Diversity of Sporocadaceae (pestalotioid fungi) from Rosa in China

Abstract

Rosa (Rosaceae) is an important ornamental and medicinal plant genus worldwide, with several species being cultivated in China. Members of Sporocadaceae (pestalotioid fungi) are globally distributed and include endophytes, saprobes but also plant pathogens, infecting a broad range of host plants on which they can cause important plant diseases. Although several Sporocadaceae species were recorded to inhabit Rosa spp., the taxa occurring on Rosa remain largely unresolved. In this study, a total of 295 diseased samples were collected from branches, fruits, leaves and spines of eight Rosa species (R. chinensis, R. helenae, R. laevigata, R. multiflora, R. omeiensis, R. rugosa, R. spinosissima and R. xanthina) in Gansu, Henan, Hunan, Qinghai, Shaanxi Provinces and the Ningxia Autonomous Region of China. Subsequently 126 strains were obtained and identified based on comparisons of DNA sequence data. Based on these results 15 species residing in six genera of Sporocadaceae were delineated, including four known species (Pestalotiopsis chamaeropis, Pes. rhodomyrtus, Sporocadus sorbi and Spo. trimorphus) and 11 new species described here as Monochaetia rosarum, Neopestalotiopsis concentrica, N. subepidermalis, Pestalotiopsis tumida, Seimatosporium centrale, Seim. gracile, Seim. nonappendiculatum, Seim. parvum, Seiridium rosae, Sporocadus brevis, and Spo. spiniger. This study also represents the first report of Pes. chamaeropis, Pes. rhodomyrtus and Spo. sorbi on Rosa. The overall data revealed that Pestalotiopsis was the most prevalent genus, followed by Seimatosporium, while Pes. chamaeropis and Pes. rhodomyrtus were the two most prevalent species. Analysis of Sporocadaceae abundance on Rosa species and plant organs revealed that spines of R. chinensis had the highest species diversity.

Citation: Peng C, Crous PW, Jiang N, et al. 2022. Diversity of Sporocadaceae (pestalotioid fungi) from Rosa in China. Persoonia 49: 201–260. https://doi.org/10.3767/persoonia.2022.49.07.

INTRODUCTION

Sporocadaceae (Xylariales, Sordariomycetes) is a well-known fungal family containing pestalotioid fungi. Traditionally, pestalotioid fungi are circumscribed as a group of coelomycetous fungi having fusoid or nearly fusoid, multi-septate conidia, with appendages at one or both ends (Nag Raj 1993, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Liu et al. 2019).

Pestalotioid fungi were previously classified in Amphisphaeriaceae, Amphisphaeriales (Eriksson 1986, Samuels et al. 1987). Subsequently, several studies suggested that Amphisphaeriales should not be accepted due to the lack of stable phylogenetic support, and hence it was treated as synonym of Xylariales (Eriksson 1987, Kang et al. 1999, Smith et al. 2003). Later, Senanayake et al. (2015) revised Xylariomycetidae and transferred several important genera of pestalotioid fungi from Amphisphaeriaceae to three new families, Bartaliniaceae, Discosiaceae and Pestalotiopsidaceae. Genera such as Bartalinia and Broomella were transferred to Bartaliniaceae, Discosia and Seimatosporium to Discosiaceae, and Neopestalotiopsis, Pestalotiopsis, Pseudopestalotiopsis, Monochaetia and Seiridium to Pestalotiopsidaceae. Crous et al. (2015a) introduced a new family Robillardaceae to accommodate Robillarda. Subsequently, Jaklitsch et al. (2016) grouped the pestalotioid fungi into a single family and revived the older family name Sporocadaceae. Therefore, Bartaliniaceae, Discosiaceae, Pestalotiopsidaceae and Robillardaceae became synonyms of Sporocadaceae. These families were classified in Amphisphaeriales which was resurrected instead of Xylariales (Senanayake et al. 2015). Recently, several studies treated Amphisphaeriales as a distinct order (Senanayake et al. 2015, Samarakoon 2016, Hongsanan et al. 2017, Wijayawardene et al. 2020) . Based on multi-locus phylogenetic analyses with morphological characters, Liu et al. (2019) confirmed the natural taxonomic status of Sporocadaceae, which currently contains 33 genera (Liu et al. 2019, Wijayawardene et al. 2020).

Sporocadaceae contains many important plant pathogens associated with diseases on a wide range of plant hosts worldwide (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Liu et al. 2019, Norphanphoun et al. 2019). Within the family, pestalotiopsis-like taxa (Neopestalotiopsis, Pestalotiopsis and Pseudopestalotiopsis) are the group that has received the most attention (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Wang et al. 2019b, Gualberto et al. 2021) . For example, N. mangiferae and N. palmarum cause leaf diseases on a variety of cash crops in Brazil, South Africa and India, weakening tree vigour, and even reducing yield in severe cases (Spaulding 1949, Mendes et al. 1998, Crous et al. 2000). Pestalotiopsis pini is an emerging pathogen causing shoot blight and stem necrosis on Pinus pinea (Silva et al. 2020), while in Australia, Pes. telopeae causes a serious leaf spot disease of Telopea spp. (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014). Furthermore, pestalotiopsis-like fungi are widespread, occur on many hosts in Proteaceae, and are generally regarded to be saprobic or weakly pathogenic (Crous et al. 2013). Neopestalotiopsis protearum was recorded as causing leaf spots and blight on several Protea and Leucospermum hosts in Zimbabwe (Swart et al. 1999, Crous et al. 2011b). This species is also reported from Australia and Proteaceae in the Western Cape Province of South Africa (Crous et al. 2013). Neopestalotiopsis protearum is probably only a problem of commercial importance in summer rainfall areas and it has been intercepted at quarantine inspection points (Taylor 2000). Pestalotiopsis montellicoides was isolated from Protea cynaroides leaves from South Africa (Mordue 1986), and a Pestalotiopsis sp. (asexual Pestalosphaeria leucospermi), was described from living leaves of a Leucospermum sp. in New Zealand (Samuels et al. 1987). In Portugal and the Canary Islands, a species of Pestalotiopsis is commonly associated with tip blight and leaf spot symptoms on Protea, Leucospermum and Leucadendron species, although pathogenicity studies have not yet been conducted (Crous et al. 2013). Members of Pseudopestalotiopsis are cosmopolitan in distribution and have often been regarded as leaves spot pathogens occurring on a broad host range, e.g., Pse. elaeidis and Pse. theae cause foliar diseases in more than 60 hosts around the world in tropical and subtropical areas (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Liu et al. 2019). In addition to pestalotiopsis-like species, the diseases caused by other groups of Sporocadaceae cannot be underestimated. Cypress canker is caused by several species of Seiridium (Bonthond et al. 2018), Allelochaeta is an important foliar pathogen of eucalypts (Crous et al. 2019b), and some species of Distononappendiculata and Truncatella cause diseases on a wide range of hosts (Crous et al. 2011a, 2013, Liu et al. 2019).

Sporocadaceae has an extremely rich species diversity in China. The investigation of the biodiversity of plant-associated pestalotioid fungi in China date back as far as 1886, when Patouillard collected and described many species from Yunnan (Patouillard 1886). With subsequent research, a total of 310 species belonging to 22 genera were reported in China, inhabiting many hosts, especially in Juglandaceae, Myrtaceae, Pinaceae, Podocarpaceae, Rhododendronaceae, Rosaceae, Theaceae and Vitaceae (Chen 2003, Ge et al. 2009, Liu et al. 2019). Most of the previous studies on Sporocadaceae in China focused on Pestalotiopsis. Previous investigations on Pestalotiopsis in China were summarised by Tai (1979), in which 38 species from 52 plant hosts were listed. A wider survey included 153 species obtained from at least 406 plant species, 67 of which are endemic to China (Ge et al. 2009). Hitherto 203 species have been reported in China, accounting for more than 65 % of the total records of this family in China. However, the distribution of 11 genera in China is still unknown, i.e., Ciliochorella, Clypeosphaeria, Diploceras, Disaeta, Distononappendiculata, Heterotruncatella, Hyalotiella, Morinia, Nonappendiculata, Parabartalinia and Xenseimatosporium. Furthermore, many species of Sporocadaceae can also cause serious plant diseases in China. Pseudopestalotiopsis camelliae-sinensis is responsible for grey blight of tea plants and causes serious losses in some tea-growing regions of China (Wang et al. 2019b), while Pes. apiculata causes severe top blight of cedar seedlings (Ge et al. 2009). Monochaetia kansensis and M. monochaeta cause leaf spots on a variety of Quercus and Castanea plants (Teng 1996, Chen et al. 2002, Chen 2003), and Truncatella laurocerasi causes grey blight and leaf spot on Eriobotrya in China (Tai 1979). Considering the importance of pestalotioid fungi, it is necessary to clarify the species diversity and distribution of Sporocadaceae in China in a modern taxonomic framework.

Rosa (Rosaceae) is widely distributed in tropical to cold temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere, including approximately 200 species (Bruneau et al. 2007, Fougère-Danezan et al. 2015). China is the main distribution area of Rosa plants globally (Wu et al. 2003). There are currently 95 Rosa spp. in China (65 of which are endemic), accounting for about 41 % of the global total (Jin 2020). Rosa species are widely cultivated and are of immense economic importance in China (Liu 2016). As important ornamental plants, Rosa spp. play a key role in Chinese landscaping (Zhang et al. 2009). Furthermore, Rosa species are important raw materials for the spice and food industry, and a rose industry has been established in many parts of China, generating huge income for the local economy (Wang 2021). Most Rosa spp. can be used in traditional Chinese medicines, having great nutritional and medicinal value (Wang 2021). In addition to these, Rosa spp. are important resource species for ecological and vegetation restoration, having great ecological value in China, because many rose species have strong resistance to stress and can survive in harsh environments (Liu 2016).

Many fungal taxa such as Botryosphaeria dothidea, Botrytis cinerea, Chaetomella raphigera, Colletotrichum siamense, Cytospora spp., Diplocarpon rosae, Elsinoe rosarum and Lasiodiplodia theobromae have in the past been identified as the causal agents of various diseases of Rosa spp. in China, and severely limited their production. (Zhang et al. 2014, Bagsic et al. 2016, Chen et al. 2016, Debener 2019, Feng et al. 2019 Jia et al. 2019, Munoz et al. 2019, Pan et al. 2020). Members of Sporocadaceae have also been reported to cause diseases on Rosa spp. Examples include cankers caused by N. rosicola, dieback caused by Ciliochorella mangiferae and Robillarda sessilis, stem lesions caused by N. rosae and R. sessilis, and leaf spots caused by Diploceras discosioides, Discosia artocreas and Truncatella angustata (Weiss 1950, Mathur 1979, Peregrine & Ahmad 1982, Eken et al. 2009, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Jiang et al. 2018). Furthermore, Rosa has proven to represent a rich niche of undescribed species of Sporocadaceae, with many remaining poorly identified, as the generic concepts have been in flux until recently (Liu et al. 2019). Therefore, conducting detailed surveys of pestalotioid fungi from Rosa spp. in China was necessary. The aims of the present study were thus to identify these fungi based on phylogenetic analyses and morphological comparisons, describe the species new to science, and gain a better understanding of the diversity and prevalence of Sporocadaceae associated with Rosa spp. in China.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sampling and isolation

A total of 295 Rosa samples (branches, fruits, leaves and spines) showing disease symptoms (Fig. 1) were collected from five provinces (Gansu, Henan, Hunan, Qinghai and Shaanxi) and the Ningxia Autonomous Region of China, which are the main production areas of Rosa plants in China. The Rosa species sampled include R. chinensis, R. helenae, R. laevigata, R. multiflora, R. omeiensis, R. rugosa, R. spinosissima and R. xanthina.

Fig. 1.

Disease symptoms on Rosa associated with infection by Sporocadaceae. a–c. Leaves spots on Rosa rugosa caused by Pestalotiopsis rhodomyrtus; d–e. lesion developing on the fruits of Rosa laevigata infected by Seimatosporium nonappendiculatum; f. dying bush; g–h. dieback on (g) Rosa rugosa and (h) Rosa xanthina caused by Seiridium rosae and Sporocadus sorbi; i–j. sporocarps of Pestalotiopsis chamaeropis and Seimatosporium centrale on the spines of (i) Rosa rugosa and (j) Rosa chinensis.

A total of 126 strains were obtained by removing the spore mass from conidiomata and generating single spore colonies, or plating superficially sterilised diseased tissue on potato dextrose agar (PDA, 20 % diced potatoes, 2 % agar and 2 % glucose) and incubating Petri dishes at 25 °C in the dark for 2–3 d. When colonies just formed, they were hyphal-tipped and transferred to fresh PDA Petri dishes (Crous et al. 2019a). Type specimens of new species from this study were deposited in the Museum of the Beijing Forestry University (BJFC), and ex-type living cultures were deposited in the China Forestry Culture Collection Centre (CFCC), Beijing, China.

Morphological analyses

Cultures were incubated on PDA at 25 °C in a 12 h day/night regime (Crous et al. 2019a). After 15 d, colony diameters were measured and colony colours were rated according to Rayner (1970). Slide preparations were mounted in lactic acid or water, from colonies sporulating on PDA, autoclaved pine needles on 2 % tap water agar (Smith et al. 1996), and incubated at 25 °C under continuous nuv-light to promote sporulation. Sections through stromata were made by hand. Observations were made with a Leica DM 2500 dissecting microscope (Wetzlar, Germany), and with a Nikon Eclipse 80i compound microscope using differential interference contrast (DIC) illumination and images recorded on a Nis DS-Ri2 camera with the Nikon NisElements F4.30.01 software. Conidial length was measured from the base of the basal cell to the base of the apical appendage, and conidial width was measured at the widest point of the conidium (Bonthond et al. 2018). Taxonomic novelties were deposited in MycoBank (Crous et al. 2004).

DNA extraction, PCR amplification and sequencing

Total genomic DNA was extracted from axenic cultures using a modified cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) protocol (Doyle & Doyle 1990). DNA products were stored at -20 °C. The extracted DNA was used as template for the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). PCR reaction primers (forward and reverse) of each fungal genus are found in Table 1. PCR parameters were initiated with 95 °C for 5 min, followed by 34 cycles of denaturation at 95 °C for 30 s, annealing at a suitable temperature for 30 s (56 °C for ITS and LSU, 52 °C for TEF, 52 °C for RPB2 and 60 °C for TUB), and extension at 72 °C for 30 s, and terminated with a final elongation step at 72 °C for 10 min. The final PCR products were examined by electrophoresis in 2 % agarose gels. The amplified PCR products were sent to a commercial sequencing provider (Tsingke Biotechnology Co. Ltd, Beijing, China).

Table 1.

PCR reaction primers (forward and reverse) for amplification of gene loci of each fungal genus.

Genus	Loci used for amplification					References
	ITS	LSU	RPB2	TEF	TUB
Monochaetia	ITS1/ITS4	LROR/LR5	RPB2-5F2/fRPB2-7cR			Liu et al. (2019), Jiang et al. (2021)
Neopestalotiopsis	ITS1/ITS4	LROR/LR5	RPB2-5F2/fRPB2-7cR	EF1-728F/EF-2	T1/Bt2b	Liu et al. (2019), Norphanphoun et al. (2019), Jiang et al. (2021)
Pestalotiopsis	ITS1/ITS4	LROR/LR5	RPB2-5F2/fRPB2-7cR	EF1-728F/EF-2	T1/Bt2b	Liu et al. (2019), Norphanphoun et al. (2019), Jiang et al. (2021)
Seimatosporium	ITS1/ITS4	LROR/LR5	RPB2-5F2/fRPB2-7cR			Goonasekara et al. (2016), Wijayawardene et al. (2016a), Liu et al. (2019)
Seiridium	ITS1/ITS4	LROR/LR5	RPB2-5F2/fRPB2-7cR	EF1-728F/EF-2	T1/Bt2b	Jiang et al. (2019), Liu et al. (2019), Marin-Felix et al. (2019)
Sporocadus	ITS1/ITS4	LROR/LR5	RPB2-5F2/fRPB2-7cR	EF1-728F/EF-2	T1/Bt2b	Liu et al. (2019)

Phylogenetic analyses

All nucleotide sequences generated from different primer pairs in this study were deposited in GenBank (Table 2). Sequences were BLASTn searched in NCBI to obtain the related sequences from recent publications and were analysed (Table 3). Sequences were aligned in MAFFT v. 7 at the web server (http://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server) (Katoh & Standley 2013, Katoh et al. 2019) and manually adjusted in MEGA v. 6 (Tamura et al. 2013).

Table 2.

Isolates sequenced and used for phylogenetic analyses in the current study.

Species1	Culture no.	Status2	Host	Tissues	Origin	GenBank accession no.
						ITS	LSU	RPB2	TEF	TUB
Monochaetia rosarum	CFCC55172 = ROC 099	T	Rosa chinensis	branches	Nanyang, Henan	MZ292088	OK560346	OL742111	OL814484	OM103654
	CFCC55173 = ROC 100		Rosa chinensis	branches	Nanyang, Henan	MZ292089	OK560347	OL742112	OL814485	OM103655
	ROC 098		Rosa chinensis	branches	Nanyang, Henan	MZ292090	OK560348	OL742113	OL814486	OM103656
	ROC 101		Rosa chinensis	branches	Nanyang, Henan	MZ292091	OK560349	OL742114	OL814487	OM103657
Neopestalotiopsis concentrica	CFCC 55162 = ROC 53	T	Rosa rugosa	spines	Xinyang, Henan	OK560707	OK560440	OL742115	OM622433	OM117698
	CFCC 55163 = ROC 64		Rosa chinensis	spines	Xinyang, Henan	OK560708	OK560441	OL742116	OM622434	OM117699
	ROC 135		Rosa chinensis	spines	Xinyang, Henan	OK560709	OK560442	OL742117	OM622435	OM117700
	ROC 136		Rosa chinensis	spines	Xinyang, Henan	OK560710	OK560443	OL742118	OM622436	OM117701
	ROC 137		Rosa chinensis	spines	Nanyang, Henan	OK560711	OK560444	OL742119	OM622437	OM117702
	ROC 138		Rosa chinensis	spines	Nanyang, Henan	OK560712	OK560445	OL742120	OM622438	OM117703
	ROC 140		Rosa chinensis	spines	Nanyang, Henan	OK560713	OK560446	OL742121	OM622439	OM117704
	ROC 141		Rosa chinensis	spines	Nanyang, Henan	OK560714	OK560447	OL742122	OM622440	OM117705
	ROC 142		Rosa chinensis	spines	Nanyang, Henan	OK560715	OK560448	OL742123	OM622441	OM117706
N. subepidermalis	CFCC 55160 = ROC 161	T	Rosa rugosa	spines	Xinyang, Henan	OK560699	OK560432	–	OM622425	OM117690
	ROC 162		Rosa rugosa	spines	Xinyang, Henan	OK560700	OK560433	–	OM622426	OM117691
	CFCC 55161 = ROC 169		Rosa chinensis	spines	Xinyang, Henan	OK560701	OK560434	–	OM622427	OM117692
	ROC 170		Rosa chinensis	spines	Xinyang, Henan	OK560702	OK560435	–	OM622428	OM117693
	ROC 171		Rosa chinensis	branches	Xinyang, Henan	OK560703	OK560436	–	OM622429	OM117694
	ROC 172		Rosa chinensis	branches	Xinyang, Henan	OK560704	OK560437	–	OM622430	OM117695
	ROC 173		Rosa chinensis	branches	Xinyang, Henan	OK560705	OK560438	–	OM622431	OM117696
	ROC 174		Rosa chinensis	spines	Xinyang, Henan	OK560706	OK560439	–	OM622432	OM117697
Pestalotiopsis chamaeropis	CFCC 55156 = ROC 23-1		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560574	OK560306	OL742124	OL814488	OM158138
	ROC 270		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560575	OK560307	OL742125	OL814489	OM158139
	ROC 272		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560576	OK560308	OL742126	OL814490	OM158140
	ROC 273		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560577	OK560309	OL742127	OL814491	OM158141
	ROC 275		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560578	OK560310	OL742128	OL814492	OM158142
	CFCC 55157 = ROC 23-2		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560579	OK560311	OL742129	OL814493	OM158143
	ROC 276		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560580	OK560312	OL742130	OL814494	OM158144
	ROC 278		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560581	OK560313	OL742131	OL814495	OM158145
	ROC 279		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560582	OK560314	OL742132	OL814496	OM158146
	ROC 280		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560583	OK560315	OL742133	OL814497	OM158147
	ROC 281		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560584	OK560316	OL742134	OL814498	OM158148
	ROC 282		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560585	OK560317	OL742135	OL814499	OM158149
	ROC 283		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560586	OK560318	OL742136	OL814500	OM158150
	ROC 286		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560587	OK560319	OL742137	OL814501	OM158151
	ROC 289		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560588	OK560320	OL742138	OL814502	OM158152
	ROC 290		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560589	OK560321	OL742139	OL814503	OM158153
	ROC 292		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560590	OK560322	OL742140	OL814504	OM158154
	ROC 293		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560591	OK560323	OL742141	OL814505	OM158155
Pes. rhodomyrtus	ROC 056		Rosa rugosa	leaves	Nanyang, Henan	OK560592	–	–	OL814506	OM158156
	ROC 057		Rosa rugosa	leaves	Nanyang, Henan	OK560593	–	–	OL814507	OM158157
	ROC 058		Rosa rugosa	leaves	Nanyang, Henan	OK560594	–	–	OL814508	OM158158
	ROC 059		Rosa rugosa	leaves	Nanyang, Henan	OK560595	–	–	OL814509	OM158159
	ROC 060		Rosa rugosa	leaves	Nanyang, Henan	OK560596	–	–	OL814510	OM158160
	ROC 061		Rosa rugosa	leaves	Nanyang, Henan	OK560597	–	–	OL814511	OM158161
	ROC 062		Rosa rugosa	leaves	Nanyang, Henan	OK560598	–	–	OL814512	OM158162
	ROC 303		Rosa multiflora	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK560599	–	–	OL814513	OM158163
	ROC 304		Rosa multiflora	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK560600	–	–	OL814514	OM158164
	ROC 305		Rosa multiflora	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK560601	–	–	OL814515	OM158165
	ROC 306		Rosa multiflora	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK560602	–	–	OL814516	OM158166
	ROC 307		Rosa multiflora	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK560603	–	–	OL814517	OM158167
	ROC 309		Rosa multiflora	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK560604	–	–	OL814518	OM158168
	ROC 311		Rosa multiflora	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK560605	–	–	OL814519	OM158169
Pes. rhodomyrtus (cont.)	ROC 356		Rosa chinensis	branches	Changsha, Hunan	OK560606	–	–	OL814520	OM158170
	ROC 357		Rosa chinensis	branches	Changsha, Hunan	OK560607	–	–	OL814521	OM158171
	ROC 358		Rosa chinensis	branches	Changsha, Hunan	OK560608	–	–	OL814522	OM158172
	ROC 359		Rosa chinensis	branches	Changsha, Hunan	OK560609	–	–	OL814523	OM158173
Pes. tumida	CFCC 55158 = ROC 110	T	Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560610	OK560324	OL742142	OL814524	OM158174
	ROC 109		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560611	OK560325	OL742143	OL814525	OM158175
	ROC 108		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560612	OK560326	OL742144	OL814526	OM158176
	CFCC 55159 = ROC 234		Rosa chinensis	branches	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560613	OK560327	OL742145	OL814527	OM158177
	ROC 235		Rosa chinensis	branches	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560614	OK560328	OL742146	OL814528	OM158178
	ROC 236		Rosa chinensis	branches	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560615	OK560329	OL742147	OL814529	OM158179
	ROC 237		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560616	OK560330	OL742148	OL814530	OM158180
	ROC 238		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560617	OK560331	OL742149	OL814531	OM158181
	ROC 240		Rosa chinensis	branches	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560618	OK560332	OL742150	OL814532	OM158182
Seimatosporium centrale	CFCC 55166 = ROC 003	T	Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560629	OK560399	ON055447	OM986918	OM301641
	ROC 001		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560630	OK560400	ON055448	OM986919	OM301642
	ROC 002		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560631	OK560401	ON055449	OM986920	OM301643
	CFCC 55169 =ROC 014		Rosa chinensis	spines	Baoji, Shaanxi	OK560632	OK560402	ON055450	OM986921	OM301644
	ROC 015		Rosa chinensis	spines	Baoji, Shaanxi	OK560633	OK560403	ON055451	OM986922	OM301645
	ROC 016		Rosa chinensis	spines	Baoji, Shaanxi	OK560634	OK560404	ON055452	OM986923	OM301646
	ROC 145		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560635	OK560405	ON055453	OM986924	OM301647
	ROC 146		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560636	OK560406	ON055454	OM986925	OM301648
	ROC 147		Rosa chinensis	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560637	OK560407	ON055455	OM986926	OM301649
Seim, gracile	CFCC 55167 = ROC 004	T	Rosa xanthina	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560638	OK560408	ON055456	OM986927	OM301650
	ROC 005		Rosa xanthina	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560639	OK560409	ON055457	OM986928	OM301651
	ROC 006		Rosa xanthina	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560640	OK560410	ON055458	OM986929	OM301652
	ROC 007		Rosa xanthina	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560641	OK560411	ON055459	OM986930	OM301653
	ROC 008		Rosa xanthina	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560642	OK560412	ON055460	OM986931	OM301654
	ROC 009		Rosa xanthina	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560643	OK560413	ON055461	OM986932	OM301655
	ROC 010		Rosa xanthina	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560644	OK560414	ON055462	OM986933	OM301656
	ROC 011		Rosa xanthina	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560645	OK560415	ON055463	OM986934	OM301657
	ROC 012		Rosa xanthina	spines	Tianshui, Gansu	OK560646	OK560416	ON055464	OM986935	OM301658
Seim, nonappendiculatum	CFCC 55168 = ROC 377	T	Rosa laevigata	fruits	Guyuan, Ningxia	OK560657	OK560427	ON055475	OM986946	OM301669
	ROC 378		Rosa laevigata	fruits	Guyuan, Ningxia	OK560658	OK560428	ON055476	OM986947	OM301670
	ROC 379		Rosa laevigata	fruits	Guyuan, Ningxia	OK560659	OK560429	ON055477	OM986948	OM301671
	ROC 380		Rosa laevigata	fruits	Guyuan, Ningxia	OK560660	OK560430	ON055478	OM986949	OM301672
	ROC 381		Rosa laevigata	fruits	Guyuan, Ningxia	OK560661	OK560431	ON055479	OM986950	OM301673
Seim, parvum	CFCC 55164 = ROC 038	T	Rosa spinosissima	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560647	OK560417	ON055465	OM986936	OM301659
	ROC 039		Rosa spinosissima	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560648	OK560418	ON055466	OM986937	OM301660
	ROC 040		Rosa spinosissima	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560649	OK560419	ON055467	OM986938	OM301661
	ROC 041		Rosa spinosissima	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560650	OK560420	ON055468	OM986939	OM301662
	ROC 042		Rosa spinosissima	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560651	OK560421	ON055469	OM986940	OM301663
	ROC 043		Rosa spinosissima	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560652	OK560422	ON055470	OM986941	OM301664
	CFCC 55165 =ROC 017		Rosa helenae	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560653	OK560423	ON055471	OM986942	OM301665
	ROC 018		Rosa helenae	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560654	OK560424	ON055472	OM986943	OM301666
	ROC 019		Rosa helenae	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560655	OK560425	ON055473	OM986944	OM301667
	ROC 020		Rosa helenae	spines	Huangnan, Qinghai	OK560656	OK560426	ON055474	OM986945	OM301668
Seiridium rosae	CFCC 55174 = ROC 208	T	Rosa rugosa	branches	Guyuan, Ningxia	OK560681	OK560394	OL742151	OL814533	OM313314
	ROC 209		Rosa rugosa	branches	Guyuan, Ningxia	OK560682	OK560395	OL742152	OL814534	OM313315
	CFCC 55175 = ROC 267		Rosa rugosa	branches	Guyuan, Ningxia	OK560683	OK560396	OL742153	OL814535	OM313316
	ROC 268		Rosa rugosa	branches	Guyuan, Ningxia	OK560684	OK560397	OL742154	OL814536	OM313317
Sporocadus brevis	CFCC 55170 = ROC 091	T	Rosa spinosissima	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK655780	OK560371	OL742155	OL814537	OM401659
	ROC 092		Rosa spinosissima	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK655781	OK560372	OL742156	OL814538	OM401660
	ROC 093		Rosa spinosissima	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK655782	OK560373	OL742157	OL814539	OM401661
Sporocadus brevis (cont.)	ROC 094		Rosa spinosissima	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK655783	OK560374	OL742158	OL814540	OM401662
	ROC 095		Rosa spinosissima	spines	Gannan, Gansu	OK655784	OK560375	OL742159	OL814541	OM401663
Spo. sorbi	ROC 105		Rosa xanthina	branches	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655785	OK560376	OL742160	OL814542	OM401664
	ROC 102		Rosa xanthina	branches	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655786	OK560377	OL742161	OL814543	OM401665
	ROC 103		Rosa xanthina	branches	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655787	OK560378	OL742162	OL814544	OM401666
	ROC 159		Rosa xanthina	spines	Ganan, Gansu	OK655788	OK560379	OL742163	OL814545	OM401667
	ROC 160		Rosa xanthina	spines	Ganan, Gansu	OK655789	OK560380	OL742164	OL814546	OM401668
	ROC 161		Rosa xanthina	spines	Ganan, Gansu	OK655790	OK560381	OL742165	OL814547	OM401669
Spo. spiniger	ROC 119	T	Rosa omeiensis	spines	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655791	OK560382	OL742166	OL814548	OM401670
	ROC 120		Rosa omeiensis	spines	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655792	OK560383	OL742167	OL814549	OM401671
	ROC 121		Rosa omeiensis	spines	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655793	OK560384	OL742168	OL814550	OM401672
	ROC 122		Rosa omeiensis	spines	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655794	OK560385	OL742169	OL814551	OM401673
	ROC 123		Rosa omeiensis	spines	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655795	OK560386	OL742170	OL814552	OM401674
	ROC 124		Rosa omeiensis	spines	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655796	OK560387	OL742171	OL814553	OM401675
	ROC 125		Rosa omeiensis	spines	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655797	OK560388	OL742172	OL814554	OM401676
Spo. trimorphus	CFCC 55171 = ROC 112		Rosa xanthina	branches	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655798	OK560389	OL742173	OL814555	OM401677
	ROC 113		Rosa xanthina	branches	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655799	OK560390	OL742174	OL814556	OM401678
	ROC 114		Rosa xanthina	branches	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655800	OK560391	OL742175	OL814557	OM401679
	ROC 115		Rosa xanthina	branches	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655801	OK560392	OL742176	OL814558	OM401680
	ROC 116		Rosa xanthina	branches	Lanzhou, Gansu	OK655802	OK560393	OL742177	OL814559	OM401681

¹ Newly described taxa and deposited sequences are in bold.

² T: ex-type.

Table 3.

Isolates from previous studies used in the phylogenetic analyses in the current study.

Species	Strain number1	Status2	Country	Substrate	GenBank accession no.					References
					ITS	LSU	RPB2	TEF	TUB
Allelochaeta acuta	CPC 16629		Australia	Eucalyptus dives	MH554086	MH554297	MH555000	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. elegans	CBS 187.81	ET	Australia	Melaleuca lanceolata	MH554014	MH554234	MH554927	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. falcata	CPC 13580		Australia	Eucalyptus alligatrix	MH554073	MH554284	MH554985	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
	CBS 131117	ET	Australia	Eucalyptus alligatrix	MH553999	MH554217	MH554907	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. fusispora	CPC 17616		Australia	Eucalyptus sp.	MH554094	MH554304	MH555008	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
	CBS 810.73	IT	Australia	Eucalyptus polyanthemos	MH554067	MH554279	MH554980	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. kriegeriana	CBS 188.81		Australia	Callistemon sieberi	MH554015	MH554235	MH554928	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. neoacuta	CBS 115131	T	South Africa	Eucalyptus smithii	JN871200	JN871209	MH554998	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
	CBS 110733		South Africa	Eucalyptus smithii	JN871201	JN871210	MH554999	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. neodilophospora	CPC 17161	T	Australia	Callistemon pinifolius	MH554090	MH554300	MH555004	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. neoorbicularis	CPC 13581		Australia	Eucalyptus regnans	MH554074	MH554285	MH554986	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. obliquae	CPC 20191	T	Australia	Eucalyptus obliqua	MH554105	MH554315	MH555018	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. orbicularis	CBS 131118	ET	Australia	Corymbia henryi	MH554000	MH554218	MH554908	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. paraelegans	CBS 150.71	T	Australia	Melaleuca ericifolia	MH554007	MH554228	MH554923	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. pseudowalkeri	CPC 17043	T	Australia	Eucalyptus sp.	MH554089	MH554299	MH555003	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
All. sparsifoliae	CPC 14529		Australia	Eucalyptus sparsifolia	MH554083	MH554294	MH554995	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
	CPC 14502	T	Australia	Eucalyptus sparsifolia	MH554082	MH554293	MH554994	–	–	Crous et al. (2018)
Bartalinia bella	CBS 125525		South Africa	Maytenus abbottii	GU291796	MH554214	MH554904	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 464.61	T	Brazil	Air	MH554051	MH554264	MH554964	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Bar. pini	CBS 143891	T	Uganda	Pinus patula	MH554125	MH554330	MH555033	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 144141		USA	Acacia koa	MH554170	MH554364	MH555067	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Bar. robillardoides	CBS 122705	ET	Italy	Leptoglossus occidentalis	LT853104	KJ710438	LT853152	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 122615		South Africa	Cupressus lusitanica	MH553989	MH554207	MH554897	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Beltrania pseudorhombica	CPC 23656		China	Pinus tabulaeformis	MH554124	KJ869215	MH555032	–	–	Crous et al. (2014a),
										Liu et al. (2019)
Bel. rhombica	CBS 123.58	T	Mozambique	Sand near mangrove swamp	MH553990	MH554209	MH554899	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Broomella vitalbae	HPC 1154		–	–	MH554173	MH554367	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 13-0798	ET	Italy	Clematis vitalba	NR 153610	KP757749	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Ciliochorella phanericola	MFLUCC 12-0310		Thailand	Dead leaves	KF827444	KF827445	KF827479	–	–	Hyde et al. (2016)
	MFLUCC 14-0984	T	Thailand	Phanera purpurea	KX789680	KX789681	–	–	–	Hyde et al. (2016)
Clypeosphaeria uniseptata	CBS 114967		Hong Kong, China	Wood	MH553979	MH554197	MH554878	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Diploceras hypericinum	CBS 109058		New Zealand	Hypericum sp.	MH553955	MH554178	MH554852	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 492.97		Netherlands	Hypericum perforatum	MH554054	MH554267	MH554967	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 197.36		Switzerland	Hypericum sp.	MH554017	MH554237	MH554930	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 143885	ET	Netherlands	Hypericum perforatum	MH554108	MH554316	MH555019	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Disaeta arbuti	CBS 143903		Australia	Acacia pycnantha	MH554148	MH554346	MH555050	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Discosia artocreas	CBS 124848	ET	Germany	Fagus sylvatica	MH553994	MH554213	MH554903	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Dis. brasiliensis	NTCL095		Thailand	Dead leaf	KF827433	KF827437	KF827474	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	NTCL097-2		Thailand	Dead leaf	KF827434	KF827438	KF827475	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	NTCL094-2		Thailand	Dead leaf	KF827432	KF827436	KF827473	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Discosia sp. 6	CBS 241.66		South Africa	Acacia karroo	MH554022	MH554244	MH554933	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Discosia sp. 7	CBS 684.70		Netherlands	Aesculus hippocastanu	MH554064	MH554277	MH554978	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Distononappendiculata banksiae	CPC 17658		Australia	Banksia marginata	MH554097	MH554307	MH555011	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 131308	T	Australia	Banksia marginata	JQ044422	JQ044442	MH554909	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CPC 20185		Australia	Banksia marginata	MH554104	MH554314	MH555017	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 143906		Australia	Banksia marginata	MH554158	MH554354	MH555057	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Dist. casuarinae	CBS 143884	T	Australia	Casuarina sp.	MH554093	MH554303	MH555007	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Dist. verruca ta	CBS 144032	T	Australia	Banksia repens	MH554163	MH554359	MH555062	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Diversimediispora humicola	CBS 302.86	T	USA	Soil	MH554028	MH554247	MH554941	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Heterotruncatella lutea	CBS 349.73	IT	Australia	Acacia pycnantha	LT853099	DQ414533	LT853146	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Het. proteicola	CBS 123029		South Africa	Protea acaulis	MH553993	MH554212	MH554902	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Het. restionacearum	CBS 119210		South Africa	Ischyrolepis cf. gaudichaudiana	DQ278915	DQ278929	MH554892	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 118150		South Africa	Restio filiformis	DQ278914	MH554203	MH554889	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Het. spadicea	CBS 118148		South Africa	Rhodocoma capensis	DQ278913	DQ278928	MH554888	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 118144		South Africa	Ischyrolepis sp.	DQ278921	DQ278926	MH554886	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Hyalotiella spartii	MFLUCC 13-0397	T	Italy	Spartium junceum	KP757756	KP757752	–	–	–	Li et al. (2015)
Hyalotiella transvalensis	CBS 303.65	T	South Africa	Soil	MH554029	MH554248	MH554942	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Hymenopleella austroafricana	CBS 143886	T	South Africa	Gleditsia triacanthos	MH554115	MH554320	MH555023	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 144027		Zambia	Combretum hereroense	MH554119	MH554324	MH555027	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 144026		South Africa	Bridelia mollis	MH554117	MH554322	MH555025	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Hym. endophytica	EMLAS5-1	T	Korea	Abies firma	KX216520	KX216518	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Hym. hippophaëicola	CBS 113687		Sweden	Hippophae rhamnoides	MH553969	MH554188	MH554863	–	–	Jaklitsch et al. (2016)
	CBS 140410	ET	Austria	Hippophae rhamnoides	KT949901	MH554224	MH554919	–	–	Jaklitsch et al. (2016)
Hym. lakefuxianensis	HKUCC 7303	T	China	Submerged wood	–	AF452047	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Hym. polyseptata	CBS 143887	T	South Africa	Combretum sp.	MH554116	MH554321	MH555024	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Hym. subcylindrica	CBS 164.77		India	Cocos nucifera	MH554009	MH554230	MH554925	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 647.74	T	India	Gypsophilla seeds	MH554062	MH554275	MH554976	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Immersidiscosia eucalypti	MAFF 242781		Japan	Unknown dead leaves	AB594793	AB593725	–	–	–	Tanaka et al. (2011)
	NBRC 104197		Japan	Ardisia japonica	AB594792	AB593724	–	–	–	Tanaka et al. (2011)
Lepteutypa fuckelii	CBS 140409	NT	Belgium	Tilia cordata	NR 154123	KT949902	MH554918	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Lep. sambuci	CBS 131707	T	UK	Sambucus nigra	NR 154124	MH554219	MH554911	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Microdochium lycopodinum	CBS 125585	T	Austria	Lycopodium annotinum	KP859016	KP858952	KP859125	–	–	Hernandez-Restrepo et al. (2016),
										Liu et al. (2019)
Mic. phragmitis	CBS 285.71	ET	Poland	Puccinia teleutosorus	KP859013	KP858949	KP859122	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Mic. seminicola	CBS 139951	T	Switzerland	Maize kernels	NR 155375	KP858974	KP859147	–	–	Hernandez-Restrepo et al. (2016),
										Liu et al. (2019)
Monochaetia camelliae	PSH2000I-151		China	Camellia hongkongensis	AY682948	–	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	PSH2000I-146		China	Camellia pitardii	AY682947	–	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Μ. castaneae	CFCC 54354 = SM9-1	T	China	Castanea mollissima	MW166222	–	–	–	–	Jiang et al. (2021)
	SM9-2		China	Castanea mollissima	MW166223	–	–	–	–	Jiang et al. (2021)
Μ. dimorphospora	NBRC 9980		Japan	Castanea pubinervis	LC146750	–	–	–	–	De Silva et al. (2018)
	NNIBRFG396		Korea	Fresh water	MT271967	–	–	–	–	De Silva et al. (2018)
Μ. ilicis	CBS 101009		Japan	Air	MH553953	MH554176	MH554849	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	KUMCC 15-0520	T	China	llex sp.	KX984153	–	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Μ. junipericola	CBS:143391		Germany	Juniperus communis	MH107900	–	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Μ. kansensis	ZJLQ468		China	Pseudotaxus chienii	KC345692	–	–	–	–	De Silva et al. (2018)
	PSHI2004Endo1030		China	Cyclobalaopsis sp.	DQ534044	–	–	–	–	De Silva et al. (2018)
	PSHI2004Endo1031		China	Quercus aliena	DQ534045	–	–	–	–	De Silva et al. (2018)
Μ. mochaeta	CBS 315.54		England	Quercus sp.	MH554030	MH554249	MH554943	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 658.95		Netherlands	Quercus robur	MH554063	MH554276	MH554977	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 115004		Netherlands	Quercus robur	AY853243	MH554198	MH554879	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 546.80		Netherlands	Culture contaminant	MH554056	MH554270	MH554969	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 199.82	ET	Italy	Quercus pubescens	MH554018	MH554238	MH554931	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	M18		Italy	Unknown plant	JX262802	–	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Μ. quercus	CBS 144034 = CPC 29514	T	Mexico	Quercus eduardi	MH554171	MH554365	MH555068	–	–	De Silva et al. (2018)
	CBS 144034 = CPC 29515		Mexico	Quercus eduardi	NR_161110	–	–	–	–	De Silva et al. (2018)
Μ. schimae	SAUCC212201	T	China	Schima superba	MZ577565	–	–	OK104874	OK104867	Zhang et al. (2022)
	SAUCC212202		China	Schima superba	MZ577566	–	–	OK104875	OK104868	Zhang et al. (2022)
	SAUCC212203		China	Schima superba	MZ577567	–	–	OK104876	OK104869	Zhang et al. (2022)
Μ. sinensis	HKAS 10065		China	Quercus sp.	NR_161064	–	–	–	–	De Silva et al. (2019)
	KUMCC 15-0517		China	Quercus sp.	MH 115996	–	–	–	–	De Silva et al. (2020)
Morinia acaciae	CBS 100230		New Zealand	Prunus salicina cv. ‘Omega’	MH553950	MH554174	MH554847	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 137994	T	France	Acacia melanoxylon	MH554002	MH554221	MH554914	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Mor. crini	CBS 143888	T	South Africa	Crinum bulbispermum	MH554118	MH554323	MH555026	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Mor. longiappendiculata	CBS 117603	T	Spain	Calluna vulgaris	AY929324	MH554202	MH554885	–	–	Collado et al. (2006),
										Liu et al. (2019)
Mor. pestalozzioides	F090354	ET	Spain	Sedum sediforme	AY929325	–	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis acrostichi	MFLUCC 17-1754	T	Thailand	Acrostichum aureum	MK764272	–	–	MK764316	MK764338	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 17-1755		Thailand	Acrostichum aureum	MK764273	–	–	MK764317	MK764339	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
N. alpapicalis	MFLUCC 17-2544	T	Thailand	Rhizophora mucronata	MK357772	–	–	MK463547	MK463545	Kumar et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 17-2545		Thailand	Rhizophora apiculata	MK357773	–	–	MK463548	MK463546	Kumar et al. (2019)
N. aotearoa	CBS 367.54	T	New Zealand	Canvas	KM 199369	–	–	KM 199526	KM 199454	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. asiatica	MFLUCC 12-0286	T	China	Leaves	JX398983	–	–	JX399049	JX399018	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. australis	CBS 114159	T	Australia	Telopea sp.	KM 199348	–	–	KM 199537	KM 199432	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. brachiata	MFLUCC 17-1555	T	Thailand	Rhizophora apiculata	MK764274	–	–	MK764318	MK764340	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
N. brasiliensis	COAD 2166	T	Brazil	Psidium guajava	MG686469	–	–	MG692402	MG692400	Bezerra et al. (2018)
N. camelliae-oleiferae	CSUFTCC81	T	China	Camellia oleifera	OK493585	–	–	OK507955	OK562360	Li etal. (2021)
N. cavernicola	KUMCC 20-0269	T	China	Cave rock surface	MW545802	–	–	MW550735	MW557596	Liu et al. (2021)
N. chiangmaiensis	MFLUCC 18-0113		Thailand	Dead leaves	–	–	–	MH388404	MH412725	Tibpromma et al. (2018)
N. chrysea	MFLUCC 12-0261	T	China	Pandanus sp.	JX398985	–	–	JX399051	JX399020	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. clavispora	MFLUCC 12-0281	T	China	Magnolia sp.	JX398979	–	–	JX399045	JX399014	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. cocoes	MFLUCC 15-0152		Thailand	Cocos nucifera	KX789687	–	–	KX789689	–	Hyde et al. (2016)
N. coffeae-arabicae	HGUP4019	T	China	Coffea arabica	KF412649	–	–	KF412646	KF412643	Song et al. (2013)
N. cubana	CBS 600.96	T	Cuba	Leaf litter	KM 199347	KM116253	MH554973	KM 199521	KM 199438	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. dendrobii	MFLUCC 14-0106		Thailand	Dendrobium cariniferum	MK993571	–	–	MK975829	MK975835	Ma et al. (2019)
N. drenthii	BRIP 72264a	T	Australia	Macadamia integrifolia	MZ303787	–	–	MZ344172	MZ312680	Prasannath et al. (2021)
N. egyptiaca	CBS 140162	T	Egypt	Mangifera indica	KP943747	–	–	KP943748	KP943746	Crous et al. (2015b)
N. ellipsospora	CBS 115113	T	China	Dead plant material	KM 199343	–	–	KM 199544	KM 199450	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	MFLUCC 12-0283		China	Dead plant material	JX398980	–	–	JX399047	JX399016	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. eucalypticola	CBS 264.37	T	–	Eucalyptus globulus	KM 199376	KM116256	MH554935	KM199551	KM199431	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. eucalyptorum	CBS 147684	T	Portugal	Eucalyptus globulus	MW794108	–	–	MW805397	MW802841	Diogo et al. (2021)
N. foedans	CGMCC 3.9123	T	China	Mangrove plant	JX398987	–	–	JX399053	JX399022	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. formicarum	CBS 362.72	T	Cuba	Plant debris	MH860500	–	–	KM199517	KM 199455	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. guajavae	FMBCC 11.1	T	Pakistan	Psidium guajava	MF783085	–	–	MH460868	MH460871	Ul Haq et al. (2021)
N. guajavicola	FMBCC 11.4	T	Pakistan	Psidium guajava	MH209245	–	–	MH460870	MH460873	Ul Haq et al. (2021)
N. hadrolaeliae	COAD 2637	T	Brazil	Hadrolaelia jongheana	MK454709	–	–	MK465122	MK465120	Freitas et al. (2019)
N. haikouensis	SAUCC212271	T	China	Ilex chinensis	OK087294	–	–	OK104877	OK104870	Zhang et al. (2022)
	SAUCC212272		China	Ilex chinensis	OK087295	–	–	OK104878	OK104871	Zhang et al. (2022)
N. hispanica	CBS 147686	T	Portugal	Eucalyptus globulus	MW794107	–	–	MW805399	MW802840	Diogo et al. (2021)
N. honoluluana	CBS 114495	T	USA	Telopea sp.	KM 199364	–	–	KM 199548	KM199461	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. hydeana	MFLUCC 20-0132	T	Thailand	Artocarpus heterophyllus	MW266069	–	–	MW251129	MW251119	Huanluek et al. (2021)
N. iberica	CBS 147688	T	Portugal	Eucalyptus globulus	MW794111	–	–	MW805402	MW802844	Diogo et al. (2021)
N. iraniensis	CBS 137768		Iran	Fragaria x ananassa	KM074045	–	–	KM074051	KM074056	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
N. javaensis	CBS 257.31	T	Indonesia	Cocos nucifera	KM 199357	–	–	KM 199543	KM 199437	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. longiappendiculata	CBS 147690	T	Portugal	Eucalyptus globulus	MW794112	–	–	MW805404	MW802845	Diogo et al. (2021)
N. lusitanica	CBS 147692	T	Portugal	Eucalyptus globulus	MW794110	–	–	MW805406	MW802843	Diogo et al. (2021)
N. macadamiae	BRIP 63737c	T	New South Wales	Macadamia integrifolia	KX186604	–	–	KX186627	KX186654	Akinsanmi et al. (2017)
N. maddoxii	BRIP 72266a	T	Australia	Macadamia integrifolia	MZ303782	–	–	MZ344167	MZ312675	Prasannath et al. (2021)
N. magna	MFLUCC 12-0652	T	France	Pteridium sp.	KF582795	–	–	KF582791	KF582793	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. mesopotamica	CBS 336.86	T	Iraq	Pinus brutia	KM 199362	KM116271	MH554944	KM 199555	KM199441	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. musae	MFLU 16-1279	T	Thailand	Musa sp.	KX789683	–	–	KX789685	KX789686	Hyde et al. (2016)
N. natalensis	CBS 138.41	T	South Africa	Acacia mollissima	KM199377	–	–	KM 199552	KM 199466	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. nebuloides	BRIP 66617	T	Australia	Sporobolus elongatus	MK966338	–	–	MK977633	MK977632	Crous et al. (2020)
N. olumideae	BRIP 72273a	T	Australia	Macadamia integrifolia	MZ303790	–	–	MZ344175	MZ312683	Prasannath et al. (2021)
N. palmarum	PSHI2004Endo458		Cuba	Zalacca wallichiana	DQ813426	–	–	–	DQ787836	Liu et al. (2010)
	PSHI2004Endo454		Cuba	Roystonea regia	DQ813427	–	–	–	DQ787837	Liu et al. (2010)
N. pandanicola	KUMCC 17-0175		–	Pandanus sp.	–	–	–	MH388389	MH412720	Tibpromma et al. (2018)
N. pemambucana	URM 7148-01	T	Brazil	Vismia guianensis	KJ792466	–	–	KU306739	–	Silvério et al. (2016)
N. perukae	FMBCC 11.3	T	Pakistan	Psidium guajava	MH209077	–	–	MH523647	MH460876	Ul Haq et al. (2021)
N. petila	MFLUCC 17-1738	T	Thailand	Rhizophora mucronata	MK764275	–	–	MK764319	MK764341	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 17-1737		Thailand	Rhizophora mucronata	MK764276	–	–	MK764320	MK764342	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
N. phangngaensis	MFLUCC 18-0119		–	Pandanus sp.	MH388354	–	–	MH388390	MH412721	Tibpromma et al. (2018)
N. piceana	CBS 394.48	T	UK	Picea sp.	KM 199368	–	–	KM199527	KM 199453	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. protearum	CBS 114178	T	Zimbabwe	Leucospermum cuneiforme	JN712498	JN712564	MH554873	LT853201	KM 199463	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. psidii	FMBCC 11.2	T	Pakistan	Psidium guajava	MF783082	–	–	MH460874	MH477870	Ul Haq et al. (2021)
N. rhapidis	GUCC 21501	T	China	Rhododendron simsii	MW931620	–	–	MW980442	MW980441	Yang et al. (2021)
N. rhizophorae	MFLUCC 17-1551	T	Thailand	Rhizophora mucronata	MK764277	–	–	MK764321	MK764343	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 17-1550		Thailand	Rhizophora mucronata	MK764278	–	–	MK764322	MK764344	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
N. rhododendri	GUCC 21504	T	China	Rhododendron simsii	MW979577	–	–	MW980444	MW980443	Yang et al. (2021)
N. rosae	CBS 101057	T	New Zealand	Rosa sp.	KM 199359	KM 116245	MH554850	KM 199524	KM 199430	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 124745		USA	Paeonia suffruticosa	KM 199360	–	–	KM 199524	KM 199430	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CRM-FRC		Mexico	Fragaria x ananassa	MN385718	–	–	MN268532	MN268529	Rebollar-Alviter et al. (2020)
	AC50		Italy	Persea americana	ON117810	–	–	ON107276	ON209165	Alberto et al. (2022)
N. rosicola	CFCC 51992	T	China	Rosa chinensis	KY885239	–	–	KY885243	KY885245	Jiang et al. (2018)
	CFCC 51993		China	Rosa chinensis	KY885240	–	–	KY885244	KY885246	Jiang et al. (2018)
N. samaragenensis	MFLUCC 12-0233	T	Thailand	Syzygium samarangense	KM 199365	–	–	KM 199556	KM 199447	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
N. saprophytica	MFLUCC 12-0282	T	China	Magnolia sp.	KY606286	–	–	JX399048	JX399017	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. scalabiensis	CAA1029	T	Portugal	Vaccinium corymbosum	MW969748			MW959100	MW934611	Santos et al. (2022)
N. sichuanensis	CFCC 54338 = SM15-1	T	China	Castanea mollissima	MW166231	–	–	MW199750	MW218524	Jiang et al. (2021)
	SM15-1C		China	Castanea mollissima	MW166232	–	–	MW199751	MW218525	Jiang et al. (2021)
N. siciliana	AC46		Italy	Persea americana	ON117813	–	–	ON107273	ON209162	Alberto et al. (2022)
	AC48		Italy	Persea americana	ON117812	–	–	ON107274	ON209163	Alberto et al. (2022)
	AC49		Italy	Persea americana	ON117811	–	–	ON107275	ON209164	Alberto et al. (2022)
N. sonneratae	MFLUCC 17-1744	T	Thailand	Sonneronata alba	MK764279	–	–	MK764323	MK764345	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 17-1745		Thailand	Sonneronata alba	MK764280	–	–	MK764324	MK764346	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.1	VRes4		Colombia	Scab disease of Guava	KR493566	–	–	KR493638	–	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.2	BPca2		Colombia	Scab disease of Guava	KR493559	–	–	KR493627	KR493666	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.3	VrleP		Colombia	Scab disease of Guava	KR493520	–	–	KR493660	KR493719	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.4	VTman4		Colombia	Scab disease of Guava	KR493554	–	–	KR493611	KR493724	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.5	BVayr1		Colombia	Scab disease of Guava	KR493545	–	–	KR493629	KR493739	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.6	BRIP 63740a		Australia	Dry flower	KX186617	–	–	KX186628	KX186656	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.7	BRIP 63745a		Australia	Dry flower	KX186614	–	–	KX186633	KX186660	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.8	CBS 119.75		India	Achras sapota	KM 199356	–	–	KM199531	KM 199439	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.9	CM M1363		Brazil	Opuntia stricta	KY549599	–	–	KY549596	KY549634	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.10	LC6489		China	Camellia sp.	KX895020	–	–	KX895239	KX895353	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.11	MFLUCC 12-0614		Midi-pyrénées	Unidentified host	KX816919	–	–	KX816889	KX816947	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.12	MMf0011		Japan	Lilium speciosum	LC184188	–	–	LC184190	LC184189	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.13	SC2A3		China	Tea plant	KU252210	–	–	KU252390	KU252477	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.14	CBS 164.42		France	Sand dune	KM 199367	–	–	KM 199520	KM 199434	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.15	CBS 266.80		India	Vitis vinifera	KM 199352	–	–	KM 199532	–	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.16	CBS 360.61		Guinea	Cinchona sp.	KM 199346	–	–	KM 199522	KM 199440	Kumar et al. (2019)
Neopestalotiopsis sp.17	CBS 361.61		Netherlands	Cissus sp.	KM 199355	–	–	KM 199549	KM 199460	Kumar et al. (2019)
N. steyaertii	IMI 192475		Australia	Eucalyptus viminalis	KF582796	–	–	KF582792	KF582794	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. surinamensis	CBS 450.74	T	Suriname	Soil	KM 199351	KM 116258	MH554962	KM199518	KM 199465	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
N. thailandica	MFLUCC 17-1730	T	Thailand	Rhizophora mucronata	MK764281	–	–	MK764325	MK764347	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
N. umbrinospora	MFLUCC 12-0285	T	China	Dead leaves	JX398984	–	–	JX399050	JX399019	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
N. vaccinii	CAA1059	T	Portugal	Vaccinium corymbosum	MW969747	–	–	MW959099	MW934610	Santos et al. (2022)
N. vacciniicola	CAA1055	T	Portugal	Vaccinium corymbosum	MW969751	–	–	MW959103	MW934614	Santos et al. (2022)
N. versicolor	CBS 303.49		China	Myrica rubra	MH856535	–	–	–	–	Vu et al. (2019)
N. vheenae	BRIP 72293a	T	Australia	Macadamia integrifolia	MZ303792	–	–	MZ344177	MZ312685	Prasannath et al. (2021)
N. vitis	MFLUCC 15-1265		China	Vitis vinifera	KU140694	–	–	KU140676	KU140685	Jayawardena et al. (2016)
N. zakeelii	BRIP 72282a	T	Australia	Macadamia integrifolia	MZ303789	–	–	MZ344174	MZ312682	Prasannath et al. (2021)
N. zimbabwana	CBS H-21769		Zimbabwe	Leucospermum cunciforme	–	JX556249	MH554855	KM 199545	KM 199456	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Nonappendiculata quercina	CBS 116061	T	Italy	Quercus suber	MH553982	MH554199	MH554882	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 270.82		Italy	Quercus pubescens	MH554025	MH554246	MH554937	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Parabartalinia lateralis	CBS 399.71	T	South Africa	Acacia karroo	MH554043	MH554256	MH554954	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Pestalotiopsis abietis	CFCC 53011	T	China	Abies fargesii	MK397013	–	–	MK622277	MK622280	Gu et al. (2021)
	CFCC 53012		China	Abies fargesii	MK397014	–	–	MK622278	MK622281	Gu et al. (2021)
	CFCC 53013		China	Abies fargesii	MK397015	–	–	MK622279	MK622282	Gu et al. (2021)
Pes. adusta	ICMP 6088	T	Fiji	Refrigerator door PVC gasket	JX399006	–	–	JX399070	JX399037	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
	CBS 263.33		Netherlands	Rhododendron ponticum	KM199316	–	–	KM 199489	KM199414	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
Pes. aggestorum	LC6301	T	China	Camellia sinensis	KX895015	–	–	KX895234	KX895348	Liu et al. (2017)
Pes. anacardiacearum	IFRDCC 2397	T	China	Mangifera indica	KC247154	–	–	KC247156	KC247155	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2013b)
Pes. arceuthobii	CBS 433.65		USA	Arceuthobium campylopodum	MH554046	–	–	MH554481	MH554722	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 434.65	T	USA	Arceuthobium campylopodum	KM 199341	–	–	KM199516	KM199427	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. arengae	CBS 331.92	T	Singapore	Arenga undulatifolia	KM 199340	–	–	KM199515	KM 199426	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. australasiae	CBS 114126	T	New Zealand	Knightia sp.	KM 199297	KM116218	MH554867	KM 199499	KM 199409	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 114141		Australia	Protea cv. ’Pink Ice’	KM 199298	–	–	KM199501	KM199410	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. australis	CBS 114193	T	Australia	Grevillea sp.	KM 199332	KM116197	MH554875	KM 199475	KM 199383	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 119350		South Africa	Brabejum stellatifolium	KM 199333	–	–	KM 199476	KM 199384	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	MEAN 1096 = CPC 36750 =		Portugal	Pinus pinea	MT374679	–	–	MT374692	MT374704	Silva et al. (2020)
	CBS 146843
	MEAN 1109		Portugal	Pinus pinea	MT374683	–	–	–	MT374708	Silva et al. (2020)
	MEAN 1110		Portugal	Pinus pinea	MT374684	–	–	MT374696	MT374709	Silva et al. (2020)
	MEAN 1111		Portugal	Pinus pinea	MT374685	–	–	MT374697	MT374710	Silva et al. (2020)
	MEAN 1112		Portugal	Pinus pinea	MT374686	–	–	MT374698	MT374711	Silva et al. (2020)
Pes. biciliata	CBS 124463	T	Slovakia	Platanus x hispanica	KM 199308	–	–	KM 199505	KM 199399	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 236.38		Italy	Paeonia sp.	KM 199309	–	–	KM 199506	KM199401	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	MEAN 1168		Portugal	Pinus pinea	MT374690	–	–	MT374702	MT374715	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. brachiata	LC2988	T	China	Camellia sp.	KX894933	–	–	KX895150	KX895265	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. brassicae	CBS 170.26	T	New Zealand	Brassica napus	KM 199379	–	–	KM 199558	–	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. camelliae	CBS 443.62		Turkey	Camellia sinensis	KM 199336	–	–	KM199512	KM 199424	Zhang et al. (2012b)
	MFLUCC 12-0277	T	China	Camellia japonica	JX399010	–	–	JX399074	JX399041	Zhang et al. (2012b)
Pes. camelliae-oleiferae	CSUFTCC08	T	China	Camellia oleifera	OK493593			OK507963	OK562368	Li et al. (2021)
	CSUFTCC09		China	Camellia oleifera	OK493594			OK507964	OK562369	Li et al. (2021)
	CSUFTCC10		China	Camellia oleifera	OK493595			OK507965	OK562370	Li et al. (2021)
Pes. chamaeropis	CBS 113607		–	–	KM 199325	–	–	KM 199472	KM 199390	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 186.71	T	Italy	Chamaerops humilis	KM 199326	–	–	KM 199473	KM199391	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. chiaroscuro	BRIP 72970	T	Australia	Sporobolus natalensis	OK422510	–	–	–	–	Crous et al. (2022)
Pes. clavata	MFLUCC 12-0268	T	China	Buxus sp.	JX398990	–	–	JX399056	JX399025	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
Pes. colombiensis	CBS 118553	T	Colombia	Eucalyptus eurograndis	KM 199307	–	–	KM 199488	KM 199421	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. digitalis	ICMP 5434	T	New Zealand	Digitalis purpurea	KP781879	–	–	–	KP781883	Liu et al. (2015)
Pes. diploclisiae	CBS 115587	T	Hong Kong, China	Diploclisia glaucescens	KM 199320	–	–	KM 199486	KM199419	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. disseminata	CBS 118552		New Zealand	Eucalyptus botryoides	MH553986	–	–	MH554410	MH554652	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 143904		New Zealand	Persea americana	MH554152	–	–	MH554587	MH554825	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	MEAN 1165		Portugal	Pinus pinea, blighted shoot	MT374687	–	–	MT374699	MT374712	Silva et al. (2020)
	MEAN 1166		Portugal	Pinus pinea, blighted shoot	MT374688	–	–	MT374700	MT374713	Silva et al. (2020)
Pes. distincta	LC3232	T	China	Camellia sinensis	KX894961	–	–	KX895178	KX895293	Silva et al. (2020)
	LC8184		China	Camellia sinensis	KY464138	–	–	KY464148	KY464158	Silva et al. (2020)
Pes. diversiseta	MFLUCC 12-0287	T	China	Rhododendron sp.	JX399009	–	–	JX399073	JX399040	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
Pes. doitungensis	MFLUCC 14-0115	T	Thailand	Dendrobium sp.	MK993574	–	–	MK975832	MK975837	Ma et al. (2019)
Pes. dracaenicola	MFLUCC 18-0913	T	Thailand	Dracaena sp.	MN962731	–	–	MN962732	MN962733	Chaiwan et al. (2020)
Pes. dracontomelonis	MFLUCC 10-0149	T	Thailand	Dracontomelon dao	KP781877	–	–	KP781880	–	Liu et al. (2015)
Pes. ericacearum	IFRDCC 2439	T	China	Rhododendron delavayi	KC537807	–	–	KC537814	KC537821	Zhang et al. (2013b)
Pes. etonensis	BRIP 66615	T	Australia	Sporobolus jacquemontii	MK966339	–	–	MK977635	MK977634	Crous et al. (2020)
Pes. formosana	NTUCC 17-009	T	Taiwan,China	On dead grass	MH809381	–	–	MH809389	MH809385	Ariyawansa & Hyde (2018)
Pes. furcata	MFLUCC 12-0054	T	Thailand	Camellia sinensis	JQ683724	–	–	JQ683740	JQ683708	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2013a)
Pes. gaultheriae	IFRD 411-014	T	China	Gaultheria forrestii	KC537805	–	–	KC537812	KC537819	Zhang et al. (2013)
Pes. gibbosa	NOF3175	T	Canada	Gaultheria shallon	LC311589	–	–	LC311591	LC311590	Watanabe et al. (2018)
Pes. grevilleae	CBS 114127	T	Australia	Grevillea sp.	KM 199300	KM116212	MH554868	KM 199504	KM 199407	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. hawaiiensis	CBS 114491	T	USA	Leucospermum cv. ’Coral’	KM 199339	–	–	KM199514	KM 199428	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. hispanica	CBS 115.391	T	Spain	Protea cv. ’Susara’	MH553981	–	–	MH554399	MH554640	Liu etal. (2019)
Pes. hollandica	CBS 265.33	T	Netherlands	Sciadopitys verticillata	KM 199328	KM 116228	MH554936	KM199481	KM 199388	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	MEAN 1091 = CPC 36745 =		Portugal	Pinus pinea, blighted shoot	MT374678	–	–	MT374691	MT374703	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 146839
Pes. humicola	CBS 115450	T	Hong Kong, China	Ilex cinerea	KM199319	KM 116208	MH554881	KM 199487	KM199418	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 336.97		Papua New Guinea	Soil	KM 199317	–	–	KM 199484	KM 199420	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. hunanensis	CSUFTCC15	T	China	Camellia oleifera	OK493599	–	–	OK507969	OK562374	Li et al. (2021)
	CSUFTCC18		China	Camellia oleifera	OK493600	–	–	OK507970	OK562375	Li et al. (2021)
	CSUFTCC19		China	Camellia oleifera	OK493601	–	–	OK507971	OK562376	Li et al. (2021)
Pes. hydei	MFLUCC 20-0135	T	Thailand	Litsea petiolata	NR_172003	–	–	MW251113	MW251112	Huanluek et al. (2021)
Pes. inflexa	MFLUCC 12-0270	T	China	Unidentified tree	JX399008	–	–	JX399072	JX399039	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
Pes. intermedia	MFLUCC 12-0259	T	China	Unidentified tree	JX398993	–	–	JX399059	JX399028	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
Pes. italiana	MFLUCC 12-0657	T	Italy	Cupressus glabra	KP781878	–	–	KP781881	KP781882	Liu et al. (2015)
Pes. jesteri	CBS 109350	T	Papua New Guinea	Fragraea bodenii	KM 199380	–	–	KM 199554	KM 199468	Strobel et al. (2000)
Pes. jiangxiensis	LC4399	T	China	Camellia sp.	KX895009	–	–	KX895227	KX895341	Liu et al. (2017)
Pes. jinchanghens	LC6636	T	China	Camellia sinensis	KX895028	–	–	KX895247	KX895361	Liu et al. (2017)
Pes. kandelicola	NCYUCC 19-0355		Taiwan,China	Kandelia candel	MT560722	–	–	MT563101	MT563099	Hyde et al. (2020)
	NCYUCC 19-0354		Taiwan,China	Kandelia candel	MT560723	–	–	MT563102	MT563100	Hyde et al. (2020)
Pes. kenyana	CBS 442.67	T	Kenya	Coffea sp.	KM 199302	KM 116234	MH554958	KM 199502	KM 199395	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. knightiae	CBS 114138	T	New Zealand	Knightia sp.	KM199310	KM116227	MH554870	KM 199497	KM 199408	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. leucadendri	CBS 121417	T	South Africa	Leucadendron sp.	MH553987	–	–	MH554412	MH554654	Liu et al. (2019)
Pes. licualicola	HGUP 4057	T	China	Licuala grandis	KC492509	–	–	KC481684	KC481683	Geng et al. (2013)
Pes. linearis	MFLUCC 12-0271	T	China	Trachelospermum sp.	JX398992	–	–	JX399058	JX399027	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
Pes. longiappendiculata	LC3013	T	China	Camellia sinensis	KX894939	–	–	KX895156	KX895271	Liu et al. (2017)
Pes. lushanensis	LC4344	T	China	Camellia sp.	KX895005	–	–	KX895223	KX895337	Liu et al. (2017)
Pes. macadamiae	BRIP 63738b	T	Australia	Macadamia integrifolia	KX186588	–	–	KX186621	KX186680	Akinsanmi et al. (2017)
Pes. malayana	CBS 102220	T	Malaysia	Macaranga triloba	KM 199306	–	–	KM 199482	KM199411	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. monochaeta	CBS 144.97	T	Netherlands	Quercus robur	KM 199327	–	–	KM 199479	KM 199386	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. nanjingensis	CSUFTCC16	T	China	Camellia oleifera	OK493602	–	–	OK507972	OK562377	Li et al. (2021)
	CSUFTCC20		China	Camellia oleifera	OK493603	–	–	OK507973	OK562378	Li et al. (2021)
	CSUFTCC04		China	Camellia oleifera	OK493604	–	–	OK507974	OK562379	Li et al. (2021)
Pes. nanningensis	CSUFTCC10	T	China	Camellia oleifera	OK562371	–	–	OK507966	OK562371	Li et al. (2021)
	CSUFTCC11		China	Camellia oleifera	OK562372	–	–	OK507967	OK562372	Li et al. (2021)
	CSUFTCC12		China	Camellia oleifera	OK562373	–	–	OK507968	OK562373	Li et al. (2021)
Pes. neolitseae	NTUCC 17-011	T	Taiwan,China	Neolitsea villosa	MH809383	–	–	MH809391	MH809387	Ariyawansa & Hyde (2018)
Pes. novae-hollandiae	CBS 130973	T	Australia	Banksia grandis	KM 199337	–	–	KM199511	KM 199425	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. oryzae	CBS 353.69	T	Denmark	Oryza sativa	KM 199299	KM116221	MH554947	KM 199496	KM 199398	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. pallidotheae	MAFF 240993	T	Japan	Pieris japonica	NR111022	–	–	LC311585	LC311584	Watanabe et al. (2010)
Pes. pandanicola	MFLUCC 16-0255	T	Thailand	Pandanus sp.	MH388361	–	–	MH388396	MH412723	Li etal. (2021)
Pes. papuana	CBS 331.96	T	Papua New Guinea	Soil	KM 199321	–	–	KM199491	KM199413	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. parva	CBS 114972		Hong Kong, China	Leaf	MH553980	–	–	MH554397	MH704625	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 278.35	T	–	Leucothoe fontanesiana	KM199313	KM 116205	MH554939	KM 199509	KM 199405	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. photinicola	GZCC 16-0028	T	China	Photinia serrulata	KY092404	–	–	KY047662	KY047663	Chen etal. (2017)
Pes. pini	MEAN 1092 = CPC 36746 =		Portugal	Pinus pinea	MT374680	–	–	MT374693	MT374705	Silva et al. (2020)
	CBS 146840
	MEAN 1094 = CPC 36748 =	T	Portugal	Pinus pinea	MT374681	–	–	MT374694	MT374706	Silva et al. (2020)
	CBS 146841
	MEAN 1095 = CPC 36749 =		Portugal	Pinus pinea	MT374682	–	–	MT374695	MT374707	Silva et al. (2020)
	CBS 146842
	MEAN 1167		Portugal	Pinus pinaster	MT374689	–	–	MT374701	MT374714	Silva et al. (2020)
Pes. pinicola	KUMCC 19-0183	T	China	Pinus armandii	MN412636	–	–	MN417509	MN417507	Tibpromma et al. (2019)
Pes. portugallica	CBS 684.85		New Zealand	Camellia japonica	MH554065	–	–	MH554501	MH554741	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 393.48	T	Portugal	–	KM 199335	KM 116233	MH554951	KM199510	KM 199422	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. rhizophorae	MFLUCC 17-0416	T	Thailand	Rhizophora apiculata	MK764283	–	–	MK764327	MK764349	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
Pes. rhododendri	IFRDCC 2399	T	China	Rhododendron sinogrande	KC537804	–	–	KC537811	KC537818	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
	CBS 144024		Zimbabwe	Pinus sp.	MH554109	–	–	MH554543	MH554782	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
Pes. rhodomyrtus	HGUP 4230	T	China	Rhodomyrtus tomentosa	KF412648	–	–	KF412645	KF412642	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
	LC3413		China	Camellia sinensis	KX894981	–	–	KX895198	KX895313	Norphanphoun et al. (2019)
Pes. rosea	MFLUCC 12-0258	T	China	Pinus sp.	JX399005	–	–	JX399069	JX399036	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
Pes. scoparia	CBS 176.25	T	–	Chamaecyparis sp.	KM 199330	–	–	KM 199478	KM 199393	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. sequoiae	MFLUCC 13-0399	T	Italy	Sequoia sempervirens	KX572339	–	–	–	–	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. shorea	MFLUCC 12-0314	T	Thailand	Shorea obtusa	KJ503811	–	–	KJ503817	KJ503814	Song et al. (2013)
Pestalotiopsis 7 FL 2019	CBS 110326		USA	Pinus sp.	MH553957	–	–	MH554375	MH554616	Silva et al. (2020)
Pestalotiopsis 7 FL 2019	CBS 127.80		Chile	Pinus radiata	MH553995	–	–	MH554422	MH554664	Silva et al. (2020)
Pes. spathulata	CBS 356.86	T	Chile	Guevina avellana	KM 199338	–	–	KM199513	KM 199423	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. spathuliappendiculata	CBS 144035	T	Australia	Phoenix canariensis	MH554172	MH554366	–	MH554607	MH554845	Liu et al. (2019)
Pes. telopeae	CBS 114137		Australia	Protea cv. ’Pink Ice’	KM 199301	–	–	KM 199559	KM 199469	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
	CBS 114161	T	Australia	Telopea sp.	KM 199296	–	–	KM 199500	KM 199403	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. terricola	CBS 141.69	T	Pacific Islands	Soil	MH554004	–	–	MH554438	MH554680	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. thailandica	MFLUCC 17-1616	T	Thailand	Rhizophora apiculata	MK764285	–	–	MK764329	MK764351	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pes. trachycarpicola	IFRDCC 2440	T	China	Trachycarpus fortunei	JQ845947	–	–	JQ845946	JQ845945	Zhang et al. (2012a)
Pes. unicolor	MFLUCC 12-0275		China	Unidentified tree	JX398998	–	–	JX399063	JX399029	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
	MFLUCC 12-0276	T	China	Rhododendron sp.	JX398999	–	–	–	JX399030	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
Pes. verruculosa	MFLUCC 12-0274	T	China	Rhododendron sp.	JX398996	–	–	JX399061	–	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
Pes. cf. verruculosa	CBS 365.54		Netherlands	Chamaecyparis lawsoniana	MH554037	–	–	MH554472	MH554713	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2012)
Pes. yanglingensis	LC3412		China	Camellia sinensis	KX894980	–	–	KX895197	KX895312	Liu et al. (2017)
	LC4553	T	China	Camellia sinensis	KX895012	–	–	KX895231	KX895345	Liu et al. (2017)
Pes. yunnanensis	HMAS 96359	T	China	Podocarpus macrophyllus	AY373375	–	–	–	–	Wei et al. (2013)
Phlogicylindrium eucalypti	CBS 120080	T	Australia	Eucalyptus globulus	NR_132813	DQ923534	MH554893	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Phlogicylindrium eucalyptorum	CBS 120221	T	Australia	Eucalyptus globus	EU040223	MH554204	MH554894	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Phlogicylindrium uniforme	CBS 131312	T	Australia	Eucalyptus globus	JQ044426	JQ044445	MH554910	–	–	Crous et al. (2011a)
Pseudopestalotiopsis cocos	CBS 272.29	T	Indonesia	Cocos nucifera	KM 199378	KM 116276	MH554938	–	–	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pse. elaeidis	CBS 413.62	IT	Nigeria	Elaeis guineensis	MH554044	MH554257	MH554955	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Pse. indica	CBS 459.78	T	India	Rosa sinensis	KM 199381	MH554263	MH554963	–	–	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2014)
Pseudosarcostroma osyridicola	CBS 103.76	T	France	Osyris alba	MH553954	MH554177	MH554851	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Robillarda africana	CBS 122.75	T	South Africa	–	KR873253	KR873281	MH554896	–	–	Crous et al. (2015a)
Rob. australiana	CBS 143882	T	Australia	–	MH554091	MH554301	MH555005	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Rob. roystoneae	CBS 115445	T	Hong Kong, China	Roystonea regia	KR873254	KR873282	MH554880	–	–	Crous et al. (2015a)
Rob. sessilis	CBS 114312	ET	Germany	Dust	KR873256	KR873284	MH554877	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Rob. terrae	CBS 587.71	T	India	Soil	KJ710484	KJ710459	MH554971	–	–	Crous et al. (2015a)
Sarcostroma australiense	CBS 144160	T	Australia	Daviesia latifolia	MH554138	MH554340	MH555044	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Sar. diversiseptatum	CBS 189.81	T	Australia	Correa reflexa	MH554016	MH554236	MH554929	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Sar. grevilleae	CBS 143418		Australia	Grevillea sp.	MH554006	MH554227	MH554922	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Sar. leucospermi	CBS 111290	T	South Africa	Leucospermum cv. ‘High Gold’	MH554081	MH554292	MH554993	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 111309		South Africa	Leucospermum cv. ‘High Gold’	MH554079	MH554290	MH554991	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Sar. longiappendiculatum	CBS 111308		South Africa	Leucospermum cv. ‘High Gold’	MH554080	MH554291	MH554992	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Sar. paragrevilleae	CBS 114142	T	Australia	Grevillea sp.	MH553974	MH554193	MH554871	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Sar. proteae	CBS 113610	T	Australia	Protea magnifica	MH553968	MH554187	MH554862	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 114189		Australia	Protea magnifica	MH553976	MH554195	MH554874	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Sar. restionis	CBS 118153		South Africa	Ischyrolepis cf. sieben	DQ278923	DQ278925	MH554890	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 282.65		UK	Pteridium aquilinum	AB594804	AB593736	MH554940	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 118154	T	South Africa	Restio filiformis	DQ278922	DQ278924	MH554891	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 111311		New Zealand	–	MH553958	MH554180	MH554854	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 114130		South Africa	Leucospermum sp.	MH553973	MH554192	MH554869	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Seimatosporium botan	HMUC-sei-302PD		Chile	Vitis vinifera	JN088482	–	–	–	–	Hatakeyama & Harada (2004)
	NBRC 104200 = H4619	T	Japan	Paeonia suffruticosa	AB594799	AB593731	–	–	LC047770	Hatakeyama & Harada (2004)
Seim, discosioides	NBRC 104201		Canada	Punica granatum	AB594800	AB593732	–	–		Tanaka et al. (2011)
Seim, elegans	NBRC 32674		Japan	Melaleuca ericifolia	AB594801	AB593733	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, eucalypti	CPC 156		South Africa	Eucalyptus smithii	JN871200	JN871209	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, falcatum	CPC 13578		Australia	Eucalyptus sp.	JN871204	JN871213	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, ficeae	MFLUCC 15-0519	T	Italy	Rubus sp.	KR092800	KR920686	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, foliicola	NBRC 32676		Japan	Juniperus phoenicea	AB594802	AB593734	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, germanicum	CBS 437.87	T	Germany	–	MH554047	MH554259	MH554957	MH554482	MH554723	Liu et al. (2019)
Seim, glandigenum	NBRC 32677		Japan	Fagus sylvatica	AB594803	AB593735	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Seim, grevilleae	ICMP 10981		South Africa	Protea sp.	AF405304	AF382372	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, hakeae	NBRC 32678		Japan	Pteridium aquilinum	AB594804	AB593736	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, hypericinum	NBRC 32647		Japan	Hypericum sp.	AB594805	AB593737	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, luteosporum	Napa754		USA	Prunus persica	KY706283	KY706308	–	KY706333	KY706258	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 142599	T	USA	Vitis vinifera	KY706284	KY706309	–	KY706334	KY706259	Liu et al. (2019)
Seim, mariae	NBRC 32681		Japan	Correa reflexa	AB594807	AB593740	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, marivanicum	IRAN 2310CT = CBS 143781	T	Iran	Vitis vinifera	MW361952	MW361960	–	MW375358	MW375352	Moghadam et al. (2022)
	IRAN 2300C = CBS 143780		Iran	Vitis vinifera	MW361951	MW361959	–	MW375357	MW375351	Moghadam et al. (2022)
Seim, obtusum	CPC 12935	T	Australia	Corymbia henryi	JN871206	JN871215	–	–	–	Barber et al. (2011)
Seim, parasiticum	NBRC 32682		Japan	Physocarpus amurensis	AB594808	AB593741	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, pezizoides	71TB		Unknown	Unknown	KF573991	–	–	–	–	Lawrence et al. (2018)
Seim, physocarpi	CBS 139968 =	T	Russia	Physocarpus opulifolius	KT198722	KT198723	MH554917	MH554434	MH554676	Liu et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 14-0625
	CBS 789.68 = NBRC 32682		Netherlands	Physocarpus amurensis	MH554066	MH554278	MH554979	MH554502	MH554742	Liu et al. (2019)
Seim, pistaciae	CBS 138865 = CPC 24455	T	Iran	Pistacia vera	KP004463	KP004491	MH554915	MH554432	MH554674	Crous et al. (2014b)
	CPC 24457		Iran	Pistacia vera	MH554126	MH554331	MH555035	MH554561	MH554799	Crous et al. (2014b)
Seim, pseudorosae	MFLUCC 14-0468	T	Italy	Rosa villosa	–	KU359035	–	–	–	Li et al. (2016)
Seim, quercinum	MFLUCC 14-1198	T	Germany	Quercus robur	KU974965	KU974964	–	–	–	Goonasekara et al. (2016)
Seim, restionis	CBS 118154		South Africa	Restio filiformis	DQ278922	DQ278924	–	–	–	Lawrence et al. (2018)
Seim, rhombisporium	MFLUCC 15-0727	T	Italy	Vaccinium myrtillus	KR092792	KR092780	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016a)
Seim, rosae	CBS 139823 = MFLUCC 14-0621	ET	Russia	Rosa kalmiussica	KT198726	KT198727	LT853153	LT853203	LT853253	Liu et al. (2019)
Seim, soli	CBS 941.69	T	Denmark	Soil	MH554071	MH554282	MH554983	MH554507	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Seim, vitifusiforme	CBS 142600	T	USA	Vitis vinifera	KY706296	KY706321	–	KY706346	KY706271	Lawrence et al. (2018)
	Napa751		USA	Vitis vinifera	KY706289	KY706314	–	KY706339	KY706264	Lawrence et al. (2018)
Seim, vitis	MFLUCC 14-0051	T	Italy	Vitis vinifera	KR920363	KR920362	–	–	–	Senanayake et al. (2015)
Seim, vitis-viniferae	CBS 123004	T	Spain	Vitis vinifera	MH553992	MH554211	MH554901	MH554418	MH554660	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 116499		Iran	Vitis vinifera	MH553984	MH554201	MH554884	MH554402	MH554643	Liu et al. (2019)
Seim, walken	CPC 17644		Australia	Eucalyptus sp.	JN871207	JN871216	–	–	–	Barber et al. (2011)
Seiridium aquaticum	MFLUCC 17-0474	T	China	Decaying wood	MK828605	–	–	–	–	Luo et al. (2019)
	S-136		China	Decaying wood	MK828606	–	–	–	–	Luo et al. (2019)
Seir. camelliae	MFLUCC 12-0647	T	China	Camellia reticula	JQ683725	–	–	JQ683741	JQ683709	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2015)
Seir. cancrinum	CBS 226.55 = IMI 052256	T	Kenya	Cupressus macrocarpa	LT853089	MH554241	LT853137	LT853186	LT853236	Bonthond et al. (2018)
	CBS 907.85		South Africa	Cupressus lustinaca	LT853090	–	LT853138	LT853187	LT853237	Bonthond et al. (2018)
Seir. Cardinale	CBS 909.85	T	South Africa	Cupressus lustinaca	LT853064	–	LT853113	LT853161	LT853211	Marin-Felix et al. (2019)
	CBS 910.85		South Africa	Cupressus sempervirens	LT853065	–	LT853114	LT853162	LT853212	Marin-Felix et al. (2019)
	CBS 523.82		New Zealand	Cupressocyparis sp.	LT853062	–	LT853111	LT853159	LT853209	Marin-Felix et al. (2019)
Seir. ceratosporum	PHSI2001Pathcw07		China	Vitis vinifera	AY687314	–	–	–	–	Jiang et al. (2019)
Seir. chinense	CFCC 53031	T	China	Trachycarpus fortunei	MK353158	–	MK351796	MK351799	MK351802	Jiang et al. (2019)
	CFCC 53032		China	Trachycarpus fortunei	MK353159	–	MK351797	MK351800	MK351803	Jiang et al. (2019)
	CFCC 53033		China	Trachycarpus fortunei	MK353160	–	MK351798	MK351801	MK351804	Jiang et al. (2019)
Seir. cupressi	CBS 122616		Greece	Cupressus sp.	LT853082	–	LT853130	LT853179	LT853229	Jiang et al. (2019)
	CBS 224.55 = IMI 052254	ET	Kenya	Cupressus macrocarpa	LT853083	–	LT853131	LT853180	LT853230	Jiang et al. (2019)
Seir. eucalypti	CBS 343.97	ET	Australia	Eucalyptus delegatensis	LT853099	MH554251	LT853146	LT853196	LT853246	Jiang et al. (2019)
Seir. kartense	CBS 142629 = CPC 20183	T	Australia	Eucalyptus cladocalyx	LT853100	–	LT853147	LT853197	LT853247	Bonthond et al. (2018)
Seir. kenyanium	CBS 228.55 = IMI 052257	T	Kenya	Juniperus procera	LT853098	MH554242	LT853145	LT853195	LT853245	Jiang et al. (2019)
Seir. marginatum	CBS 140403	ET	France	Rosa canina	KT949914	MH554223	LT853149	LT853199	LT853249	Jaklitsch et al. (2016)
Seir. neocupressi	CBS 142625 = CPC 23786	T	Italy	Cupressus sempervirens	LT853079	MH554329	LT853127	LT853176	LT853226	Bonthond et al. (2018)
	CBS 142626		Italy	Cupressus sempervirens	LT853080	–	LT853128	LT853177	LT853227	Bonthond et al. (2018)
Seir. papillatum	CBS 340.97 = VPRI 20827	T	Australia	Eucalyptus delegatensis	LT853102	DQ414531	LT853150	LT853200	LT853250	Jiang et al. (2019)
Seir. pezizoides	CBS 145115		Italy	Vitis vinifera	MK079342	–	MK058475	MK058480	MK058485	Marin-Felix et al. (2019)
Seir. phylicae	CBS 133587 = CPC 19964	T	Tristan da Cunha	Phylica arborea	LT853091	–	LT853139	LT853188	–	Crous et al. (2012)
	CPC 19962		Tristan da Cunha	Phylica arborea	LT853092	–	LT853140	LT853189	–	Crous et al. (2012)
Seir. podocarpi	CBS 137995	T	South Africa	Podocarpus latifolus	LT853101	–	LT853148	LT853198	LT853248	Crous et al. (2014a)
Seir. pseudocardinale	MFLUCC 13-0525		Italy	Cupressus arizonica	KU848210	–	–	–	–	Wijayawardene et al. (2016b)
	CBS 122613 = CMW 1648		Portugal	Cupressus sp.	LT853096	MH554206	LT853143	LT853193	LT853243	Wijayawardene et al. (2016b)
Seir. rosarum	MFLUCC 17-0654	T	Italy	Rosa sp.	MG828961	–	–	–	–	Wanasinghe et al. (2018)
Seir. spyridicola	CBS 142628	T	Australia	Spyridium globosum	LT853095	–	LT853142	LT853192	LT853242	Bonthond et al. (2018)
Seir. unicorne	CBS 120306		South Africa	Cupressus sempervirens	LT853087	–	LT853135	LT853184	LT853234	Bonthond et al. (2018)
	CBS 538.82 = NBRC 32684	T	New Zealand	Cryptomeria japonica	LT853088	MH554269	LT853136	LT853185	LT853235	Bonthond et al. (2018)
Seir. venetum	MFLU 14-0265	T	Italy	Cornus mas	KT438836	–	–	–	KT438837	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2015)
Sporocadus biseptatus	CBS 110324 = MYC 754	T	–	–	MH553956	MH554179	MH554853	MH554374	MH554615	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. cornicola	CBS 143889 = CPC 23235		Germany	Cornus sanguinea	MH554121	MH554326	MH555029	MH554555	MH554794	Liu et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 14-0448	T	Italy	Cornus sanguinea	KU974967	–	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. cornii	MFLUCC 14-0467	T	Italy	Cornus sp.	KT162918	KR559739	–	–	–	Moghadam et al. (2022)
Spo. cotini	CBS 139966 =	T	Russia	Cotinus coggygria	MH554003	MH554222	MH554916	MH554433	MH554675	Liu et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 14-0623
Spo. incanus	CBS 123003	T	Spain	Prunus dulcis	MH553991	MH554210	MH554900	MH554417	MH554659	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. italicus	MFLUCC 14-1196	T	Italy	Crategus sp.	MF614829	MF614829	–	–	–	Moghadam et al. (2022)
Spo. kurdistanicus	IRAN 2356C = CBS 143778	T	Iran	Vitis vinifera	MW361950	MW361958	–	MW375356	MW375350	Moghadam et al. (2022)
	IRAN 2355C		Iran	Vitis vinifera	MW361949	–	–	–	–	Moghadam et al. (2022)
	IRAN 2354C		Iran	Vitis vinifera	MW361948	MW361957	–	MW375355	MW375349	Moghadam et al. (2022)
	IRAN 2313C = CBS 143777		Iran	Vitis vinifera	MW361947	MW361956	–	MW375354	MW375348	Moghadam et al. (2022)
Spo. lichenicola	CBS 354.90 = NBRC 32677		Germany	Fagus sylvatica	MH554035	MH554252	MH554948	MH554470	MH554711	Liu et al. (2019)
	CPC 24528		Germany	Juniperus communis	MH554127	MH554332	MH555036	MH554562	MH554800	Liu et al. (2019)
	NBRC 32625 = IMI 079706	ET	UK	Rosa canina	MH883643	MH883646	MH883647	MH883644	MH883645	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. mali	CBS 446.70	T	Netherlands	Malus sylvestris	MH554049	MH554261	MH554960	MH554484	MH554725	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. microcyclus	CBS 424.95	T	Germany	Sorbus aria	MH554045	MH554258	MH554956	MH554480	MH554721	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 887.68 = NBRC 32680		Netherlands	Ribes sp.	MH554068	MH554280	MH554981	MH554504	MH554744	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. multiseptatus	CBS 143899 = CPC 26606	T	Serbia	Viburnum sp.	MH554141	MH554343	MH555047	MH554576	MH554814	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. pseudocorni	MFLU 13-0529	T	Italy	Cornus sp.	–	KU359033	–	–	–	Moghadam et al. (2022)
Spo. rosarum	CBS 113832 = UPSC2172		Sweden	Rosa canina	MH553970	MH554189	MH554864	MH554388	MH554629	Liu et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 15-0563	T	Italy	Rosa canina	MG828960	MG829071	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 14-0466	T	Italy	Rosa canina	KT284775	KT281912	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. rosigena	CBS 116498		Iran	Vitis vinifera	MH553983	MH554200	MH554883	MH554401	MH554642	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 129166 = MSCL 860		Latvia	Rhododendron	MH553996	MH554215	MH554905	MH554423	MH554665	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 182.50		Netherlands	Pyrus communis	MH554013	MH554233	MH554926	MH554447	MH554689	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 250.49		Netherlands	Rubus fruticosus	MH554023	MH554245	MH554934	MH554457	MH554699	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 466.96		Netherlands	Rubus sp.	MH554052	MH554265	MH554965	MH554487	MH554728	Liu et al. (2019)
	MFLU 16-0239	T	Italy	Rosa canina	MG828958	MG829069	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. rotundatus	CBS 616.83	T	Canada	Arceuthobium pussilum	MH554060	MH554273	MH554974	MH554496	MH554737	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. sorbi	CBS 160.25		–	–	MH554008	MH554229	MH554924	MH554442	MH554684	Liu et al. (2019)
	MFLUCC 14-0469	T	Italy	Sorbus torminalis	KT284774	KT281911	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Spotocadus sp.	CBS 506.71		Italy	Euphorbia sp.	MH554055	MH554268	MH554968	MH554490	MH554731	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. trimorphus	CBS 114203 = UPSC2430	T	Sweden	Rosa canina	MH553977	MH554196	MH554876	MH554395	MH554636	Liu et al. (2019)
Strickeria kochii	CBS 140411	ET	Austria	Robinia pseudoacacia	NR_154423	KT949918	MH554920	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Synnemapestaloides juniperi	CBS 477.77	T	France	Juniperus phoenicea	MH554053	MH554266	MH554966	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Syn. rhododendri	MAFF 239201	T	Japan	Rhododendron brachycarpum	LC047753	LC047744	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	MAFF 243052		Japan	Rhododendron brachycarpum	LC047757	LC047748	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Truncatella angustata	CBS 398.71		Turkey	Soil	MH554042	MH554255	MH554953	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 231.77		Turkey	Gossypium sp.	MH554021	MH554243	MH554932	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CPC 21354		France	Vitis vinifera cv. ‘Prunelard’	MH554111	MH554317	MH555020	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 642.97		Switzerland	Heterodera carotae	MH554061	MH554274	MH554975	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 393.80		Chile	Gevuina avellana	MH554041	MH554254	MH554952	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 938.70		Netherlands	Prunus laurocerasus	MH554070	MH554281	MH554982	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 356.33		–	Prunus sp.	MH554036	MH554253	MH554949	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 144025	NT	France	Vitis vinifera cv. ‘Prunelard	MH554112	MH554318	MH555021	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 338.32		Netherlands	Lupinus sp.	MH554033	MH554250	MH554945	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 165.25		–	Prunus armeniaca	MH554010	MH554231	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
undetermined sp. 1	CBS 113991		Sweden	Salix caprea	MH553971	MH554190	MH554865	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
undetermined sp. 2	CBS 387.77		Finland	Skin of man	MH554040	KM 116277	MH554950	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
Xenoseimatosporium quercinum	MFLUCC 14-1198	T	Germany	Quercus robur	NR_155804	NG_059681	–	–	–	Liu et al. (2019)
	CBS 129171			Rhododendron sp.	MH553997	MH554216	MH554906	–	–	Liu et al. (2029)

¹ BRIP: Queensland Plant Pathology Herbarium, Australia; CBS: Culture collection of the Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands; CFCC: China Forestry Culture Collection Center, China; CMW: Culture Collection of the Forestry and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute (FABI), University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa; CPC: Culture collection of Pedro Crous, housed at the Westerdijk Institute; HGUP: Plant Pathology Herbarium of Guizhou University; HHUF: herbarium of Hirosaki University; HKUCC: The University of Hong Kong Culture Collection; HPC: Herbarium of Pedro Crous, housed at the Westerdijk Institute; ICMP: International Collection of Micro-organisms from Plants, Landcare Research, Private Bag 92170, Auckland, New Zealand; IFRDCC: International Fungal Research and Development Culture Collection; IMI: International Mycological Institute, CABI-Bioscience, Egham, Bakeham Lane, United Kingdom; LC: working collection of Lei Cai, housed at the Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China; MAFF: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan; MEAN: culture collection of INIAV Institute, Oeiras, Portugal; MFLUCC: Mae Fah Luang University Culture Collection; NOF: The Fungus Culture Collection of the Northern Forestry Centre, Alberta, Canada; MSCL: Microbial Strain Collection of Latvia; NBRC: Biological Resource Center; NTUCC: National Taiwan University Culture Collection, Taiwan; UPSC: Uppsala University Culture Collection of Fungi, Sweden; VPRI: Victorian Plant Disease Herbarium, Australia.

² Status: status of the strains. ET: ex-epitype; IT: ex-isotype; NT: ex-neotype; R: reference strain; ST: ex-syntype; T: ex-type.

³ MFLUCC 15-0563: Type of Seimatosporium rosigenum, MFLUCC 14-0466: Type of Seimatosporium pseudorosarum.

Seven phylogenetic analyses were conducted based on both individual and combined loci for one family (Sporocadaceae) and six genera (Monochaetia, Neopestalotiopsis, Pestalotiopsis, Seimatosporium, Seiridium and Sporocadus). Maximum Parsimony (MP) was used to construct phylogenies using PAUP v. 4.0b10 (Swofford 2003), Maximum Likelihood (ML) was executed in RAxML (Dean et al. 2014) implemented in raxmlGUI v. 1.5b1 (Silvestro & Michalak 2012) and MrBayes v. 3.1.2 was used for Bayesian analyses (BA) (Huelsenbeck & Ronquist 2001).

Trees were visualised with FigTree v. 1.4.0 (http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uksoftware/figtree/), and additional layout was done with Adobe Illustrator CS v. 5. Maximum-likelihood bootstrap values (MLBP) and Maximum-parsimony bootstrap values (MPBP) equal or greater than 50 % are provided for each tree. Bayesian posterior probabilities (BYPP) > 0.90 are indicated as thickened lines.

Prevalence

To determine the prevalence of Sporocadaceae genera and species on Rosa spp. and plant parts (branches, fruits, leaves or spines), the Isolation Rate (RI) was calculated for each species with the formula: RI % = (NS / NI) × 100, where NS was the number of isolates from the same genera or species, and NI was the total number of isolates from each Rosa sp. or plant part. The overall RI was calculated using the NI value equal to the total number of isolates obtained from Rosa plants (Vieira et al. 2014, Fu et al. 2019, Guo et al. 2020).

RESULTS

Phylogenetic analyses

The concatenated DNA sequence dataset (ITS, LSU and RPB2) was used to infer delimitation at the family level. The concatenated alignment had a total length of 2419 characters including alignment gaps (659 for ITS, 890 for LSU and 832 for RPB2). Of these, 1 401 characters were constant, 144 variable characters were parsimony-uninformative and 874 characters were parsimony informative. The ML search resolved a best tree with an InL of -36418.696700. The BA lasted for 1 855 000 generations and the 50 % consensus tree and posterior probabilities were calculated from 2 784 trees from two runs. The ML tree confirmed the same tree topology and the clades as those presented in the Bayesian phylogeny (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2.

Phylogenetic tree of Sporocadaceae (50 % majority rule consensus) based on maximum likelihood (ML) analysis of the combined LSU, ITS and RPB2 sequence alignment. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Bayesian posterior probabilities. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Genera in this study are delimited in coloured boxes and isolates collected in this study are in bold. Ex-type strains are represented in bold.

Following alignment of Monochaetia, the ITS sequence data with a total of 599 characters including gaps, of which 496 characters were constant, 15 variable characters were parsimony uninformative, and 88 characters were variable and parsimony informative. The parsimony analysis resulted in 1 000 equally parsimonious trees, one of which is in Fig. 3 (CI = 0.780, RI = 0.887, RC = 0.692, HI = 0.220). The topology of the phylogenetic trees generated from the MP, ML and BA methods were congruent.

Fig. 3.

Phylogenetic tree of Monochaetia resulting from maximum likelihood (ML) analysis of the ITS sequence alignment. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Ex-type strains are represented in bold; strains obtained in the current study in blue. The flower symbol represents species that have been recorded from Rosa.

In the phylogenetic tree constructed for Neopestalotiopsis and Pestalotiopsis, sequences of the combined ITS, TEF and TUB were aligned. In Neopestalotiopsis, the alignment comprises 2 263 characters including alignment gaps after alignment (580 for ITS, 592 for TEF and 787 for TUB). Of these, 1647 characters were constant, 383 variable characters were parsimonyuninformative and 233 characters were parsimony informative. The MP analysis resulted in a single equally most parsimonious tree (CI = 0.672, RI = 0.659, RC = 0.442, HI = 0.328). In Pestalotiopsis, the alignment comprises 2 183 characters including alignment gaps after alignment (590 for ITS, 670 for TEF and 909 for TUB), of which 1165 characters were constant, 384 variable characters were parsimony-uninformative and 634 characters were parsimony informative. The MP analysis resulted in a single equally most parsimonious tree (CI = 0.565, RI = 0.845, RC = 0.478, HI = 0.435). MP was similar to the topology from ML and BA (Fig. 4, 5).

Fig. 4.

The best Maximum Likelihood tree from the multi-gene alignment (ITS, TUB and TEF) for the Neopestalotiopsis. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Ex-type strains are represented in bold; strains obtained in the current study in blue. The flower symbol represents species that have been recorded from Rosa.

Fig. 5.

The best Maximum Likelihood tree from the multi-gene alignment (ITS, TUB and TEF) for the Pestalotiopsis. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Ex-type strains are represented in bold; strains obtained in the current study in blue. The flower symbol represents species that have been recorded from Rosa.

In Seimatosporium, the combined ITS + LSU dataset had an aligned length of 1495 characters in the dataset (601 for ITS and 887 for LSU), of which 1 181 characters are constant, 118 are variable and parsimony-uninformative, and 196 are parsimony informative. Maximum Parsimony analysis yielded 750 equally parsimonious trees (CI = 0.674, RI = 0.738, RC = 0.497, HI = 0.326), and a strict consensus tree is shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6.

The best Maximum Likelihood tree from the multi-gene alignment (ITS and LSU) for the Seimatosporium. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Ex-type strains are represented in bold; strains obtained in the current study in blue. The flower symbol represents species that have been recorded from Rosa.

In Seiridium, the combined ITS, RPB2, TEF and TUB dataset consists of 2 897 characters including alignment gaps (598 for ITS, 818 for RPB2, 606 for TEF and 829 for TUB), of which 1 637 are constant, 454 are variable parsimony uninformative characters and 806 are parsimony-informative characters. The MP analysis resulted in a single equally most parsimonious tree (CI = 0.664, RI = 0.689, RC = 0.457, HI = 0.336) (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7.

The best Maximum Likelihood tree from the multi-gene alignment (ITS, RPB2, TEF and TUB) for the Seiridium. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Ex-type strains are represented in bold; strains obtained in the current study in blue. The flower symbol represents species that have been recorded from Rosa.

In Sporocadus, the combined sequences of ITS, LSU, RPB2, TEF and TUB were aligned. The combined data comprises 3619 characters including alignment gaps (566 for ITS, 900 for LSU, 869 for RPB2, 496 for TEF and 760 for TUB). Of these, 2 671 characters were constant, 263 variable characters were parsimony-uninformative and 685 characters were parsimony informative. The MP analysis resulted in a single equally most parsimonious tree (CI = 0.657, RI = 0.808, RC = 0.531, HI = 0.343) (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8.

The best Maximum Likelihood tree from the multi-gene alignment (ITS, LSU, RPB2, TEF and TUB) for the Sporocadus. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Ex-type strains are represented in bold; strains obtained in the current study in blue. The flower symbol represents species that have been recorded from Rosa.

All the MP analyses resulted in a tree with the same topology and terminal clades as the ML and BA trees. The new species from the present study appeared in distinct clades with high bootstrap support.

Taxonomy

Based on the morphology and multi-locus phylogeny, 126 isolates were assigned to 15 species belonging to six genera in Sporocadaceae, including 11 species newly described below.

Monochaetia rosarum C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843811; Fig. 9

Fig. 9.

Monochaetia rosarum (BJFC-S1877, holotype). a. Disease symptoms; b–c. habit of conidiomata on branch; d. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); e. longitudinal section through conidioma; f. conidiomata on PDA; g–i. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; k. conidia. — Scale bars: b–c, e = 50 μm; f = 200 μm; g–k = 10 μm.

Etymology. The species epithet reflects the name of the host plant genus Rosa.

Typus. China, Henan Province, Nanyang City, Neixiang county, Baotianman Nature Reserve, N33°29'29" E111°55'50", alt. 1311 m, on branches of R. chinensis, 7 Aug. 2020, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (holotype BJFC-S1877, ex-type culture CFCC 55172 = ROC 099).

Symptoms appeared as circular to irregular, red or dark brown and raised, dehiscent lesions on twigs and branches (Fig. 9b–c). Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata visible on the host, globose or irregular, superficial to semiimmersed, scattered or aggregated, black or red, 76–118 μm diam. Conidiophores septate and branched, hyaline, smooth-walled or verruculose. Conidiogenous cells annellidic, discrete or integrated, cylindrical, subcylindrical, hyaline or pale brown, smooth, 6.5–14(–15) × (1–)1.5–2 μm (av. = 10.7 ± 2.84 × 1.7 ± 0.26 μm). Conidia fusoid, straight or slightly curved, 4-septate, wall smooth, not constricted at the septa, (17.5–)18–20(–21) × 5–6(–7) μm (av. = 19.5 ± 0.95 × 5.4 ± 0.37 μm); basal cell obconic with or without truncate base, thin-walled, hyaline, 2.5–3(–3.5) μm (av. = 2.6 ± 0.27 μm) long; three median cells, doliiform or subcylindrical, mid-brown, thick-walled, the first median cell from base (3–)3.5–5 μm (av. = 4.2 ± 0.42 μm) long, the second cell (2.5–)3–3.5(–4.5) μm (av. = 3.4 ± 0.27 μm) long, the third cell (3–)3.5–4(–5) μm (av. = 3.7 ± 0.36 μm) long, together (10.5–)11.5–12.5(–13) μm (av. = 12.1 ± 0.47 μm) long; apical cell conic with an acute apex, thin-walled, hyaline, 2–2.5(–3) μm (av. = 2.4 ± 0.31 μm) long; apical appendage single, tubular, attenuated, unbranched, variously bent; (8–)9–12(–12.5) μm (av. = 10.8 ± 1.36 μm) long; basal appendage single, unbranched, centric, 4.5–6(–6.5) μm (av. = 5.5 ± 0.48 μm); mean conidium length/width ratio = 3.25 : 1.

Culture characteristics — On PDA, colonies slowly growing, up to 10 mm diam after 3 d and reaching 38–40 mm after 15 d, white to pale grey with a uniform texture, with an irregular margin, lacking aerial mycelium, becoming greyish and yellowish after 30 d, reverse yellowish brown. Conidiomata globose, distributed irregularly on the medium surface, exuding globose, dark brown to black conidial masses.

Additional materials examined. China, Henan Province, Nanyang City, Neixiang county, Baotianman Nature Reserve, N33°29'68" E111°55'16", alt. 1329 m, on branches of R. chinensis, 7 Aug. 2020, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (BJFC-S1878, cultures CFCC 55173 = ROC 100, ROC 98, ROC 101).

Notes — Monochaetia rosarum forms an independent clade and is phylogenetically distinct from M. kansensis (Fig. 3). Monochaetia rosarum can be distinguished from M. kansensis in ITS loci by 13 bp differences (from 561 characters, with 97.6 % sequence identity, including 3 bp gaps). In addition, M. rosarum differs from M. kansensis in producing thinner conidia (5–6 μmvs 6–8 μm). Furthermore, the apical and basal appendages of M. rosarum are significantly shorter than those of M. kansensis (9–12 μm vs 15–26 μm and 4.5–6 μm vs 10–38 μm).

Four Monochaetia species have been reported from Rosa spp., i.e., M. concentrica, M. rosae-caninae, M. seiridioides and M. turgida (Guba 1961, Tai 1979, Nag Raj 1993, Chen 2003). These four species are easily distinguishable from our new species based on conidial dimensions. Monochaetia concentrica and M. seiridioides have longer conidia than M. rosarum (20–26 μm vs 18–20 μm and 26–28 μm vs 18–20 μm). Monochaetia turgida has wider conidia than M. rosarum (7.6–8.3 μm vs 5–6 μm).

Although M. rosarum and M. rosae-caninae have similar conidial width (5–6 μm vs 5–7 μm), the conidia of M. rosarum is significantly longer than those of M. rosae-caninae (18–20 μm vs 16–18 μm). In addition, M. rosarum is similar to M. camelliae in conidial dimensions (18–20 × 5–6 μm vs 18–20 × 4–7 μm), the latter having been previously reported from Camellia, Eucalyptus and Peltophorum. However, based on the combined gene phylogenetic analysis, M. rosarum is separated from M. camelliae and the apical appendages of M. rosarum are shorter than those of M. camelliae (9–12 μm vs 12–14 μm).

Key to Monochaetia species on Rosa spp.

• 1. Conidial length more than 20 μm 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

• 1. Conidial length less than 20 μm 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

• 2. Conidia 20–26 × 6.5–8.5 μm, apical appendage 15 μm long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M. concentrica

• 2. Conidia 26–28 × 6–7 μm, apical appendage 12 μm long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .M. seiridioides

• 3. Conidial width more than 8 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . M. turgida

• 3. Conidial width less than 8 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

• 4. Conidia 16–18 × 5–7 μm . . . . . . . . . . . .M. rosae-caninae

• 4. Conidia 18–20 × 5–6 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .M. rosarum

Neopestalotiopsis concentrica C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843813; Fig. 10

Fig. 10.

Neopestalotiopsis concentrica (BJFC-S1882, holotype). a–b. Appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; c. conidiomata on PDA; d. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); e–l. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; m. conidia. — Scale bars: c = 200 μm; e–l = 10 μm.

Etymology. Name refers to the concentric circles formed by colonies on PDA.

Typus. China, Henan Province, Xinyang City, Jigong Mountain, N31°49'3" E114°4'33", alt. 717 m, on spines of R. rugosa, 6 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (holotype BJFC-S1882, ex-type culture CFCC 55162 = ROC 053).

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata globose or irregular, superficial to semi-immersed, scattered or aggregated, visible as black acervuli on the host, 93–117 μm diam. Conidiophores often reduced to conidiogenous cells. Conidiogenous cells discrete, ampulliform or irregular, variable in size, (3–)3.5–14.5(–15) × 3–5(–5.5) μm (av. = 7.8 ± 4.96 × 4.0 ± 1.21 μm), hyaline to subhyaline. Conidia fusoid, ellipsoid, straight to slightly curved, 4-septate, 14–18.5(–19) × 4.5–5(–6) μm (av. = 15.7 ± 1.06 × 4.9 ± 0.69 μm); basal cell conic to obconic with a truncate base, hyaline and thin-walled, 3–3.5(–4.0) μm (av. = 4.3 ± 0.21 μm) long; three median cells doliiform, (9–)9.5–10.5(–11) μm (av. = 10.0 ± 0.96 μm) long, wall rugose, versicoloured, septa darker than the rest of the cell, second cell from the base pale brown, 3–3.5 μm (av. = 3.3 ± 0.28 μm) long; third cell honey brown, 3–4 μm (av. = 3.74 ± 0.44 μm) long; fourth cell brown, 3–3.5 μm (av. = 3.1 ± 0.31 μm) long; apical cell (2.5–)3–3.5(–4) μm (av. = 3.4 ± 0.86 μm) long, hyaline, cylindrical, thinand smooth-walled; with 2–3 tubular apical appendages (mostly three), branched or unbranched, filiform, 19–26(–26.5) μm (av. = 22.6 ± 2.14 μm) long; basal appendage single, tubular, unbranched, centric, (3–)3.5–5.5(–6.0) μm (av. = 4.1 ± 0.95 μm) long.

Culture characteristics — Colony on PDA with flattened mycelium, white, smoke grey in the centre, reverse with smoke grey pigments formed a concentric ring pattern, reaching at 58–62 mm diam in 15 d at 28 °C. Conidiomata globose, irregularly distributed on the medium surface, exuding globose, dark brown to black conidial masses.

Additional materials examined. China, Henan Province, Xinyang City, Jigong Mountain, N31°49'1" E114°4'12", alt. 723 m, on spines of R. chinensis, 6 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1883, living culture CFCC 55163 = ROC 064, ROC 135, ROC 136); Henan Province, Nanyang City, Xinyang City, Shihe District, N31°49'8" E114°3'58", alt. 727 m, on spines of R. chinensis, 6 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1884, cultures ROC 137, ROC 138, ROC 140, ROC 141, ROC 142).

Notes — This species is most closely related to N. ellipsospora, N. rhapidis and N. samarangensis (Fig. 4), but distinguished from N. ellipsospora by 15 bp difference in the concatenated alignment (two in the ITS region (482/484, 99.5 % with no gaps), nine TEF (531/540, 98.3 % with four gaps) and four TUB (436/440, 99.0 % with four gaps)), from N. rhapidis by 13 bp difference (six in the ITS region (507/513, 98.8 % with no gaps), three TEF (499/502, 99.4 % with three gaps) and four TUB (743/747, 99.4 % with no gaps)) and from N. samarangensis by 12 bp difference (three in the ITS region (481/484, 99.3 % with two gaps), three TEF (537/540, 99.4 % with three gaps) and six TUB (434/440, 98.6 % with no gaps)). Moreover, N. concentrica differs from these two species in morphology, namely by having longer apical appendages than N. ellipsospora (19–26 μm vs 5–12 μm), N. rhapidis (19–26 μm vs 11–16 μm) and N. samarangensis (19–26 μm vs 12–18 μm). However, its conidia are shorter than those of N. ellipsospora (14–18.5 μm vs 19–25 μm), N. rhapidis (14–18.5 μm vs 22–25.5 μm) and N. samarangensis (14–18.5 μm vs 18–21 μm).

Neopestalotiopsis concentrica is phylogenetically and morphologically distinct from N. clavispora, N. palmarum, N. rosae, N. rosicola and N. versicolor, which were previously also reported from Rosa (Liu et al. 2010, Feng et al. 2014, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Jiang et al. 2018, Vu et al. 2019). Its conidia are smaller than N. clavispora (14–18.5 × 4.5–5 μm vs 20–24 × 6.5–8.5 μm), N. palmarum (14–18.5 × 4.5–5 μm vs 19–23.6 × 5.6–6.6 μm), N. rosae (14–18.5 × 4.5–5 μm vs 22–37 × 7.5–9.5 μm), N. rosicola (14–18.5 × 4.5–5 μm vs 20.2–25.5 × 5.5–8 μm) and N. versicolor (14–18.5 × 4.5–5 μm vs 21.2–28.3 × 7.1–8.3 μm).

Neopestalotiopsis subepidermalis C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843812; Fig. 11

Fig. 11.

Neopestalotiopsis subepidermalis (BJFC-S1879, holotype). a. Appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; b. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); c. conidiomata on PDA; d–g. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; h. conidia. — Scale bars: c = 200 μm; d–h = 10 μm.

Etymology. Referring to the conidioma occurring under the epidermis of spines, not breaking through the epidermis.

Typus. China, Henan Province, Xinyang City, Jigong Mountain, N31°49'15" E114°3'31", alt. 163.4 m, on spines of R. rugosa, 5 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (holotype BJFC-S1879, ex-type culture CFCC 55160 = ROC 161, ROC 162).

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata globose or irregular, superficial to semi-immersed, scattered or aggregated, visible as black acervuli on the host, 80–122 μm diam. Conidiophores septate, branched, subcylindrical, hyaline to subhyaline, often reduced to conidiogenous cells. Conidiogenous cells discrete, collarette present and not flared, cylindrical, hyaline to subhyaline, (5.5–)6–18(–18.5) Sexual morph not observed. 3–5 μm (av. = 11.2 ± 2.90 × 3.8 ± 0.60 μm). Conidia fusoid, ellipsoid, straight to slightly curved, 4-septate, (19.5–)20–25(–26) × 7.5–9(–9.5) μm (av. = 22.6 ± 2.10 × 8.4 ± 0.95 μm); basal cell conic to obconic with a truncate base, hyaline and thin-walled, 4.0–5.5 μm (av. = 4.6 ± 0.64 μm) long; three median cells doliiform, 14–16 μm (av. = 15.0 ± 1.06 μm) long, wall rugose, versicoloured, septa darker than the rest of the cell, second cell from the base pale brown, (4.5–)5–6 μm (av. = 5.7 ± 0.44 μm) long; third cell honey brown, (4.5–)5–6 μm (av. = 5.4 ± 0.36 μm) long; fourth cell brown, (3.5–)4–5 μm (av. = 4.5 ± 0.72 μm) long; apical cell 3–3.5(–4) μm (av. = 3.2 ± 0.27 μm) long, hyaline, cylindrical, thinand smooth-walled; with 2–4 tubular apical appendages, branched or unbranched, filiform, (26.5–) 27–32.5(–33.5) μm (av. = 29.2 ± 1.79 μm) long; basal appendage single, tubular, unbranched, centric, (6.5–)7–7.5(–8) μm (av. = 7.3 ± 0.58 μm) long.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on PDA with aerial mycelium white, fluffy, reverse yellowish pigment accumulation in the centre, surrounded by amber, pure white at the colony margin, reaching at 58–60 mm diam in 15 d at 28 °C. Conidiomata globose, irregularly distributed on the medium surface, exuding globose, dark brown to black conidial masses.

Additional materials examined. China, Henan Province, Xinyang City, Jigong Mounta, N31°49'20" E114°32'6", alt. 220.1 m , on spines of R. chinensis, 5 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1880, cultures CFCC 55161 = ROC 169, ROC 170); Henan Province, Xinyang City, Shihe District, N31°49'23" E114°3'24", alt. 199.6 m, on branches and spines of R. chinensis, 5 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1881, cultures ROC 171, ROC 172, ROC 173, ROC 174).

Notes — The eight strains of N. subepidermalis in the present study form a well-supported independent clade distinct from known Neopestalotiopsis species (ML/MP/BI = 87/84/0.98). Neopestalotiopsis subepidermalis is most closely related to N. camelliae-oleiferae, N. mesopotamica, N. rosae and N. vacciniicola (Fig. 4), but differs from them in concatenated alignment. A comparison of the ITS region showed one nucleotide difference (453/454, 99.7 % with two gaps) with N. camelliaeoleiferae, three nucleotide differences (526/529, 99.4 % with a single gap) with N. mesopotamica, two nucleotide differences (524/526, 99.6 % with no gaps) with N. rosae, one nucleotide differences (519/520, 99.8 % with a single gap) with N. vacciniicola. Comparison of the TEF region revealed 15 bp differences (520/535, 97.1 % with no gaps) with N. camelliae-oleiferae, three bp differences (469/472, 99.5 % with no gaps) with N. mesopotamica, two bp differences (479/481, 99.5 % with no gaps) with N. rosae, 13 bp differences (462/475, 97.2 % with no gaps) with N. vacciniicola. Comparison of the TUB region revealed two bp differences (400/402, 99.5 % with no gaps) with N. camelliae-oleiferae, eight bp differences (723/731, 98.9 % with no gaps) with N. mesopotamica, 11 bp differences (736/747, 98.5 % with no gaps) with N. rosae, seven bp differences (412/419, 98.3 % with no gaps) with N. vacciniicola. Neopestalotiopsis rosae was also recorded from Rosa, but the morphological characteristics of N. rosae, in which the apical appendages do not arise from the apical crest are distinct from N. subepidermalis and other taxa in this genus (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014). In addition, N. subepidermalis differs from the three other species in the dimensions of its conidia and apical appendages: the conidia of N. subepidermalis are shorter than N. mesopotamica (20–25 μm vs 26–32 μm), but longer than those of N. vacciniicola (20–25 μm vs 14.5–15.2 μm). Furthermore, the apical appendages of N. subepidermalis are significantly longer than those of N. camelliae-oleiferae (27–32.5 μm vs 15.5–18.5 μm) and N. vacciniicola (27–32.5 μm vs 4.3–24.3 μm).

Based on the phylogeny, N. subepidermalis is distinct from N. clavispora, N. palmarum, N. rosicola and N. versicolor, the four Neopestalotiopsis species associated with Rosa besides N. rosae (Liu et al. 2010, Feng et al. 2014, Jiang et al. 2018, Vu et al. 2019) (Fig. 4). Furthermore, N. subepidermalis differs from N. clavispora and N. versicolor in having the longer basal appendage (7–7.5 μm vs 3–5.5 μm and 7–7.5 μm vs 2.4–6.8 μm), while N. subepidermalis has longer apical appendages than N. rosicola and N. palmarum (27–32.5 μm vs 17–22.8 μm and 27–32.5 μm vs 11.8–18.9 μm).

Key to Neopestalotiopsis species on Rosa spp.

• 1. Conidial width less than 6 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

• 1. Conidial width more than 6 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

• 2. Conidia 14–18.5 × 4.5–5 μm, apical appendage 19–26 μm long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N. concentrica

• 2. Conidia 19–23.6 × 5.6–6.6 μm, apical appendage 11.8–18.9 μm long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N. palmarum

• 3. Basal appendages less than 5.5 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

• 3. Basal appendages more than 5.5 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

• 4. Conidia 20–24 × 6–8 μm, apical appendages 22–32 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N. clavispora

• 4. Conidia 21.2–28.3 × 7.1–8.3 μm, apical appendage 18.9–30.7 μm long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N. versicolor

• 5. Apical appendages do not arise from the apical crest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N. rosae

• 5. Apical appendages arise from the apical crest . . . . . . . . . 6

• 6. Conidia 20.2–25.5 × 5.5–8.0 μm, apical appendages 17.0–22.8 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N. rosicola

• 6. Conidia 20–25 × 7.5–9 μm, apical appendages 27–32.5 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N. subepidermalis

Pestalotiopsis chamaeropis Maharachch. et al., Stud. Mycol. 79: 158. 2014 — Fig. 12

Fig. 12.

Pestalotiopsis chamaeropis (BJFC-S1885). a. Appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; b. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); c. conidiomata on PDA; d–i. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; j. conidia. — Scale bars: c = 200 μm; d–i = 10 μm.

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata globose or irregular, superficial to semi-immersed, scattered or aggregated, visible as black acervuli on the host. Conidiophores septate, branched, subcylindrical, hyaline, verruculose. Conidiogenous cells discrete, cylindrical, hyaline, smooth-walled, collarette present and not flared, with prominent periclinal thickening, (5.5–)7–8.5(–10) × 2–4(–4.5) μm (av. = 7.6 ± 1.32 × 3.4 ± 0.66 μm). Conidia fusoid, ellipsoid, straight to slightly curved, 4-septate, (25–)26–27.5(–28) × 7–8.5(–9) μm (av. = 27 ± 0.54 × 7.9 ± 0.56 μm); basal cell obconic with a truncate base, hyaline, thin-walled, 4.5–5.5(–6) μm (av. = 5.1 ± O. 36 μm) long; three median cells doliiform to subcylindrical, (15–)16.5–17(–18) μm (av. = 16.7 ± 0.52 μm) long, wall verruculose, concolourous, but occasionally the two upper median cells are slightly darker than the lower median cell, brown, second cell from the base 3.5–6(–6.5) μm (av. = 5.2 ± 0.81 μm) long, third cell (3–)5–6(–6.5) μm (av. = 5.4 ± 0.35 μm) long, fourth cell (3.5–)5.5–6(–6.5) μm (av. = 5.7 ± 0.42 μm) long; apical cell 3.5–5(–6) μm (av. = 4.4 ± 0.57 μm) long, hyaline, subcylindrical, thinand smooth walled; with 2–3 tubular apical appendages (mostly three), arising from the apical crest, unbranched, filiform, variable in size, 6–24(–24.5) μm (av. = 16.4 ± 3.66 μm) long; basal appendage single, tubular, unbranched, centric, 5.5–8(–8.5) μm (av. = 6.7 ± 1.07 μm) long.

Culture characteristics — Colony on PDA with fluffy mycelium, panniform, aerial mycelium white, reverse white or light yellow, being yellow at the centre and white at the edge. Colony 60–66 mm diam in 15 d at 28 °C. Conidiomata globose, irregularly distributed on the medium surface, exuding globose, dark brown to black conidial masses.

Materials examined. China, Gansu Province, Tianshui City, Maiji District, Maiji Mountain, N34°20'35" E106°0'22", alt. 1509 m, on spines of R. chinensis, 18 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1885, cultures CFCC 55156 = ROC 23-1, ROC 270, ROC 272, ROC 273, ROC 275); Gansu Province, Tianshui City, Maiji District, Maiji Mountain, N34°20'52" E106°0'16", alt. 1508 m, on spines of R. chinensis, 18 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1886, cultures CFCC 55157 = ROC 23-2, ROC 276, ROC 278, ROC 279, ROC 280); Gansu Province, Tianshui City, Maiji District, Maiji Mountain, N34°20'17" E106°0'36", alt. 1500 m, on spines of R. chinensis, 19 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1887, cultures ROC 281, ROC 282, ROC 283, ROC 286); ibid. (cultures ROC 289, ROC 290, ROC 292, ROC 293).

Notes — Pestalotiopsis chamaeropis was first described from leaves of Chamaerops humilis in Italy and subsequently reported on a wide range of hosts (e.g., Camellia sinensis, Pieris japonica, Prostanthera rotundifolia, Vandopsis spp. and Vitis vinifera) (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Moslemi & Taylor 2015, Liu et al. 2017, Ran et al. 2017, Jayawardena et al. 2018, Nozawa et al. 2019, Wang et al. 2019b). In this study, 18 isolates clustered together with the ex-type culture of Pes. chamaeropis (CBS 186.71) in the multi-locus phylogenetic tree (Fig. 5). This is the first report of this fungus on R. chinensis. Compared with the description of the ex-type isolate CBS 186.71, CFCC 55156 has smaller conidiogenous cells (7–8.5 × 2–4 μm vs 20–50 × 2–5 μm).

Pestalotiopsis rhodomyrtus Y Song et al., Phytotaxa 126: 27. 2013 — Fig. 13

Fig. 13.

Pestalotiopsis rhodomyrtus (BJFC-S1888). a. Disease symptoms; b–c. appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; d. conidiomata on PDA; d–h. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; i. conidia. — Scale bars: d = 200 μm; e–i = 10 μm.

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata globose or irregular. superficial to semi-immersed, scattered or aggregated, visible as black acervuli on the host, 86–99 μm. Conidiophores branched, subcylindrical, hyaline. Conidiogenous cells discrete, cylindrical or ampulliform, hyaline, smooth-walled, collarette present and not flared, with prominent periclinal thickening, (5–)6.5–10(–11.5) × (1.5–)2–3 μm (av. = 8.4 ± 1.35 × 2.7 ± 0.67 μm). Conidia fusoid, ellipsoid, straight to slightly curved, 4-septate, (17.5–)19–26 × (5–) 5.5–6.5(–7) μm (av. = 22.7 ± 1.21 × 5.9 ± 0.52 μm); basal cell obconic with a truncate base, hyaline, minutely verruculose and thin-walled, 3–5(–5.5) μm (av. = 4.2 ± 0.52 μm) long; three median cells doliiform to subcylindrical, (11–)12–18.5(–19.5) μm (av. = 14.9 ± 1.46 μm) long, wall verruculose, concolourous, pale brown, second cell from the base (3–)4.5–5.5 μm (av. = 4.8 ± 0.36 μm) long, third cell (3–)3.5–5(–5.5) μm (av. = 4.6 ± 0.54 μm), fourth cell 4–5.5(–6) μm (av. = 4.9 ± 0.38 μm); apical cell (3–)3.5–5.5 μm (av. = 4.4 ± 0.85 μm) long, hyaline, cylindrical to subcylindrical, thin and smooth walled; with 2–3 tubular apical appendages (mostly three), arising from the apical crest, unbranched, filiform, flexuous, (9–)11.5–20(–21.5) μm (av. = 15.7 ± 1.58 μm) long; one basal appendage, tubular, centric appendage tubular, branched or unbranched, (5.5–)6–7.5 μm (av. = 6.9 ± 1.74 μm) long.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on PDA flat with entire margin, aerial mycelium white, cottony, fluffy; reverse white in the centre and faint yellow margin, colony diam 59–63 mm diam in 15 d. Conidia in mass black. Conidiomata globose, irregularly distributed on the medium surface, exuding globose, black conidial masses.

Materials examined. China, Henan Province, Nanyang City, Neixiang county, Mahuang Village, N33°20'14" E114°52'1", alt. 266 m, on leaves of R. rugosa, 7 Aug. 2020, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (BJFC-S1888, cultures ROC 056, ROC 057, ROC 058); ibid. (cultures ROC 059, ROC 060, ROC 061, ROC 062); Gansu Province, Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Lintan County, Yeliguan, N34°53'48" E103°35'2", alt. 2740 m, on spines of R. multiflora, 18 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1889, cultures ROC 303, ROC 304, ROC 305, ROC 306); ibid. (cultures ROC 307, ROC 309, ROC 311); Hunan Province, Changsha City, Changsha County, N28°58'52" E113°34'38", alt. 61 m, on branches of R. chinensis, 10 Nov. 2020, C.M. Tian & N. Jiang (BJFC-S1890, cultures ROC 356, ROC 357, ROC 358, ROC 359).

Notes — Pestalotiopsis rhodomyrtus was initially described from Rhodomyrtus tomentosa in Guangxi Province, China (Song et al. 2013). In addition, this species was discovered on Camellia sinensis (Liu et al. 2017, Wang et al. 2019a). In this study, 18 isolates were identified as belonging to this species (Fig. 5) and this is the first report of this fungus on the host genus Rosa.

Compared with the description of the ex-type isolate HGUP 4230, isolate ROC 056 has longer apical and basal appendages (11.5–20 μm vs 7.5–14.9 μm and 6–7.5 μm vs 2.8–4.9 μm).

Pestalotiopsis tumida C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843814; Fig. 14

Fig. 14.

Pestalotiopsis tumida (BJFC-S1891 holotype). a. Disease symptoms; b. appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; c–d. conidiomata on PDA; e. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); f. conidiomata on Rosa chinensis; g–k. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; l. conidia. — Scale bars: c–d = 200 μm; f–l = 10 μm.

Etymology. Name refers to the basal appendage that is occasionally swollen at the tip.

Typus. China, Gansu Province, Tianshui City, Maiji District, Maiji Mounta, N34°20'32" E106°0'29", alt. 1601 m, on spines of R. chinensis, 15 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (holotype BJFC-S1891, ex-type cultures CFCC 55158 = ROC 110, ROC 108, ROC 109).

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata globose or irregular. superficial to semi-immersed, scattered or aggregated, visible as black acervuli on the host. Conidiophores branched, subcylindrical, hyaline. Conidiogenous cells discrete, cylindrical or ampulliform, hyaline, smooth-walled, collarette present and not flared, with prominent periclinal thickening, (7–)8–11.5(–12) × (1.5–)2–4.5 μm (av. = 10.4 ± 2.23 × 2.9 ± 0.83 μm). Conidia fusoid, ellipsoid, straight to slightly curved, 4-septate, (19–)19.5–23.5(–24) × 6.5–7.5 μm (av. = 21.4 ± 1.33 × 6.9 ± 0.58 μm); basal cell obconic with a truncate base, hyaline, minutely verruculose and thin-walled, (2.5–)3–4.5 μm (av. = 3.9 ± 0.58 μm) long; three median cells doliiform to subcylindrical, (14–)14.5–18(–18.5) μm (av. = 16.6 ± 1.68 μm) long, wall verruculose, concolourous, light brown, second cell from the base (3.5–)4–5 μm (av. = 4.6 ± 0.36 μm) long, third cell (4–)4.5–6.5 μm (av. = 5.3 ± 0.68 μm), fourth cell (4.5–)5.5 μm (av. = 5.1 ± 0.34 μm); apical cell 4.5–6 μm (av. = 5.1 ± 0.49 μm) long, hyaline, cylindrical to subcylindrical, thinand smooth walled; with 2–3 tubular apical appendages (mostly three), arising from the apical crest, unbranched, filiform, flexuous, (10–)10.5–15.5(–16) μm (av. = 13.1 ± 2.07 μm) long; 1–2 basal appendages, tubular, centric appendage tubular, branched or unbranched, occasionally swollen at the tip, (6.5–)7–19(–19.5) μm (av. = 10.9 ± 3.44 μm) long, excentric appendage tubular, 6.5–7.5(–8) μm (av. = 7.3 ± 0.26 μm) long.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on PDA with aerial mycelium white, fluffy, reverse yellow pigment accumulation in the centre, surrounded by amber, pure white at the colony margin. Colony 56–60 mm diam in 15 d at 28 °C. Conidiomata globose, irregularly distributed on the medium surface, exuding globose, black conidial masses.

Additional materials examined. China, Gansu Province, Tianshui City, Maiji District, Maiji Mounta, N34°20'36" E106°0'23", alt. 1557 m, on branches and spines of R. chinensis, 15 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1892, cultures CFCC 55159 = ROC 234, ROC 235, ROC 236, ROC 237); ibid. (cultures ROC 238, ROC 240).

Notes — Pestalotiopsis tumida formed a distinct clade (ML/ MP/BI = 100/100/1) in the multi-locus analyses and is sister to Pes. intermedia and Pes. linearis. Pestalotiopsis tumida (Fig. 5) can be distinguished from Pes. intermedia and Pes. linearis in ITS (two different unique fixed alleles in Pes. intermedia (531/533, 99.5 % with a single gap) and two in Pes. linearis (536/538, 99.5 % with no gaps)), TEF loci (six different unique fixed alleles in Pes. intermedia (526/532, 98.6 % with no gaps) and four in Pes. linearis (528/532, 99.2 % with no gaps)) and TUB loci (10 different unique fixed alleles in Pes. intermedia (443/553, 97.7 % with four gaps) and 18 in Pes. linearis (415/433, 95.7 % with three gaps)). Moreover, the conidial morphology of Pes. tumida is significantly different from these two species. Pestalotiopsis tumida differs from Pes. intermedia and Pes. linearis by shorter conidia (Pes. tumida: 19.5–23.5 μm vs Pes. intermedia: 24–28 μm, Pes. linearis: 24–33 μm). In addition, it is different from Pes. linearis in bearing shorter apical appendages (10.5–15.5 μm vs 24–33 μm) and longer basal appendages (7–19 μm vs 4–7 μm).

There are 11 species of Pestalotiopsis that have been recorded from Rosa, namely Pes. adusta, Pes. algeriensis, Pes. aquatica, Pes. lespedezae, Pes. longisetula, Pes. macrochaeta, Pes. maculans, Pes. oleandri, Pes. populi-nigrae, Pes. rosae and Pes. suffocata (Riley 1960, Guba 1961, Mathur 1979, Rai 1990, Zhu et al. 1991, Nag Raj 1993, Mendes et al. 1998, Sameva 2004, Wei et al. 2005, Kobayashi 2007, Ge et al. 2009). Pestalotiopsis tumida can be easily distinguished from Pes. adusta, Pes. algeriensis, Pes. aquatica, Pes. longisetula and Pes. oleandri by the colour of its median conidial cells. The median conidial cells of these five species are versicolourous while the three median conidial cells of Pes. tumida are concolourous. Pestalotiopsis tumida can be distinguished from other Rosa associated species by the size of its conidia and length of appendages (Table 4). Furthermore, the basal appendage of Pes. tumida is occasionally swollen at the tip, a unique morphological character that distinguishes it from other species that have been recorded from Rosa.

Table 4.

Synopsis of Pestalotiopsis species with concolourous median conidium cells from Rosa.

Species	Conidia length (μm)	Conidia width (μm)	Middle cells length (μm)	Length of apical appendages (μm)	Length of basal appendages (μm)	Host	Country	References
Pestalotiopsis lespedezae	20.2–25	7.5–8.8	13.8–17.5	15–27.5	5–6.3	Rosa canina	India	Mathur (1979)
Pes. macrochaeta	24.8–33	6.6–7.6	13.0–21.2	15.3–34.2	7.1–11.8	Rosa sp.	Brazil	Mendes al. (1998)
Pes. maculans	19–27.5	6–8	10–15.5	16–24	4.2–5	Rosa sp.	Bulgaria	Sameva ((2004)
Pes. populi-nigrae	21.2–28.3	7.1–8.3	14.2–16.5	21.2–31.9	2.4–7.1	Rosa hybrida	Japan	Kobayashi (2007)
Pes. rosae	20.5–28.8	5–6.3	11.8–16.3	10–25	4–5.3	Rosa sp.	China	Ge et al. (2009)
Pes. suffocata	20.8–28.6	5.8–7.1	13.6–18.8	15.6–35.1	1.3–3.5	Rosa sp.	China	Ge et al. (2009)
Pes. tumida	19.5–23.5	6.5–7.5	14.5–18	10.5–15.5	7–19	Rosa chinensis	China	Present study

* Newly described taxon is in bold.

Key to Pestalotiopsis species on Rosa spp.

• 1. Median conidial cells versicolourous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

• 1. Median conidial cells concolourous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

• 2. Length of apical appendages less than 12 μm . . . . . . . . 3

• 2. Length of apical appendages more than 12 μm . . . . . . 5

• 3. Basal appendages less than 3.5 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

• 3. Basal appendages more than 3.5 μm . . Pes. algeriensis

• 4. Conidia not or slightly constricted at the septa, 16–22 × 5–7 μm, apical appendages 5–12 μm .... Pes. adusta

• 4. Conidia constricted at the septa, 18.9–28.3 × 4.7–7.1 μm, apical appendages 16.5–28.3 μm . . . . . . . Pes. oleandri

• 5. Conidia 20.6–28.2 × 7.2–8.2 μm, apical appendages 12.8–23 μm, basal appendages 2–4 μm . . . . . . Pes. aquatica

• 5. Conidia 20.6–25.7 × 6.4–7.7 μm, apical appendages 20.6–36 μm, basal appendages 5.1–7.7 μm . Pes. longisetula

• 6. Basal appendages less than 5 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

• 6. Basal appendages more than 5 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

• 7. Conidia 3–7.514.94-septate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pes. rosae

• 7. Conidia 4-septate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

• 8. Conidia 21.8–28.3 × 6.6–8.3 μm, apical appendages 21.2–31.9 μm, basal appendages 1.5–3 μm Pes. populi-nigrae

• 8. Conidia 19–27.5 × 6–8 μm, apical appendages 16–24 μm, basal appendages 4.2–5 μm . . . . . Pes. maculans

• 9. Conidial length less than 26 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

• 9. Conidial length more than 26 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

• 10. Basal appendages occasionally swollen at the tip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pes. tumida

• 10. Basal appendages not occasionally swollen at the tip 11

• 11. Conidia 19.7–26.3 × 4.9–6.7 μm, apical appendages 7.5–14.9 μm, basal appendages 2.8–4.9 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pes. rhodomyrtus

• 11. Conidia 20–25 × 7.5–8.5 μm, apical appendages 15–22.5 μm, basal appendages 3.7–7.5 μm Pes. lespedezae

• 12. Basal appendages less than 5.5 μm .... Pes. suffocata

• 12. Basal appendages more than 5.5 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

• 13. On PDA, reverse of colonies cinnamon-rufous, conidia 24.8–33 × 6.6–7.6 μm, apical appendages 15.3–34.2 μm, basal appendages 7.1–11.8 μm . . . . . . . . . Pes. macrochaeta

• 13. On PDA, reverse of colonies white, conidia 26–27.5 × 7–8.5 μm, apical appendages 6–24 μm, basal appendages 5.5–8 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pes. chamaeropis

Seimatosporium centrale C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843816; Fig. 15

Fig. 15.

Seimatosporium centrale (BJFC-S1893, holotype). a–b. Disease symptoms; c. appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; d. conidiomata on PDA; e. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); f. longitudinal section through conidiomata; g–k. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; l. conidia. — Scale bars: c–d = 200 μm; f = 20 μm; g–l = 10 μm.

Etymology. Name refers to conidiomata produced in the centre of the colonies on PDA.

Typus. China, Gansu Province, Tianshui City, Maiji District, Dongcha Town, N34°19'34" E106°34'27", alt. 1120 m, on spines of R. chinensis, 16 July 2019, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (holotype BJFC-S1893, ex-type cultures CFCC 55166 = ROC 003, ROC 001, ROC 002).

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata solitary to gregarious, immersed to semi-immersed, unilocular, subglobose, visible as black acervuli on the spines of R. chinensis. Conidiophores branched at the base, hyaline. Conidiogenous cells discrete or integrated, cylindrical, subcylindrical or irregular, hyaline, smooth, thick-walled, (6–)7.5–21.5(–23.5) × (2–)2.5–3(–3.5) μm (av. = 14.4 ± 3.23 × 2.7 ± 0.35 μm). Conidia straight or slightly curved, fusoid, cylindrical or subcylindrical, concolourous, 3-septate, mostly constricted at the septa, transverse septa fairly thick, smooth-walled, (18.5–) 19.5–23.5(–24) × (5–)5.5–7 μm (av. = 20.9 ± 1.58 × 6.1 ± 0.52 μm); basal cell obconic with a truncate base, hyaline to pale brown, (4–)4.5–5.5(–6) μm (av. = 5.0 ± 0.64 μm) long; middle cells cylindrical, pale brown, second cell from base (4–)4.5–5.5 μm (av. = 5.0 ± 0.39 μm), third cell from base (4.5–)5–6(–6.5) μm (av. = 5.4 ± 0.58 μm), together (9.5–)10–11.5(–12) μm (av. = 10.7 ± 0.88 μm) long; apical cell conical, pale brown, (3.5–)4–5 μm (av. = 4.2 ± 0.32 μm); apical appendage single, unbranched, centric, occasionally excentric, 3.5–5.5(–7) μm (av. = 4.9 ± 0.67 μm) long; basal appendage single, unbranched, excentric, (3–)4.5–5(–6) μm (av. = 5.0 ± 0.27 μm) long; mean conidium length/width ratio = 3.40 : 1.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on PDA with aerial mycelium white, dense, reverse with tawny pigment accumulation, being darker at the centre and paler at the edge. Colony 56–58 mm diam in 15 d at 28 °C. Conidiomata are observed around 25 d and are mostly produced in the centre of the colony. Conidiomata globose, exuding black conidial masses.

Additional materials examined. China, Shaanxi Province, Baoji City, Fengxian County, Xinjia Mountain, N34°12'45" E106°36'25", alt. 1609 m, on spines of R. chinensis, 16 July 2019, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (BJFC-S1894, cultures CFCC 55169 = ROC 014, ROC 015, ROC 016); Gansu Province, Tianshui City, Maiji District, Maiji Mountain, N34°20'44" E106°0'22", alt. 1601 m, on spines of R. chinensis, 15 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1895, cultures ROC 145, ROC 146, ROC 147).

Notes — The nine isolates studied form a well-supported independent clade distinct from known Seimatosporium species (ML/MP/BI = 98/96/1). Seimatosporium centrale is most closely related to Seim. botan, Seim. discosioides, Seim. gracile sp. nov. and Seim. nonappendiculatum sp. nov. (Fig. 6). Among them, Seim. discosioides as pathogens occurring on some Rosaceae hosts, especially on Rosa spp. (Shoemaker 1964, Nag Raj 1993). A pairwise comparison of the ITS sequence showed seven nucleotide differences out of 557 nucleotides (98.7 % similarity, including two gaps) between Seim. centrale and Seim. discosioides, while LSU showed six nucleotide differences out of 794 nucleotides (99.2 % similarity, without gaps). Meanwhile, Seim. discosioides morphologically differs from our new species and other Seimatosporium species associated with Rosa by the absent of appendages. Seimatosporium centrale differs from Seim. botan in morphology, namely having wider conidia (5.5–7 μm vs 4–5 μm) and their mean conidium length/ width ratio is quite distinct (3.4 : 1 in Seim. centrale vs 4.6 : 1 in Seim. botan). In addition, Seim. botan has two types of conidia (with only basal appendage and both apical and basal appendages) while Seim. centrale has only one conidial type (both apical and basal appendages). Furthermore, Seim. centrale can be distinguished from Seim. gracile by its extremely high mean conidium length/width ratio (3.40 : 1 vs 6.19 : 1) and from Seim. nonappendiculatum by the colour of its basal cell (pale brown vs hyaline).

Besides Seim. discosioides, four species of Seimatosporium have been recorded from Rosa, namely Seim. caninum, Seim. pseudorosae, Seim. salicinum and Seim. rosae (Nag Raj 1993, Kobayashi 2007, Mulenko et al. 2008, Norphanphoun et al. 2015, Hyde et al. 2016). Seimatosporium centrale has larger conidia than Seim. pseudorosae and Seim. rosae (19.5–23.5 × 5.5–7 μm vs 12–17.5 × 3–6 μm and 19.5–23.5 × 5.5–7 μm vs 10–16 × 3–4.5 μm). However, the apical appendages of Seim. centrale are noticeably shorter than those of the two species (3.5–5.5 μm vs 8–25 μm and 3.5–5.5 μm vs 1.5–15 μm). Seimatosporium caninum and Seim. salicinum can be distinguished from Seim. centrale based on the number of conidial septa. While Seim. centrale has 3-septate conidia, Seim. salicinum has 2–3-septate and Seim. caninum only has 2-septate conidia (Wanasinghe et al. 2018).

Seimatosporium gracile C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843818; Fig. 16

Fig. 16.

Seimatosporium gracile (BJFC-S1896, holotype). a. Appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; b. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); c. conidiomata formed on pine needles; d–k. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; l. conidia. — Scale bars: c = 200 μm; d–l = 10 μm.

Etymology. From Latin ‘gracile’ means slender/slim, which refers to the shape of the conidia.

Typus. China, Gansu Province, Tianshui City, Qingshui county, Shidong Mountain, N34°41'4" E106°21'34", alt. 1697 m, on spines of R. xanthina, 17 July 2019, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (holotype BJFC-S1896, ex-type cultures CFCC 55167 = ROC 004, ROC 005, ROC 006).

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata solitary to gregarious, immersed when immature, becoming erumpent at maturity, subglobose, up to 95–337 μm diam, 56–104 μm high, visible as black conidiomata on the spines. Conidiophores irregularly branched, mostly branched at the base, 1–3-septate, hyaline. Conidiogenous cells discrete or integrated, ampulliform, cylindrical or subcylindrical, hyaline, smooth, thick-walled, variable in size, (7–)8.5–21.5(–23) × 1.52(–3) μm (av. = 15.6 ± 3.23 × 1.6 ± 0.18 μm). Conidia straight or slightly curved, cymbiform or fusoid, concolourous, 3-septate, barely constricted at the septa, transverse septa dark brown and fairly thick, smooth-walled, (13.5–)14.5–19.5(–20) × 2.5–3(–3.5) μm (av. = 16.7 ± 1.82 × 2.7 ± 0.25 μm); basal cell obconic with or without a truncate base, pale brown to hyaline, (2.5–)3–4(–4.5) μm (av. = 3.6 ± 0.47 μm) long; middle cells cylindrical, pale brown, second cell from base (3–)3.5–4.5 μm (av. = 3.9 ± 0.37 μm), third cell from base 3.5–4(–4.5) μm (av. = 3.8 ± 0.27 μm), together 7–8(–9) μm (av. = 7.7 ± 0.43 μm) long; apical cell conical, pale brown, (2.5–)3–3.5(–4.5) μm (av. = 3.2 ± 0.28 μm); apical appendage single, unbranched, centric, (3–)4–8(–8.5) μm (av. = 6.3 ± 1.58 μm) long; basal appendage single, unbranched, excentric, 4.5–8.5(–9) μm (av. = 6.1 ± 1.22 μm) long; mean conidium length/width ratio = 6.19 : 1.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on PDA flat with irregular margin, colony yellow or pale yellow in the centre with fluffy aerial mycelia and pale white margin; reverse tawny pigment accumulation formed in the shape of a concentric ring pattern. Colony 56–58 mm diam in 15 d at 28 °C. Conidiomata sparse, concentrically and irregularly distributed on the medium surface.

Additional materials examined. China, Gansu Province, Tianshui City, Qingshui county, Shidong mountain, N34°41'4" E106°21'35", alt. 1699 m, on spines of R. xanthina, 17 July 2019, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (BJFC-S1897, cultures ROC 007, ROC 008, ROC 009); ibid. (cultures ROC 010, ROC 011, ROC 012).

Notes — Seimatosporium gracile forms an independent clade (ML/MP/BI = 100/100/1) and is phylogenetically distinct from Seim. nonappendiculatum (described below) (Fig. 6). A comparison of the ITS region showed 0.35 % differences (two bp difference of 566 bp, with one single gap), 0.23 % bp differences (2 bp difference of 846 bp, with no gaps) in the LSU region, 2.1 % bp differences (7 bp difference of 326 bp, with no gaps) in TEF, 2.4 % bp differences (11 bp difference of 464 bp, with no gaps) in TUB and 0.38 % bp differences (4 bp difference of 1051 bp, with no gaps) in RPB2, which is evidence for new species rank. Moreover, the two species are morphologically distinct. Seimatosporium gracile differs from Seim. nonappendiculatum in the colour of its basal cell and presence or absence of appendages. While Seim. gracile has a pale brown basal cell with both apical and basal appendages, Seim. nonappen diculatum has a hyaline basal cell with no appendages or only basal appendage. Furthermore, the typical characteristic of Seim. gracile is that the conidia are slender and has a markedly higher mean conidial length/width ratios (6.19 : 1) than other species that have been recorded from Rosa in this genus.

Seimatosporium nonappendiculatum C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843820; Fig. 17

Fig. 17.

Seimatosporium nonappendiculatum (BJFC-S1901, holotype). a–b. Disease symptoms; c. appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; d. conidiomata formed on PDA; e. longitudinal section through conidiomata; f–m. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; n. conidia. — Scale bars: d = 200 μm; e = 20 μm; f–n = 10 μm.

Etymology. Referring to conidia lacking an apical appendage.

Typus. China, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Guyuan City, Jingyuan County, N35°23'53" E106°22'33", alt. 1786 m, on fruits of R. laevigata, 29 Aug. 2020, C. Peng (holotype BJFC-S1901, ex-type cultures CFCC 55168 = ROC 377, ROC 378).

Symptoms are marked by slightly collapsed lesions, with regular margin, black dark brown, round spots on fruits (Fig. 19a–c). Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata solitary to gregarious, subglobose, globose or irregular, up to 287–436 μm diam, 135–160 μm high. Conidiophores cylindrical, branched at the base, 1–3-septate, hyaline, smooth-walled. Conidiogenous cells discrete or integrated, ampulliform, cylindrical or subcylindrical, hyaline, smooth, thick-walled, variable in size, (5–)6.5–13.5(–16) × (1.5–)2–2.5(–3) μm (av. = 9.9 ± 2.21 × 2.3 ± 0.25 μm). Conidia straight or curved, fusoid or pyriform, 3-septate, distoseptate or euseptate, with or without constrictions at the septa, transverse septa dark brown and fairly thick, smooth-walled, (17–)18–23.5(–24) × (5–)5.5–7 μm (av. = 20.3 ± 1.47 × 6.4 ± 0.52 μm); basal cell obconic with a truncate base, hyaline or almost hyaline, (3–)3.5–4.5 μm (av. = 3.9 ± 0.39 μm) long; middle cells cylindrical, pale to medium brown, second cell from base 3–5(–5.5) μm (av. = 4.3 ± 0.32 μm), third cell from base (3.5–)4–4.5(–5) μm (av. = 4.3 ± 0.44 μm), together (7–)8–10(–11) μm (av. = 8.7 ± 0.32 μm) long; apical cell obtuse or conical, pale brown, (3–)4.5–5.5 μm (av. = 4.8 ± 0.31 μm); apical appendage absent; basal appendage lacking or, when present, single, unbranched, excentric, 1.5–4 μm (av. = 2.9 ± 0.93 μm) long; mean conidium length/ width ratio = 3.17 : 1.

Fig. 19.

Asexual morph of Seimatosporium parvum (BJFC-S1898, holotype). a. Appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; b. appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; c. conidiomata formed on pine needles; d. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); e–l. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; m. conidia. — Scale bars: c = 200 μm; e–m = 10 μm.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on PDA flat with entire margin, colony yellow or pale yellow in the centre with fluffy aerial mycelia and pale white margin; reverse with yellow pigment. Colony 50–52 mm diam in 15 d at 25 °C. Conidiomata sparse, concentrically and irregularly distributed on the medium surface.

Additional material examined. China, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Guyuan City, Jingyuan County, N35°23'53" E106°22'36", alt. 1788 m, on fruits of R. laevigata, 29 Aug. 2020, C. Peng (BJFC-S1902, cultures ROC 379, ROC 380, ROC 381).

Notes — Seimatosporium nonappendiculatum forms an independent clade (ML/MP/BI = 89/93/1) and is phylogenetically distinct from Seim. gracile (Fig. 6). The differences between Seim. nonappendiculatum and Seim. gracile have been mentioned above (see Seim. gracile).

Seimatosporium nonappendiculatum is characterised by its fusoid to pyriform, 3-septate conidia with a hyaline basal cell, lacking an apical appendage or with an excentric basal appendage. These morphological characteristics can easily distinguish Seim. nonappendiculatum from other Seimatosporium species previously reported from Rosa. Seimatosporium botan which was collected from Paeonia suffruticosa in Japan also has two types of conidia (Hatakeyama & Harada 2004). Seimatosporium botan can produce conidia with only one basal appendage which morphologically resembles our new Seimatosporium species, but Seim. botan has longer basal appendages (4–8 μm vs 1.5–4 μm) and larger mean conidium length/width ratio (4.6 : 1 vs 3.17 : 1). The other conidial type of Seim. botan bears appendages at both ends, which is very different from the conidia of Seim. nonappendiculatum. Besides Seim. botan, Seim. grammitum, Seim. hebeiense and Seim. hysterioides produce conidia with only a basal appendage (Shoemaker 1964, Hatakeyama & Harada 2004). Seimatosporium nonappendiculatum can be distinguished from these three species by its larger conidia (18–23.5 × 5.5–7 μm vs 12–18.5 × 3.5–5.5 μm, 18–23.5 × 5.5–7 μm vs 13.5–17.6 × 4.5–6.5 μm and 18–23.5 × 5.5–7 μm vs 12–18 × 5.5–6.5 μm). Seimatosporium pseudoglandigenum produces conidia without appendages which morphologically resemble the other conidial type of Seim. nonappendiculatum (Wijayawardene et al. 2016a). However, the conidia of Seim. pseudoglandigenum only has one conidial type. Although Seim. nonappendiculatum is similar to Seim. pseudoglandigenum in conidial size (18–23.5 × 5.5–7 μm vs 15–23 × 5–8 μm), Seim. pseudoglandigenum can be distinguished from our new species based on the colour of its apical conidial cells. While Seim. nonappendiculatum has pale brown apical cells and the apical cell is heterochromatic to the basal cells, Seim. pseudoglandigenum has hyaline apical cells and the apical cell is concolourous to the basal cells (Wijayawardene et al. 2016a).

Seimatosporiumparvum C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843819; Fig. 18, 19

Fig. 18.

Sexual morph of Seimatosporiumparvum (BJFC-S1898, holotype). a. Disease symptoms; b. appearance of ascomata on host substrate; c–d. longitudinal section through ascomata; e. asci and pseudoparaphyses; f–g. asci; h–i. ascospores. — Scale bars: c–d = 50 μm; f–k = 10 μm.

Etymology. From Latin parva ‘small’, referring to smaller conidia.

Typus. China, Qinghai Province, Huangnan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Zeku County, N37°18'51" E101°56'34", alt. 2890 m, on spines of R. spinosissima, 12 July 2019, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (holotype BJFC-S1898, ex-type cultures CFCC 55164 = ROC 038, ROC 039, ROC 040).

Sexual morph: Ascomata 52–155 μm high × 102–254 μm diam, black, immersed, solitary or gregarious, fully or partly erumpent, globose, uniloculate. Ostiole 6.5–16.5 μm, single, dark grey to black. Peridium 22–68 μm wide, comprising 2 layers, outer most layer heavily pigmented, thick-walled, comprising dark brown cells of textura angularis, inner layer composed of hyaline, flattened cells of textura angularis. Pseudoparaphyses numerous, 1.6–2.7 μm wide, filamentous, branched. Asci (86.5–) 91.599(–102.5) × (9–)10–11(–12.5) μm (av. = 96.7 ± 4.13 × 10.6 ± 1.16 μm), 8-spored, bitunicate, fissitunicate, clavate to cylindrical. Ascospores (21–)23.5–29(–30.5) × (3–)4.5–6(–7) μm (av. = 26.4 ± 2.21 × 5.4 ± 1.01 μm), overlapping biseriate, fusiform with narrow ends, mostly curved, 4–5-septate, constricted at the central septum, cells above central septum swollen, (3.5–)4.5–5.5(–6) × (4–)4.5–6 μm (av. = 5.1 ± 0.37 × 5.5 ± 1.02 μm). Asexual morph: Acervuli conidiomata solitary to gregarious, immersed when immature, becoming erumpent at maturity, unilocular, subglobose, up to 133–262 μm diam, 80–121 μm high, visible as black acervuli on the spines of R. spinosissima. Conidiophores cylindrical, branched at the base, smooth. Conidiogenous cells discrete or integrated, ampulliform, cylindrical or subcylindrical, hyaline, smooth, thick-walled, variable in size, (7–)9.5–24.5(–26.5) × (1–)1.5–2(–2.5) μm (av. = 16.5 ± 3.23 × 1.7 ± 0.97 μm). Conidia straight or slightly curved, cylindrical or subcylindrical, concolourous, 3-septate, without constrictions at the septa, transverse septa dark brown and fairly thick, smooth-walled, (10–)11–13.5(–14) × (2–)2.5–3.5(–4) μm (av. = 12.3 ± 0.51 × 2.9 ± 0.25 μm); basal cell obconic with a truncate base, pale brown to brown, (2–)2.5–3.5(–4) μm (av. = 2.6 ± 0.32 μm) long; middle cells cylindrical, pale brown to medium brown, second cell from base 2–3(–3.5) μm (av. = 2.7 ± 0.27 μm), third cell from base 2–3(–4) μm (av. = 2.4 ± 0.36 μm), together (5.5–)6–7(–8) μm (av. = 6.4 ± 0.41 μm) long; apical cell obtuse or conical, pale brown, (2–) 2.5–3.5 μm (av. = 3.1 ± 0.31 μm); apical appendage single, unbranched, centric, (17–)19.5–22.5(–23) μm (av. = 21.3 ± 2.13 μm) long; basal appendage single, unbranched, excentric, (18–)19.5–28.5(–30) μm (av. = 25.8 ± 2.32 μm) long; mean conidium length/width ratio = 3.95 : 1.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on PDA flat with entire margin, colony yellow or pale yellow in the centre with fluffy aerial mycelia and pale white margin; reverse with yellow pigment. Colony 54–58 mm diam in 15 d at 28 °C. Conidiomata sparse, concentrically and irregularly distributed on the medium surface.

Additional materials examined. China, Qinghai Province, Huangnan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Zeku County, N37°18'60" E101°56'43", alt. 2899 m, on spines of R. spinosissima, 12 July 2019, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (BJFC-S1899, cultures ROC 041, ROC 042, ROC 043); ibid., N37°18'56" E101°56'09", alt. 2910 m, on branches of R. helenae, 13 July 2019, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (BJFC-S1900, cultures CFCC 55165 = ROC 017, ROC 018, ROC 019, ROC 020).

Notes — Seimatosporium parvum is most closely related to Seim. pseudorosae which has also been reported from Rosa (Hyde et al. 2016) (Fig. 6). Pairwise comparison of the LSU sequence data reveals 7 bp difference from 668 (98.7 %, without gap region) between this species and Seim. pseudorosae.

Moreover, morphological differences between Seim. parvum and Seim. pseudorosae are obvious, namely Seim. parvum have smaller conidia (11–13.5 × 2.5–3.5 μm vs 12–17.5 × 4–6 μm). Furthermore, the basal appendages of Seim. parvum are longer than those of Seim. pseudorosae (19.5–28.5 μm vs 6–15 μm).

In addition to Seim. pseudorosae, Seim. parvum is separated from Seim. rosae which has also been reported from Rosa based on phylogenetic analysis (Norphanphoun et al. 2015) (Fig. 6). Furthermore, Seim. parvum differs from other Seimatosporium species associated with Rosa in producing thinner conidia (Seim. parvum: 2.5–3.5 μm vs Seim. salicinum: 4–6 μm and Seim. rosae: 3–4.5 μm) and having longer apical appendage (Seim. parvum: 19.5–22.5 μm vs Seim. salicinum: 9–14 μm and Seim. rosae: 5–10 μm). Although Seim. caninum is similar to Seim. parvum in conidial dimensions (9.5–12 × 4–5 μm vs 11–13.5 × 2.5–3.5 μm), the conidia of this species only have two septa and lack appendages, which make Seim. caninum easily distinguishable from other species of Seimatosporium (Nag Raj 1993).

Key to Seimatosporium species on Rosa spp.

• 1. Conidia lacking appendages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

• 1. Conidia with appendages at both ends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

• 2. Conidia 2-septate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seim caninum

• 2. Conidia 3-septate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seim. discosioides

• 3. Appendages less than 8 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

• 3. Appendages more than 8 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

• 4. Conidia with appendages at both ends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

• 4. Conidia without apical appendage, with or without basal appendage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seim. nonappendiculatum

• 5. Conidial length more than 15 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

• 5. Conidial length less than 15 μm . . . . . . . . . . . Seim. rosae

• 6. Mean conidium length/width ratio = 3.40 : 1, conidia 19.5–23.5 × 5.5–7 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seim. centrale

• 6. Mean conidium length/width ratio = 6.19 : 1, conidia 14.5–19.5 × 2.5–3 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seim. gracile

• 7. Mean conidium length/width ratio less than 6 . . . . . . . . . 8

• 7. Mean conidium length/width ratio more than 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seim. parvum

• 8. Conidia 3-septate, 12–17.5 × 3–6 μm Seim. pseudorosae

• 8. Conidia 2–3-septate, 11–17 × 4–6 μm . . . Seim. salicinum

Seiridium rosae C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843821; Fig. 20

Fig. 20.

Seiridium rosae (BJFC-S1903, holotype). a–b. Disease symptoms c. appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; d. conidiomata on PDA; e. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); f–g. conidiomata on Rosa rugosa; h–n. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; o. conidia. — Scale bars: c–d = 200 μm; h–o = 10 μm.

Etymology. The epithet reflects the name of the host plant genus Rosa.

Typus. China, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Guyuan City, Jingyuan County, N35°18'52" E106°21'53", alt. 2157 m, on branches of R. rugosa, 27 Aug. 2020, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (holotype BJFC-S1903, ex-type cultures CFCC55174 = ROC 208, ROC 209).

Symptoms appeared as elongate and ovoid, red or dark red, raised, dehiscent lesions on twigs or branches (Fig. 20a–c). Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata irregularly scattered over the surface, solitary to gregarious, immersed when immature, erumpent from tissue at maturity, subglobose to globose and occasionally irregular. Conidiophores septate, cylindrical, irregularly branched, mostly branched at the base. Conidiogenous cells discrete, hyaline, subcylindrical to cylindrical, smooth-and thin-walled, the size varies tremendously, (8–)12–64.5(–70) × (1–)1.5–2(–3) μm (av. = 27.8 ± 15.43 × 1.7 ± 0.16 μm). Conidia fusoid, straight or slightly curved, 5-septate, not striate, distoseptate without pores, bearing one or two basal and one or more apical appendages, (29–)31–35(–36.5) × (7–)8–9.5 μm (av. = 32.6 ± 0.83 × 8.8 ± 0.47 μm); basal cell obconic, hyaline, smooth-walled, with marginal frill, (3–)3.5–4.5 μm (av. = 4.1 ± 0.63 μm); four median cells brown, smooth-walled, cylindrical to doliiform; second cell from base (4–)5.5–6.5(–7) μm (av. = 6.1 ± 0.21 μm); third cell (3–)4–5.5(–6) μm (av. = 4.9 ± 0.52 μm); fourth cell (3–) 3.5–5.5(–6.5) μm (av. = 4.7 ± 0.68 μm), fifth cell (4–)6–7.5 μm (av. = 6.5 ± 0.48 μm), together (18–)20.5–24.5(–26) μm (av. = 22.8 ± 2.65 μm); apical cell conical, hyaline, smooth-walled, (3–)3.5–5.5(–7) μm (av. = 4.1 ± 1.05 μm) long; apical appendages single or multiple, centric, branched or unbranched, occasionally swollen at the tip, (27–)28.5–44.5(–46) μm (av. = 35.3 ± 4.68 μm); 1–2 basal appendages (mostly two), cylindrical, centric, occasionally excentric, unbranched or branched, (2–)3–4.5 μm (av. = 3.7 ± 0.55 μm).

Culture characteristics — Colony on PDA with flattened mycelium, white, smoke grey in the centre, reverse with pale yellow pigments formed in concentric pattern. Colony 36–40 mm diam in 15 d at 25 °C, with concentrically distributed conidiomata.

Additional materials examined. China, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Guyuan City, Jingyuan County, N35°18’52” E106°21’55”, alt. 2158 m, on branches of R. rugosa, 27 Aug. 2020, C.M. Tian, Y.M. Liang & C. Peng (cultures CFCC 55175 = ROC 267, ROC 268).

Notes — Seiridium rosae clustered in a well-supported independent clade (ML/MP/BI = 100/100/1) closely related to Seir. aquaticum and Seir. venetum (Fig. 7). Seiridium rosae can be distinguished from Seir. venetum in ITS (19 bp difference from 463 characters, with 95.8 % similarity, including 28 gaps) and TUB (7 bp difference from 365 characters, with 98.1 % similarity, including no gaps) sequences. Pairwise comparison of the ITS sequence data reveals 49 bp difference from 526 (90.6 % similarity, including 10 gaps) between our new species and the Seir. aquaticum. Seiridium rosae is distinct from Seir. aquaticum by its branched appendages, while Seir. aquaticum has conidia bearing single, short and unbranched appendage (Luo et al. 2019). Additionally, Seir. rosae has thinner conidia (8–9.5 μm vs 12–14 μm) and longer basal appendages (the basal appendages of Seir. aquaticum reduced to marginal frills) than Seir. aquaticum (Luo et al. 2019). Seiridium venetum can also produce conidia with branched apical appendages (Nag Raj 1985), but this species can be distinguished from Seir. rosae based on conidial dimensions (31–35 × 8–9.5 μm vs 20–30 × 6.5–8.5 μm). Seiridium rosae morphologically resembles Seir. pezizoides (basionym: Pestalotia pezizoides) which was isolated from Vitis sp. in Italy and the USA having 5-distoseptate conidia with one or more, branched or unbranched apical appendages (Nag Raj 1985). However, Seir. rosae differs from Seir. pezizoides in having longer apical appendages (28.5–44.5 μm vs 8.5–27 μm) and shorter basal appendages (3–4.5 μm vs 5.5–14 μm). Besides, the conidia of Seir. rosae mostly bear two basal appendages while Seir. pezizoides only has one basal appendage (Nag Raj 1985, Marin-Felix et al. 2019). Seiridium rosae is also morphologically distinct from other Seridium species associated with Rosa (i.e., Seir. marginatum and Seir. rosarum) (Jaklitsch et al. 2016, Wanasinghe et al. 2018). Seiridium rosae differs from Seir. marginatum in having smaller conidia (31–35 × 8–9.5 μm vs 38–42 × 8.8–10.2 μm), and differs from Seir. rosarum in having larger conidia (31–35 × 8–9.5 μm vs 22–28 × 7–9 μm) and longer conidiogenous cell (12–64.5 μm vs 5–20 μm) (Jaklitsch et al. 2016, Wanasinghe et al. 2018).

Key to Seiridium species on Rosa spp.

• 1. Conidia with one or more, branched or unbranched apical appendages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seir. rosae

• 1. Conidia with one unbranched apical appendage . . . . . . . 2

• 2. Conidia 38.2–42 × 8.8–10.2 μm, appendages up to 52 μm long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seir. marginatum

• 2. Conidia 22–28 × 7–9 μm, appendages up to 12 μm long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seir. rosarum

Sporocadus brevis C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — Myco-Bank MB 843822; Fig. 21

Fig. 21.

Sporocadus brevis (BJFC-S1904, holotype). a. Disease symptoms; b–c. appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; d. conidiomata formed on pine needles; e. longitudinal section through conidiomata; f. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); g–m. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; n. conidia. — Scale bars: c–d = 200 μm; e = 50 μm; g–n = 10 μm.

Etymology. The Latin ‘brevis’ meaning short, which refers to the conidial size.

Typus. China, Gansu Province, Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Lintan County, Yeliguan, N34°53'43" E103°35'2", alt. 2808 m, on spines of R. spinosissima, 21 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (holotype BJFC-S1904, ex-type cultures CFCC 55170 = ROC 091, ROC 092, ROC 093).

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata solitary to gregarious, mostly irregular or subglobose, erumpent through the surface of bark when mature, up to 187–251 μm diam, visible as black acervuli on the spines. Conidiophores septate, branched at base, smooth, hyaline, mostly reduced to conidiogenous cells. Conidiogenous cells discrete or integrated, lageniform, filiform or ampulliform, sometimes irregular, hyaline, smooth, without annellations, (2.5–)3.5–19(–21) × 1–2(–2.5) μm (av. = 8.2 ± 3.62 × 1.6 ± 0.24 μm). Conidia straight or slightly curved, fusoid or obovoid, pale brown, mostly 2-septate, rarely 3-septate, septa fairly thick-walled and darker than the rest of the cell, wall smooth and occasionally slightly constricted at the septa, (9–)10–12(–12.5) × (6–)6.5–7(–7.5) μm (av. = 11.3 ± 0.74 × 6.4 ± 0.22 μm), lacking appendages; basal cell obconic with or without a truncate base, hyaline to pale brown, thick-walled, shorter than other cells, 1.5–3.5(–4) μm (av. = 2.4 ± 0.47 μm) long; median cells doliiform, each (2–)3–4.5(–5) μm (av. = 3.7 ± 0.43 μm) long, pale to mid-brown; apical cell (2.5–)3–5(–5.5) μm (av. = 4.2 ± 0.68 μm), short conic with a wide round apex, concolourous with the median cell in 2-septate conidia paler than median cells in 3-septate conidia; mean conidium length/width ratio = 1.76 : 1.

Culture characteristics — Cultures on PDA with aerial mycelium white, fluffy, reverse with a mottled tawny pigment. Colony 54–56 mm diam in 15 d at 28 °C. Conidiomata sparse and distributed irregularly on the medium surface.

Additional material examined. China, Gansu Province, Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Lintan County, Yeliguan, N34°53'48" E103°35'2", alt. 2806 m, on spines of R. spinosissima, 21 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1905, cultures ROC 094, ROC 095).

Notes — Sporocadus brevis is introduced based on multigene phylogenetic analysis, with five isolates clustering separately in a well-supported clade (ML/MP/BI = 100/100/1) (Fig. 8). Sporocadus brevis is most closely related to Spo. trimorphus, which was isolated from R. canina in Sweden (Liu et al. 2019), but distinguished based on ITS, RPB2, TEF and TUB loci from Spo. trimorphus by 34 bp in the concatenated alignment, in which 2 bp are distinct in the ITS region (from 506 characters, with 99.6 % sequence identity, including 1 gap), 5 bp in the RPB2 region (from 832 characters, with 99.3 % sequence identity, no gaps), 11 bp in the TEF region (from 468 characters, with 97.6 % sequence identity, including 1 gap) and 16 bp in the TUB region (from 702 characters, with 97.7 % sequence identity, including 1 gap). Morphologically, Spo. trimorphus can produce conidia with appendages but the conidia of Spo. brevis lack appendages (Liu et al. 2019). Moreover, conidia of Spo. brevis are wider than those of Spo. trimorphus (6.5–7 μm vs 3–4.5 μm).

In addition to Sporocadus trimorphus, Spo. lichenicola, Spo. rosarum and Spo. rosigena are also associated with Rosa spp. (Wanasinghe et al. 2018, Liu et al. 2019). Sporocadus brevis can be easily distinguished from these species by the conidial length (10–12 μm in Spo. brevis vs 18–25 μm in Spo. lichenicola) and width (6.5–7 μm in Spo. brevis vs 4–6 μm in Spo. rosarum, 3.5–6.5 μm in Spo. rosigena). Furthermore, the mean conidium length/width ratio of Spo. brevis is smaller than these four species (Spo. brevis: 1.76 : 1 vs Spo. lichenicola: 3 : 1, Spo. rosarum: 2.24 : 1, Spo. rosigena: 2.4 : 1 and Spo. trimorphus: 3.4 : 1).

Sporocadus sorbi (Wijayaw. et al.) F. Liu et al., Stud. Mycol. 92: 404. 2019 — Fig. 22

Fig. 22.

Sporocadus sorbi (BJFC-S1906). a–b. Appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; c. conidiomata on PDA; d–g. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; h. conidia. — Scale bars: c = 200 μm; d–h = 10 μm.

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata solitary to gregarious, mostly subglobose, immersed to semi-immersed, up to 390–420 μm diam, 121–130 μm high, visible as black or dark red acervuli on the stems. Conidiophores septate, mostly branched at base, hyaline, smooth.

Conidiogenous cells discrete or integrated, sub-cylindrical or lageniform, variable in size, hyaline, smooth, with annellations, (7–)12–43.5(–48) × 1.5–2(–2.5) μm (av. = 17.2 ± 9.78 × 1.9 ± 0.34 μm). Conidia fusoid or obovoid, straight, 3-septate, transverse septa brown to dark brown, slightly constricted at the septa, wall smooth, (9.5–)11–15.5(–17) × (3–)3.5–5.5(–6) μm (av. = 13.7 ± 1.54 × 4.3 ± 0.21 μm), lacking appendages; basal cell obconic with or without a truncate base, hyaline to pale grey, 2–3(–3.5) μm (av. = 2.7 ± 0.38 μm) long; median cells mostly two, cylindrical, fairly thick-walled and pale brown, each 3–4.5(–5) μm (av. = 4.1 ± 0.54 μm) long; apical cell conic, hyaline or concolourous with median cells, 2–3(–4) μm (av. = 2.6 ± 0.32 μm) long; mean conidium length/width ratio = 3.18 : 1.

Culture characteristics — Colony on PDA with fluffy aerial mycelium, panniform, aerial mycelium white to pale brown, reverse umber coloured, being darker at the centre and paler at the edge. Colony 36–42 mm diam in 15 d at 25 °C. Conidio-mata black, distributed circularly at the colony margin on the medium surface.

Materials examined. China, Gansu Province, Lanzhou City, Yuzhong County, Xinglong Mountain, N35°48'2" E104°3'57", alt. 2160 m, on branches of R. xanthina, 26 Aug. 2020, C. Peng (BJFC-S1906, cultures ROC 102, ROC 103, ROC 105); Gansu Province, Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Lintan County, Yeliguan, N34°53'45" E103°35'2", alt. 2806 m, on spines of R. xanthina, 21 Aug. 2020, C. Peng & S. Jia (BJFC-S1907, cultures ROC 159, ROC 160, ROC 161).

Notes — Sporocadus sorbi was first reported from a dead leaf of Sorbus torminalis in Italy (Lawrence et al. 2018). In this study, six isolates of Sporocadus were identified as belonging to this species, and this is the first report of this fungus on Rosa plants, and in China.

Conidia of the ex-type (MFLUCC 14-0469) of Spo. sorbi are slightly wider than those of isolate ROC 101 (5.5–7.5 μm vs 3.5–5.5 μm), and it has shorter conidiogenous cells (8–20 μm vs 12–43.5 μm).

Sporocadus spiniger C. Peng & C.M. Tian, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB 843823; Fig. 23

Fig. 23.

Sporocadus spiniger (BJFC-S1908, holotype). a. Disease symptoms; b. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); c–d. appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; e. conidiomata formed on pine needles; f–h, j–m. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; i. longitudinal section through conidiomata; n. conidia. — Scale bars: e = 200 μm; f–h, j–m, n = 10 μm; i = 50 μm.

Etymology. Referring to the fact that this strain was isolated from spines.

Typus. China, Gansu Province, Lanzhou City, Yongdeng County, Dayou Town, N36°44'20" E102°49'27", alt. 2743 m, on spines of R. omeiensis, 25 Oct. 2020, C. Peng (holotype BJFC-S1908, ex-type cultures ROC 119, ROC 120, ROC 121).

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular conidiomata solitary to gregarious, mostly irregular, occasionally subglobose, superficial to semi-immersed, up to 154–196 μm diam, 61–95 μm high, visible as black acervuli on the spines. Conidiophores septate, mostly branched at base, hyaline, smooth. Conidiogenous cells discrete, filiform or ampulliform, sometimes cylindrical and subcylindrical, hyaline, smooth, without annellations, (12–)14.5–30.5(–34) × 1–1.5 μm (av. = 23.8 ± 4.27 × 1.2 ± 0.18 μm). Conidia straight or slightly curved, clavate or subcylindrical, with round ends, pale brown, (2–)3-septate, septa darker than the rest of cell, wall smooth and slightly constricted at the septa, (12.5–)14.5–16.5(–17.5) × (4–)4.5–5(–5.5) μm (av. = 15.8 ± 0.54 × 4.9 ± 0.31 μm), lacking appendages; basal cell obconic with round base, hyaline to pale brown, paler than other cells, thick-walled, (2–)2.5–3.5(–4) μm (av. = 2.8 ± 0.21 μm) long; median cells doliiform, the second cell from base is slightly longer than the third cell in 3-septate conidia, 3.5–4.5 μm (av. = 4.2 ± 2.17 μm) vs 2.5–3 μm (av. = 2.7 ± 0.16 μm), pale to mid-brown; median cell 4.9–5.0 μm (av. = 5.0 ± 0.07 μm), pale brown in 2-septate conidia; apical cell in 2-septate conidia significantly longer than apical cell in 3-septate conidia, (5.5–)6–6.5 μm (av. = 6.2 ± 0.09 μm) vs (2–)2.5–3.5 μm (av. = 2.7 ± 0.31 μm), short conic with a wide round apex, concolourous with the median cells; mean conidium length/width ratio = 3.22 : 1.

Culture characteristics — Cultures on PDA with white aerial mycelium and regular margin, fluffy, reverse yellowish brown. Colony 48–52 mm diam in 15 d at 25 °C. Acervuli black, distributed irregularly at the colony margin on the medium surface.

Additional material examined. China, Lanzhou City, Yongdeng County, Dayou Town, N36°44'17" E102°49'25", alt. 2745 m, on spines of R. omeiensis, 25 Oct. 2020, C. Peng (BJFC-S1909, cultures ROC 122, ROC 123, ROC 124, ROC 125).

Notes — Based on the multi-locus phylogenetic analysis, the seven isolates cluster separately in a well-supported clade (ML/ MP/BI = 100/100/1) (Fig. 8). Sporocadus spiniger is most closely related to Spo. brevis and Spo. trimorphus, differentiated from them in ITS (three different unique fixed alleles in Spo. brevis (521/524, 99.4 % with no gaps) and three in Spo. trimorphus (503/506, 99.4 % with no gaps)), LSU loci (four bp in Spo. brevis (884/888, 99.5 % with a single gap) and eight bp in Spo. trimorphus (876/884, 99.0 % with no gaps)), RPB2 loci (35 bp in Spo. brevis (812/847, 95.8 % with no gaps) and 39 bp in Spo. trimorphus (793/832, 95.3 % with no gaps)), TEF loci (40 bp in Spo. brevis (433/473, 91.5 % with 11 gaps) and 45 bp in Spo. trimorphus (427/472, 91.5 % with 11 gaps)) and TUB loci (45 bp in Spo. brevis (663/708, 93.6 % with 10 gaps) and 41 bp in Spo. trimorphus (667/708, 94.2 % with 10 gaps)). Moreover, Spo. spiniger differs from Spo. brevis in having longer conidia (14.5–16.5 μm vs 10–12 μm) and conidiogenous cells (14.5–30.5 μm vs 3.5–19 μm). The conidia are also wider than those of Spo. trimorphus (4.5–5 μm vs 3–4.5 μm).

Other species of Sporocadus that have been recorded from Rosa can be distinguished from this new species based on the number of septa and presence or absence of appendages. While Spo. spiniger has mostly 3-septate conidia without appendages, Spo. lichenicola has 4–5-septate conidia and Spo. rosarum has conidia with one apical appendage (Liu et al. 2019). Sporocadus rosigena mostly has 3-septate conidia without appendages that are morphologically similar to those of Spo. spiniger (Liu et al. 2019), but these two species have a distinctly different mean conidium length/width ratio (Spo. spiniger: 3.22 : 1 vs Spo. rosigena: 2.4 : 1).

Sporocadus trimorphus F. Liu et al., Stud. Mycol. 92: 406. 2018 — Fig. 24

Fig. 24.

Sporocadus trimorphus (BJFC-S1910). a. Disease symptoms; b. colonies on PDA at 3 d (left) and 15 d (right); c–d. appearance of conidiomata on host substrate; e. conidiomata on PDA; f. longitudinal section through conidiomata; g–k. conidiogenous cells with attached conidia; l. conidia. — Scale bars: e = 200 μm; f = 20 μm; g–l = 10 μm.

Sexual morph not observed. Asexual morph: Acervular stromata ostiolate, immersed or semi-immersed in plant tissues, slightly to strongly erumpent through the bark surface, sometimes delimited by a black or dark red marginal line, up to 207–269 μm diam, 82–144 μm high. Conidiophores septate, mostly branched at base, hyaline, smooth. Conidiogenous cells discrete or integrated, sub-cylindrical, lageniform or ampulliform, hyaline, smooth, with annellations, (11.5–)13–34(–38.5) × 1.5–2.5 μm (av. = 24.5 ± 6.43 × 2.0 ± 0.31 μm). Conidia fusoid or obovoid, straight, 3-septate, transverse septa fairly thick, wall smooth, (11–)12–16 × 4.5–5.5 μm (av. = 14.1 ± 1.22 × 4.8 ± 0.14 μm), bearing appendages; basal cell obconic with or without a truncate base, hyaline to pale brown, 2–3 μm (av. = 2.7 ± 0.41 μm) long; median cells mostly two, cylindrical, fairly thick-walled and pale brown, each (3–)3.5–4.5(–5) μm (av. = 4.1 ± 0.88 μm) long; apical cell conic, hyaline or concolourous with median cells, (1.5–)2–3.5(–4.5) μm (av. = 2.7 ± 0.28 μm) long; apical appendage lacking or, when present, single, unbranched, attenuated, tubular or flexuous, (6.5–)8–13.5 μm (av. = 11.3 ± 1.39 μm) long; basal appendage lacking or, when present, unbranched, tubular or flexuous, centric or excentric, (7–)9–12(–13.5) μm (av. = 10.4 ± 1.27 μm) long; mean conidium length/width ratio = 2.94 : 1.

Culture characteristics — On PDA, colonies initially white, irregular, lacking aerial mycelium, fast growing, reaching up to 60–62 mm diam in 15 d. Colonies pale white to pale grey after 15 d, lacking aerial mycelium. Conidiomata distributed sparsely over the medium surface.

Material examined. China, Gansu Province, Lanzhou City, Yuzhong County, Xinglong Mountain, N35°47'37" E104°3'53", alt. 2168 m, on branches of R. xanthina, 25 Aug. 2020, C. Peng (BJFC-S1910, cultures CFCC 55171 = ROC 112, ROC 113, ROC 114, ROC 115, ROC 116).

Notes — Sporocadus trimorphus was first described from R. canina in Sweden (Liu et al. 2019). In this study, five isolates were identified as belonging to this species and this species is also reported for the first time from China. Sporocadus trimorphus is characterised by three conidial types, i.e., non-appendaged, either apical or basal appendaged, and both apical and basal appendaged conidia (Liu et al. 2019).

Compared with the description of the ex-type isolate CBS 114203, isolate CFCC 55171 has shorter apical appendages (8–13.5 μm vs 2–20 μm), slightly wider conidia (4.5–5.5 μm vs 3–4.5 μm) and longer conidiogenous cells (13–34 μm vs 4.5–14 μm).

Key to Sporocadus species on Rosa spp.

• 1. Conidia with appendages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

• 1. Conidia lacking appendages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

• 2. Conidia 3–5-septate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spo. lichenicola

• 2. Conidia 3-septate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

• 3. Mean conidium length/width ratio less than 3 . . . . . . . . . 4

• 3. Mean conidium length/width ratio more than 3 . . . . . . . . 5

• 4. Conidia 10–12 × 6.5–7 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spo. brevis

• 4. Conidia 10–15 × 3.5–6.5 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . Spo. rosigena

• 5. Conidia 11–15.5 × 3.5–5.5 μm, conidiogenous cells 11.0–28.5 × 1.0–1.7 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spo. sorbi

• 5. Conidia 14.5–16.5 × 4.5–5 μm, conidiogenous cells 14.5–30.5 × 1.0–1.5 μm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spo. spiniger

• 6. Conidia of two types, i.e., non-appendaged or only basal appendaged . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spo. rosarum

• 6. Conidia of three types, i.e., non-appendaged, either apical or basal appendaged, or both apical and basal appendaged conidia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spo. trimorphous

Prevalence

Pestalotiopsis was the most prevalent genus (45 isolates, 35.2 % of the total isolates from Rosa), followed by Seimatosporium (33 isolates, 26.2 %) and Sporocadus (23 isolates, 18.3 %). The isolation rate of the other genera varied from 3.1 % to 13.5 % (Fig. 25). Pestalotiopsis was also the most abundant genus in all tissues investigated and had the highest isolation rate from all tissues. Seiridium was the genus with the lowest richness among all tissues, isolated only from branches (Fig. 26).

Fig. 25.

Overall isolation rate (%) of Sporocadaceae genera and species.

Fig. 26.

Isolation rate (%) of Sporocadaceae genera from each Rosa organs.

Fifteen species present in six genera (Monochaetia, Neopestalotiopsis, Pestalotiopsis, Seimatosporium, Seiridium and Sporocadus) were identified. Pestalotiopsis chamaeropis and Pes. rhodomyrtus (18 isolates, 14 % of the isolates from Rosa) were the two most prevalent species, followed by Seim. parvum (10 isolates, 8 %). Neopestalotiopsis concentrica, Seim. centrale and Seim. gracile have the same isolation rate of 7 %. In the current study, N. concentrica, N. subepidermalis, Pes. rhodomyrtus and Seim. parvum were isolated from spines/branches of two and three species of Rosa. Each of the remaining 11 species of Sporocadaceae was only isolated from one Rosa species (Fig. 29).

Fig. 29.

Isolation rate (%) of Sporocadaceae species from each Rosa sp.

The isolation rate of Seimatosporium in fruits and Pestalotiopsis in leaves was 100 %. These data reveal low generic and species diversity in these plant organs. In contrast, the branches had the highest genus diversity among all organs in this study, except for Seimatosporium, the other five genera were isolated from branches. Although the generic diversity of spines was slightly lower than that of branches, the number of strains isolated from the spines and the species diversity of spines was the highest of all tissues and was much higher than that of any other tissues (Fig. 26, 27).

Analysis of the abundance of Sporocadaceae species on Rosa species revealed seven species from R. chinensis, four from R. rugosa, three from R. xanthina and two from R. spinosissima, respectively (Fig. 29), with only one species on the remaining Rosa species, namely R. multiflora (Pes. rhodomyrtus), R. helenae (Seim. parvum), R. laevigata (Seim. nonappendiculatum) and R. omeiensis (Spo. spiniger) (Fig. 29). These findings might be due to the smaller sampling size of R. multiflora, R. helenae, R. laevigata and R. omeiensis obtained, since symptomatic branches were far less commonly observed than for the other Rosa species.

DISCUSSION

In this study, many Rosa specimens were collected from six major rose production areas (Gansu, Henan, Hunan, Ningxia, Qinghai and Shaanxi) in China, and 126 pestalotioid strains were obtained elsewhere. Multi-locus phylogenetic and morphological analyses revealed 15 species belonging to six genera in Sporocadaceae, namely Monochaetia, Neopestalotiopsis, Pestalotiopsis, Seimatosporium, Seiridium and Sporocadus.

Seimatosporium species have been extensively studied on several hosts (Tanaka et al. 2011, Liu et al. 2019), but not yet on Rosa spp. Up to now, five species of Seimatosporium have been recorded from Rosa, namely Seim. caninum on R. canina, Seim. pseudorosae on R. villosa, Seim. salicinum on R. multiflora and R. spinosissima, Seim. rosae on R. canina, R. kalmiussica, R. mucosa and R. pomifera, Seim. discosioides on R. blanda, R. heliophila, R. moschata, R. multiflora and R. rugosa (Weiss 1950, Nag Raj 1993, Cho & Shin 2004, Kobayashi 2007, Li et al. 2016, Crous et al. 2018, Liu et al. 2019). Among them, Seim. salicinum has been recorded in China (Tai 1979). In this study, a total of four new Seimatosporium species were introduced from Rosa in China. Seimatosporium is the genus which has the most species found and has a relatively high isolation rate (26.2 %) (Fig. 25). Seimatosporium species from Rosa spp. in previous and present studies show quite a difference based on morphology and DNA sequence data. Seimatosporium rosae is distinguished from the four new species in this study based on DNA phylogenetic data (Fig. 6) and the number of conidial septa (3–6-septate vs 3-septate). Although Seim. pseudorosae is closely related to Seim. parvum in this study (Fig. 6), these two species can be clearly distinguished by the size of their conidia and the length of their appendages. There are no sequence data available for Seim. caninum and Seim. salicinum for comparison, but the morphological characteristics of Seim. caninum (appendages lacking, 2-septate conidia) clearly distinguish it from other Seimatosporium species (Nag Raj 1993). Seimatosporium salicinum also produces 2-septate conidia (Sutton 1975, Nag Raj 1993), and this morphological characteristic distinguishes it from our four new species. Except for Seim. salicinum (the main hosts are Salix spp. and Rosaceae plants) (Nag Raj 1993, Tanaka et al. 2011), the other species from Rosa spp. are rarely recorded on other hosts (Nag Raj 1993, Mulenko et al. 2008, Li et al. 2016, Bonthond et al. 2018). Currently, seven Seimatosporium species have been reported from China besides our new species and Seim. salicinum. However, none of them occur on Rosa spp., i.e., Seim. botan, Seim. grammitum and Seim. hebeiensis on Paeonia suffruticosa, Seim. lonicerae on Pinus tabulaeformis, Seim. rhododendri on Rhododendron aureum, Seim. piceae on Picea jezoensis and Seim. maria (Tai 1979, Wang 1985, Nag Raj 1993, Guo 2004, Duan et al. 2011). Among these species, Seim. botan can produce conidia with only basal appendages (Hatakeyama & Harada 2004), which is similar to Seim. nonappendiculatum, to which it formed a sister clade. Seimatosporium grammitum and Seim. hebeiensis produce conidia lacking appendages and are therefore similar to Seim. nonappendiculatum. However, they differ significantly in their conidial dimensions. Having conidia with only basal appendages or without appendages, makes Seim. nonappendiculatum unique in the Sporocadaceae, and phylogenetically it clustered closer Sporocadus (conidia lacking appendages) than other Seimatosporium species (Fig. 2). The most typical morphological characteristics of Seim. piceae is that the length of the appendages is longer than the conidia itself (Wang 1985), which is most similar to the new species Seim. parvum (Fig. 6), but the conidia and appendages of Seim. parvum are significantly shorter than Seim. picea (14.3–15 × 4.21–4.34 μm vs 18–23 × 5–7 μm). In addition, the conidial dimensions of the other two new species, Seim. centrale and Seim. gracile, are significantly different from those species currently recorded in China.

Sporocadus is the type of Sporocadaceae and generally characterised by non-appendaged, 3-septate conidia (Liu et al. 2019). Sporocadus has long been assumed to be a synonym of Seimatosporium (Sutton 1975), but was confirmed to be a separate genus based on multigene phylogeny and conidial morphology (Brockmann 1976, Nag Raj 1993, Liu et al. 2019, Wijayawardene et al. 2020). However, in this study, although ITS-Blast is useful to locate species at the generic and family level, relatively weak in distinguishing Seimatosporium from Sporocadus, and even less so at the species level. Therefore, analysing these two genera at the family level is necessary to classify species into the correct genus (Fig. 2). Corresponding to the taxonomic classification determined by multi-locus phylogenetic analyses (Fig. 2), most Sporocadus species also exhibit characteristic morphological characters, including their non-appendaged and 3-septate conidia. In previous studies, most of these features have been used to delimit this genus (Brockmann 1976, Nag Raj 1993). It is worth to note that the presence or absence of conidial appendages is not a stable taxonomic character for the genus (Liu et al. 2019). For example, the conidia of Seim. discosioides and Seim. germanicum are also non-appendaged (Shoemaker 1964, Liu et al. 2019). Liu et al. (2019) introduced Spo. trimorphus and the conidia of this species have three types, i.e., non-appendaged which is the typical morphological characteristics of this genus; both apical and basal appendaged conidia which is the typical characteristics of Seimatosporium and either apical or basal appendaged conidia. This was also the first time that species with appendaged conidia were observed in Sporocadus, which renders morphology-based identifications more difficult, and underlines the necessity of molecular data for accurate identification. This study also found Spo. trimorphus on R. xanthina, which is also a first report from China. The other important morphological characteristic of this genus is 3-septate conidia (Nag Raj 1993). However, the number of conidial septa is far too unstable a feature to determine generic delineations. Liu et al. (2019) were the first to suggest that Sporocadus species could produce 2-septate conidia and introduced five species with this conidial type, namely Spo. biseptatus, Spo. incanus, Spo. rosarum, Spo. rosigena and Spo. rotundatus. Although the newly described species Spo. brevis can also produce conidia with two septa, this species is phylogenetically distinct from these five species (Fig. 8) and has significantly wider conidia (Table 5). To our knowledge, this study represents the first resolution of Sporocadus species in China based on multilocus sequence data. A total of four species of Sporocadus were identified in this study, and the isolation rate is similar to that of Seimatosporium (Fig. 25). Besides Spo. brevis and Spo. trimorphus, this study also described a new species Spo. spiniger, and represents the first report of Spo. sorbi on Rosa globally. Currently, only one Sporocadus species has been reported from China, namely Spo. lichenicola, the type species of the genus (Tai 1979). The hosts of this species include many Rosa plants and can cause leaf spot or brown spot of R. xanthina in China (Tai 1979, Wu 1992, Chen 2003). Based on multigene phylogenetic analyses, Spo. lichenicola is also separated from the two new species (Fig. 8). Moreover, the conidia of Spo. lichenicola are 4–5-septate, which is also an important morphological characteristic distinguishing it from other species in Sporocadus (Norphanphoun et al. 2015). In addition to Spo. lichenicola, relatively little has been recorded about Sporocadus species associated with Rosa. Liu et al. (2019) transferred four Seimatosporium species associated with Rosa to Sporocadus based on molecular systematics and morphological characteristics, namely Spo. rosarum (synonyms: Seim. rosarum, Seim. pseudorosarum and Seim. rosigenum) and Spo. rosigena (basionym: Seim. rosicola). Sporocadus rosarum forms a large sister clade with the two new species and Spo. trimorphus (Fig. 8), but the conidia of Spo. rosarum have an apical appendage, which makes it easy to distinguish them from other species of Sporocadus (Wanasinghe et al. 2018, Liu et al. 2019). Sporocadus rosigena is separated from the two new species in this study based on DNA phylogeny (Fig. 8) and there are also differences in conidial dimensions. It is remarkable that Seim. caninum isolated from R. chinensis has the typical morphological characteristics of Sporocadus, that is, with conidia lacking appendages (Sutton 1975). The feature of 2-septate conidia distinguishes Seim. caninum from other species in Seimatosporium and most of the members in Sporocadus. As described above, six Sporocadus species (including the new species described here) can produce 2-septate conidia similar to those of Seim. caninum, but the conidia of Seim. caninum are smaller than those of other species (Table 5). Therefore, since related sequence data of Seim. caninum are unavailable, further research is needed to resolve which genus it belongs to.

Table 5.

Synopsis of Seimatosporium caninum and species with 2-septate conidia in Sporocadus.

Species	Length of conidia (μm)	Width of conidia (μm)	Host	Country	References
Seimatosporium caninum	9.5–12	4.5–5.5	Quercus incana	India	Sutton (1975)
Sporocadus biseptatus	12.5–19.5	4.5–9	Unknown	Unknown	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. brevis	10–12	6.5–7	Rosa spinosissima	China	Present study
Spo. incanus	11.5–20	4.5–6.5	Prunus dulcis	Spain	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. rosarum	9.0–14.0	4.0–6.0	Rosa canina	Europe	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. rosigena	10.0–15.0	3.5–6.5	Vitis vinifera	Iran	Liu et al. (2019)
			Rosa canina	Italy	Liu et al. (2019)
			Rh ododendron sp.	Latvia	Liu et al. (2019)
			Rubus fruticosus	Netherlands	Liu et al. (2019)
Spo. rotundatus	9.0–16.5	4.5–7.5	Arceuthobium pussilum	Canada	Liu et al. (2019)

* Newly described taxon is in bold.

Pestalotiopsis is the genus with the highest isolation rate in this study, namely 29.6 % (Fig. 25), which is basically in line with expectations, because Pestalotiopsis, as an important plant pathogen, has many records and can parasitise more than 50 plant families in China (Tai 1979, Chen 2003, Ge et al. 2009). Cash crops such as palm, eucalypts, guava and tea trees have suffered serious damage due to species of Pestalotiopsis (Ge et al. 2009, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2013a, Wang et al. 2019a, b). This genus also has many records on Rosa plants. In China, five species of Pestalotiopsis have been recorded from Rosa, namely Pes. rosae and Pes. suffocata that are parasitic on R. chinensis, Pes. oleandri that is parasitic on R. laevigata, Pes. longisetula that is parasitic on R. henryi and Pes. aquatica that is saprophytic on R. chinensis (Zhu et al. 1991, Wei et al. 2005, Ge et al. 2009). Beyond that, there are six species of Pestalotiopsis recorded from Rosa in different countries (Riley 1960, Guba 1961, Mathur 1979, Rai 1990, Nag Raj 1993, Mendes et al. 1998, Sameva 2004, Kobayashi 2007). In this study, Pes. chamaeropis and Pes. rhodomyrtus are newly reported from Rosa. For the newly described species, Pes. tumida isolated from R. chinensis, morphological differences distinguish this species and other known species recorded on Rosa, especially in terms of the conidial dimensions and length of the appendages, as well as shape of basal appendages. The results of our study suggest that the species diversity of Pestalotiopsis on Rosa in China may be higher than what was previously expected.

Neopestalotiopsis was separated from Pestalotiopsis based on its versicolourous median conidium cells and indistinct conidiophores (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Liu et al. 2017, 2019). In this study, two new species of Neopestalotiopsis were introduced from Rosa based on the phylogenetic analyses and morphological characteristics, namely N. concentrica and N. subepidermalis. Five Neopestalotiopsis species associated with Rosa have been recorded, namely N. clavispora, N. palmarum, N. rosae, N. rosicola and N. versicolor (Liu et al. 2010, Feng et al. 2014, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Jiang et al. 2018, Vu et al. 2019). For these five species, N. clavispora, N. palmarum, N. rosicola and N. versicolor have been reported in China and cause leaf blotch, stem canker of R. chinensis and leaf spot disease of many other hosts (Ge et al. 2009, Feng et al. 2014, Jiang et al. 2018), but these four species are phylogenetically separated from our new species (Fig. 4) and there are also differences in their conidial morphology. Neopestalotiopsis rosae is morphologically quite distinct from other taxa in the genus (has appendages which do not arise from the apical crest, but at different regions in the upper half of the apical cell; Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014). With the increase of collections and DNA data, N. clavispora, N. palmarum, N. rosae and N. versicolor appear to be widely distributed in different countries where they cause severe diseases on different hosts, e.g., N. rosae causes dieback, crown rot, fruit rot and root rot of many economically important plants including Eucalyptus, Fragaria, Paeonia and Vitis (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Rebollar-Alviter et al. 2020, Santos et al. 2020, Cosseboom & Hu 2021), and N. clavispora can infect more than 50 plant species belonging to 27 families in China and about 17 other countries, resulting in severe leaf diseases (Qiu et al. 2020). For this reason, the two new species isolated from Rosa may present dangerous pathogens for other hosts, and further work is needed to better understand the role and distribution of these two new Neopestalotiopsis species. For other pestalotiopsis-like species associated with Rosa, as mentioned above, some Pestalotiopsis spp. on Rosa (Pes. adusta, Pes. algeriensis, Pes. aquatica, Pes. longisetula and Pes. oleandri) have the typical morphological characteristics of Neopestalotiopsis, namely versicolourous median conidium cells (Guba 1961, Mordue & Holliday 1971, Zhu et al. 1991, Wei et al. 2005, Ge et al. 2009, Cardoso et al. 2017). However, due to the lack of related DNA sequence data, their taxonomy still needs to be resolved. However, our two new Neopestalotiopsis species can be distinguished from these five Pestalotiopsis species based on their conidial and appendage morphology (Table 6). This study also encountered the same problem as previous studies on Neopetalotiopsis compared to other genera, namely the short branch length and low support rate of the current phylogenetic tree based on ITS, TEF and TUB (Liu et al. 2017, Norphanphoun et al. 2019). More gene regions will have to be introduced in future studies to provide better support for species in the genus.

Table 6.

Synopsis of two new Neopestalotiopsis species and species with versicolourous median conidium cells in Pestalotiopsis.

Species	Length of conidia (μm)	Width of conidia (μm)	Length of apical appendages (μm)	Length of basal appendages (μm)	Host	Country	References
Neopestalotiopsis concentrica	14–18.5	4.5–5	19–26	3.5–5.5	Rosa rugosa	China	Present study
N. subepidermalis	20–25	7.5–9	27–32.5	7–7.5	Rosa rugosa	China	Present study
Pestalotiopsis adusta	16–22.4	4.7–6.6	5 –12	3.5	Rosa indica	India	Rai (1990)
Pes. algeriensis	20.5–31.3	6.3–8.0	13.3–17.8	3–6.3	Rosa sempervirens	Algeria	Nag Raj (1993)
Pes. aquatica	20.6–28.2	7.2–8.2	12.8–23	2–4	Rosa sp.	China	Ge et al. (2009)
Pes. longisetula	20.6–25.7	6.4–7.7	20.6–36	5.1–7.7	Rosa henryi	China	Ge et al. (2009)
					Rosa sp.	China	Ge et al. (2009)
Pes. oleandri	15–22.6	5–7.5	14–16.5	6.1–11.5	Rosa laevigata	China	Ge et al. (2009)
					Rosa sp.	China	Zhu et al. (1991)

* Newly described taxa are in bold.

Many species of Pestalotiopsis and Neopestalotiopsis have overlapping morphological characteristics, and it is difficult to identify them solely based on morphology (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Liu et al. 2017). Some morphological characteristics are unstable and vary with host range, culture and other environmental conditions (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2011, Norphanphoun et al. 2019). But at the same time, conidial morphology can still provide a good reference for species distinction of pestalotioid fungi (Crous et al. 2012). Therefore, the combination of morphology and molecular systematics based on sequence data has become an important means to solve the classification of pestalotiopsis-like and support the introduction of new species (Crous et al. 2012, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Liu et al. 2019).

Monochaetia has undergone a lot of changes since it was introduced, and many species have been transferred to other genera, such as Diploceras, Monochaetinula, Sarcostroma, Seimatosporium and Seiridium (De Silva et al. 2018, Liu et al. 2019). However, species of Monochaetia are morphologically conserved at present and the typical morphological characteristic of this genus is that conidia have a single centric apical and basal appendage (if present) (De Silva et al. 2018, Liu et al. 2019). Previous reports on the hosts of Monochaetia were mainly concentrated on Fagaceae (especially Castanea and Quercus spp.) (De Silva et al. 2018, Liu et al. 2019). In this study one new species, M. rosarum, was isolated from Rosa and can be distinguished from other phylogenetically allied species based on conidial dimensions. In addition, there are currently four species of Monochaetia that have been recorded from Rosa, namely M. concentrica, M. rosae-caninae, M. seiridioides and M. turgida (Guba 1961, Tai 1979, Chen 2003). Except for M. rosae-caninae, three other species have also been recorded in China (Tai 1979, Chen 2003). The species associated with Rosa have relatively wide host ranges mainly concentrated in the Rosaceae, excluding the Fagaceae (Weiss 1950, Sutton 1980, Nag Raj 1993), and the choice of host may also be affected by the geographical environment. For example, M. turgida, has been recorded on Rosa spp. in India, on Crataegus spp. in the USA, and on Pyrus spp in China (Mathur 1979, Tai 1979, Nag Raj 1993). Besides the three species on Rosa mentioned above (M. concentrica, M. seiridioides and M. turgida), 16 species of Monochaetia have been recorded from China (Table 7). Among them, Chen et al. (2002) introduced seven Monochaetia species based on morphology and host, i.e., M. caryotae on Caryota ochlandra, M. cycadis on Cycas revoluta, M. elaeocarpi on Elaeocarpus serratus, M. garciniae on Garcinia tinctoria, M. hirta on Castanopsis fabri, M. sabinae on Sabina chinensis and M. salaccae on Salacca secanda, and all these species are endemic to China. Although sequence data for these species are not available and reliance only on morphology and host data in Monochaetia taxonomy is far from perfect, the ongoing discovery of this genus from other hosts except for Fagaceae in China will deepen our understanding of the species in this genus. It is worth mentioning that Zhao & Li (1994) have described a species M. nodosporella, the hosts of which include also Castanopsis spp. Characteristics of this species are quite different from morphological characters of Monochaetia, including 4-celled distoseptate conidia with two olivaceous-brown median cells, lacking appendages. Considering the limited sampling and the lack of sequence data, the taxonomy of M. nodosporella remains unresolved and will be treated once DNA sequence data have been obtained. Aside from the species associated with Rosa and the Chinese endemic species mentioned above, the remaining species recorded in China have a relatively small range of host plants mainly on Castanea and Quercus, and are geographically widespread (Tai 1979, Zhao & Li 1994, Chen et al. 2002). For example, M. monochaeta and M. kansensis have also been recorded in many countries besides China, but the hosts are basically Quercus and Castanea (Ellis & Everhart 1893, Weiss 1950, Guba 1961, Nag Raj 1993, Cho & Shin 2004, Kobayashi 2007). Therefore, for the new species M. rosarum described in this study, many specimens still need to be collected to improve our understanding of its host range and distribution.

Table 7.

Monochaetia species that have been recorded in China in previous studies

Species	Host	Location	Collector	References
Monochaetia caryotae	Caryota ochlandra	Guangxi, China	Y.X. Chen & G. Wei	Chen et al. (2002)
M. castaneae	Castanea mollissima	Sichuan, China	N. Jiang	Jiang et al. (2021)
M. celaeocarpi	Elaeocarpus serratus	Hainan, China	Z.W. Wang & G. Wei	Chen et al. (2002)
M. concentrica	Rosa xanthina	Jilin, China	P.K. Qi	Tai (1979)
M. cycadis	Cycas revoluta	Guangxi, China	G. Wei	Chen et al. (2002)
M. diospyri	Diospyros lotus	–	–	Chen et al. (2002)
M. garciniae	Garcinia tinctoria	Hainan, China	Z.W. Wang & G. Wei	Chen et al. (2002)
M. hirta	Castanopsis fabri	Hainan, China	Z.W. Wang & G. Wei	Chen et al. (2002)
M. kansensis	Castanea mollissima	–	–	Chen et al. (2002)
	Quercus dentata	Henan, China	M.Q, Wang	Tai (1979)
	Q. dentata	Gansu, China	Y.R. Meng	Meng (2003)
M. monochaeta	Q. dentata	Gansu, China	Y.R. Meng	Meng et al. (2003)
	Q. variabilis	Jiangsu, China	–	Teng (1963)
	Q. variabilis	Jiangsu, China	Q.Y. Shen	Tai (1979)
M. nattrassii	Camellia sinensis	Hong Kong	–	Sutton et al. (1980)
M. nodosporella	Castanopsis delavayi	Yunnan, China	Zhao & Li	Zhao & Li (1994)
M. sabinae	Sabina chinensis	Guangxi, China	G. Wei	Chen et al. (2002)
M. saccardoi	Q. variabilis	Jiangsu, China	–	Teng (1963)
M. salaccae	Salacca secunda	Yunnan, China	G. Wei	Chen et al. (2002)
M. seiridioides	R. xanthina	Henan, China	M.Q, Wang	Tai (1979)
M. turgida	Pyrus communis	Guangdong, China	Z. Tu	Tai (1979)

Seiridium generally produces 5-septate conidia with a single centric apical and single excentric basal appendage (Bonthond et al. 2018, Liu et al. 2019). Nees (1817) established Seiridium based on Seir. marginatum which was collected from rose stems in Germany, and this is also the earliest record of pestalotioid fungi on the Rosa plants. Presently, besides the type species Seir. marginatum, only one Seiridium species has been recorded from Rosa, namely Seir. rosarum, which is distributed in Europe and Australia (Sutton 1980, Nag Raj 1993, Jaklitsch et al. 2016). In this study, a new species Seir. rosae was introduced from R. multiflora in China. The newly described species can be distinguished from most Seiridium species by its numerous appendages, which are branched, while in Seiridium appendages are fewer and generally unbranched (Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014). However, conidial appendages are branched, which is not unique to Seir. rosae in Seiridium and is also typical for Seir. indicum, Seir. pezizoides and Seir. venetum (Pavgi & Singh 1970, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2015, Marin-Felix et al. 2019). Seiridium rosae is easily distinguishable from these three species based on conidial morphology (Table 8). It is worth mentioning that Seiridium is the most important pathogen group in Sporocadaceae (Bonthond et al. 2018). Seiridium is the main pathogen of cypress canker and causes huge economic losses worldwide (Boesewinkel 1983, Graniti 1986, 1993, 1998, Barnes et al. 2001, Tsopelas et al. 2007). There are currently nine species of Seiridium recorded in China, with diverse hosts (Table 9). However, thus far China still has no record of Seiridium spp. on Cupressaceae.

Table 8.

Synopsis of species with branched appendages in Seiridium.

Species	Length of conidia (μm)	Width of conidia (μm)	Length of apical appendages (μm)	Length of basal appendages (μm)	Host	Country	References
Seiridium indicum	22–30.8	7.7–8.8	4.4–11	1–1.8	Spirea micrantha	India	Nag Raj (1993)
Seir. pezizoides	28–33.5	7–8	8.5–27	5.5–14	Vitis vinifera	Italy	Marin-Felix et al. (2019)
Seir. rosae	31–35	8–9.5	28.5–44.5	3–4.5	Rosa rugosa	China	Present study
Seir. venetum	20–30	6.5–8.5	10–35	2–5	Cornus sanguinea	Italy	Nag Raj (1993)

* Newly described taxa is in bold.

Table 9.

Seiridium species that have been recorded in China in previous studies.

Species	Host	Location	Collector	References
Seiridium camelliae	Camellia reticulata	Yunnan, China	Y.M. Zhang	Maharachchikumbura et al. (2015)
Seir. ceratosporum	Vitis vinifera	Yunnan, China	–	Bonthond et al. (2018)
Seir. chinense	Trachycarpus fortunei	Shaanxi, China	N. Jiang & C.M. Tian	Jiang et al. (2018)
Seir. cupressi	Vitis sp.	Zhejiang, China	–	Teng (1996)
Seir. eriobotryae	Eriobotrya japonica	Guangxi, China	G. Wei	Chen et al. (2002)
Seir. manilkarae	Manilkara zapota	Yunnan, China	G. Wei	Chen et al. (2002)
Seir. pezizoides	Camellia oleifera	Hunan, China	J.X. Yu	Yu et al. (2018)
Seir. unicorne	Eriobotrya japonica	Jiangsu, China	F.L. Tai	Tai (1979)
	Malus mandshurica	Jilin, China	Miura	Tai (1979)
	M. prunifolia	Jilin, China	P.K. Qi	Tai (1979)
	M. pumila	Yunnan, China	L.D. Lin	Tai (1979)
	Pyrus ussuriensis	Jilin, China	P.K. Qi	Tai (1979)
	Sorbus alnifolia	Jilin, China	Miura	Tai (1979)
	V. vinifera	Jiangsu, China	L. Ling	Tai (1979)
Seir. venetum	Cornus sp.	Yunnan, China	–	Tai (1979)

In this study, the species diversity of Sporocadaceae on the stems and spines of Rosa was significantly higher than that on the leaves and fruits. Nevertheless, a new species Seim. nonappendiculatum was isolated from the fruits of Rosa laevigata and Pes. rhodomyrtus, that was first reported on Rosa, was isolated from leaves of Rosa rugosa. Therefore, the leaves and fruits of Rosa plants might harbour many more species of pestalotioid fungi yet unknown to science. This study represents the first systematic investigation, morphological and molecular characterisation of Sporocadaceae on Rosa. The findings of this study reveal taxonomic, morphological and biological diversity of Sporocadaceae associated with different Rosa spp. in China. Other than expanding our knowledge of the genetic diversity and hosts of Sporocadaceae on Rosa, it provides crucially important information to understand the ecology of the Sporocadaceae associated with Rosa. Further study is needed to test the pathogenicity of these species and understand their biological and epidemiological characteristics to contribute towards better disease management.

Fig. 27.

Isolation rate (%) of Sporocadaceae species from each Rosa organs.

Fig. 28.

Isolation rate (%) of Sporocadaceae genera from each Rosa sp.

Supplementary material

Fig. S1

Phylogenetic tree of Monochaetia resulting from maximum likelihood (ML) analysis of the ITS sequence alignment. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Isolates collected in this study are in bold and blue.

Fig. S2

Phylogenetic trees based on maximum likelihood (ML) analyses for species in Neopestalotiopsis. a. ITS region; b. TEF gene region; c. TUB gene region. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Isolates collected in this study are in bold and blue.

Fig. S3

Phylogenetic trees based on maximum likelihood (ML) analyses for species in Pestalotiopsis. a. ITS region; b. TEF gene region; c. TUB gene region. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Isolates collected in this study are in bold and blue.

Fig. S4

Phylogenetic trees based on maximum likelihood (ML) analyses for species in Seimatosporium. a. ITS region; b. LSU gene region. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Isolates collected in this study are in bold and blue.

Fig. S5

Phylogenetic trees based on maximum likelihood (ML) analyses for species in Seiridium. a. ITS region; b. RPB2 gene region; c. TEF gene region; d. TUB gene region. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RaxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Isolates collected in this study are in bold and blue.

Fig. S6

Phylogenetic trees based on maximum likelihood (ML) analyses for species in Sporocadus. a. ITS region; b. LSU gene region; c. RPB2 gene region; d. TEF gene region; e. TUB gene region. Nodes are labelled with bootstrap values from RAxML/Parsimony bootstrap/Bayesian posterior probabilities values. Nodes receiving below 50 bootstrap values and 0.5 probability values are not labelled. The scale bar represents the expected number of changes per site. Isolates collected in this study are in bold and blue.