Skip to main content
NCBI home page
MycoKeys logoLink to MycoKeys
. 2025 Dec 4;126:75–91. doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.126.174186

Two new species of Neohelicomyces (Tubeufiaceae, Tubeufiales) from Hainan Province, China

Fan Gao 1, Ting-Hong Tan 1,✉, Song Bai 2,✉, Chun-Fang Wu 1, Ning-Ning Zhao 1, Na Qiu 1, Min Zhou 1, Jian Ma 2,3,✉
PMCID: PMC12699345  PMID: 41395223

Abstract

During a survey of helicosporous hyphomycetes in tropical regions, four fungal strains were isolated from decaying wood in terrestrial habitats of Hainan Province, China. Based on combined phylogenetic analyses of LSU, ITS, tef1-α, and rpb2 sequence data, together with morphological evidence, two novel species, Neohelicomyces terrestris and N. tropicus, are herein proposed. Comprehensive descriptions, illustrations, taxonomic notes, and phylogenetic analyses are provided to confirm the taxonomic placement. The newly described species were found in tropical rainforests, thereby expanding the known distribution of Neohelicomyces in tropical terrestrial habitats.

Key words: Dothideomycetes , helicosporous hyphomycetes, phylogeny, taxonomy, two new species

Introduction

Helicosporous hyphomycetes are a group of asexual fungi characterized by helicoid or spiral conidia (Lu and Kang 2020; Ma et al. 2024b). To date, reported helicosporous hyphomycetes belong to three phyla (Ascomycota, Basidiomycota, and Zoopagomycota), 10 classes (Agaricomycetes, Atractiellomycetes, Dothideomycetes, Eurotiomycetes, Exobasidiomycetes, Leotiomycetes, Orbiliomycetes, Sordariomycetes, Tremellomycetes, and Zoopagomycetes), 20 orders (Agaricales, Atractiellales, Chaetosphaeriales, Exobasidiales, Helotiales, Hypocreales, Lulworthiales, Microascales, Microthyriales, Mycosphaerellales, Mytilinidiales, Orbiliales, Pleosporales, Pleurotheciales, Sclerococcales, Torpedosporales, Tremellales, Tubeufiales, Venturiales, and Zoopagales), 25 families, 103 genera, and nine fossil genera (Morgan 1892; Moore 1957; Rao and Rao 1964; Goos 1985; Tsui et al. 2006; Boonmee et al. 2011, 2014, 2021; Hyde et al. 2016; Singh and Singh 2016; Chaiwan et al. 2017; Dai et al. 2017; Doilom et al. 2017; Tibpromma et al. 2018; Li et al. 2022; Tian et al. 2022). Among them, the Tubeufiaceae (Tubeufiales, Dothideomycetes) is the most species-rich and morphologically diverse group of helicosporous hyphomycetes (Lu et al. 2017, 2018a, 2018b, 2022, 2023b; Luo et al. 2017; Ma et al. 2023, 2024b, 2025). Helicosporous genera within Tubeufiaceae, such as Helicoma, Helicomyces, Helicosporium, Neohelicomyces, Neohelicosporium, and Tubeufia, represent important fungal resources capable of producing secondary metabolites with novel chemical structures and notable bioactivities (Lu et al. 2018b; Lu and Kang 2020; Zeng et al. 2022; Qian et al. 2023; Zhang et al. 2023a, 2023b, 2024; Zheng et al. 2023). These compounds show considerable potential in drug development, including antitumor, anticancer, and antibacterial applications (Ma et al. 2024b).

Neohelicomyces Z.L. Luo, D.J. Bhat & K.D. Hyde was established by Luo et al. (2017) with N. aquaticus as the type species, based on phylogenetic analyses of combined LSU, ITS, and tef1-α sequence data and morphological characteristics. Currently, Neohelicomyces comprises 32 accepted species (Luo et al. 2017; Lu et al. 2018b, 2022; Tibpromma et al. 2018; Crous et al. 2019a, 2019b; Dong et al. 2020; Hsieh et al. 2021; Yang et al. 2023; Ma et al. 2024b; Lin et al. 2025; Peng et al. 2025; Sun et al. 2025). Species of Neohelicomyces are distributed across China, the Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Thailand, and the USA, occurring as saprobes on various substrates such as bamboo culms, Deschampsia cespitosa, Fraxinus excelsior, Melaleuca styphelioides, Miscanthus floridulus, Pandanus sp., Quercus robur, and decaying wood in both freshwater and terrestrial habitats (Linder 1929; Goos 1986, 1989, 1990; Tsui et al. 2006; Zhao et al. 2007; Ruibal et al. 2009; Luo et al. 2017; Lu et al. 2018b, 2022; Tibpromma et al. 2018; Crous et al. 2019a, 2019b; Dong et al. 2020; Hsieh et al. 2021; Yang et al. 2023; Ma et al. 2024b; Lin et al. 2025; Peng et al. 2025; Sun et al. 2025). The asexual morph of Neohelicomyces is characterized by gregarious, white, grayish-brown, yellowish-green, and pinkish colonies; macronematous, mononematous, erect, septate, pale brown, branched and/or unbranched conidiophores; mono- to polyblastic, integrated, terminal or intercalary conidiogenous cells with denticles; and acropleurogenous or pleurogenous, aseptate or septate, guttulate, hyaline, helicoid conidia (Yang et al. 2023; Ma et al. 2024a, 2024b; Peng et al. 2025). The sexual morph is characterized by superficial, solitary, scattered, reddish brown to brown, subglobose ascomata; eight-spored, bitunicate, cylindric-clavate, rounded-at-apex, short-pedicellate asci; and multiseriate, narrowly cylindrical, straight to slightly curved, hyaline to pale brown, septate, rough ascospores (Sun et al. 2025).

In this study, four isolates of helicosporous hyphomycetes, representing two distinct taxonomic lineages, were collected from terrestrial environments in Hainan Province, China. Comprehensive analyses, including detailed morphological observations, illustrations, and multigene phylogenetic assessments, were conducted to accurately characterize these isolates. Based on the integrative evidence, two previously undescribed species are proposed and formally introduced here: Neohelicomyces terrestris and N. tropicus. These findings not only expand the current understanding of the genus Neohelicomyces but also provide valuable insights into its diversity in tropical terrestrial habitats.

Materials and methods

Sample collection, specimen examination, and isolation

Decaying wood was collected from Hainan Province, southwestern China. Samples were taken to the laboratory in plastic bags with the collection details, including localities and dates (Rathnayaka et al. 2024). The microscopic features were examined and photographed using a stereomicroscope (SMZ-168, Nikon, Japan) and an ECLIPSE Ni compound microscope (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) with a Canon 90D digital camera (Canon, China). Measurements were made using Tarosoft (R) Image Frame Work software. Photo plates were assembled using Adobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Adobe Systems, USA).

Single-spore isolation was performed following the methods described by Senanayake et al. (2020), and the germinated conidia were aseptically transferred to fresh PDA plates. Morphological characters of fungal colonies, including color, shape, and size, were documented. Dried specimens were deposited in the Herbarium of the Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences (Herb. HKAS), Kunming, China, and the Herbarium of the Guizhou Academy of Agriculture Sciences (Herb. GZAAS), Guiyang, China. Pure cultures were deposited in the Guizhou Culture Collection (GZCC), Guiyang, China. MycoBank numbers of the newly obtained species were registered in the MycoBank database (https://www.mycobank.org/).

DNA extraction, PCR amplification, and sequencing

Fresh fungal mycelia were scraped from colonies grown on PDA plates and transferred to a 1.5 mL microcentrifuge tube using a sterilized lancet for genomic DNA extraction. Genomic DNA was extracted using the Biospin Fungus Genomic DNA Extraction Kit (BioFlux, China). LR0R/LR5, ITS5/ITS4, EF1-983F/EF1-2218R, and fRPB2-5F/fRPB2-7cR were employed to amplify the large ribosomal subunit (LSU; Vilgalys and Hester 1990), internal transcribed spacer (ITS; White et al. 1990), translation elongation factor 1-alpha (tef1-α; Rehner and Buckley 2005), and RNA polymerase II second-largest subunit (rpb2; Liu et al. 1999) sequence fragments, respectively. DNA preparation was conducted in a 25 μL mixture, which included 1 μL DNA, 1 μL each of the forward and reverse primers, and 22 μL of 1.1× T3 Super PCR Mix (including 8.5 μL distilled-deionized water; Tsingke Biotech, Chongqing, China). The conditions for the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) correspond to those reported by Ma et al. (2023). The PCR products were purified and sequenced with the same primers at Beijing Tsingke Biotechnology Co., Ltd.

Phylogenetic analyses

The newly obtained sequences were checked and assembled using BioEdit v.7.0.5.3 (Hall 1999) and SeqMan v.7.0.0 (DNASTAR, Madison, WI, USA; Swindell and Plasterer 1997), respectively. The sequences incorporated in this study were downloaded from GenBank (Table 1; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). Multiple sequences were aligned using MAFFT v.7.473 (https://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server/; Katoh et al. 2019). The dataset was trimmed using trimAl v.1.2rev59 software (Capella-Gutiérrez et al. 2009). A combined sequence dataset was created using SequenceMatrix-Windows-1.7.8 software (Vaidya et al. 2011).

Table 1.

Taxa used in this study and their GenBank accession numbers.

Taxon Strain GenBank Accessions
LSU ITS tef1-α rpb2
Helicotubeufia hydei MFLUCC 17-1980T MH290026 MH290021 MH290031 MH290036
Helicotubeufia jonesii MFLUCC 17-0043T MH290025 MH290020 MH290030 MH290035
Neohelicomyces acropleurogenus CGMCC 3.25549T PP639450 PP626594 PP596351 PP596478
Neohelicomyces aquaticus MFLUCC 16-0993T KY320545 KY320528 KY320561 MH551066
Neohelicomyces aquisubtropicus GZCC 23-0080T PQ098537 PQ098499 PV768327 PV768336
Neohelicomyces aseptatus CGMCC 3.25564T PP639451 PP626595 PP596352 PP596479
Neohelicomyces astrictus HKAS 105122T PQ898796 PQ898760 PV040811 N/A
Neohelicomyces brunneus HKAS 105147T PQ898805 PQ898768 PV040818 N/A
Neohelicomyces dehongensis MFLUCC 18-1029T MN913709 NR_171880 MT954393 N/A
Neohelicomyces denticulatus GZCC 19-0444T MW133855 OP377832 N/A N/A
Neohelicomyces deschampsiae CPC 33686T MK442538 MK442602 N/A N/A
Neohelicomyces edgeworthiae CGMCC 3.25565T PP639453 PP626597 PP596354 PP596481
Neohelicomyces grandisporus KUMCC 15-0470T KX454174 KX454173 N/A MH551067
Neohelicomyces guizhouensis GZCC 23-0725T PP512973 PP512969 PP526727 PP526733
Neohelicomyces guttulatus CGMCC 3.25550T PP639454 PP626598 PP596355 N/A
Neohelicomyces hainanensis GZCC 22-2009T OP508774 OP508734 OP698085 OP698074
Neohelicomyces helicosporus GZCC 23-0633T PP512975 PP512971 PP526729 PP526735
Neohelicomyces hyalosporus GZCC 16-0086T MH558870 MH558745 MH550936 MH551064
Neohelicomyces hydei GZCC 23-0727T PP512977 N/A PP526731 PP526737
Neohelicomyces lignicola CGMCC 3.25551T PP639456 PP626600 PP596357 PP596483
Neohelicomyces longisetosus NCYU-106H1-1-1T N/A MT939303 N/A N/A
Neohelicomyces macrosporus CGMCC 3.25552T PP639457 PP626601 PP596358 PP596484
Neohelicomyces maolanensis GZCC 23-0079T PQ098529 N/A PQ490683 PQ490677
Neohelicomyces melaleucae CPC 38042T MN567661 MN562154 MN556835 N/A
Neohelicomyces pallidus CBS 271.52 AY856887 AY916461 N/A N/A
Neohelicomyces pallidus CBS 962.69 AY856886 AY916460 N/A N/A
Neohelicomyces pandanicola KUMCC 16-0143T MH260307 MH275073 MH412779 N/A
Neohelicomyces qixingyaensis CGMCC 3.25569T PP639458 PP626602 PP596359 PP596485
Neohelicomyces sexualis HGUP 24-0021T PQ570861 PQ570844 N/A N/A
Neohelicomyces sp. GMBCC 2225 PX308848 PX308843 PX314510 PX314514
Neohelicomyces sp. GMBCC 2217 PX308846 PQ737369 PX314508 PX314512
Neohelicomyces submersus MFLUCC 16-1106T KY320547 KY320530 N/A MH551068
Neohelicomyces subtropicus GZCC 23-0076T PQ098530 PQ098492 PQ490685 PQ490679
Neohelicomyces terrestris GZCC 23-0399T PX575662 PX575639 PX512845 PX512836
Neohelicomyces terrestris GZCC 25-0660 PX575663 PX575640 PX512846 PX512837
Neohelicomyces thailandicus MFLUCC 11-0005T MN913696 NR_171882 N/A N/A
Neohelicomyces tropicus GZCC 25-0661T PX575664 PX575641 PX512847 PX512838
Neohelicomyces tropicus GZCC 25-0662 PX575665 PX575642 PX512848 PX512839
Neohelicomyces wuzhishanensis GZCC 23-0410T PQ098532 PQ098494 PV768325 PV768334
Neohelicomyces xiayadongensis CGMCC 3.25568T PP639460 PP626604 PP596361 PP596487
Neohelicomyces yunnanensis GZCC 23-0735T PP664113 PP664109 N/A N/A
Tubeufia guttulata GZCC 23-0404T OR030834 OR030841 OR046678 OR046684
Tubeufia hainanensis GZCC 22-2015T OR030835 OR030842 OR046679 OR046685
Tubeufia javanica MFLUCC 12-0545T KJ880036 KJ880034 KJ880037 N/A
Tubeufia krabiensis MFLUCC 16-0228T MH558917 MH558792 MH550985 MH551118
Tubeufia latispora MFLUCC 16-0027T KY092412 KY092417 KY117033 MH551119
Tubeufia laxispora MFLUCC 16-0232T KY092408 KY092413 KY117029 MF535287
Tubeufia mackenziei MFLUCC 16-0222T KY092410 KY092415 KY117031 MF535288
Tubeufia muriformis GZCC 22-2039T OR030836 OR030843 OR046680 OR046686
Tubeufia nigroseptum CGMCC 3.20430T MZ853187 MZ092716 OM022002 OM022001
Tubeufia pandanicola MFLUCC 16-0321T MH260325 MH275091 N/A N/A
Open in a new tab

Note: “T” indicates ex-type strains. Newly generated sequences are in bold. “N/A” indicates unavailable data in GenBank.

The maximum likelihood (ML) analysis was carried out using RAxML-HPC v.8 on XSEDE (8.2.12) with a GTRGAMMA approximation and rapid bootstrap analysis followed by 1,000 bootstrap replicates (Stamatakis 2014). The substitution model was automatically tested by the server. Bayesian Inference (BI) analysis was performed using MrBayes on XSEDE (3.2.7a) via CIPRES (Stamatakis 2014). The aligned FASTA file was converted to a Nexus format file using AliView (Daniel et al. 2010). The best-fit evolutionary model for the individual datasets was determined using MrModeltest v.2.3.10 (Nylander et al. 2008). The GTR+G+I substitution model was selected for LSU, ITS, and tef1-α, whereas the SYM+I+G model was applied to rpb2. The posterior probabilities (BYPP) were determined based on Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (BMCMC) sampling (Huelsenbeck and Ronquist 2001). Four simultaneous Markov chains were run for 10,000,000 generations, and trees were sampled every 1,000th generation. The burn-in phase was set at 25%, and the remaining trees were used for calculating posterior probabilities (BYPP).

Phylogenetic trees were visualized using FigTree v.1.4.4 and edited with Adobe Illustrator CC 2019 (v.23.1.0; Adobe Systems, USA).

Phylogenetic results

The phylogenetic positions of the four novel strains were assessed using a multi-locus phylogenetic approach. The concatenated sequence matrix comprised 3,431 characters (LSU: 1–856, ITS: 857–1,450, tef1-α: 1,451–2,362, and rpb2: 2,363–3,431) across 51 taxa. Base frequencies and rates were A = 0.249274, C = 0.247026, G = 0.255949, and T = 0.247750; substitution rates were AC = 1.139215, AG = 5.117176, AT = 2.501758, CG = 1.050796, CT = 8.734543, and GT = 1.000000. The distribution shape parameter α equaled 0.181304.

Based on the multi-gene phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1), our collections are identified as two distinct Neohelicomyces species within the family Tubeufiaceae (Tubeufiales, Dothideomycetes). The isolates GZCC 23-0399 and GZCC 25-0660 formed a sister clade to N. wuzhishanensis (GZCC 23-0410), with robust support of 87% ML and 1.00 BYPP. Furthermore, isolates GZCC 25-0661 and GZCC 25-0662 clustered together and formed a sister clade to N. hainanensis (GZCC 22-2009), with 95% ML and 1.00 BYPP support (Fig. 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Phylogenetic tree generated from maximum likelihood (ML) analysis based on the combined LSU, ITS, tef1-α, and rpb2 sequence data. Bootstrap support values for ML (≥ 70%) and BYPP (≥ 0.95) are indicated near their respective nodes. Both Maximum Likelihood (ML) and Bayesian Inference (BYPP) analyses produced congruent topologies. A hyphen (“-”) indicates a value lower than 70% for ML and a posterior probability lower than 0.95 for Bayesian inference. The tree is rooted with Helicotubeufia hydei (MFLUCC 17-1980) and H. jonesii (MFLUCC 17-0043). Ex-type strains are denoted with “T,” and newly obtained strains are in bold black fonts.

Taxonomy

. Neohelicomyces terrestris

T.H. Tan & J. Ma sp. nov.

609D7686-4B51-5D7B-9419-66681785D632

904429

Fig. 2

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Neohelicomyces terrestris (HKAS 128950, holotype). a, b. Colonies on the host surface; c–e. Conidiophores and conidiogenous cells; f–h. Conidiogenous cells; i–n. Conidia; o, p. Colonies on PDA from above and below. Scale bars: 50 μm (c–e); 10 μm (f–n).

Etymology.

The species epithet “terrestris’’ refers to the terrestrial habitat of this fungus.

Holotype.

HKAS 128950.

Description.

Saprobic on decaying wood in a terrestrial habitat. Sexual morph Undetermined. Asexual morph Hyphomycetous, helicosporous. Colo­nies on natural substrate superficial, effuse, gregarious, with masses of crowded, glistening conidia, white to brown. Mycelium partly immersed, partly superficial, composed of hyaline to pale brown, branched, septate, smooth hyphae. Conidiophores 106–212 × 3–4.5 μm (x̄ = 176 × 4 μm, n = 25), macronematous, mononematous, erect, cylindrical, flexuous, widest at the base, tapering towards narrow apex, branched or unbranched, septate, brown at base, subhyaline towards apex, thick-walled. Conidiogenous cells 7.5–25 × 2–4 μm (x̄ = 13.5 × 3.5 μm, n = 25), holoblastic, monoblastic, or polyblastic, integrated, terminal or intercalary, cylindrical, with denticles, subhyaline to pale brown, smooth-walled. Conidia solitary, acropleurogenous, helicoid, developing on tooth-like protrusion, 15–21 μm diam. and conidial filament 2.5–3.5 μm wide (x̄ = 17.5 × 3 μm, n = 20), 107–143 μm long (x̄ = 128.5 μm, n = 30), loosely coiled 21/2–3 times, becoming loosely coiled in water, septate, guttulate, hyaline, smooth-walled.

Culture characteristics.

Conidia germinated on PDA and produced germ tubes within 11 h. Colonies on PDA reached 27 mm in diameter after 40 days of incubation at 25 °C, with an irregular shape, raised surface, and undulate margin, pale brown to brown; the reverse was brown to dark brown.

Material examined.

China • Hainan Province, Wuzhishan City, Shuimanhe tropical rainforest scenic area in Wuzhishan, 18°92′N, 109°63′E, on decaying wood in a terrestrial habitat, 4 November 2024, Ting-Hong Tan & Jian Ma, WZ66 (HKAS 128950, holotype), ex-type living cultures GZCC 23-0399 • ibid., WZ67 (GZAAS 23-0403, paratype), living culture GZCC 25-0660.

Notes.

Morphologically, Neohelicomyces terrestris (HKAS 128950) resembles Parahelicomyces laxisporus (HKAS 128943) in having macronematous, mononematous, erect, widest-at-the-base, tapering-towards-a-narrow-apex, brown-at-base, subhyaline-towards-apex, flexuous conidiophores; holoblastic, monoblastic or polyblastic, integrated, cylindrical conidiogenous cells with denticles, subhyaline to pale brown; and acropleurogenous, helicoid, aseptate, guttulate, hyaline conidia (Ma et al. 2024b). However, N. terrestris (HKAS 128950) differs from Pa. laxisporus (HKAS 128943) by its wider conidial diameter (up to 21 μm vs. 14.5–16 μm) and longer conidia (up to 143 μm vs. 80.5–124 μm) (Ma et al. 2024b). Phylogenetically, our isolates (GZCC 23-0399 and GZCC 25-0660) form a sister clade to N. wuzhishanensis (GZCC 23-0410), with 87% ML and 1.00 BYPP support (Fig. 1). Comparison of the LSU, ITS, tef1-α, and rpb2 sequence data between Neohelicomyces terrestris (GZCC 23-0399) and N. wuzhishanensis (GZCC 23-0410) revealed nucleotide base differences of 5/486 bp (1%, including three gaps), 26/484 bp (5.4%, including 10 gaps), 25/937 bp (2.7%, including seven gaps), and 33/926 bp (3.6%, with no gaps), respectively. Therefore, based on both multi-gene phylogenetic analyses and morphological differences, we introduce Neohelicomyces terrestris as a novel species.

. Neohelicomyces tropicus

T.H. Tan & J. Ma sp. nov.

AEE65D81-C4A0-57F3-A5FA-E2DD51230827

904430

Fig. 3

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Neohelicomyces tropicus (GZAAS 25-0675, holotype). a. Colonies on the host surface; b–d. Conidiophores, conidiogenous cells, and conidia; e–g. Conidiogenous cells; j: Germinated conidium; k–q. Conidia; h, i. Colonies on PDA from above and below. Scale bars: 50 μm (b–d); 10 μm (e–g, j–q).

Etymology.

The species epithet “tropicus” refers to the tropical climate in which the species occurs.

Holotype.

GZAAS 25-0675.

Description.

Saprobic on decaying wood in a terrestrial habitat. Sexual morph Undetermined. Asexual morph Hyphomycetous, helicosporous. Colonies on natural substrate superficial, gregarious, with a little of crowded, glistening conidia, white. Mycelium partly immersed, partly superficial, composed of hyaline to pale brown, branched, septate, smooth hyphae. Conidiophores 139–175 × 4–5.5 μm (x̄ = 154 × 4.5 μm, n = 25), macronematous, mononematous, erect, cylindrical, straight or slightly flexuous, branched or unbranched, septate, subhyaline to pale brown, thick-walled. Conidiogenous cells 10–17 × 3–4 μm (x̄ = 14 × 3.5 μm, n = 25), holoblastic, monoblastic or polyblastic, integrated, terminal or intercalary, cylindrical, with denticles, subhyaline to pale brown, smooth-walled. Conidia solitary, acropleurogenous, helicoid, tapering towards the rounded ends, developing on tooth-like protrusion, 15.5–20 μm diam. and conidial filament 2–3.5 μm wide (x̄ = 17.5 × 2.5 μm, n = 20), 95–140 μm long (x̄ = 116 μm, n = 20), tightly coiled up to 3 times, becoming loosely coiled when the conidia are young and not becoming loose when mature in water, aseptate, guttulate, hyaline, smooth-walled.

Culture characteristics.

Conidia germinated on PDA and produced germ tubes within 14 h. Colonies on PDA reached 25 mm in diameter after 38 days of incubation at 25 °C with a circular shape, flat surface, and entire margin, pale brown to brown; the reverse was pale brown to brown.

Material examined.

China • Hainan Province, Baoting Li and Miao Autonomous County, Qixianling Hot Spring National Forest Park, on decaying wood in a terrestrial habitat, 2 November 2024, Ting-Hong Tan & Jian Ma, Q45 (GZAAS 25-0675, holotype), ex-type living culture GZCC 25-0661 • ibid., Q47 (GZAAS 25-0690, paratype), living culture GZCC 25-0662.

Notes.

In the phylogenetic analyses (Fig. 1), our isolates (GZCC 25-0661 and GZCC 25-0662) formed a well-supported sister clade to Neohelicomyces hainanensis (GZCC 22-2009), with 95% ML and 1.00 BYPP values. Morphologically, N. tropicus (GZAAS 25-0675) and N. hainanensis (GZAAS 22-2009) are nearly identical in their conidiophores, conidiogenous cells, and conidia (Lu et al. 2022). However, nucleotide comparisons among the LSU, ITS, tef1-α, and rpb2 sequence data between Neohelicomyces tropicus (GZCC 25-0661) and N. hainanensis (GZCC 22-2009) revealed differences of 4/815 bp (0.5%, with no gaps), 23/482 bp (4.8%, including 18 gaps), 15/912 bp (1.6%, with no gaps), and 27/1,045 bp (2.6%, with no gaps), respectively. Therefore, based on the molecular data, we introduce Neohelicomyces tropicus as a novel species.

Discussion

Helicosporous hyphomycetes share similar conidial characteristics, making accurate identification based solely on morphology challenging (Kuo and Goh 2018a, 2018b, 2021; Xiao et al. 2023; Ma et al. 2023, 2024b, 2025). Additional molecular evidence, particularly multi-gene phylogenetic analyses, is essential for accurate taxonomic delineation. However, accurate recognition of all key DNA markers used to identify and circumscribe helicosporous hyphomycetes depends on the availability and completeness of sequence data. The absence or partial representation of certain gene regions may lead to species misidentification. For instance, our newly isolated species, Neohelicomyces tropicus and N. hainanensis, exhibit only minor morphological differences and form sister clades in the phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1). When only ITS and LSU sequences are compared, the two taxa appear to represent the same species; however, further analyses of tef1-α and rpb2 sequences, together with interspecific variation, support the recognition of N. tropicus as a distinct species. Similarly, some species of Helicosporium, Neohelicosporium, and Tubeufia require tef1-α and rpb2 sequence data for accurate identification (Lu et al. 2018b; Xiao et al. 2023; Ma et al. 2024b).

Some helicosporous taxa exhibit similar conidial, conidiophore, and conidiogenous cell morphologies; however, multi-gene phylogenetic analyses have revealed that they belong to different genera (Lu et al. 2018b; Ma et al. 2024b). For instance, our newly introduced Neohelicomyces terrestris and certain Parahelicomyces species possess macronematous, mononematous, erect conidiophores that are widest at the base, tapering toward a narrow apex, brown at the base, subhyaline toward the apex, and flexuous. They also feature holoblastic, monoblastic to polyblastic, integrated, cylindrical conidiogenous cells with denticles that are subhyaline to pale brown and acropleurogenous, helicoid, aseptate, guttulate, hyaline conidia (Lu et al. 2018b; Ma et al. 2024b). Nevertheless, DNA sequence data clearly indicate that N. terrestris belongs to Neohelicomyces rather than Parahelicomyces. Furthermore, previous studies have demonstrated that certain morphologically similar helicosporous taxa are distributed across different genera, families, orders, and even classes (Lu et al. 2018b; Dayarathne et al. 2019; Jayasiri et al. 2019; Ma et al. 2024b). Therefore, accurate taxonomic identification of this group requires both morphological and molecular evidence.

Ecological factors appear to play a non-negligible role in the classification and diversification of helicosporous hyphomycetes (Ma et al. 2024b). These fungi are commonly associated with specific substrates such as decaying wood, submerged plant debris, or bamboo, which may influence their morphological adaptations and sporulation patterns. Therefore, ecological specialization may contribute not only to morphological differentiation but also to phylogenetic divergence within the group. Integrating ecological data with molecular evidence may thus provide a more comprehensive framework for understanding species boundaries and evolutionary relationships among helicosporous hyphomycetes.

Supplementary Material

XML Treatment for Neohelicomyces terrestris
XML Treatment for Neohelicomyces tropicus

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Shaun Pennycook (Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research, New Zealand) for his valuable suggestions on the fungal nomenclature.

Citation

Gao F, Tan T-H, Bai S, Wu C-F, Zhao N-N, Qiu N, Zhou M, Ma J (2025) Two new species of Neohelicomyces (Tubeufiaceae, Tubeufiales) from Hainan Province, China. MycoKeys 126: 75–91. https://doi.org/10.3897/mycokeys.126.174186

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the National Scholarship Fund of China Scholarship Council (CSC), the Projects of Guizhou Provincial Science and Technology (QKHZC-[2020]1Y065).

Contributor Information

Ting-Hong Tan, Email: tinghongtan@163.com.

Song Bai, Email: basonmail@163.com.

Jian Ma, Email: yanmajian@163.com.

Additional information

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Ethical statement

No ethical statement was reported.

Use of AI

No use of AI was reported.

Funding

This work was funded by the National Scholarship Fund of the China Scholarship Council (CSC) and the Projects of Guizhou Provincial Science and Technology (QKHZC-[2020]1Y065).

Author contributions

Writing – review and editing: JM, SB, THT, FG, CFW, NNZ, NQ, MZ.

Author ORCIDs

Fan Gao https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9887-9729

Ting-Hong Tan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2933-2696

Song Bai https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1972-2834

Chun-Fang Wu https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5166-0060

Ning-Ning Zhao https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4407-755X

Na Qiu https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1637-4720

Min Zhou https://orcid.org/0009-0009-6871-8928

Jian Ma https://orcid.org/0009-0008-1291-640X

Data availability

All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text.

References

  1. Boonmee S, Zhang Y, Chomnunti P, Chukeatirote E, Tsui CKM, Bahkali AH, Hyde KD. (2011) Revision of lignicolous Tubeufiaceae based on morphological reexamination and phylogenetic analysis. Fungal Diversity 51: 63–102. 10.1007/s13225-011-0147-4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Boonmee S, Rossman AY, Liu JK, Li WJ, Dai DQ, Bhat JD, Jones EBG, McKenzie EHC, Xu JC, Hyde KD. (2014) Tubeufiales, ord. nov., integrating sexual and asexual generic names. Fungal Diversity 68: 239–298. 10.1007/s13225-014-0304-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Boonmee S, Wanasinghe DN, Calabon MS, Huanraluek N, Chandrasiri SKU, Jones GEB, Rossi W, Leonardi M, Singh SK, Rana S, Singh PN, Maurya DK, Lagashetti AC, Choudhary D, Dai YC, Zhao CL, Mu YH, Yuan HS, He SH, Phookamsak R, Jiang HB, Martin MP, Duenas M, Telleria MT, Kalucka IL, Jagodzinski AM, Liimatainen K, Pereira DS, Phillips AJL, Suwannarach N, Kumla J, Khuna S, Lumyong S, Potter TB, Shivas RG, Sparks AH, Vaghefi N, Abdel-Wahab MA, Abdel-Aziz FA, Li GJ, Lin WF, Singh U, Bhatt RP, Lee HB, Nguyen TTT, Kirk PM, Dutta AK, Acharya K, Sarma VV, Niranjan M, Rajeshkumar KC, Ashtekar N, Lad S, Wijayawardene NN, Bhat DJ, Xu RJ, Wijesinghe SN, Shen HW, Luo ZL, Zhang JY, Sysouphanthong P, Thongklang N, Bao DF, Aluthmuhandiram JVS, Abdollahzadeh J, Javadi A, Dovana F, Usman M, Khalid AN, Dissanayake AJ, Telagathoti A, Probst M, Peintner U, Garrido-Benavent I, Bona L, Merenyi Z, Boros L, Zoltan B, Stielow JB, Jiang N, Tian CM, Shams E, Dehghanizadeh F, Pordel A, Javan-Nikkhah M, Denchev TT, Denchev CM, Kemler M, Begerow D, Deng CY, Harrower E, Bozorov T, Kholmuradova T, Gafforov Y, Abdurazakov A, Xu JC, Mortimer PE, Ren GC, Jeewon R, Maharachchikumbura SSN, Phukhamsakda C, Mapook A, Hyde KD. (2021) Fungal diversity notes 1387–1511: Taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions on genera and species of fungal taxa. Fungal Diversity 111: 1–335. 10.1007/s13225-021-00489-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Capella-Gutiérrez S, Silla-Martínez JM, Gabaldón T. (2009) trimAl: A tool for automated alignment trimming in large-scale phylogenetic analyses. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 25(15): 1972–1973. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp348 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chaiwan N, Lu YZ, Tibpromma S, Bhat DJ, Hyde KD, Boonmee S. (2017) Neotubeufia gen. nov. and Tubeufia guangxiensis sp. nov. (Tubeufiaceae) from freshwater habitats. Mycosphere: Journal of Fungal Biology 8: 1443–1456. 10.5943/mycosphere/8/9/9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Crous P, Schumacher RK, Akulov A, Thangavel R, Hernández-Restrepo M, Carnegie A, Cheewangkoon R, Wingfield MJ, Summerell BA, Quaedvlieg W. (2019a) New and interesting fungi. 2. Fungal Systematics and Evolution 3: 57–134. 10.3114/fuse.2019.03.06 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Crous PW, Wingfield M, Lombard L, Roets F, Swart W, Alvarado P, Carnegie A, Moreno G, Luangsaard J, Thangavel R. (2019b) Fungal Planet description sheets: 951–1041. Persoonia. Molecular Phylogeny and Evolution of Fungi 43: 223–425. 10.3767/persoonia.2019.43.06 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Dai DQ, Phookamsak R, Wijayawardene NN, Li WJ, Bhat DJ, Xu JC, Taylor JE, Hyde KD, Chukeatirote E. (2017) Bambusicolous fungi. Fungal Diversity 82: 1–105. 10.1007/s13225-016-0367-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Daniel GP, Daniel GB, Miguel RJ, Florentino FR, David P. (2010) ALTER: Program-oriented conversion of DNA and protein alignments. Nucleic Acids Research 38: W14–W18. 10.1093/nar/gkq321 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  10. Dayarathne MC, Maharachchikumbura SS, Jones EG, Dong W, Devadatha B, Yang J, Ekanayaka AH, De Silva W, Sarma VV, Al-Sadi AM. (2019) Phylogenetic revision of Savoryellaceae and evidence for its ranking as a subclass. Frontiers in Microbiology 10: 840. 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00840 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  11. Doilom M, Dissanayake AJ, Wanasinghe DN, Boonmee S, Liu JK, Bhat DJ, Taylor JE, Bahkali AH, McKenzie EHC, Hyde KD. (2017) Microfungi on Tectona grandis (teak) in Northern Thailand. Fungal Diversity 82: 107–182. 10.1007/s13225-016-0368-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Dong W, Wang B, Hyde KD, McKenzie EHC, Raja HA, Tanaka K, Abdel-Wahab MA, Abdel-Aziz FA, Doilom M, Phookamsak R, Hongsanan S, Wanasinghe DN, Yu XD, Wang GN, Yang H, Yang J, Thambugala KM, Tian Q, Luo ZL, Yang JB, Miller AN, Fournier J, Boonmee S, Hu DM, Nalumpang S, Zhang H. (2020) Freshwater Dothideomycetes. Fungal Diversity 105: 319–575. 10.1007/s13225-020-00463-5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Goos R. (1985) A review of the anamorph genus Helicomyces. Mycologia 77: 606–618. 10.1080/00275514.1985.12025146 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Goos R. (1986) A review of the anamorph genus Helicoma. Mycologia 78: 744–761. 10.1080/00275514.1986.12025318 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Goos R. (1989) On the anamorph genera Helicosporium and Drepanospora. Mycologia 81: 356–374. 10.1080/00275514.1989.12025759 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Goos RD. (1990) Review of the anamorph genus Xenosporium. Mycologia 82: 742–752. 10.2307/3760161 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Hall TA. (1999) BioEdit: A user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symposium Series 41: 95–98. [Google Scholar]
  18. Hsieh SY, Goh TK, Kuo CH. (2021) New species and records of Helicosporium sensu lato from Taiwan, with a reflection on current generic circumscription. Mycological Progress 20: 169–190. 10.1007/s11557-020-01663-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist FJB. (2001) MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 17: 754–755. 10.1093/bioinformatics/17.8.754 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Hyde KD, Hongsanan S, Jeewon R, Bhat DJ, McKenzie EHC, Jones EBG, Phookamsak R, Ariyawansa HA, Boonmee S, Zhao Q, Abdel-Aziz FA, Abdel-Wahab MA, Banmai S, Chomnunti P, Cui BK, Daranagama DA, Das K, Dayarathne MC, de Silva NI, Dissanayake AJ, Doilom M, Ehanayaka AH, Gibertoni TB, Go’es-Neto A, Huang SK, Jayasiri SC, Jayawardena RS, Konta S, Lee HB, Li WJ, Lin CG, Liu JK, Lu YZ, Luo ZL, Manawasinghe IS, Manimohan P, Mapook A, Niskanen T, Norphanphoun C, Papizadeh M, Perera RH, Phukhamsakda C, Richter C, de Santiago ALCM, Drechsler-Santos ER, Senanayake IC, Tanaka K, Tennakoon TMDS, Thambugala KM, Tian Q, Tibpromma S, Thongbai B, Vizzini A, Wanasinghe DN, Wijayawardene NN, Wu HX, Yang J, Zeng XY, Zhang H, Zhang JF, Bulgakov TS, Camporesi E, Bahkali AH, Amoozegar MA, Araujo-Neta LS, Ammirati JF, Baghela A, Bhatt RP, Bojantchev D, Buyck B, de Silva GA, de Lima CLF, de Oliveira RJV, de Souza CAF, Dai YC, Dima B, Duong TT, Ercole E, Mafalda-Freire F, Ghosh A, Hashimoto A, Kamolhan S, Kang JC, Karunarathna SC, Kirk PM, Kyto¨vuori I, Lantieri A, Liimatainen K, Liu ZY, Liu XZ, Lu¨cking R, Medardi G, Mortimer PE, Nguyen TTT, Promputtha I, Raj KNA, Reck MA, Lumyong S, Shahzadeh-Fazeli SA, Stadler M, Soudi MR, Su HY, Takahashi T, Tangthirasunun N, Uniyal P, Wang Y, Wen TC, Xu JC, Zhang ZK, Zhao YC, Zhou JL, Zhu L. (2016) Fungal diversity notes 367–490: Taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions to fungal taxa. Fungal Diversity 80: 1–270. 10.1007/s13225-016-0373-x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Jayasiri S, Hyde K, Jones E, McKenzie E, Jeewon R, Phillips A, Bhat D, Wanasinghe D, Liu J, Lu Y. (2019) Diversity, morphology and molecular phylogeny of Dothideomycetes on decaying wild seed pods and fruits. Mycosphere: Journal of Fungal Biology 10(1): 1–186. 10.5943/mycosphere/10/1/1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Katoh K, Rozewicki J, Yamada KD. (2019) MAFFT online service: Multiple sequence alignment, interactive sequence choice and visualization. Briefings in Bioinformatics 20: 1160–1166. 10.1093/bib/bbx108 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Kuo CH, Goh TK. (2018a) A new species and a new record of Helicomyces from Taiwan. Mycoscience 59(5): 433–440. 10.1016/j.myc.2018.04.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Kuo CH, Goh TK. (2018b) Two new species of helicosporous hyphomycetes from Taiwan. Mycological Progress 17: 557–569. 10.1007/s11557-018-1384-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Kuo CH, Goh TK. (2021) Two new species and one new record of Xenosporium with ellipsoidal or ovoid conidia from Taiwan. Mycologia 113(2): 434–449. 10.1080/00275514.2020.1837566 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Li LL, Shen HW, Bao DF, Lu YZ, Su HY, Luo ZL. (2022) New species, Parahelicomyces yunnanensis sp. nov. and Tubeufia nigroseptum sp. nov. from freshwater habitats in Yunnan, China. Phytotaxa 530(1): 21–37. 10.11646/phytotaxa.530.1.2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Lin CG, Hyde KD, Feng Y, Xiao P, Liu NG, Lu Z, Luo ZL, Liu JK. (2025) Notes, outline, systematics and phylogeny of hyaline-spored hyphomycetes. Fungal Diversity. 10.1007/s13225-025-00561-2 [DOI]
  28. Linder DH. (1929) A monograph of the helicosporous fungi imperfecti. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 16: 227–388. 10.2307/2394038 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Liu YJ, Whelen S, Hall BD. (1999) Phylogenetic relationships among ascomycetes: Evidence from an RNA polymerse II subunit. Molecular Biology and Evolution 16(12): 1799–1808. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026092 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Lu YZ, Kang JC. (2020) Research progress on helicosporous hyphomycetes. Journal of Fungal Research 18(4): 304–314. 10.13341/j.jfr.2020.8012 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Lu YZ, Boonmee S, Dai DQ, Liu JK, Hyde KD, Bhat DJ, Ariyawansa H, Kang JC. (2017) Four new species of Tubeufia (Tubeufiaceae, Tubeufiales) from Thailand. Mycological Progress 16: 403–417. 10.1007/s11557-017-1280-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Lu YZ, Boonmee S, Liu JK, Hyde KD, McKenzie EHC, Eungwanichayapant PD, Kang JC. (2018a) Multi-gene phylogenetic analyses reveals Neohelicosporium gen. nov. and five new species of helicosporous hyphomycetes from aquatic habitats. Mycological Progress 17: 631–646. 10.1007/s11557-017-1366-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Lu YZ, Liu JK, Hyde KD, Jeewon R, Kang JC, Fan C, Boonmee S, Bhat DJ, Luo ZL, Lin CG. (2018b) A taxonomic reassessment of Tubeufiales based on multi-locus phylogeny and morphology. Fungal Diversity 92: 131–344. 10.1007/s13225-018-0411-y [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Lu YZ, Ma J, Xiao XJ, Zhang LJ, Xiao YP, Kang JC. (2022) Four new species and three new records of helicosporous hyphomycetes from China and their multi-gene phylogenies. Frontiers in Microbiology 13: 1053849. 10.3389/fmicb.2022.1053849 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  35. Lu YZ, Ma J, Xiao XJ, Zhang LJ, Ma XY, Xiao YP, Kang JC. (2023a) Two novel species and one new record of Helicoma from tropical China. Mycosystema 42(1): 263–277. 10.13346/j.mycosystema.220445 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Lu YZ, Ma J, Xiao XJ, Zhang LJ, Xiao YP, Kang JC. (2023b) Morphology and phylogeny of Tubeufia liyui sp. nov. Journal of Fungal Research 21(1/2/3): 14–23. 10.13341/j.jfr.2023.1582 [DOI]
  37. Luo ZL, Bhat DJ, Jeewon R, Boonmee S, Bao DF, Zhao YC, Chai HM, Su HY, Su XJ, Hyde KD. (2017) Molecular phylogeny and morphological characterization of asexual fungi (Tubeufiaceae) from freshwater habitats in Yunnan, China. Cryptogamie. Mycologie 38(1): 27–53. 10.7872/crym/v38.iss1.2017.27 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Ma J, Xiao XJ, Liu NG, Boonmee S, Xiao YP, Lu YZ. (2023) Morphological and multi-gene phylogenetic analyses reveal Pseudotubeufia gen. nov. and two new species in Tubeufiaceae from China. Journal of Fungi (Basel, Switzerland) 9: 742. 10.3390/jof9070742 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  39. Ma J, Gomdola D, Boonmee S, Shen HW, Tang X, Zhang LJ, Lu YZ, Hyde KD. (2024a) Three new species of Neohelicomyces (Tubeufiales, Tubeufiaceae) from freshwater and terrestrial habitats in China. MycoKeys 105: 317–336. 10.3897/mycokeys.105.124129 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Ma J, Hyde KD, Tibpromma S, Gomdola D, Liu NG, Norphanphoun C, Bao DF, Boonmee S, Xiao XJ, Zhang LJ, Luo ZL, Zhao Q, Suwannarach N, Karunarathna SC, Liu JK, Lu YZ. (2024b) Taxonomy and systematics of lignicolous helicosporous hyphomycetes. Fungal Diversity 129: 365–653. 10.1007/s13225-024-00544-9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Ma XY, Song DD, Ma J. (2025) Morphological and phylogenetic analyses reveal two new species of Neohelicomyces (Tubeufiales, Tubeufiaceae) from China. MycoKeys 121: 237–251. 10.3897/mycokeys.121.158721 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Moore RT. (1957) Index to the Helicosporae: Addenda. Mycologia 49(4): 580–587. 10.1080/00275514.1957.12024670 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Morgan AP. (1892) North american helicosporae. Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History 15.
  44. Nylander JAA, Zoology S, Posada D, Mrmodeltest R, Os F. (2008) MrModeltest2 v. 2.3 (Program for Selecting DNA Substitution Models Using PAUP*). Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala, Sweden.
  45. Peng T, Lu YZ, Bai S, Zhang JY, Xiao XJ, Wu N, Ma J. (2025) Novel Helicosporium and Neohelicomyces (Tubeufiaceae, Tubeufiales) species from terrestrial habitats in China and Thailand. MycoKeys 112: 81–101. 10.3897/mycokeys.112.140211 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Qian S, Zeng X, Qian Y, Lu Y, He Z, Kang J. (2023) A saprophytic fungus Tubeufa rubra produces novel rubracin D and E reversing multidrug resistance in cancer cells. Journal of Fungi (Basel, Switzerland) 9(3): 309. 10.3390/jof9030309 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Rao PR, Rao D. (1964) Some helicosporae from Hyderabad-II. Mycopathologia et Mycologia Applicata 24: 27–34. 10.1007/BF02049433 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Rathnayaka AR, Tennakoon DS, Jones GE, Wanasinghe DN, Bhat DJ, Priyashantha AH, Stephenson SL, Tibpromma S, Karunarathna SC. (2024) Significance of precise documentation of hosts and geospatial data of fungal collections, with an emphasis on plant-associated fungi. New Zealand Journal of Botany 63(2–3): 462–489. 10.1080/0028825X.2024.2381734 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Rehner SA, Buckley E. (2005) A beauveria phylogeny inferred from nuclear ITS and EF1-α sequences: Evidence for cryptic diversification and links to Cordyceps teleomorphs. Mycologia 97: 84–98. 10.3852/mycologia.97.1.84 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Ruibal C, Gueidan C, Selbmann L, Gorbushina AA, Crous PW, Groenewald J, Muggia L, Grube M, Isola D, Schoch CL. (2009) Phylogeny of rock-inhabiting fungi related to Dothideomycetes. Studies in Mycology 64: 123–133. 10.3114/sim.2009.64.06 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Senanayake IC, Rathnayaka AR, Marasinghe DS, Calabon MS, Gentekaki E, Lee HB, Hurdeal VG, Pem D, Dissanayake LS, Wijesinghe SN, Bundhun D, Nguyen TT, Goonasekara ID, Abeywickrama PD, Bhunjun CS, Jayawardena RS, Wanasinghe DN, Jeewon R, Bhat DJ, Xiang MM. (2020) Morphological approaches in studying fungi: Collection, examination, isolation, sporulation and preservation. Mycosphere : Journal of Fungal Biology 11(1): 2678–2754. 10.5943/mycosphere/11/1/20 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Singh P, Singh S. (2016) Additions to helicoid fungi from India. Current Research in Environmental & Applied Mycology 6(4): 248–255. 10.5943/cream/6/4/2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Stamatakis A. (2014) RAxML version 8: A tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 30: 1312–1313. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Sun YR, Hyde KD, Liu NG, Jayawardena RS, Wijayawardene NN, Ma J, Zhang Q, Al-Otibi F, Wang Y. (2025) Micro-fungi in southern China and northern Thailand: Emphasis on medicinal plants. Fungal Diversity 131: 99–299. 10.1007/s13225-024-00549-4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  55. Swindell SR, Plasterer TN. (1997) Seqman. In Sequence data analysis guidebook. Springer, 75–89. 10.1385/0-89603-358-9:75 [DOI]
  56. Tian XG, Karunarathna SC, Xu RJ, Lu YZ, Suwannarach N, Mapook A, Bao DF, Xu JC, Tibpromma S. (2022) Three new species, two new records and four new collections of Tubeufiaceae from Thailand and China. Journal of Fungi (Basel, Switzerland) 8(2): 206. 10.3390/jof8020206 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Tibpromma S, Hyde KD, McKenzie EHC, Bhat DJ, Phillips AJL, Wanasinghe DN, Samarakoon MC, Jayawardena RS, Dissanayake AJ, Tennakoon DS, Doilom M, Phookamsak R, Tang AMC, Xu JC, Mortimer PE, Promputtha I, Maharachchikumbura SSN, Khan S, Karunarathna SC. (2018) Fungal diversity notes 840–928: Micro-fungi associated with Pandanaceae. Fungal Diversity 93: 1–160. 10.1007/s13225-018-0408-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Tsui CK, Sivichai S, Berbee ML. (2006) Molecular systematics of Helicoma, Helicomyces and Helicosporium and their teleomorphs inferred from rDNA sequences. Mycologia 98: 94–104. 10.3852/mycologia.98.1.94 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Vaidya G, Lohman DJ, Meier R. (2011) SequenceMatrix: Concatenation software for the fast assembly of multi-gene datasets with character set and codon information. Cladistics: The International Journal of the Willi Hennig Society 27: 171–180. 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2010.00329.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Vilgalys R, Hester M. (1990) Rapid genetic identification and mapping of enzymatically amplified ribosomal DNA from several Cryptococcus species. Journal of Bacteriology 172(8): 4238–4246. 10.1128/jb.172.8.4238-4246.1990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. White TJ, Bruns T, Lee S, Taylor J. (1990) Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications, 315–322. 10.1016/B978-0-12-372180-8.50042-1 [DOI]
  62. Xiao XJ, Ma J, Zhang LJ, Liu NG, Xiao YP, Tian XG, Luo ZL, Lu YZ. (2023) Additions to the genus Helicosporium (Tubeufiaceae, Tubeufiales) from China with an identifcation key to Helicosporium taxa. Journal of Fungi (Basel, Switzerland) 9: 775. 10.3390/jof9070775 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  63. Yang J, Liu LL, Jones EBG, Hyde KD, Liu ZY, Bao DF, Liu NG, Li WL, Shen HW, Yu XD. (2023) Freshwater fungi from karst landscapes in China and Thailand. Fungal Diversity 119: 1–212. 10.1007/s13225-023-00514-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Zeng X, Qian S, Lu YZ, Li Y, Chen L, Qian Y, He Z, Kang JC. (2022) A novel nitrogen-containing glyceride from fungal saprobe Tubeufa rubra reverses MDR of tumor cell lines to doxorubicin. Records of Natural Products 16(6): 622–632. 10.25135/rnp.320.2201.2334 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Zhang LJ, Yang MF, Ma J, Xiao XJ, Ma XY, Zheng DG, Han MY, Xia ML, Jayawardena RS, Mapook A. (2023a) Neogrisphenol A, a potential ovarian cancer inhibitor from a new record fungus Neohelicosporium griseum. Metabolites 13(3): 435. 10.3390/metabo13030435 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Zhang LJ, Ma J, Ma X, Feng X, Bai X, Huang Y, Jayawardena RS, Mapook A, Kang JC, Lu YZ. (2023b) A new record of Neohelicosporium guangxiense and its secondary metabolites. Warasan Khana Witthayasat Maha Witthayalai Chiang Mai 50(2): 1–12. 10.12982/CMJS.2023.010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  67. Zhang LJ, Ma J, Yang MF, Zhao TM, Han MY, Zheng DG, Mapook A, Lu YZ, Jayawardena RS. (2024) Polyketides from Neohelicosporium griseum: Structure assignment and bioactivity investigation. Medicinal Chemistry Research: An International Journal for Rapid Communications on Design and Mechanisms of Action of Biologically Active Agents 33: 308–313. 10.1007/s00044-023-03172-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  68. Zhao GZ, Liu XZ, Wu WP. (2007) Helicosporous hyphomycetes from China. Fungal Diversity 26: 313–524. [Google Scholar]
  69. Zheng W, Han L, He ZJ, Kang JC. (2023) A new alkaloid derivative from the saprophytic fungus Neohelicomyces hyalosporus PF11-1. Natural Product Research 1–5. 10.1080/14786419.2023.2167202 [DOI] [PubMed]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

XML Treatment for Neohelicomyces terrestris
mycokeys.126.174186-treatment1.xml (19.1KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Neohelicomyces tropicus
mycokeys.126.174186-treatment2.xml (15.6KB, xml)

Data Availability Statement

All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text.

Articles from MycoKeys are provided here courtesy of Pensoft Publishers

RESOURCES