Diaporthe diversity and pathogenicity revealed from a broad survey of grapevine diseases in Europe
Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
PubMed
30504999
PubMed Central
PMC6146647
DOI
10.3767/persoonia.2018.40.06
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- Vitis, canker, multi-locus sequence typing, pathogenicity,
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
Species of Diaporthe are considered important plant pathogens, saprobes, and endophytes on a wide range of plant hosts. Several species are well-known on grapevines, either as agents of pre- or post-harvest infections, including Phomopsis cane and leaf spot, cane bleaching, swelling arm and trunk cankers. In this study we explore the occurrence, diversity and pathogenicity of Diaporthe spp. associated with Vitis vinifera in major grape production areas of Europe and Israel, focusing on nurseries and vineyards. Surveys were conducted in Croatia, Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Spain and the UK. A total of 175 Diaporthe strains were isolated from asymptomatic and symptomatic shoots, branches and trunks. A multi-locus phylogeny was established based on five genomic loci (ITS, tef1, cal, his3 and tub2), and the morphological characters of the isolates were determined. Preliminary pathogenicity tests were performed on green grapevine shoots with representative isolates. The most commonly isolated species were D. eres and D. ampelina. Four new Diaporthe species described here as D. bohemiae, D. celeris, D. hispaniae and D. hungariae were found associated with affected vines. Pathogenicity tests revealed D. baccae, D. celeris, D. hispaniae and D. hungariae as pathogens of grapevines. No symptoms were caused by D. bohemiae. This study represents the first report of D. ambigua and D. baccae on grapevines in Europe. The present study improves our understanding of the species associated with several disease symptoms on V. vinifera plants, and provides useful information for effective disease management.
ARO The Volcani Center 68 HaMacabim Road Rishon LeZion 7505101 Israel
Centre for Agricultural Research Hungarian Academy of Sciences H 2462 Martonvasar Hungary
Centre for Crop Health University of Southern Queensland Toowoomba QLD 4350 Australia
Centre for Research and Development Eszterházy Károly University H 3300 Eger Hungary
Fera Sand Hutton York YO41 1LZ UK
INIA CIFOR C Coruna km 7 5 28040 Madrid Spain
IRTA Centre de Cabrils Carretera de Cabrils km 2 08348 Cabrils Spain
Shamir Research Institute Katsrin Israel
University of Debrecen Institute of Food Science 4032 Debrecen Böszörményi út 138 Hungary
University of Idaho Parma Research and Extension Center Parma Idaho USA
Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute Uppsalalaan 8 3584 CT Utrecht The Netherlands
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Aveskamp MM, Verkley GJM, De Gruyter J, et al. 2009. DNA phylogeny reveals polyphyly of Phoma section Peyronellaea and multiple taxonomic novelties. Mycologia 101: 363–382. PubMed
Baumgartner K, Fujiyoshi F, Travadon R, et al. 2013. Characterization of species of Diaporthe from wood cankers of grape in Eastern North American vineyards. Plant Disease 97: 912–920. PubMed
Carbone I, Kohn LM. 1999. A method for designing primer sets for the speciation studies in filamentous ascomycetes. Mycologia 91: 553–556.
Carroll GC. 1986. The biology of endophytism in plants with particular reference to woody perennials. In: Fokkema NJ, Van den Heuvel J. (eds), Microbiology of the phyllosphere: 205–222. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Chepkirui C, Stadler M. 2017. The genus Diaporthe: a rich source of diverse and bioactive metabolites. Mycological Progress 16: 477–494.
Cinelli T, Mondello V, Marchi G, et al. 2016. First report of Diaporthe eres associated with cane blight of grapevine (Vitis vinifera) in Italy. Plant Disease 100: 532.
Corsaro MM, De Castro C, Evidente A, et al. 1998. Chemical structure of two phytotoxic exopolysaccharides produced by Phomopsis foeniculi. Carbohydrate Research 308: 349–357. PubMed
Crous PW, Gams W, Stalpers JA, et al. 2004b. MycoBank: an online initiative to launch mycology into the 21st century. Studies in Mycology 50: 19–22.
Crous PW, Groenewald JZ, Risede JM, et al. 2004a. Calonectria species and their Cylindrocladium anamorphs: species with sphaeropedunculate vesicles. Studies in Mycology 50: 415–430. PubMed PMC
Crous PW, Groenewald JZ, Shivas RG, et al. 2011a. Fungal Planet description sheets: 69–91. Persoonia 26: 108–156. PubMed PMC
Crous PW, Summerell BA, Swart L, et al. 2011b. Fungal pathogens of Proteaceae. Persoonia 27: 20–45. PubMed PMC
Crous PW, Verkley GJM, Groenewald JZ, et al. 2009. Fungal Biodiversity. [CBS Laboratory Manual Series 1]. Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Crous PW, Wingfield MJ, Richardson DM, et al. 2016. Fungal Planet description sheets: 400–468. Persoonia 36: 316–458. PubMed PMC
Dai DQ, Wijayawardene NN, Bhat DJ, et al. 2014. Pustulomyces gen. nov. accommodated in Diaporthaceae, Diaporthales, as revealed by morphology and molecular analyses. Cryptogamie, Mycologie 35: 63–72.
Dai J, Krohn K, Flörke U, et al. 2005. Novel highly substituted biraryl ethers, phomopsines D-G, isolated from endophytic fungus Phomopsis sp. from Adenocarpus foliolosus. European Journal of Organic Chemistry 23: 5100–5105.
Diogo ELF, Santos JM, Phillips AJL. 2010. Phylogeny, morphology and pathogenicity of Diaporthe and Phomopsis species on almond in Portugal. Fungal Diversity 44: 107–115.
Dissanayake AJ, Liu M, Zhang W, et al. 2015. Morphological and molecular characterisation of Diaporthe species associated with grapevine trunk disease in China. Fungal Biology 119: 283–294. PubMed
Dissanayake AJ, Phillips AJL, Hyde KD, et al. 2017. The current status of species in Diaporthe. Mycosphere 8: 1106–1156.
Erincik O, Madden LV, Ferree DC, et al. 2001. Effect of growth stage on susceptibility of grape berry and rachis tissues to infection by Phomopsis viticola. Plant Disease 85: 517–520. PubMed
Fu CH, Hsieh HM, Chen CY, et al. 2013. Ophiodiaporthe cyatheae gen. et sp. nov., a diaporthalean pathogen causing a devastating wilt disease of Cyathea lepifera in Taiwan. Mycologia 105: 861–872. PubMed
Gao YH, Liu F, Cai L. 2016. Unravelling Diaporthe species associated with Camellia. Systematics and Biodiversity 14: 102–117.
Gao YH, Lui F, Duan W, et al. 2017. Diaporthe is paraphyletic. IMA Fungus 8: 153–187. PubMed PMC
Gao YH, Su YY, Sun W, et al. 2015. Diaporthe species occurring on Lithocarpus glabra in China, with descriptions of five new species. Fungal Biology 119: 295–309. PubMed
Garcia-Reyne A, López-Medrano F, Morales JM, et al. 2011. Cutaneous infection by Phomopsis longicolla in a renal transplant recipient from Guinea: first report of human infection by this fungus. Transplant Infectious Disease 13: 204–207. PubMed
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. PubMed PMC
Gomes RR, Glienke C, Videira SIR, et al. 2013. Diaporthe: a genus of endophytic, saprobic and plant pathogenic fungi. Persoonia 31: 1–41. PubMed PMC
Grasso FM, Marini M, Vitale A, et al. 2012. Canker and dieback on Platanus × acerifolia caused by Diaporthe scabra. Forest Pathology 42: 510–513.
Guarnaccia V, Crous PW. 2017. Emerging citrus diseases in Europe caused by Diaporthe spp. IMA Fungus 8: 317–334. PubMed PMC
Guarnaccia V, Groenewald JZ, Polizzi G, et al. 2017. High species diversity in Colletotrichum associated with citrus diseases in Europe. Persoonia 39: 32–50. PubMed PMC
Guarnaccia V, Vitale A, Cirvilleri G, et al. 2016. Characterisation and pathogenicity of fungal species associated with branch cankers and stem-end rot of avocado in Italy. European Journal of Plant Pathology 146: 963–976.
Hillis DM, Bull JJ. 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Systematic Biology 42: 182–192.
Huang F, Hou X, Dewdney MM, et al. 2013. Diaporthe species occurring on citrus in China. Fungal Diversity 61: 237–250.
Isaka M, Jaturapat A, Rukseree K, et al. 2001. Phomoxanthones A and B, novel xanthone dimers from the endophytic fungus Phomopsis species. Journal of Natural Products 64: 1015–1018. PubMed
Kajitani Y, Kanematsu S. 2000. Diaporthe kyushuensis sp. nov. the teleomorph of the causal fungus of grapevine swelling arm in Japan, and its anamorph Phomopsis vitimegaspora. Mycoscience 41: 111–114.
Kaliterna J, Milicevic T, Cvjetkovic B. 2012. Grapevine trunk diseases associated with fungi from the Diaporthaceae family in Croatian vineyards. Archives of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology 63: 471–478. PubMed
Katoh K, Standley DM. 2013. MAFFT Multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30: 772–780. PubMed PMC
Kumar S, Stecher G, Tamura K. 2016. MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Molecular Biology and Evolution 33: 1870–1874. PubMed PMC
Kumaran RS, Hur BK. 2009. Screening of species of the endophytic fungus Phomopsis for the production of the anticancer drug taxol. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry 54: 21–30. PubMed
Kuo KC, Leu LS. 1998. Phomopsis vitimegaspora: a pathogenic Phomopsis from vines. Mycotaxon 66: 497–499.
Lamprecht SC, Crous PW, Groenewald JZ, et al. 2011. Diaporthaceae associated with root and crown rot of maize. IMA Fungus 2: 13–24. PubMed PMC
Lombard L, Van Leeuwen GCM, Guarnaccia V, et al. 2014. Diaporthe species associated with Vaccinium, with specific reference to Europe. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 53: 287–299.
Merrin SJ, Nair NG, Tarran J. 1995. Variation in Phomopsis recorded on grapevine in Australia and its taxonomic and biological implications. Australasian Plant Pathology 24: 44–56.
Mostert L, Crous PW, Kang JC, et al. 2001a. Species of Phomopsis and a Libertella sp. occurring on grapevines with specific reference to South Africa: morphological, cultural, molecular and pathological characterization. Mycologia 93: 146–167.
Mostert L, Kang JC, Crous PW, et al. 2001b. Phomopsis saccharata sp. nov., causing a canker and die-back disease of Protea repens in South Africa. Sydowia 53: 227–235.
Muralli TS, Suryanarayanan TS, Geeta R. 2006. Endophytic Phomopsis species: host range and implications for diversity estimates. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 52: 673–680. PubMed
Nylander JAA. 2004. MrModeltest v. 2. Program distributed by the author. Uppsala, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University.
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. PubMed
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.
Pearson RC, Goheen C. 1994. Phomopsis cane and leaf spot. In: Hewitt WB, Pearson RC. (eds), Compendium of grape diseases: 17–18. APS Press, St Paul, MI.
Phillips AJL. 1999. The relationship between Diaporthe perjuncta and Phomopsis viticola on grapevines. Mycologia 91: 1001–1007.
Pine TS. 1958. Etiology of the dead-arm of grapevines. Phytopathology 48: 192–197.
Pine TS. 1959. Development of the grape dead-arm disease. Phytopathology 49: 738–743.
Prencipe S, Nari L, Vittone G, et al. 2017. First report of Diaporthe eres causing stem canker on peach (Prunus persica) in Italy. Plant Disease 101: 1052.
Pscheidt JW, Pearson RC. 1989. Effect of grapevine training systems and pruning practices on occurrence of Phomopsis cane and leaf spot. Plant Disease 73: 825–828.
Rawnsley B, Wicks TJ, Scott ES, et al. 2004. Diaporthe perjuncta does not cause Phomopsis cane and leaf spot disease of grapevine in Australia. Plant Disease 88: 1005–1010. PubMed
Rayner RW. 1970. A mycological colour chart. Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew, UK.
Rehner SA, Uecker FA. 1994. Nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer phylogeny and host diversity in the coelomycete Phomopsis. Canadian Journal of Botany 72: 1666–1674.
Ronquist F, Teslenko M, Van der Mark P, et al. 2012. MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Systematic Biology 61: 539–542. PubMed PMC
Rossman AY, Adams GC, Cannon PF, et al. 2015. Recommendations of generic names in Diaporthales competing for protection or use. IMA Fungus 6: 145–154. PubMed PMC
Santos JM, Phillips AJL. 2009. Resolving the complex of Diaporthe (Phomopsis) species occurring on Foeniculum vulgare in Portugal. Fungal Diversity 34: 111–125.
Santos JM, Vrandečić K, Cìosić J, et al. 2011. Resolving the Diaporthe species occurring on soybean in Croatia. Persoonia 27: 9–19. PubMed PMC
Santos L, Alves A, Alves R. 2017. Evaluating multi-locus phylogenies for species boundaries determination in the genus Diaporthe. PeerJ 5:e3120; doi: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3120. PubMed PMC
Santos PJC, Savi DC, Gomes RR, et al. 2016. Diaporthe endophytica and D. terebinthifolii from medicinal plants for biological control of Phyllosticta citricarpa. Microbiological Research 186–187: 153–160. PubMed
Says-Lesage V, Roeckel-Drevet P, Viguié A, et al. 2002. Molecular variability within Diaporthe/Phomopsis helianthi from France. Phytopathology 92: 308–313. PubMed
Scheper RWA, Crane DC, Whisson DL, et al. 2000. The Diaporthe teleomorph of Phomopsis Taxon 1 on grapevine. Mycological Research 104: 226–231.
Schilder AMC, Erincik O, Castlebury L, et al. 2005. Characterization of Phomopsis spp. infecting grapevines in the Great Lakes region of North America. Plant Disease 89: 755–762. PubMed
Senanayake IC, Crous PW, Groenewald JZ, et al. 2017. Families of Diaporthales based on morphological and phylogenetic evidence. Studies in Mycology 86: 217–296. PubMed PMC
Smith H, Wingfield MJ, Crous PW, et al. 1996. Sphaeropsis sapinea and Botryosphaeria dothidea endophytic in Pinus spp. and Eucalyptus spp. in South Africa. South African Journal of Botany 62: 86–88.
Swofford DL. 2003. PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), v. 4.0b10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
Tan YP, Edwards J, Grice KRE, et al. 2013. Molecular phylogenetic analysis reveals six new species of Diaporthe from Australia. Fungal Diversity 61: 251–260.
Thompson SM, Tan YP, Shivas RG, et al. 2015. Green and brown bridges between weeds and crops reveal novel Diaporthe species in Australia. Persoonia 35: 39–49. PubMed PMC
Thompson SM, Tan YP, Young AJ, et al. 2011. Stem cankers on sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in Australia reveal a complex of pathogenic Diaporthe (Phomopsis) species. Persoonia 27: 80–89. PubMed PMC
Udayanga D, Castlebury LA, Rossman AY, et al. 2014a. Insights into the genus Diaporthe: phylogenetic species delimitation in the D. eres species complex. Fungal Diversity 67: 203–229.
Udayanga D, Castlebury LA, Rossman AY, et al. 2014b. Species limits in Diaporthe: molecular re-assessment of D. citri, D. cytosporella, D. foeniculina and D. rudis. Persoonia 32: 83–101. PubMed PMC
Udayanga D, Castlebury LA, Rossman AY, et al. 2015. The Diaporthe sojae species complex: Phylogenetic re-assessment of pathogens associated with soybean, cucurbits and other field crops. Fungal Biology 119: 383–407. PubMed
Udayanga D, Liu X, McKenzie EHC, et al. 2011. The genus Phomopsis: biology, applications, species concepts and names of common phytopathogens. Fungal Diversity 50: 189–225.
Uecker FA. 1988. A world list of Phomopsis names with notes on nomenclature, morphology and biology. Mycological Memoirs 13: 1–231.
Úrbez-Torres JR, Adams P, Kamas J, et al. 2009. Identification, incidence and pathogenicity of fungal species associated with grapevine dieback in Texas. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 60: 497–507.
Úrbez-Torres JR, Peduto F, Smith RJ, et al. 2013. Phomopsis dieback: a grapevine trunk disease caused by Phomopsis viticola in California. Plant Disease 97: 1571–1579. PubMed
Van der Aa HA, Noordeloos ME, De Gruyter J. 1990. Species concepts in some larger genera of the Coelomycetes. Studies in Mycology 32: 3–19.
Van Niekerk JM, Groenewald JZ, Farr DF, et al. 2005. Reassessment of Phomopsis species on grapevines. Australasian Plant Pathology 34: 27–39.
Van Rensburg JCJ, Lamprecht SC, Groenewald JZ, et al. 2006. Characterization of Phomopsis spp. associated with die-back of rooibos (Aspalathus linearis) in South Africa. Studies in Mycology 55: 65–74. PubMed PMC
Wehmeyer LE. 1926. A biologic and phylogenetic study of stromatic Sphaeriales. American Journal of Botany 13: 575–645.
Wehmeyer LE. 1933. The genus Diaporthe Nitschke and its segregates. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbon.
White TJ, Bruns T, Lee S, 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.
Wilcox WA, Ellis MA, Ramsley B, et al. 2015. Phomopsis cane and leaf spot. In: Wilcox WF, Gubler WD, Uyemoto JK. (eds), Compendium of grape diseases, disorders, and pests, second ed. APS, S. Paul, MN, USA.
Yang J, Xu F, Huang C, et al. 2010. Metabolites from the mangrove endophytic fungus Phomopsis sp. (#zsu-H76). European Journal of Organic Chemistry 19: 3692–3695.
Lignans Extract from Knotwood of Norway Spruce-A Possible New Weapon against GTDs
