHungaryJX010242JX009916JX009696JX009562JX009863JX010403
C. siamenseCBS 130420Jasminum sambacVietnamHM131511HM131497JX009713HM131507JX009895JX010415
C. thailandicumBCC 38879*Hibiscus rosasinensisThailandJN050242JN050231JN050220JN050248
MFLUCC10092Alocasia sp.ThailandJN050243JN050232JN050221JN050249
C. theobromicolaCBS 124945*Theobroma cacaoPanamaJX010294JX010006JX009591JX009444JX009869JX010447
ICMP 17814Fragaria vescaUSAJX010288JX010003JX009589JX009448JX009819JX010379
ICMP 17957Stylosanthes viscosaAustraliaJX010289JX009962JX009597JX009575JX009821JX010380
C. tiICMP 4832*Cordyline sp.New ZealandJX010269JX009952JX009649JX009520JX009898JX010442
ICMP 5285Cordyline australisNew ZealandJX010267JX009910JX009650JX009553JX009897JX010441
C. tropicaleCBS 124949*Theobroma cacaoPanamaJX010264JX010007JX009719JX009489JX009870JX010407
ICMP 18672Litchi chinensisJapanJX010275JX010020JX009722JX009480JX009826JX010396
C. tropicicolaBCC 38877*Citrus maximaThailandJN050240JN050229JN050218JN050246
MFLUCC100167Paphiopedilum bellatolumThailandJN050241JN050230JN050219JN050247
C. viniferumCAUG27Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145440KP145412KP145356KP145328KP145384KP145468
GZAAS 5.08601*Vitis vinifera, cv. ‘Shuijing’ChinaJN412804JN412798JQ309639JN412795JN412813
GZSSS 5.08608Vitis vinifera, cv. ‘Hongti’ChinaJN412802JN412800JQ412782JN412793JN412811
C. xanthorrhoeaeICMP 17903*Xanthorrhoea preissiiAustraliaJX010261JX009927JX009653JX009478JX009823JX010448
C. yunnanenseCBS 132135*Buxus sp.ChinaJX546804JX519248JX546706JX519239JX519231
Glomella cingulataICMP 10643Camellia williamsiiUKJX010224JX009908JX009630JX009540JX009891JX010436
‘f. sp. camelliae
Monilochaetes infuscansCBS 869.96*Ipomoea batatasSouth AfricaJQ005780JX546612JQ005843JQ005801JQ005864

* = Ex-type culture. Strains studied in this paper are in bold font.

Table 2b

Strains used for the phylogenetic analysis of the Colletotrichum acutatum species complex with details about host, location, and GenBank accession numbers.

SpeciesIsolateHostLocationGenBank accessions
ITSGAPDHCHS-1HIS3ACTTUB2
C. acutatumCBS 112996*Carica papayaAustraliaJQ005776JQ948677JQ005797JQ005818JQ005839JQ005860
CBS 144.29Capsicum annuumSri LankaJQ948401JQ948732JQ949062JQ949392JQ949722JQ950052
C. chrysanthemiCBS 126518Carthamus sp.NetherlandsJQ948271JQ948601JQ948932JQ949262JQ949592JQ949922
IMI 364540Chrysanthemum coronariumChinaJQ948272JQ948602JQ948933JQ949263JQ949593JQ949923
C. fioriniaeCAUA18Capsicum annuumChinaKP145016KP145096KP145048KP145064KP145032KP145080
CAUA20Capsicum annuumChinaKP145226KP145162KP145290KP145194KP145130KP145258
CAUA24Capsicum annuumChinaKP145017KP145097KP145049KP145065KP145033KP145081
CAUA25Capsicum annuumChinaKP145018KP145098KP145050KP145066KP145034KP145082
CAUA26Capsicum annuumChinaKP145019KP145099KP145051KP145067KP145035KP145083
CAUA27Capsicum annuumChinaKP145020KP145100KP145052KP145068KP145036KP145084
CAUA28Capsicum annuumChinaKP145021KP145101KP145053KP145069KP145037KP145085
CAUA29Capsicum annuumChinaKP145022KP145102KP145054KP145070KP145038KP145086
CAUA30Capsicum annuumChinaKP145023KP145103KP145055KP145071KP145039KP145087
CAUA31Capsicum annuumChinaKP145024KP145104KP145056KP145072KP145040KP145088
CAUA32Capsicum annuumChinaKP145025KP145105KP145057KP145073KP145041KP145089
CAUA37Capsicum annuumChinaKP145026KP145106KP145058KP145074KP145042KP145090
CAUA38Capsicum annuumChinaKP145027KP145107KP145059KP145075KP145043KP145091
CAUA39Capsicum annuumChinaKP145028KP145108KP145060KP145076KP145044KP145092
CAUA40Capsicum annuumChinaKP145029KP145109KP145061KP145077KP145045KP145093
CAUA41Capsicum annuumChinaKP145030KP145110KP145062KP145078KP145046KP145094
CAUA48Capsicum annuumChinaKP145031KP145111KP145063KP145079KP145047KP145095
CBS 125396Malus domesticaUSAJQ948299JQ948629JQ948960JQ949290JQ949620JQ949950
CBS 127537Vaccinium sp.USAJQ948317JQ948647JQ948978JQ949308JQ949638JQ949968
CBS 128517*Fiorinia sp.USAJQ948292JQ948622JQ948953JQ949283JQ949613JQ949943
CBS 129916Vaccinium sp.USAJQ948317JQ948647JQ948978JQ949308JQ949638JQ949968
CBS 293.67Persea sp.AustraliaJQ948310JQ948640JQ948971JQ949301JQ949631JQ949961
CBS 127601Mangifera sp.AustraliaJQ948311JQ948641JQ948972JQ949302JQ949632JQ949962
CBS 129947Vitis sp.PortugalJQ948343JQ948673JQ949004JQ949334JQ949664JQ949994
CBS 200.35Rubus sp.USAJQ948293JQ948623JQ948954JQ949284JQ949614JQ949944
C. gloeosporioidesIMI 356878*Citrus sinensiItalyJX010152JX010056JX009818JX009531JX010445
C. godetiaeCBS 133.44*Godetia sp.DenmarkJQ948402JQ948733JQ949063JQ949393JQ949723JQ950053
C. guajavaeIMI 350839*Psidium sp.IndiaJQ948270JQ948600JQ948931JQ949261JQ949591JQ949921
C. laticiphilumCBS 112989*Hevea sp.IndiaJQ948289JQ948619JQ948950JQ949280JQ949610JQ949940
C. nymphaeaeCBS 515.78*Nymphaea sp.NetherlandsJQ948197JQ948527JQ948858JQ949188JQ949518JQ949848
C. orchidophilumCBS 632.80*Dendrobium sp.USAJQ948151JQ948481JQ948812JQ949142JQ949472JQ949802
C. salicisCBS 607.94*Salix sp.NetherlandsJQ948460JQ948791JQ949121JQ949451JQ949781JQ950111
C. scovilleiCAUA1Capsicum annuumChinaKP145208KP145144KP145272KP145176KP145112KP145240
CAUA2Capsicum annuumChinaKP145209KP145145KP145273KP145177KP145113KP145241
CAUA3Capsicum annuumChinaKP145210KP145146KP145274KP145178KP145114KP145242
CAUA4Capsicum annuumChinaKP145211KP145147KP145275KP145179KP145115KP145243
CAUA5Capsicum annuumChinaKP145212KP145148KP145276KP145180KP145116KP145244
CAUA6Capsicum annuumChinaKP145213KP145149KP145277KP145181KP145117KP145245
CAUA7Capsicum annuumChinaKP145214KP145150KP145278KP145182KP145118KP145246
CAUA8Capsicum annuumChinaKP145215KP145151KP145279KP145183KP145119KP145247
CAUA9Capsicum annuumChinaKP145216KP145152KP145280KP145184KP145120KP145248
CAUA10Capsicum annuumChinaKP145217KP145153KP145281KP145185KP145121KP145249
CAUA11Capsicum annuumChinaKP145218KP145154KP145282KP145186KP145122KP145250
CAUA12Capsicum annuumChinaKP145219KP145155KP145283KP145187KP145123KP145251
CAUA13Capsicum annuumChinaKP145220KP145156KP145284KP145188KP145124KP145252
CAUA14Capsicum annuumChinaKP145221KP145157KP145285KP145189KP145125KP145253
CAUA15Capsicum annuumChinaKP145222KP145158KP145286KP145190KP145126KP145254
CAUA16Capsicum annuumChinaKP145223KP145159KP145287KP145191KP145127KP145255
CAUA17Capsicum annuumChinaKP145224KP145160KP145288KP145192KP145128KP145256
CAUA19Capsicum annuumChinaKP145225KP145161KP145289KP145193KP145129KP145257
CAUA21Capsicum annuumChinaKP145227KP145163KP145291KP145195KP145131KP145259
CAUA22Capsicum annuumChinaKP145228KP145164KP145292KP145196KP145132KP145260
CAUA23Capsicum annuumChinaKP145229KP145165KP145293KP145197KP145133KP145261
CAUA33Capsicum annuumChinaKP145230KP145166KP145294KP145198KP145134KP145262
CAUA34Capsicum annuumChinaKP145231KP145167KP145295KP145199KP145135KP145263
CAUA35Capsicum annuumChinaKP145232KP145168KP145296KP145200KP145136KP145264
CAUA36Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145233KP145169KP145297KP145201KP145137KP145265
CAUA42Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145234KP145170KP145298KP145202KP145138KP145266
CAUA43Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145235KP145171KP145299KP145203KP145139KP145267
CAUA44Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145236KP145172KP145300KP145204KP145140KP145268
CAUA45Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145237KP145173KP145301KP145205KP145141KP145269
CAUA46Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145238KP145174KP145302KP145206KP145142KP145270
CAUA47Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145239KP145175KP145303KP145207KP145143KP145271
CBS 120708Capsicum sp.ThailandJQ948269JQ948599JQ948930JQ949260JQ949590JQ949920
CBS 126529*Capsicum sp.IndonesiaJQ948267JQ948597JQ948928JQ949258JQ949588JQ949918
CBS 126530Capsicum sp.IndonesiaJQ948268JQ948598JQ948929JQ949259JQ949589JQ949919
C. simmondsiiCBS 122122*Carica sp.AustraliaJQ948276JQ948606JQ948937JQ949267JQ949597JQ949927

* = Ex-type culture. Strains studied in this paper are in bold font.

Table 2c

Strains used for the phylogenetic analysis of Colletotrichum species with curved conidia with details on host, location, and GenBank accession numbers.

SpeciesIsolateHostLocationGenBank accession numbers
ITSACTTUB2CHS-1GAPDHHIS3
C. anthrisciCBS 125335Anthriscus sylvestrisNetherlandsGU227846GU227944GU228140GU228336GU228238GU228042
C. chlorophytiIMI 103806*Chlorophytum sp.IndiaGU227894GU227992GU228188GU228384GU228286GU228090
CBS 142.79Stylosanthes hamataAustraliaGU227895GU227993GU228189GU228385GU228287GU228091
C. circinansCBS 111.21Allium cepaUSAGU227854GU227952GU228148GU228344GU228246GU228050
CBS 221.81*Allium cepaSerbiaGU227855GU227953GU228149GU228345GU228247GU228051
C. dematiumCBS 125.25*Eryngium campestreFranceGU227819GU227917GU228113GU228309GU228211GU228015
CBS 125340ApiaceaeCzech RepublicGU227820GU227918GU228114GU228310GU228212GU228016
C. fructiCBS 346.37*Malus sylvestrisUSAGU227844GU227942GU228138GU228334GU228236GU228040
C. incanumATCC 64682*Glycine maxUSAKC110789KC110825KC110816KC110807KC110798
IL6AGlycine maxUSAKC110787KC110823KC110814KC110805KC110796
IL9AGlycine maxUSAKC110788KC110824KC110815KC110806KC110797
CAUCT34Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145641KP145505KP145675KP145539KP145573KP145607
C. liliiCBS 109214Lilium sp.JapanGU227810GU227908GU228104GU228300GU228202GU228006
C. lindemuthianumCBS 151.28Lilium sp.NetherlandsGU227800GU227898GU228094GU228290GU228192GU227996
C. lineolaCBS 125337*Apiaceae sp.Czech RepublicGU227829GU227927GU228123GU228319GU228221GU228025
CBS 125339Apiaceae sp.Czech RepublicGU227830GU227928GU228124GU228320GU228222GU228026
C. liriopesCBS 119444*Lirope muscariMexicoGU227804GU227902GU228098GU228294GU228196GU228000
CBS 122747Lirope muscariMexicoGU227805GU227903GU228099GU228295GU228197GU228001
C. phaseolorum 1CBS 157.36Phaseolus radiatus var. aureusJapanGU227896GU227994GU228190GU228386GU228288GU228092
C. phaseolorum 2CBS 158.36Vigna sinensisJapanGU227897GU227995GU228191GU228387GU228289GU228093
C. rusciCBS 119206*Ruscus sp.ItalyGU227818GU227916GU228112GU228308GU228210GU228014
C. spaethianumCBS 167.49*Hosta sieboldianaGermanyGU227807GU227905GU228101GU228297GU228199GU228003
CBS 100063Lilium sp.South KoreaGU227808GU227906GU228102GU228298GU228200GU228004
CBS 101631Hemerocallis sp.New ZealandGU227809GU227907GU228103GU228299GU228201GU228005
C. spinaciaeCBS 128.57Spinacia oleraceaNetherlandsGU227847GU227945GU228141GU228337GU228239GU228043
IMI 104607Spinacia sp.ItalyGU227850GU227948GU228144GU228340GU228242GU228046
C. tofieldiaeCBS 168.49Lupinus polyphyllusGermanyGU227802GU227900GU228096GU228292GU228194GU227998
CBS 495.85Tofieldia calyculataSwitzerlandGU227801GU227899GU228095GU228291GU228193GU227997
C. trichellumCBS 118198Hedera sp.GuatemalaGU227813GU227911GU228107GU228303GU228205GU228009
CBS 217.64Hedera helixUKGU227812GU227910GU228106GU228302GU228204GU228008
C. truncatumCBS 182.52Glycine maxUSAGU227866GU227964GU228160GU228356GU228258GU228062
CBS195.32Glycine maxUSAGU227865GU227963GU228159GU228355GU228257GU228061
CBS 345.70Glycine maxDenmarkGU227867GU227965GU228161GU228357GU228259GU228063
CBS 151.35*Phaseolus lunatusUSAGU227862GU227960GU228156GU228352GU228254GU228058
CAUCT1Capsicum annuumChinaKP145608KP145472KP145642KP145506KP145540KP145574
CAUCT2Capsicum annuumChinaKP145609KP145473KP145643KP145507KP145541KP145575
CAUCT3Capsicum annuumChinaKP145610KP145474KP145644KP145508KP145542KP145576
CAUCT4Capsicum annuumChinaKP145611KP145475KP145645KP145509KP145543KP145577
CAUCT5Capsicum annuumChinaKP145612KP145476KP145646KP145510KP145544KP145578
CAUCT6Capsicum annuumChinaKP145613KP145477KP145647KP145511KP145545KP145579
CAUCT7Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145614KP145478KP145648KP145512KP145546KP145580
CAUCT8Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145615KP145479KP145649KP145513KP145547KP145581
CAUCT9Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145616KP145480KP145650KP145514KP145548KP145582
CAUCT10Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145617KP145481KP145651KP145515KP145549KP145583
CAUCT11Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145618KP145482KP145652KP145516KP145550KP145584
CAUCT12Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145619KP145483KP145653KP145517KP145551KP145585
CAUCT13Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145620KP145484KP145654KP145518KP145552KP145586
CAUCT14Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145621KP145485KP145655KP145519KP145553KP145587
CAUCT15Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145622KP145486KP145656KP145520KP145554KP145588
CAUCT16Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145623KP145487KP145657KP145521KP145555KP145589
CAUCT17Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145624KP145488KP145658KP145522KP145556KP145590
CAUCT18Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145625KP145489KP145659KP145523KP145557KP145591
CAUCT19Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145626KP145490KP145660KP145524KP145558KP145592
CAUCT20Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145627KP145491KP145661KP145525KP145559KP145593
CAUCT21Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145628KP145492KP145662KP145526KP145560KP145594
CAUCT22Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145629KP145493KP145663KP145527KP145561KP145595
CAUCT23Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145630KP145494KP145664KP145528KP145562KP145596
CAUCT24Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145631KP145495KP145665KP145529KP145563KP145597
CAUCT25Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145632KP145496KP145666KP145530KP145564KP145598
CAUCT26Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145633KP145497KP145667KP145531KP145565KP145599
CAUCT27Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145634KP145498KP145668KP145532KP145566KP145600
CAUCT28Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145635KP145499KP145669KP145533KP145567KP145601
CAUCT29Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145636KP145500KP145670KP145534KP145568KP145602
CAUCT30Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145637KP145501KP145671KP145535KP145569KP145603
CAUCT31Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145638KP145502KP145672KP145536KP145570KP145604
CAUCT32Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145639KP145503KP145673KP145537KP145571KP145605
CAUCT33Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145640KP145504KP145674KP145538KP145572KP145606
CAUCT33Capsicum sp.ChinaKP145640KP145504KP145674KP145538KP145572KP145606

* = Ex-type culture. Strains studied in this paper are in bold

Genealogical concordance phylogenetic species recognition analysis

New species and their most closely related neighbours were analysed using the Genealogical Concordance Phylogenetic Species Recognition (GCPSR) model with a pairwise homoplasy index (PHI) test as described by Quaedvlieg et al. (2014). The PHI tests were performed in SplitsTree4 (Huson 1998, Huson & Bryant 2006) to determine the recombination level within phylogenetically closely related species using a six-locus concatenated dataset (ACT, CAL, CHS, GAPDH, ITS, and TUB2) for C. conoides, C. grossum, and C. liaoningense and their respective related species. A pairwise homoplasy index below a 0.05 threshold (Φw < 0.05) indicated the presence of significant recombination in the dataset. The relationship between closely related species was visualised by constructing a split graph.

Pathogenicity assay

Seven chili cultivars, Capsicum annuum cv. Chaotianjiao, Denglongjiao, Sanyingjiao, Zidantou, C. frutescens cv. Shuangla, Xiaomila and C. chinense cv. Huangdijiao, were inoculated with representative strains of 15 Colletotrichum species respectively (Table 3, ,4).4). Pathogenicity tests were conducted on chili following the methods described by Montri et al. (2009) and Mongkolporn et al. (2010). Healthy, ripe red and green chili fruits were surface sterilised in 1 % NaClO for 5 min separately, washed twice with sterile-distilled water, and air dried on sterile filter paper. Each fruit was inoculated with 1 μL of a conidial suspension (1 × 106 conidial/mL), which was injected onto the non-wounded fruit surface using a microsyringe (Shanghai, China). Control fruits were treated with 1 μL of distilled water. Each isolate was inoculated to five replicate fruits. The inoculated fruits were incubated in a moist chamber at 28 °C and were examined for symptoms daily for 9 d. The virulence and pathotypes were evaluated as described by Montri et al. (2009). The experiment was conducted twice.

Table 3

Anthracnose severity scores on a 0–9 scale and pathotypes of 15 Colletotrichum species isolates at the ripe red fruit stage of seven chili cultivars.

IsolateCapsicum annuum
C. frutescens
C. chinense
MeanPathotype
ChaotianjiaoDenglongjiaoSanyingjiaoZidantouShuanlaXiaomilaHuangdijiao
C. aenigma CAUG2655755756PC1-R
C. cliviae CAUOS577577505PC2-R
C. conoides CAUG1777777556PC1-R
C. endophytica CAUG2800000000PC3-R
C. fioriniae CAUT3477999978PC1-R
C. fructicola CAUG177999978PC1-R
C. gloeosporioides CAUG277997757PC1-R
C. grossum CAUG777775576PC1-R
C. hymenocallidis CAUG957997706PC2-R
C. incanum CAUT3457757556PC1-R
C. karstii CAUOS175779977PC1-R
C. liaoningense CAUOS297995958PC1-R
C. scovillei CAUA179999798PC1-R
C. truncatum CAUT177979978PC1-R
C. viniferum CAUG2757999958PC1-R
Mean66777756

Table 4

Anthracnose severity scores on a 0–9 scale and pathotypes of 15 Colletotrichum species isolates at the mature green fruit stage of seven chili cultivars.

IsolateCapsicum annuum
C. frutescens
C. chinense
MeanPathotype
ChaotianjiaoDenglongjiaoSanyingjiaoZidantouShuanlaXiaomilaHuangdijiao
C. aenigma CAUG2655550003PC1-G
C. cliviae CAUOS579577577PC2-G
C. conoides CAUG1775057504PC3-G
C.endophyticaCAUG2800000000PC4-G
C. fioriniae CAUT3499779978PC2-G
C. fructicola CAUG179950776PC5-G
C.gloeosporioidesCAUG259750776PC5-G
C. grossum CAUG733055503PC3-G
C.hymenocallidis CAUG955557776PC2-G
C. incanum CAUT3455537555PC2-G
C. karstii CAUOS157770004PC1-G
C.liaoningense CAUOS255975376PC2-G
C. scovillei CAUA177779977PC2-G
C. truncatum CAUT175577756PC2-G
C. viniferum CAUG2755579977PC2-G
Mean56555545

RESULTS

Disease survey and strain isolation

Symptoms of anthracnose were circular or angular sunken lesions on chili fruits and irregularly shaped brown spots with dark brown edges on leaves. A total of 1 285 isolates of Colletotrichum spp. were obtained from 29 provinces in China (Fig. 1, Table 1). Attempts were made to collect samples from multiple locations in Tibet and Xinjiang provinces for several years but failed to locate symptomatic plants. All strains were isolated from fruits except those from Jiangxi province, where serious damage was found on chili leaves rather than on fruits.

Group assessment

Based on megablast searches in GenBank using ITS sequences and the colony morphologies on PDA, all strains were assigned to four groups, i.e., those that produce cylindrical conidia with round ends were assigned to the C. gloeosporioides species complex; those that produce acute ends or ± cylindrical conidia with only one acute end were assigned to the C. acutatum species complex; those that produce dark setae and curved conidia were assigned to the Colletotrichum species with curved conidia; and the remaining strains were assigned to a fourth group. Among the 121 isolates, 31 belonged to the C. gloeosporioides complex; 48 belonged to the C. acutatum complex; 34 belonged to the Colletotrichum species with curved conidia, and eight belonged to the fourth group (Damm et al. 2012a, b, 2013, 2014, Weir et al. 2012, Crouch 2014).

Multi-locus phylogenetic analyses

The 121 representative isolates from chili were subjected to multi-locus phylogenetic analyses (Table 2a, ,2b,2b, ,2c).2c). The trees generated from the Bayesian and RaxML analyses were essentially similar to that from the MP analysis (Fig. 2) and are therefore not shown. In Fig. 2, the 31 isolates in the C. gloeosporioides complex clustered in eight clades, eight with C. fructicola, 13 with C. gloeosporioides, and four with C. aenigma, C. endophytica, C. hymenocallidis, and C. viniferum, respectively. In addition, two distinct lineages, which clustered distantly from any known species in the complex, were recognised as new species and herein described as C. conoides and C. grossum (Fig. 2). In Fig. 3, the isolates of the C. acutatum complex clustered in two clades, 31 with C. scovillei and 17 with C. fioriniae. In the Colletotrichum species with curved conidia, 33 isolates clustered with C. truncatum, and one clustered with C. incanum (Fig. 4). The remaining isolates were assigned to C. cliviae and C. karstii. A new lineage belonging to the fourth group, distinct from all known species, is herein described as a new species, C. liaoningense (Fig. 6).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g002.jpg

Maximum parsimony tree of isolates in the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex obtained from a heuristic search of combined ACT, CAL, CHS-1, GAPDH, ITS, and TUB2 gene sequences. Colletotrichum boninense was used as the outgroup. Bootstrap support values ≥ 50 %, Bayesian posterior probability values ≥ 0.95 and RAxML bootstrap support values (ML ≥ 50 %) are shown at the nodes. Tree length = 1665, CI = 0.672, RI = 0.889, RC = 0.597, HI = 0.328. Ex-type strains are emphasised in bold.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g003.jpg

Maximum parsimony tree of isolates in the Colletotrichum acutatum species complex obtained from a heuristic search of combined ACT, CHS-1, GAPDH, HIS3, ITS, and TUB2 gene sequences. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides was used as the outgroup. Bootstrap support values ≥ 50 % and Bayesian posterior probability values ≥ 0.95 are shown at the nodes. Tree length = 943, CI = 0.757, RI = 0.912, RC = 0.691, HI = 0.243. Ex-type strains are emphasised in bold.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g004.jpg

Maximum parsimony tree of Colletotrichum species with curved conidia obtained from a heuristic search of combined ACT, CHS-1, GAPDH, HIS3, ITS, and TUB2 gene sequences. Colletotrichum lindemuthianum was used as the outgroup. Bootstrap support values ≥ 50 % and Bayesian posterior probability values ≥ 0.95 are shown at the nodes. Tree length = 2853, CI = 0.467, RI = 0.859, RC = 0.401, HI = 0.533. Ex-type strains are emphasised in bold.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g006.jpg

Maximum parsimony tree of isolates of Colletotrichum species in the fourth group obtained from a heuristic search of combined ACT, CAL, CHS-1, GAPDH, ITS, and TUB2 gene sequences. Monilochaetes infuscans was used as the outgroup. Bootstrap support values ≥ 50 % and Bayesian posterior probability values ≥ 0.95 are shown at the nodes. Tree length = 2913, CI = 0.717, RI = 0.870, RC = 0.624, HI = 0.283. Ex-type strains are emphasised in bold.

Pathogenicity

All tested isolates except that of C. endophytica were pathogenic to most of the detached ripe red chili fruits (Table 3). All Capsicum annuum and Ca. frutescens cultivars were susceptible to all tested Colletotrichum species (except C. endophytica), with disease scores from 5 to 9. Capsicum chinense was susceptible to most of the Colletotrichum species, except C. cliviae CAUOS5, C. endophytica CAUG28, and C. hymenocallidis CAUG9. Capsicum annuum and Ca. frutescens were the most susceptible, with average scores of 7. Three pathotypes (PC1-R, PC2-R, and PC3-R) were identified (Table 3) based on three differential reactions of tested strains with Capsicum chinense cv. Huangdijiao, Ca. annuum and Ca. frutescens. Host reactions of the mature green fruit were similar to those of the ripe fruit (Table 4). Similar to the ripe fruit, all three cultivars of the mature green fruit of Capsicum annuum, Zidantou, Denglongjiao, and Sanyingjiao were susceptible to all tested Colletotrichum species, except C. endophytica, with average scores from 5 to 6. Most of the Capsicum frutescens cultivars and Ca. chinense cv. Huangdijiao at the green fruit stage were susceptible to most isolates, except C. aenigma CAUG26, C. conoides CAUG17, C. gloeosporioides CAUG2, C. grossum CAUG7, C. fructicola CAUG1 and C. karstii CAUOS1. Five pathotypes were identified based on the differential reactions with Xiaomila, Shuangla, and Huangdijiao (Table 4). All of the pathogenic isolates formed sunken, brown to dark lesions on the fruits. No symptoms developed on the negative controls.

Prevalence of Colletotrichum species

To determine the prevalence of the Colletotrichum species associated with chili in China, the sample locations and the number of isolates were assessed for each species. Isolates with highly similar morphology and ITS sequences to those of the ex-type of C. truncatum appear to be most common (N = 422), representing 33 % of all isolates, and presenting in 56 % of all sampling locations (Fig. 5). All 34 isolates chosen from this group for multi-locus phylogenetic analysis were confirmed to be C. truncatum (Fig. 4). It therefore appears that C. truncatum is the most prevalent species of Colletotrichum on chili in China. The next most prevalent species included C. scovillei, C. gloeosporioides, C. fioriniae, and C. fructicola, which accounted for 21, 14, 14, and 13 % of all the isolates, respectively. The remaining species were detected in less than 3 % of the sampling locations.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g005.jpg

Prevalence of Colletotrichum species on chili in China based on preliminary identifications. a. The percentage of isolates represented by the indicated Colletotrichum species on chili; b. number of sampling locations where the seven most prevalent species were isolated.

Taxonomy

Based on the morphology and the multi-locus phylogeny, the 121 isolates were assigned to 15 species. Seven species (C.aenigma, C. cliviae, C. endophytica, C. hymenocallidis, C. incanum, C. karstii, and C. viniferum) were reported from chili for the first time. Three other species (C. fioriniae, C. fructicola, and C. scovillei) were reported for the first time in China, and a further three species newly described.

Colletotrichum conoides Y.Z. Diao, C. Zhang, L. Cai & X.L. Liu, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB812003; Fig. 7

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g007.jpg

Colletotrichum conoides (CAUG17). a–b. Colonies on PDA above and below; c. conidiophores; d–e, g–h: appressoria; f. conidia. — Scale bars: c–h = 10 μm.

Etymology. Referring to the host variety (Capsicum annuum var. conoides) from which the fungus was first collected.

Colonies on PDA attaining 53–55 mm diam in 4 d at 28 °C; aerial mycelia greyish white; reverse light grey to medium grey with white margin. Chlamydospores not observed. Vegetative hyphae hyaline, smooth-walled, septate, branched. Conidiomata and setae not observed. Conidiophores formed directly on aerial mycelium, hyaline, aseptate. Conidiogenous cells hyaline, cylindrical to clavate, 22–30 × 3.5–5 μm, opening 2.5–3 μm. Conidia hyaline, aseptate, smooth-walled, cylindrical to clavate, both ends obtusely rounded, contents granular and mostly equally distributed, 13–17.5 × 5–6.5 μm (av. = 15.9 × 5.9 μm), L/W ratio = 2.7. Appressoria single or in small groups, medium to dark brown, aseptate, mostly ellipsoidal to irregular in outline, and crenate or deeply lobed at margin, 4–11.5 × 6–10.5 μm (av. = 8.35 × 7.1 μm), L/W ratio = 1.2. Sexual morph not observed after 8 wk.

Specimen examined. CHINA, Jiangsu Province, Nanjing City, on fruits of Capsicum annuum var. conoides, Sept. 2010, Y.Z. Diao (holotype HMAS 246481, ex-type living culture CGMCC 3.17615 = CAUG17 = LC6226); ibid., NJ26, living culture CAUG33; ibid., NJ27, living culture CAUG34.

Notes — Colletotrichum conoides is phylogenetically most closely related to C. hebeiense (Fig. 2). Sequence data from ITS and CHS-1 could not separate the two species, but they can be distinguished by GAPDH (12 bp), ACT (4 bp), or TUB (3 bp). The two species also differ in the following characteristics: the granules are uniformly distributed in the conidia of C. conoides but mostly present at the polar ends in the conidia of C. hebeiense; most appressoria of C. conoides are ovoid ellipsoidal with crenate or deeply lobed margin, while those of C. hebeiense are clavate to subglobose; conidia of C. conoides are slightly larger than those of C. hebeiense (13–17.5 × 5–6.5 μm vs 11.6–15.3 × 4.47–6.88 μm). In addition, C. conoides was described from Capsicum annuum var. conoides, while C. hebeiense was described from Vitis vinifera (Yan et al. 2015). A PHI test revealed no significant recombination event between C. conoides and C. hebeiense (Fig. 8).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g008.jpg

The results of the pairwise homoplasy index (PHI) test of closely related species using both LogDet transformation and splits decomposition. PHI test results (Φw) < 0.05 indicate significant recombination within the dataset.

Colletotrichum grossum Y.Z. Diao, C. Zhang, L. Cai & X.L. Liu, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB812006; Fig. 9

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g009.jpg

Colletotrichum grossum (CAUG7). a–b. Colonies on PDA above and below; c–e: conidiophores; f. conidia; g–k: appressoria. — Scale bars: c–f, j–k = 10 μm (j applied to g–j).

Etymology. Referring to the host variety (Capsicum annuum var. grossum) from which the fungus was first collected.

Colonies on PDA attaining 49–52 mm diam in 4 d at 28 °C; aerial mycelia white, reverse light grey with white margin. Chlamydospores not observed. Vegetative hyphae hyaline, smooth-walled, septate, branched. Conidiomata and setae not observed. Conidiophores formed directly on aerial mycelium, hyaline, aseptate. Conidiogenous cells hyaline, cylindrical to clavate, 22–32 × 3–3.5 μm, opening 2–2.5 μm. Conidia hyaline, aseptate, smooth-walled, cylindrical to clavate, both ends rounded or one end acute, contents granular and mostly present at the polar ends, 14.5–20.5 × 5–7.5 μm (av = 16.8 × 6.3 μm), L/W ratio = 2.7. Appressoria single, medium brown, aseptate, mostly ovoid or ellipsoidal to irregular in outline, and crenate in margin. 5.5–11.5 × 4–10.5 μm (av = 8.65 × 6.1 μm), L/W ratio = 1.4. Sexual morph not observed after 8 wk.

Specimen examined. CHINA, Hainan Province, Haikou city, on chili fruits (Capsicum annuum var. grossum), Oct. 2010, Y.Z Diao (holotype HMAS 246480, ex-type living culture CGMCC3.17614 = CAUG7 = LC6227); ibid., HN2, living culture CAUG31; ibid., HN3, living culture CAUG32.

Notes — Colletotrichum grossum is phylogenetically most closely related to C. theobromicola (Fig. 2). The sequence data of ITS and CAL do not separate the two species, but they can be distinguished by GAPDH (3 bp), ACT (5 bp), and TUB (8 bp). In morphology, C. grossum differs from C. theobromicola by having wider conidia (14.5–20.5 × 5–7.5 μm vs 14.5–18.7 × 4.5–5.5 μm) and colonies that are flat white rather than black as in C. theobromicola (Rojas et al. 2010). A PHI test revealed no significant recombination event between C. grossum and C. theobromicola (Fig. 8).

Colletotrichum liaoningense Y.Z. Diao, C. Zhang, L. Cai & X.L. Liu, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB812007; Fig. 10

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is per-38-20-g010.jpg

Colletotrichum liaoningense (CAUOS2). a–b. Colonies on PDA above and below; c–e: conidiophores; f. conidia; g–k: appressoria. — Scale bars: d–k = 10 μm (d applies to c–d).

Etymology. Referring to the province in China where the fungus was first collected.

Colonies on PDA attaining 48–51 mm diam in 4 d at 28 °C; aerial mycelia light grey, reverse medium to dark brown with white margin. Chlamydospores not observed. Vegetative hyphae hyaline, smooth-walled, septate, branched. Conidiomata acervular. Setae medium grey, smooth-walled to verruculose, 3–6-septate, 46–68 μm long, base cylindrical, conical, or slightly inflated, 4.5–6.5 μm diam at the widest part, tip rounded. Conidiophores formed directly on aerial mycelium, hyaline, aseptate. Conidiogenous cells hyaline, cylindrical to clavate, 27–30 × 3.5–4.5 μm, opening 2–4 μm. Conidia cylindrical to clavate, both ends rounded or one end acute, contents granular and mostly present at the polar ends, hyaline, aseptate, smooth-walled, 14–18.5 μm × 5–7.5 μm (av. = 16.3 × 6.1 μm), L/W ratio = 2.7. Appressoria single, medium to dark brown, aseptate, mostly ellipsoidal to irregular in outline, and crenate at margin, 3.5–5 × 2.5–4.5 μm (av. = 4.1 × 2.9 μm), L/W ratio = 1.4. Sexual morph not observed after 8 wk.

Specimen examined. CHINA, Xingcheng city, Liaoning Province on chili fruits (Capsicum annuum var. conoides), Oct. 2012, Y.Z. Diao (holotype HMAS 246479, ex-type living culture CGMCC3.17616 = CAUOS2 = LC6228); ibid., LN3, living culture CAUOS3; ibid., LN4, living culture CAUOS4; ibid., LN6, living culture CAUOS6.

Notes — Colletotrichum liaoningense is phylogenetically most closely related to C. brevisporum (Fig. 6). The sequence data from ITS and ACT could not separate the two species; however, they can be distinguished from each other via GAPDH (10 bp) or TUB (12 bp). The granules are equally distributed in the conidia of C. liaoningense but mostly present at the polar ends in conidia of C. brevisporum. The appressoria of C. liaoningense are smaller than those of C. brevisporum (3.5–5 × 2.5–4.5 μm vs 10–13 × 8–11 μm) (Noireung et al. 2012). A PHI test revealed no significant recombination event between C. liaoningense and C. brevisporum (Fig. 8).

DISCUSSION

Colletotrichum truncatum, the most frequently isolated species in this study, has been reported from more than 460 plant species (Farr & Rossman 2016). This taxon has also been shown to cause serious damage to chili production in Australia, China, India, Thailand, and other countries (Poonpolgul & Kumphai 2007, Than et al. 2008, Sharma et al. 2014, Diao et al. 2015). In China, C. truncatum has been reported from tomato, dragon fruit, pumpkin, and other crops (Chai et al. 2014, Cheng et al. 2014, Diao et al. 2014, Guo et al. 2014). Geographic populations of C. truncatum in China exhibit significant genetic differentiation and recombination abilities, which can probably be attributed to the prevalence of this species (Diao et al. 2015).

Colletotrichum gloeosporioides has been reported to infect chili in Australia, China, India, Korea, Thailand, the USA, and other countries (Shin et al. 1999, Kim et al. 2008, Than et al. 2008). However, a recent study revealed this taxon to be a species complex comprising many morphologically similar taxa (Weir et al. 2012). Therefore, this new classification system necessitates a re-investigation of species in the C. gloeosporioides species complex on chili, as species in this complex exhibit biological and physiological differences. In the current study, C. gloeosporioides s.str. and C. fructicola were revealed to be most prevalent in this complex, representing 47 % and 42 % of the isolates, respectively (Fig. 2). Colletotrichum fructicola was originally isolated from coffee berries (Prihastuti et al. 2009), and has since been found on a wide range of host plants (Weir et al. 2012). However, this is the first report of C. fructicola infecting chili. In previous studies, C. gloeosporioides s.str. was shown to be an uncommon pathogen on chili and other fruits in the tropics (Phoulivong et al. 2010). Additionally, we failed to isolate C. gloeosporioides s.str. from chili in the tropical regions of China, e.g. Hainan, south of Guangdong, and Yunnan provinces (Table 1), which suggested a significant effect of climate on the distribution of these pathogens. Pathogenicity of all obtained species from chili in this study was confirmed by inoculation tests, except for that of C. endophytica. Colletotrichum endophytica, which was originally reported as an endophytic fungus in tropical grasses (Manamgoda et al. 2013), did not show pathogenicity to any chili cultivars in our test, further underlining the possible endophytic nature of this species.

Colletotrichum acutatum is a commonly reported species, and causes anthracnose on numerous plants worldwide (Damm et al. 2012a). It was originally described from Carica papaya, Capsicum frutescens, and Delphinium ajacis in Australia (Simmonds 1965), but has subsequently been reported to infect chili in almost all pepper-growing countries, such as Australia, China, India, Korea, New Zealand, Thailand, and the USA (Than et al. 2008). Like C. gloeosporioides, C. acutatum has also been shown to represent a species complex (Damm et al. 2012a). Interestingly, C. acutatum s.str. was not found on chili in China (Fig. 3). Only C. scovillei and C. fioriniae were identified from this complex (Fig. 3).

No Colletotrichum species were detected on chili in Tibet and Xinjiang, despite the fact that several field trips have been made to these provinces, and attempts have been made for to isolate these fungi. The failure to detect Colletotrichum species from these regions might be explained by the high latitude, small growing area, dry climate, and high day/night variation in temperature. Colletotrichum fructicola and C. truncatum were isolated from leaves in the Jiangxi province, and were also found from fruits in other sampling regions. In previous studies, these two species were primarily isolated from fruits from various plants (Poonpolgul & Kumphai 2007, Than et al. 2008, Alaniz et al. 2015, Diao et al. 2015).

In summary, the current study represents the hitherto most intensive investigation of Colletotrichum species on chili in China, which revealed 15 species, with the dominant species being C. fioriniae, C. fructicola, C. gloeosporioides, C. scovillei, and C. truncatum. The information provided here could prove useful for the control of anthracnose on chili, as well as for the screening of new chili cultivars against anthracnose.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Special Fund for Agro-scientific Research in the Public Interest of China (No. 201303023), and also partially supported by the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (2012CB111401).

REFERENCES

  • Alaniz S, Hernández L, Mondino P. 2015. Colletotrichum fructicola is the dominant and one of the most aggressive species causing bitter rot of apple in Uruguay. Tropical Plant Pathology 40: 265–274. [Google Scholar]
  • Bailey JA, Jeger MJ. 1992. Colletotrichum: biology, pathology and control. CAB International, Wallingford. [Google Scholar]
  • Cai L, Hyde KD, Taylor PWJ, et al. 2009. A polyphasic approach for studying Colletotrichum. Fungal Diversity 39: 183–204. [Google Scholar]
  • Cai L, Jeewon R, Hyde KD. 2006. Phylogenetic investigations of Sordariaceae based on multiple gene sequences and morphology. Mycological Research 110: 137–150. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Carbone I, Kohn LM. 1999. A method for designing primer sets for speciation studies in filamentous ascomycetes. Mycologia 91: 553–556. [Google Scholar]
  • Chai AL, Zhao YJ, Shi YX, et al. 2014. Identification of Colletotrichum capsici (Syd.) Butler causing anthracnose on pumpkin in China. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology 36: 121–124. [Google Scholar]
  • Cheng BP, Huang YH, Peng AT, et al. 2014. First report of leaf and fruit spot of Citrus reticulata Blanco cv. Nian Ju caused by Colletotrichum truncatum in China. Plant Disease 98: 422. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Crouch JA. 2014. Colletotrichum caudatum s.l. is a species complex. IMA Fungus 5: 17–30. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Crous PW, Gams W, Stalpers JA, et al. 2004a. MycoBank: an online initiative to launch mycology into the 21st century. Studies in Mycology 50: 19–22. [Google Scholar]
  • Crous PW, Groenewald JZ, Risède JM, et al. 2004b. Calonectria species and their Cylindrocladium anamorphs: species with sphaeropedunculate vesicles. Studies in Mycology 50: 415–430. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Damm U, Cannon PF, Liu F, et al. 2013. The Colletotrichum orbiculare species complex: important pathogens of field crops and weeds. Fungal Diversity 61: 29–59. [Google Scholar]
  • Damm U, Cannon PF, Woudenberg JHC, et al. 2012a. The Colletotrichum acutatum species complex. Studies in Mycology 73: 37–113. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Damm U, Cannon PF, Woudenberg JHC, et al. 2012b. The Colletotrichum boninense species complex. Studies in Mycology 73: 1–36. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Damm U, O’Connell RJ, Groenewald JZ, et al. 2014. The Colletotrichum destructivum species complex – hemibiotrophic pathogens of forage and field crops. Studies in Mycology 79: 49–84. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Damm U, Woudenberg JHC, Cannon PF, et al. 2009. Colletotrichum species with curved conidia from herbaceous hosts. Fungal Diversity 39: 45–87. [Google Scholar]
  • Dean R, Van Kan JA, Pretorius ZA, et al. 2012. The Top 10 fungal pathogens in molecular plant pathology. Molecular Plant Pathology 13: 414–430. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Diao YZ, Zhang C, Lin D, et al. 2014. First report of Colletotrichum truncatum causing anthracnose of tomato in China. Plant Disease 98: 687. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Diao YZ, Zhang C, Xu JP, et al. 2015. Genetic differentiation and recombination among geographic populations of the fungal pathogen Colletotrichum truncatum from chili peppers in China. Evolutionary Applications 8: 108–118. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Farr DF, Rossman AY. 2016. Fungal Databases, Systematic Mycology and Microbiology Laboratory, ARS, USDA; Retrieved February 6, 2016, from http://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/. [Google Scholar]
  • Glass NL, Donaldson GC. 1995. Development of primer sets designed for use with the PCR to amplify conserved genes from filamentous ascomycetes. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 61: 1323–1330. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Guo LW, Wu YX, Ho HH, et al. 2014. First report of dragon fruit (Hylocereus undatus) anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum truncatum in China. Journal of Phytopathology 162: 272–275. [Google Scholar]
  • Huson DH. 1998. SplitsTree: analyzing and visualizing evolutionary data. Bioinformatics 14: 68–73. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Huson DH, Bryant D. 2006. Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionary studies. Molecular Biology and Evolution 23: 254–267. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Kanto T, Uematsu S, Tsukamoto T, et al. 2014. Anthracnose of sweet pepper caused by Colletotrichum scovillei in Japan. Journal of General Plant Pathology 80: 73–78. [Google Scholar]
  • Katoh K, Toh H. 2010. Parallelization of the MAFFT multiple sequence alignment program. Bioinformatics 26: 1899–1900. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Kim JT, Park SY, Choi W, et al. 2008. Characterization of Colletotrichum isolates causing anthracnose of pepper in Korea. The Plant Pathology Journal 24: 17–23. [Google Scholar]
  • Kohli Y, Brunner LJ, Yoell H, et al. 1995. Clonal dispersal and spatial mixing in populations of the plant pathogenic fungus, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Molecular Ecology 4: 69–77. [Google Scholar]
  • Li Q, Han YZ, Zhang GC. 2009. Status and development trends of hot pepper industry home and abroad. Hubei Agricultural Science 9: 2278–2281. [Google Scholar]
  • Liao CY, Chen MY, Chen YK, et al. 2012. Characterization of three Colletotrichum acutatum isolates from Capsicum spp. European Journal of Plant Pathology 133: 599–608. [Google Scholar]
  • Lin Q, Lv Z, Huang R, et al. 2004. Screening of pepper germplasm for resistance to TMV, CMV, phytophthora blight and anthracnose. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences 18: 108–110. [Google Scholar]
  • Liu F, Damm U, Cai L, et al. 2013. Species of the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides complex associated with anthracnose diseases of Proteaceae. Fungal Diversity 61: 89–105. [Google Scholar]
  • Liu JK, Phookamsak R, Doilom M, et al. 2012. Towards a natural classification of Botryosphaeriales. Fungal Diversity 57: 149–210. [Google Scholar]
  • Manamgoda DS, Udayanga D, Cai L, et al. 2013. Endophytic Colletotrichum from tropical grasses with a new species C. endophytica. Fungal Diversity 61: 107–115. [Google Scholar]
  • Mongkolporn O, Montri P, Supakaew T, et al. 2010. Differential reactions on mature green and ripe chili fruit infected by three Colletotrichum spp. Plant Disease 94: 306–310. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Montri P, Taylor PWJ, Mongkolporn O. 2009. Pathotypes of Colletotrichum capsici, the causal agent of chili anthracnose, in Thailand. Plant Disease 93: 17–20. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Murray MG, Thompson WF. 1980. Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant DNA. Nucleic Acids Research 8: 4321–4326. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Noireung P, Phoulivong S, Liu F, et al. 2012. Novel species of Colletotrichum revealed by morphology and molecular analysis. Cryptogamie Mycologie 33: 347–362. [Google Scholar]
  • Nylander JAA. 2004. MrModelTest v2. Program distributed by the author. Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University. [Google Scholar]
  • O’Donnell K, Cigelnik E. 1997. Two divergent intragenomic rDNA ITS2 types within a monophyletic lineage of the fungus Fusarium are nonorthologous. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 7: 103–116. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • O’Donnell K, Nirenberg HI, Aoki T, et al. 2000. A multigene phylogeny of the Gibberella fujikuroi species complex: Detection of additional phylogenetically distinct species. Mycoscience 41: 61–78. [Google Scholar]
  • Perfect SE, Hughes HB, O’Connell RJ, et al. 1999. Colletotrichum: a model genus for studies on pathology and fungal – plant interactions. Fungal Genetics and Biology 27: 186–198. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Phoulivong S, Cai L, Chen H, et al. 2010. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides is not a common pathogen on tropical fruits. Fungal Diversity 44: 33–43. [Google Scholar]
  • Poonpolgul S, Kumphai S. 2007. Chilli pepper anthracnose in Thailand. In: The First International Symposium on Chili Anthracnose: 23 Convention Center, Seoul National University, Korea. [Google Scholar]
  • Prihastuti H, Cai L, Chen H, et al. 2009. Characterization of Colletotrichum species associated with coffee berries in northern Thailand. Fungal Diversity 39: 89–109. [Google Scholar]
  • Quaedvlieg W, Binder M, Groenewald JZ, et al. 2014. Introducing the Consolidated Species Concept to resolve species in the Teratosphaeriaceae. Persoonia 33: 1–40. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Rojas EI, Rehner SA, Samuels GJ, et al. 2010. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides s.l. associated with Theobroma cacao and other plants in Panama: multilocus phylogenies distinguish host-associated pathogens from asymptomatic endophytes. Mycologia 102: 1318–1338. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19: 1572–1574. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Sharma G, Kumar PA, Damodara SB. 2014. Infra-specific diversity of Colletotrichum truncatum associated with chilli anthracnose in India based on microsatellite marker analysis. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 47: 2509–2523. [Google Scholar]
  • Sharma G, Shenoy BD. 2014. Colletotrichum fructicola and C. siamense are involved in chilli anthracnose in India. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 47: 1179–1194. [Google Scholar]
  • Shin H, Xu T, Zhang C, et al. 1999. The comparative study of capsicum anthracnose pathogens from Korea with that of China. Journal of Zhejiang University (Agriculture and Life Sciences) 26: 629–634. [Google Scholar]
  • Simmonds JH. 1965. A study of the species of Colletotrichum causing ripe fruit rots in Queensland. Queensland Journal of Agricultural and Animal Science 22: 437–459. [Google Scholar]
  • Swofford D. 2002. PAUP 4.0 b10: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Computer programme. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, USA. [Google Scholar]
  • Templeton MD, Rikkerink EHA, Solon SL, et al. 1992. Cloning and molecular characterization of the glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase-encoding gene and cDNA from the plant pathogenic fungus Glomerella cingulata. Gene 122: 225–230. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Than PP, Prihastuti H, Phoulivong S, et al. 2008. Chilli anthracnose disease caused by Colletotrichum species. Journal of Zhejiang University Science B 9: 764–778. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Weir BS, Johnston PR, Damm U. 2012. The Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex. Studies in Mycology 73: 115–180. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • White TJ, Bruns T, Lee J, et al. 1990. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, et al. (eds), PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications: 315–322. Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA. [Google Scholar]
  • Yan JY, Jayawardena M, Goonasekara ID, et al. 2015. Diverse species of Colletotrichum associated with grapevine anthracnose in China. Fungal Diversity 71: 233–246. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Persoonia : Molecular Phylogeny and Evolution of Fungi are provided here courtesy of Naturalis Biodiversity Center & Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures

Citations & impact 


Impact metrics

Jump to Citations
Jump to Data

Citations of article over time

Alternative metrics

Altmetric item for https://www.altmetric.com/details/29213611
Altmetric
Discover the attention surrounding your research
https://www.altmetric.com/details/29213611

Smart citations by scite.ai
Smart citations by scite.ai include citation statements extracted from the full text of the citing article. The number of the statements may be higher than the number of citations provided by EuropePMC if one paper cites another multiple times or lower if scite has not yet processed some of the citing articles.
Explore citation contexts and check if this article has been supported or disputed.
https://scite.ai/reports/10.3767/003158517x692788

Supporting
Mentioning
Contrasting
4
120
0

Article citations


Go to all (49) article citations

Data 


Data behind the article

This data has been text mined from the article, or deposited into data resources.

Similar Articles 


To arrive at the top five similar articles we use a word-weighted algorithm to compare words from the Title and Abstract of each citation.