Skip to main content
Persoonia : Molecular Phylogeny and Evolution of Fungi logoLink to Persoonia : Molecular Phylogeny and Evolution of Fungi
. 2017 Jun 7;39:32–50. doi: 10.3767/persoonia.2017.39.02

High species diversity in Colletotrichum associated with citrus diseases in Europe

V Guarnaccia 1,, JZ Groenewald 1, G Polizzi 2, PW Crous 1,3,4
PMCID: PMC5832956  PMID: 29503469

Abstract

Species of Colletotrichum are considered important plant pathogens, saprobes, and endophytes on a wide range of plant hosts. Several species are well-known on citrus, either as agents of pre- or post-harvest infections, such as anthracnose, postbloom fruit drop, tear stain and stem-end rot on fruit, or as wither-tip of twigs. In this study we explored the occurrence, diversity and pathogenicity of Colletotrichum spp. associated with Citrus and allied genera in European orchards, nurseries and gardens. Surveys were carried out during 2015 and 2016 in Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal and Spain. A total of 174 Colletotrichum strains were isolated from symptomatic leaves, fruits, petals and twigs. A multi-locus phylogeny was established based on seven genomic loci (ITS, GAPDH, ACT, CAL, CHS-1, HIS3 and TUB2), and the morphological characters of the isolates determined. Preliminary pathogenicity tests were performed on orange fruits with representative isolates. Colletotrichum strains were identified as members of three major species complexes. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides s.str. and two novel species (C. helleniense and C. hystricis) were identified in the C. gloeosporioides species complex. Colletotrichum karstii, C. novae-zelandiae and two novel species (C. catinaense and C. limonicola) in the C. boninense species complex, and C. acutatum s.str. was also isolated as member of C. acutatum species complex. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides and C. karstii were the predominant species of Colletotrichum isolated. This study represents the first report of C. acutatum on citrus in Europe, and the first detection of C. novae-zelandiae from outside New Zealand. Pathogenicity tests revealed C. gloeosporioides s.str. to be the most virulent species on fruits. The present study improves our understanding of species associated with several disease symptoms on citrus fruits and plants, and provides useful information for effective disease management.

Keywords: Anthracnose, Citrus, multi-locus sequence typing, pathogenicity

INTRODUCTION

Colletotrichum is one of the most important genera of plant pathogenic fungi, responsible for several diseases in many crops worldwide (Sutton 1992, Cannon et al. 2000, 2012, Cai et al. 2009, Udayanga et al. 2013). Colletotrichum spp. were recently included in the list of the 10 most important plant pathogenic fungi in the world, based on perceived scientific and economic importance (Dean et al. 2012). Agricultural production losses caused by Colletotrichum spp. involve important staple food crops grown in developing countries throughout the tropics and subtropics (Dean et al. 2012). Colletotrichum species can infect more than 30 plant genera (Perfect et al. 1999, Farr et al. 2006, Damm et al. 2012a, b, Farr & Rossman 2017), causing anthracnose disease and postharvest decay on a wide range of tropical, subtropical and temperate fruits, grasses, vegetable crops and ornamental plants (Bailey & Jeger 1992, Bernstein et al. 1995, Freeman & Shabi 1996, Crouch et al. 2009, Lima et al. 2011, Damm et al. 2012a, b, Anderson et al. 2013, Crous et al. 2016b, Guarnaccia et al. 2016, De Silva et al. 2017). Moreover, many Colletotrichum species are latent plant pathogens, endophytes, epiphytes or saprobes, switching to a pathogenic lifestyle when host plants are subjected to stress conditions, or placed in postharvest storage (Crous et al. 2016a). Appressoria that develop from germinating spores, start plant infection by penetration of the cuticle (Deising et al. 2000) and occasionally also of the epidermal cells via fungal hyphae (Bailey & Jeger 1992).

The taxonomy of Colletotrichum species has recently been reviewed in several impactful studies (Cannon et al. 2008, Cai et al. 2009, Damm et al. 2009, 2012a, b, 2013, 2014, Weir et al. 2012, Liu et al. 2014, 2015, 2016). Before the molecular era, morphological characters such as size and shape of conidia and appressoria, presence or absence of setae, aspect, colour and growth rate of the colonies, formed the basis to study and compare the taxonomy of Colletotrichum species (Von Arx 1957, Sutton 1980, 1992). Modern studies demonstrated that these characters are not reliable for species level identification due to their variability under changing environmental conditions (Cai et al. 2009, Liu et al. 2016).

Following adoption of the use of multi-gene phylogenetic analysis, the polyphasic protocols for studying the genus Colletotrichum significantly changed the classification and species concepts in Colletotrichum (Cannon et al. 2012, Damm et al. 2012a, b, 2013, 2014, Weir et al. 2012). Several systematic studies of nearly all acknowledged species have led to the identification of 11 Colletotrichum species complexes, and more than 20 singleton species (Cannon et al. 2012, Liu et al. 2014, 2016, Marin-Felix et al. 2017). In plant pathology the most important species are members of the C. gloeosporioides (Cannon et al. 2008, Phoulivong et al. 2010, Weir et al. 2012), C. acutatum (Marcelino et al. 2008, Shivas & Tan 2009, Damm et al. 2012a, Baroncelli et al. 2015), C. boninense (Moriwaki et al. 2003, Yang et al. 2009, Damm et al. 2012b) and C. truncatum (Damm et al. 2009, Cannon et al. 2012) complexes. The use of multi-locus phylogenetic analyses revealed many cases, in which certain Colletotrichum spp. that were historically considered to be causal agents of economically important plant disease, were then revealed to be different species, such as C. alienum which seems to be the most important species in Proteaceae cultivation (Liu et al. 2013), and not C. gloeosporioides s.str. as previously assumed (Lubbe et al. 2004).

The citrus industry is one of the most important fruit industries worldwide. The Mediterranean countries are second only to China for fruit production, and are the largest fruit exporter after South Africa (FAO 2016). Therefore, the study and knowledge of all the pathogens affecting this crop is imperative. The use of a polyphasic approach in the past revealed many cryptic and new Colletotrichum species associated with citrus, belonging to four species complexes, namely: the C. boninense species complex (C. boninense, C. citricola, C. constrictum, C. karstii and C. novae-zelandiae) (Damm et al. 2012b, Huang et al. 2013); the C. acutatum species complex (C. abscissum, C. acutatum, C. citri, C. godetiae, C. johnstonii, C. limetticola and C. simmondsii) (Damm et al. 2012a, Huang et al. 2013, Crous et al. 2015); the C. truncatum species complex (C. truncatum) (Damm et al. 2009) and the C. gloeosporioides species complex (C. fructicola, C. gloeosporioides, C. kahawae subsp. ciggaro and C. siamense) (Weir et al. 2012, Huang et al. 2013, Perrone et al. 2016, Liu et al. 2016). Further Colletotrichum species such as C. brevisporum and C. tropicicola have been reported in association with citrus (Huang et al. 2013).

Several major diseases of citrus are caused internationally by Colletotrichum species (Timmer et al. 2000, Lima et al. 2011). According to several reports published before the main Colletotrichum revisions (Damm et al. 2009, 2012a, b, 2013, 2014, Weir et al. 2012), C. gloeosporioides and C. abscissum (previously known as C. acutatum) are the causal agents of postbloom fruit drop (PFD) in Brazil (Peres et al. 2008, Lima et al. 2011, Crous et al. 2015) and Bermuda (McGovern et al. 2012), causing petal necrosis, abscission of developing fruit and the formation of persistent calyces of various citrus species. A recent extensive investigation in citrus orchards of São Paulo state (Brazil), revealed only C. abscissum and C. gloeosporioides s.str. associated with PFD disease (Silva et al. 2016). Key lime anthracnose (KLA), a disease complex relating to leaves, flowers and fruits of Key lime, was initially reported to be caused by C. acutatum (Brown et al. 1996, Peres et al. 2008, MacKenzie et al. 2009), but later classified as C. limetticola (Damm et al. 2012a). Colletotrichum gloeosporioides was previously thought to be the only Colletotrichum species causing post-harvest anthracnose (Brown 1975, Sutton 1980, Freeman & Shabi 1996), but recent works showed that several species of Colletotrichum are associated with fruit decay worldwide (Peng et al. 2012, Damm et al. 2012a, b, Weir et al. 2012). Huang et al. (2013) demonstrated the ability of C. fructicola and C. truncatum to cause anthracnose on citrus fruits. Moreover, C. gloeosporioides s.lat. was also reported to cause pre-harvest symptoms such as wither-tip on twigs, tear-stain (Klotz 1961, Benyahia et al. 2003) and stem-end rot on fruit (Kaur et al. 2007).

Recently, various infections caused by Colletotrichum spp. strongly compromised citrus production in different Mediterranean countries: heavy pre-harvest anthracnose symptoms appeared on orange fruits and lesions on leaves of mandarins in Italy (Aiello et al. 2015, Perrone et al. 2016), twig wither-tip symptoms were observed on cultivated orange trees in Tunisia (Rhaiem & Taylor 2016), and severe anthracnose symptoms on unripe and ripe lemon fruits were recorded in Portugal (Ramos et al. 2016). In these studies, Colletotrichum species belonging to the C. acutatum species complex were never found associated with citrus. However, C. acutatum s.lat. was reported in Mediterranean countries causing diseases on several hosts such as Fragaria × ananassa (Garrido et al. 2008), Arbutus unedo (Polizzi et al. 2011) and Olea europaea (Talhinhas et al. 2011). Because of the commercial yield losses in citrus orchards caused by Colletotrichum infections, the recent findings and the changes in the species concepts, new surveys are required to study the Colletotrichum species diversity related to citrus and their occurrence and association with foliar and fruit diseases.

The current study aimed to investigate the major citrus production areas in Europe by large-scale sampling, and to identify isolates via morphology and multi-locus phylogeny based on modern taxonomic concepts. In 2015 and 2016 several surveys were conducted in commercial nurseries, citrus orchards, gardens, backyards and plant collections to determine the occurrence of Colletotrichum spp. associated with Citrus and allied genera (Atlantia, Fortunella, Microcitrus, Murraya, Poncirus). In particular the objectives of the present study were:

  • i) to conduct extensive surveys for sampling fresh plant materials;

  • ii) to cultivate as many Colletotrichum isolates as possible;

  • iii) to subject those isolates to DNA sequence analyses combined with morphological characterisation;

  • iv) to compare the obtained results with the data from other phylogenetic studies on the genus; and

  • v) to evaluate the pathogenicity of Colletotrichum species to citrus fruit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sampling and isolation

During 2015 and 2016 several surveys were conducted in many of the main citrus-producing regions of Europe. Fruits and leaves with lesions and typical anthracnose symptoms and twigs showing wither-tip were collected from more than 70 sites in Andalusia, Valencia, Balearic Islands (Spain), Apulia, Calabria, Sicily, Eoalian Islands (Italy), Algarve (Portugal), Missolonghi, Nafplio, Arta, Crete (Greece) and Malta and Gozo (Malta). Investigated species of Citrus and allied genera such as Atlantia, Fortunella, Microcitrus, Murraya and Poncirus (Rutaceae) included Australasian lime, citranges, citrons, kumquat, mandarins, oranges, pummelo, grapefruit, limes, lemons and ornamental brushes.

Fungal isolates were obtained following two procedures. In the first, leaf, fruit and twig fragments (5 × 5 mm) were surface-sterilised in a sodium hypochlorite solution (10 %) for 20 s, followed by 70 % ethanol for 30 s, and rinsed three times in sterilised water. The fragments were dried in sterilised tissue paper, placed on malt extract agar (MEA; Crous et al. 2009) amended with 100 μg/mL penicillin and 100 μg/mL streptomycin (MEA-PS) and incubated at 25 °C until characteristic Colletotrichum colonies were observed. In the second procedure, plant material was incubated in moist chambers at room temperature (25 °C ± 3 °C) for up to 10 d and inspected daily for fungal sporulation. Sporulating conidiomata obtained through both procedures were collected and crushed in a drop of sterile water and then spread over the surface of MEA-PS plates. After 24 h germinating spores were individually transferred onto MEA plates. The isolates used in this study are maintained in the culture collection of the Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute (CBS), Utrecht, The Netherlands, and in the working collection of Pedro Crous (CPC), housed at the Westerdijk Institute.

DNA extraction, PCR amplification and sequencing

Genomic DNA was extracted using a Wizard® Genomic DNA Purification Kit (Promega Corporation, WI, USA) following the manufacturer’s instructions. Partial regions of seven loci were amplified. The primers ITS5 and ITS4 (White et al. 1990) were used to amplify the internal transcribed spacer region (ITS) of the nuclear ribosomal RNA operon, including the 3’ end of the 18S rRNA, the first internal transcribed spacer region, the 5.8S rRNA gene; the second internal transcribed spacer region and the 5’ end of the 28S rRNA gene. The primers CL1 and CL2 (O’Donnell et al. 2000) were used to amplify part of the calmodulin (CAL) gene. The partial glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) gene was amplified using primers GDF1 + GDR1 (Guerber et al. 2003). The primers ACT-512F and ACT-783R (Carbone & Kohn 1999) were used to amplify part of the actin gene (ACT). The partial beta-tubulin (TUB2) gene was amplified with primers T1 (Glass & Donaldson 1995) and Bt-2b (O’Donnell & Cigelnik 1997). The primers CHS-79F and CHS-345R (Carbone & Kohn 1999) were used to amplify part of the chitin synthase 1 (CHS-1) gene. The partial histone3 (HIS3) gene was amplified with primers CYLH3F and CYLH3R (Crous et al. 2004b).

The PCR amplification mixtures and cycling conditions for all seven loci were followed as described by Damm et al. (2012b). The PCR products were sequenced in both directions using the BigDye® Terminator v. 3.1 Cycle Sequencing Kit (Applied Biosystems Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA), after which amplicons were purified through Sephadex G-50 Fine columns (GE Healthcare, Freiburg, Germany) in MultiScreen HV plates (Millipore, Billerica, MA). Purified sequence reactions were analysed on an Applied Biosystems 3730xl DNA Analyzer (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The DNA sequences generated were analysed and consensus sequences were computed using the program SeqMan Pro (DNASTAR, Madison, WI, USA).

Phylogenetic analyses

Novel sequences generated in this study were blasted against the NCBIs GenBank nucleotide database to determine the closest relatives for a taxonomic framework of the studied isolates. Alignments of different gene regions, including sequences obtained from this study and sequences downloaded from GenBank, were initially performed by using the MAFFT v. 7 online server (http://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server/index.html) (Katoh & Standley 2013), and then manually adjusted in MEGA v. 6.06 (Tamura et al. 2013). To establish the identity of isolates at species level, phylogenetic analyses were conducted first individually for each locus (data not shown) and then as concatenated analyses of seven loci. Two separate analyses were conducted for the C. boninense species complex and the remainder of the Colletotrichum spp. included in this study. Additional reference sequences were selected based on recent studies on Colletotrichum species (Damm et al. 2012a, b, Weir et al. 2012, Huang et al. 2013). Phylogenetic analyses were based on Maximum Parsimony (MP) for all the individual loci and on both MP and Bayesian Inference (BI) for the multilocus analyses. For BI, the best evolutionary model for each partition was determined using MrModeltest v. 2.3 (Nylander 2004) and incorporated into the analyses. MrBayes v. 3.2.5 (Ronquist et al. 2012) was used to generate phylogenetic trees under optimal criteria per partition. The Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) analysis used four chains and started from a random tree topology. The heating parameter was set to 0.2 and trees were sampled every 1 000 generations. Analyses stopped once the average standard deviation of split frequencies was below 0.01. The MP analyses were done using PAUP (Swofford 2003). Phylogenetic relationships were estimated by heuristic searches with 100 random addition sequences. Tree bisection-reconnection was used, with the branch swapping option set on ‘best trees’ only with all characters weighted equally and alignment gaps treated as fifth state. Tree length (TL), consistency index (CI), retention index (RI) and rescaled consistence index (RC) were calculated for parsimony and the bootstrap analyses (Hillis & Bull 1993) were based on 1 000 replications. Sequences generated in this study were deposited in GenBank (Table 1) and alignments and phylogenetic trees in TreeBASE (www.treebase.org).

Table 1.

Collection details and GenBank accession numbers of isolates included in this study.

Species Culture no.1 Host Locality Associated symptoms GenBank no.2
ITS GAPDH ACT CAL CHS-1 TUB2 HIS3
Colletotrichum abscissum COAD 1876 Citrus sinensis Brazil KP843124 KP843127 KP843139 KP843130 KP843133 KP843136
COAD 1877 Citrus sinensis Brazil KP843126 KP843129 KP843141 KP843132 KP843135 KP843138
C. acutatum CBS 112759 Hakea sericea South Africa JQ948391 JQ948722 JQ949712 JQ949052 JQ950042 JQ949382
CBS 112996 Carica papaya Australia JQ005776 JQ948677 JQ005839 JQ005797 JQ005860 JQ005818
CBS 129952 Olea europaea Portugal JQ948364 JQ948695 JQ949685 JQ949025 JQ950015 JQ949355
CBS 142407 = CPC 27005 Citrus sinensis Italy, Messina Leaf lesion KY856397 KY856221 KY855968 KY856133 KY856479 KY856303
CPC 26987 Citrus limon Italy, Messina Leaf lesion KY856398 KY856222 KY855969 KY856134 KY856480 KY856304
C. alienum ICMP 12071 Malus domestica New Zealand JX010251 JX010028 JX009572 JX009654 JX009882 JX010411
C. annellatum CBS 129826 Hevea brasiliensis Colombia JQ005222 JQ005309 JQ005570 JQ005743 JQ005396 JQ005656 JQ005483
C. asianum CBS 130418 Coffea arabica Thailand FJ972612 JX010053 JX009584 FJ917506 JX009867 JX010406 KY856305
C. boninense CBS 123755 Crinum asiaticum ‘Sinicum’ Japan JQ005153 JQ005240 JQ005501 JQ005674 JQ005327 JQ005588 JQ005414
GZAAS5.09505 Citrus medica China JQ247622 JQ247598 JQ247646 JQ247634
C. brevisporum GZAAS5.09545 Citrus medica China JQ247623 JQ247599 JQ247647 JQ247589 JQ247635
C. camelliae ICMP 10643 Camellia × williamsii UK JX010224 JX009908 JX009540 JX009630 JX009891 JX010436
C. catinaense CBS 142416 = CPC 28019 Citrus sinensis Portugal, Mesquita Fruit tear stain KY856399 KY856223 KY855970 KY856052 KY856135 KY856481 KY856306
CBS 142417 = CPC 27978 Citrus reticulata Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856400 KY856224 KY855971 KY856053 KY856136 KY856482 KY856307
CPC 28149 Citrus aurantiifolia Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856401 KY856225 KY855972 KY856054 KY856137 KY856483 KY856308
C. citri CBS 134233 Citrus aurantiifolia China KC293581 KC293741 KY855973 KC293701 KY856138 KC293661 KY856309
CBS 134234 Citrus aurantiifolia China KC293582 KC293742 KY855974 KC293702 KY856139 KC293662 KY856310
C. citricola CBS 134228 Citrus unchiu China KC293576 KC293736 KC293616 KC293696 KY856140 KC293656 KY856311
CBS 134229 Citrus unchiu China KC293577 KC293737 KC293617 KC293697 KY856141 KC293657 KY856312
C. constrictum CBS 128504 Citrus limon New Zealand JQ005238 JQ005325 JQ005586 JQ005759 JQ005412 JQ005672 KY856313
C. fructicola CBS 238.49 Ficus edulis Germany JX010181 JX009923 JX009495 JX009671 JX009839 JX010400 KY856314
CBS 125397 Tetragastris panamensis Panama JX010173 JX010032 JX009581 JX009674 JX009874 JX010409 KY856315
ICMP 18581 Coffea arabica Thailand JX010165 JX010033 FJ907426 FJ917508 JX009866 JX010405
C. gloeosporioides CBS 112999 Citrus sinensis Italy JX010152 JX010056 JX009531 JX009731 JX009818 JX010445 KY856316
CBS 142408 = CPC 28059 Citrus sinensis ‘Lanelate’ Spain, Moncada Petal lesions KY856402 KY856226 KY855975 KY856055 KY856142 KY856484 KY856317
CPC 26172 Citrus sinensis ‘Tarocco Tapi’ Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856403 KY856227 KY855976 KY856056 KY856143 KY856485 KY856318
CPC 26178 Citrus sinensis ‘Tarocco Tapi’ Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856404 KY856228 KY855977 KY856057 KY856144 KY856486 KY856319
CPC 26371 Citrus sinensis ‘Valencia’ Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856405 KY856229 KY855978 KY856058 KY856145 KY856487 KY856320
CPC 26373 Citrus limon Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856406 KY856230 KY855979 KY856059 KY856146 KY856488 KY856321
CPC 26376 Citrus paradisi Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856407 KY856231 KY855980 KY856060 KY856147 KY856489 KY856322
CPC 26381 Citrus limon Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856408 KY856232 KY855981 KY856061 KY856148 KY856490 KY856323
CPC 26479 Citrus sinensis Italy, Enna Fruit lesion KY856409 KY856233 KY855982 KY856062 KY856149 KY856491 KY856324
CPC 26486 Citrus sinensis Italy, Enna Fruit lesion KY856410 KY856234 KY855983 KY856063 KY856150 KY856492 KY856325
CPC 26488 Citrus sinensis Italy, Catania Fruit lesion KY856411 KY856235 KY855984 KY856064 KY856151 KY856493 KY856326
CPC 26515 Citrus medica Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856412 KY856236 KY855985 KY856065 KY856152 KY856494 KY856327
CPC 26803 Citrus sinensis ‘Tarocco Meli’ Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856413 KY856237 KY855986 KY856066 KY856153 KY856495 KY856328
CPC 26809 Citrus limon Spain, Malaga Leaf lesion KY856414 KY856238 KY855987 KY856067 KY856154 KY856496 KY856329
CPC 26823 Citrus paradisi Spain, Malaga Leaf lesion KY856415 KY856239 KY855988 KY856068 KY856155 KY856497 KY856330
CPC 26937 Citrus paradisi Spain, Malaga Twigs wither-tip KY856416 KY856240 KY855989 KY856069 KY856156 KY856498 KY856331
CPC 26957 Citrus reticulata ‘Nova’ Greece, Nafplio Leaf lesion KY856417 KY856241 KY855990 KY856070 KY856157 KY856499 KY856332
CPC 26965 Citrus sinensis Italy, Vibo Valentia Fruit lesion KY856418 KY856242 KY855991 KY856071 KY856158 KY856500 KY856333
CPC 26975 Citrus paradisi Italy, Vibo Valentia Twigs wither-tip KY856419 KY856243 KY855992 KY856072 KY856159 KY856501 KY856334
CPC 26985 Citrus reticulata ‘Nova’ Italy, Vibo Valentia Leaf lesion KY856420 KY856244 KY855993 KY856073 KY856160 KY856502 KY856335
CPC 27019 Citrus limon Italy, Cosenza Twigs wither-tip KY856421 KY856245 KY855994 KY856074 KY856161 KY856503 KY856336
CPC 27021 Fortunella margarita Italy, Vibo Valentia Twigs wither-tip KY856422 KY856246 KY855995 KY856075 KY856162 KY856504 KY856337
CPC 27088 Citrus reticulata Greece, Missolonghi Leaf lesion KY856423 KY856247 KY855996 KY856076 KY856163 KY856505 KY856338
CPC 27127 Citrus maxima Greece, Missolonghi Twigs wither-tip KY856424 KY856248 KY855997 KY856077 KY856164 KY856506 KY856339
CPC 27129 Citrus bergamia Greece, Missolonghi Fruit lesion KY856425 KY856249 KY855998 KY856078 KY856165 KY856507 KY856340
CPC 27839 Citrus sinensis Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856426 KY856250 KY855999 KY856079 KY856166 KY856508 KY856341
CPC 27841 Citrus sinensis Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856427 KY856251 KY856000 KY856080 KY856167 KY856509 KY856342
CPC 27905 Citrus limon Malta, Gozo Twigs wither-tip KY856428 KY856252 KY856001 KY856081 KY856168 KY856510 KY856343
CPC 27923 Citrus sinensis Malta, Gozo Leaf litter KY856429 KY856253 KY856002 KY856082 KY856169 KY856511 KY856344
CPC 27939 Citrus limon Portugal, Faro Leaf lesion KY856430 KY856254 KY856003 KY856083 KY856170 KY856512 KY856345
CPC 27941 Citrus sinensis Portugal, Silves Twigs wither-tip KY856431 KY856255 KY856004 KY856084 KY856171 KY856513 KY856346
CPC 27971 Citrus sinensis ‘Valencia’ Portugal, Mesquita Fruit lesion KY856432 KY856256 KY856005 KY856085 KY856172 KY856514 KY856347
CPC 27991 Citrus sinensis ‘Valencia’ Portugal, Mesquita Fruit tear stain KY856433 KY856257 KY856006 KY856086 KY856173 KY856515 KY856348
CPC 28001 Citrus paradisi Portugal, Faro Leaf lesion KY856434 KY856258 KY856007 KY856087 KY856174 KY856516 KY856349
CPC 28021 Citrus sinensis Portugal, Mesquita Twigs wither-tip KY856435 KY856259 KY856008 KY856088 KY856175 KY856517 KY856350
CPC 28023 Citrus limon Portugal, Monchique Leaf lesion KY856436 KY856260 KY856009 KY856089 KY856176 KY856518 KY856351
CPC 28029 Citrus sinensis Portugal, Silves Twigs wither-tip KY856437 KY856261 KY856010 KY856090 KY856177 KY856519 KY856352
CPC 28052 Citrus reticulata Spain, Algemesi Twigs wither-tip KY856438 KY856262 KY856011 KY856091 KY856178 KY856520 KY856353
CPC 28056 Citrus sinensis ‘Lanelate’ Spain, Moncada Petal lesions KY856439 KY856263 KY856012 KY856092 KY856179 KY856521 KY856354
CPC 28061 Citrus sinensis Spain, Castellò Leaf lesion KY856440 KY856264 KY856013 KY856093 KY856180 KY856522 KY856355
CPC 28063 Citrus sinensis Spain, Castellò Leaf lesion KY856441 KY856265 KY856014 KY856094 KY856181 KY856523 KY856356
CPC 28155 Citrus floridana Italy, Catania Fruit lesion KY856442 KY856266 KY856015 KY856095 KY856182 KY856524 KY856357
CPC 28159 Citrus digitata Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856443 KY856267 KY856016 KY856096 KY856183 KY856525 KY856358
CPC 28196 Atlantia citroides Spain, Soller Leaf lesion KY856444 KY856268 KY856017 KY856097 KY856184 KY856526 KY856359
CPC 28197 Microcitrus australasica Spain, Soller Twigs wither-tip KY856445 KY856269 KY856018 KY856098 KY856185 KY856527 KY856360
ICMP 12938 Citrus sinensis New Zealand JX010147 JX009935 JX009560 JX009732 JX009746
ICMP 18695 Citrus sp. USA JX010153 JX009979 JX009494 JX009735 JX009779
ICMP 18730 Citrus sp. New Zealand JX010157 JX009981 JX009548 JX009737 JX009861
ICMP 18738 Carya illinoinensis Australia JX010151 JX009976 JX009542 JX009730 JX009797
C. godetiae CBS 133.44 Clarkia hybrida Denmark JQ948402 JQ948733 JQ949723 JQ949063 JQ950053 JQ949393
C. helleniense CBS 142418 = CPC 26844 Poncirus trifoliata Greece, Arta Twigs wither-tip KY856446 KY856270 KY856019 KY856099 KY856186 KY856528 KY856361
CBS 142419 = CPC 27107 Citrus reticulata Greece, Arta Fruit lesion KY856447 KY856271 KY856020 KY856100 KY856187 KY856529 KY856362
CPC 26845 Poncirus trifoliata Greece, Arta Twigs wither-tip KY856448 KY856272 KY856021 KY856101 KY856188 KY856530 KY856363
CPC 27108 Citrus reticulata Greece, Arta Fruit lesion KY856449 KY856273 KY856022 KY856102 KY856189 KY856531 KY856364
C. hystricis CBS 142411 = CPC 28153 Citrus hystrix Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856450 KY856274 KY856023 KY856103 KY856190 KY856532 KY856365
CBS 142412 = CPC 28154 Citrus hystrix Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856451 KY856275 KY856024 KY856104 KY856191 KY856533 KY856366
C. johnstonii CBS 128532 Citrus sp. New Zealand JQ948443 JQ948774 JQ949764 JQ949104 JQ950094 JQ949434
C. kahawae subsp. kahawae ICMP 17816 Coffea arabica Kenya JX010231 JX010012 JX009452 JX009642 JX009813 JX010444
C. kahawae subsp. ciggaro ICMP 18539 Olea europaea Australia JX010230 JX009966 JX009523 JX009635 JX009800 JX010434
C. karstii CBS 126532 Citrus sp. South Africa JQ005209 JQ005296 JQ005557 JQ005730 JQ005383 JQ005643 JQ005470
CBS 127597 Diospyros australis Australia JQ005204 JQ005291 JQ005552 JQ005725 JQ005378 JQ005638 JQ005465
CBS 128551 Citrus sp. New Zealand JQ005208 JQ005295 JQ005556 JQ005729 JQ005382 JQ005642 JQ005469
CBS 129829 Gossypium hirsutum Germany JQ005189 JQ005276 JQ005537 JQ005710 JQ005363 JQ005623 JQ005450
CBS 129833 Musa sp. Mexico JQ005175 JQ005262 JQ005523 JQ005696 JQ005349 JQ005609 JQ005436
CBS 134226 Citrus limon China KC293570 KC293730 KC293610 KC293690 KY856192 KC293650 KY856367
CBS 142415 = CPC 26379 Fortunella margarita Italy, Catania Fruit tear stain KY856452 KY856276 KY856025 KY856105 KY856193 KY856534 KY856368
CPC 26375 Citrus paradisi Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856453 KY856277 KY856026 KY856106 KY856194 KY856535 KY856369
CPC 27023 Citrus sinensis Italy, Cosenza Leaf lesion KY856454 KY856278 KY856027 KY856107 KY856195 KY856536 KY856370
CPC 27035 Citrus paradisi Spain, Almeria Leaf lesion KY856455 KY856279 KY856028 KY856108 KY856196 KY856537 KY856371
CPC 27063 Fortunella margarita Italy, Vibo Valentia Leaf lesion KY856456 KY856280 KY856029 KY856109 KY856197 KY856538 KY856372
CPC 27065 Citrus sinensis Spain, Almeria Leaf lesion KY856457 KY856281 KY856030 KY856110 KY856198 KY856539 KY856373
CPC 27077 Citrus reticulata ‘Nova’ Spain, Almeria Twigs wither-tip KY856458 KY856282 KY856031 KY856111 KY856199 KY856540 KY856374
CPC 27817 Citrus paradisi Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856459 KY856283 KY856032 KY856112 KY856200 KY856541 KY856375
CPC 27845 Citrus sinensis Italy, Catania Twigs wither-tip KY856460 KY856284 KY856033 KY856113 KY856201 KY856542 KY856376
CPC 27853 Citrus sinensis Italy, Catania Fruit lesion KY856461 KY856285 KY856034 KY856114 KY856202 KY856543 KY856377
CPC 27979 Citrus reticulata Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856462 KY856286 KY856035 KY856115 KY856203 KY856544 KY856378
CPC 27989 Citrus sinensis Portugal, Mesquita Twigs wither-tip KY856463 KY856287 KY856036 KY856116 KY856204 KY856545 KY856379
CPC 27999 Citrus limon Portugal, Faro Twigs wither-tip KY856464 KY856288 KY856037 KY856117 KY856205 KY856546 KY856380
CPC 28065 Citrus limon Spain, Castellò Leaf lesion KY856465 KY856289 KY856038 KY856118 KY856206 KY856547 KY856381
CPC 28142 Citrus limon Italy, Catania Fruit lesion KY856466 KY856290 KY856039 KY856119 KY856207 KY856548 KY856382
CPC 31139 Citrus sinensis Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856467 KY856291 KY856040 KY856120 KY856208 KY856549 KY856383
CPC 31143 Citrus sinensis Malta, Zurrieq Twigs wither-tip KY856468 KY856292 KY856041 KY856121 KY856209 KY856550 KY856384
CPC 31144 Citrus sinensis Malta, Zurrieq Twigs wither-tip KY856469 KY856293 KY856042 KY856122 KY856210 KY856551 KY856385
CPC 31196 Murraya paniculata Italy, Catania Leaf lesion KY856470 KY856294 KY856043 KY856123 KY856211 KY856552 KY856386
C. limetticola CBS 114.14 Citrus aurantifolia USA, Florida JQ948193 JQ948523 JQ949514 JQ948854 JQ949844 JQ949184
C. limonicola CBS 142409 = CPC 27861 Citrus limon Malta, Gozo Leaf lesion KY856471 KY856295 KY856044 KY856124 KY856212 KY856553 KY856387
CBS 142410 = CPC 31141 Citrus limon Malta, Gozo Leaf lesion KY856472 KY856296 KY856045 KY856125 KY856213 KY856554 KY856388
CPC 27862 Citrus limon Malta, Gozo Leaf lesion KY856473 KY856297 KY856046 KY856126 KY856214 KY856555 KY856389
C. musae CBS 116870 Musa sp. USA JX010146 JX010050 JX009433 JX009742 JX009896 HQ596280
C. novae-zelandiae CBS 128505 Capsicum annuum New Zealand JQ005228 JQ005315 JQ005576 JQ005749 JQ005402 JQ005662 JQ005489
CBS 130240 Citrus medica New Zealand JQ005229 JQ005316 JQ005577 JQ005750 JQ005403 JQ005663 JQ005490
CBS 142413 = CPC 26949 Citrus paradisi Greece, Missolonghi Leaf lesion KY856474 KY856298 KY856047 KY856127 KY856215 KY856556 KY856390
CBS 142414 = CPC 27888 Citrus sinensis Malta, Gozo Twigs wither-tip KY856475 KY856299 KY856048 KY856128 KY856216 KY856557 KY856391
CPC 27864 Citrus limon Malta, Gozo Twigs wither-tip KY856476 KY856300 KY856049 KY856129 KY856217 KY856558 KY856392
CPC 27890 Citrus sinensis Malta, Gozo Twigs wither-tip KY856477 KY856301 KY856050 KY856130 KY856218 KY856559 KY856393
CPC 27957 Citrus limon Malta, Gozo Leaf lesion KY856478 KY856302 KY856051 KY856131 KY856219 KY856560 KY856394
C. siamense GZAAS5.09506 Murraya sp. China JQ247633 JQ247609 JQ247657 JQ247596 JQ247644
C. simmondsii CBS 122122 Carica papaya Australia JQ948276 JQ948606 JQ949597 JQ948937 JQ949927 JQ949267
GZAAS5.09510 Murraya sp. China JQ247631 JQ247607 JQ247655 JQ247595 JQ247643
C. ti ICMP 4832 Cordyline sp. New Zealand JX010269 JX009952 JX009520 JX009649 JX009898 JX010442
C. tropicale CBS 124949 Theobroma cacao Panama JX010264 JX010007 JX009489 JX009719 JX009870 JX010407 KY856395
C. tropicicola BCC 38877 Citrus maxima Thailand JN050240 JN050229 JN050218 JN050246
C. truncatum CBS 151.35 Phaseolus lunatus USA GU227862 GU228254 GU227960 KY856132 GU228352 GU228156 GU228058
CBS 134232 Citrus limon China KC293580 KC293740 KC293620 KC293700 KY856220 KC293660 KY856396
Moniolochaetes infuscans CBS 869.96 Ipomoea batatas South Africa JQ005780 JX546612 JQ005843 JQ005801 JQ005864 JQ005822

1 BCC: Culture Collection, National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (BIOTEC), Khlong Luang, Pathumthani, Thailand; CBS: Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands; COAD: Coleção Octávio Almeida Drummond, Viçosa, Brazil; CPC: Culture collection of P.W. Crous, housed at the Westerdijk Institute; GZAAS: Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Science herbarium, Guizhou Province, China; ICMP: International Collection of Microorganisms from Plants, Landcare Research, Auckland, New Zealand. Ex-type and ex-epitype cultures are indicated in bold.

2 ITS: internal transcribed spacers 1 and 2 together with 5.8S nrDNA; GAPDH: partial glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase gene; ACT: partial actin gene; CAL; partial calmodulin gene; CHS-1: partial chitin synthase 1 gene; TUB2: partial beta-tubulin gene; HIS3: histone3. Sequences generated in this study are indicated in italics.

Morphology

Agar plugs (6-mm-diam) were taken from the edge of actively growing cultures on PDA and transferred to the centre of 9-cm-diam Petri dishes containing PDA and synthetic nutrient-poor agar medium (SNA; Nirenberg 1976) as described in recent studies (Huang et al. 2013, Diao et al. 2017). Cultures were incubated at 25 °C with a 12/12 h fluorescent light/dark cycle for 10 d. Colony characters and pigment production on PDA and SNA were noted after 10 d. Colony colours were rated according to Rayner (1970). Cultures were examined periodically for the development of ascomata, conidiomata and setae. Colony diameters were measured after 7 and 10 d. The morphological characteristics were examined by mounting fungal structures in clear lactic acid and 30 measurements at × 1 000 magnification were determined for each isolate using a Zeiss Axioscope 2 microscope with interference contrast (DIC) optics. Descriptions and illustrations of taxonomic novelties were deposited in MycoBank (www.MycoBank.org; Crous et al. 2004a).

Pathogenicity

Fruits of two sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) clones (‘Tarocco Scirè’ and ‘Tarocco Nucellare’) were collected in Sicily during the veraison stage and used for artificial inoculation. A subset of 13 isolates representing the Colletotrichum species isolated from specimens collected in Europe (Table 2) were inoculated following the adapted wound/drop method (Cai et al. 2009, Aiello et al. 2015, Cristóbal-Martínez et al. 2017). Eight fruits for each isolate/clone combination were inoculated. Fruits were washed and surface-disinfected by immersion in 70 % ethanol for 10 min, and rinsed twice in sterilised water. Six inoculation points per fruit were labelled with a dot made with a permanent marker and were injured using a sterile pipette tip (wounds of 2 mm diam). A spore suspension (1.0 × 105 conidia/mL) was obtained from cultures grown on PDA for 15 d at 27 °C, and 10 μL were injected into each inoculation point. Control fruits were inoculated with sterile water. The inoculated oranges were placed in plastic containers, covered with plastic bags and incubated in a growth chamber with 100 % relative humidity at 25 °C under a lighting rig providing a 12 h photoperiod. Symptom development was evaluated 10 d after inoculation and the percentage of infected inoculation points was calculated per each isolate/clone combination. This percentage value was calculated by the formula [(%) = (infected inoculation points / inoculated inoculation points) × 100 %].

Table 2.

Pathogenicity testing of Colletotrichum species: percentage of infected inoculation points of citrus fruits.

Species Isolates Infected inoculation points (%)
Tarocco ‘Scirè’ Tarocco ‘Nucellare’
Colletotrichum acutatum CBS 142407 = CPC 27005 0 0
C. catinaense CBS 142417 = CPC 27978 12.5 4.1
C. catinaense CBS 142416 = CPC 28019 18.75 6.2
C. gloeosporioides CBS 142408 = CPC 28059 87.5 83.3
C. helleniense CBS 142418 = CPC 26844 14.6 8.3
C. helleniense CBS 142419 = CPC 27107 31.2 16.6
C. hystricis CBS 142411 = CPC 28153 20.8 8.3
C. hystricis CBS 142412 = CPC 28154 16.6 10.4
C. karstii CBS 142415 = CPC 26379 8.3 6.2
C. limonicola CBS 142409 = CPC 27861 25 8.3
C. limonicola CBS 142410 = CPC 31141 16.6 12.5
C. novae-zelandiae CBS 142413 = CPC 26949 20.8 16.6
C. novae-zelandiae CBS 142414 = CPC 27888 10.4 4.1

The inoculated fungi were re-isolated from the obtained lesions and the identity of the re-isolated fungi confirmed by sequencing the loci ACT and GAPDH, thus fulfilling Koch’s postulates.

RESULTS

Sampling and isolation

Symptoms of anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum spp. were frequently observed on several Citrus species in all countries investigated. The leaves presented necrotic, more or less circular spots. These lesions appeared with a pale brown to purple margin and produced the fruiting bodies of the fungus (Fig. 1a–b). Different symptoms appeared on fruits. Irregular and sunken lesions, of variable size, from purple-brown to black with acervuli (Fig. 1d–g), were observed. Further, fruits showed tear stain (Fig. 1h), as superficial, reddish brown streaks or bands (down) along the fruit. Moreover, a dark-brown to black rot, with a well-defined margin at the stem-end was occasionally detected (Fig. 1i). Mummified fruits were occasionally observed in association with affected tips (Fig. 1c). Twigs showed typical dieback and wither-tip (Fig. 1k). Under high moisture conditions, pink masses of spores appeared sporulating in acervuli on dead twigs. A total of 174 monosporic isolates resembling those of the genus Colletotrichum were collected. The Colletotrichum isolates were recovered from 17 species of Citrus at 44 different sites in multiple locations of Greece, Italy, Malta, Spain and Portugal. Among them, 67 isolates were obtained from leaves, 72 were associated with twigs, 28 from fruits and seven were isolated from petals. Based on initial ITS and GAPDH sequencing, 82 representative isolates were selected (Table 1) for phylogenetic analysis and further taxonomic study.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Symptoms on citrus tissues with associated Colletotrichum spp. a–b. Anthracnose symptoms on leaves of naturally infected: a. Citrus bergamia and b. Fortunella margarita; c. mummified fruit of Citrus limon; d–g. various symptoms on fruits: d. diverse lesions and e–f. sunken lesions on orange and g. on mandarin; h. tear stain on grapefruit; i. stem-end rot on orange; j. typical anthracnose on fallen orange fruits; k. wither-tip of Citrus sinensis tree.

Phylogenetic analyses

The 14 MP trees derived from the single gene sequence alignments (ITS, GAPDH, ACT, CAL, CHS-1, HIS3 and TUB2) for both the C. boninense species complex and the remainder of the Colletotrichum spp., produced topologically similar trees, and confirmed that 30 isolates recovered in this study belong to the C. boninense species complex, 50 to C. gloeosporioides species complex and two to C. acutatum species complex. The combined species phylogeny of the C. boninense species complex consisted of 45 sequences, including the outgroup sequences of C. acutatum (culture CBS 112996). All the species belonging to the C. gloeosporioides and C. acutatum species complexes were included in a combined phylogeny consisting of 86 sequences, including the outgroup sequences of Moniolochaetes infuscans (CBS 896.96). A total of 3 149 characters (ITS: 1–549, GAPDH: 556–863, ACT: 870–1166, CAL: 1173–1946, CHS-1: 1953–2237, TUB2: 2244–2754, HIS3: 2761–3149) were included in both phylogenetic analyses. For the phylogeny of the C. boninense species complex, 411 characters were parsimony-informative, 454 were variable and parsimony-uninformative and 2 248 characters were constant. A maximum of 1 000 equally most parsimonious trees were saved (Tree length = 1 236, CI = 0.871, RI = 0.947 and RC = 0.825). Regarding the C. gloeosporioides and C. acutatum species complexes, 1 171 characters were parsimony-informative, 319 were variable and parsimony-uninformative and 1 623 characters were constant. A maximum of 1 000 equally most parsimonious trees were saved (Tree length = 3 238, CI = 0.736, RI = 0.921 and RC = 0.678). Bootstrap support values from the parsimony analysis were plotted on the Bayesian phylogenies presented in Fig. 2, 3. For both of the Bayesian analyses, MrModeltest suggested that all partitions should be analysed with dirichlet state frequency distributions, except for the CHS-1 partition, which was analysed with a fixed state frequency distribution. The following models were recommended by MrModeltest and used: GTR+I+G for ITS, CAL and HIS3, HKY+I+G for GAPDH and TUB2, HKY+G for ACT and SYM+I+G for CHS-1. In the Bayesian analysis of the C. boninense species complex, the ITS partition had 68 unique site patterns, the GAPDH partition 147, the ACT partition 108, the CAL partition 144, the CHS-1 partition 51, the TUB2 partition 146, the HIS3 partition 72 and the analysis ran for 2 260 000 generations, resulting in 4 522 trees of which 3 392 trees were used to calculate the posterior probabilities. Regarding the C. gloeosporioides and C. acutatum species complex, the ITS partition had 167 unique site patterns, the GAPDH partition 247, the ACT partition 183, the CAL partition 304, the CHS-1 partition 81, the TUB2 partition 257, the HIS3 partition 123 and the analysis ran for 4 890 000 generations, resulting in 9 782 trees of which 7 338 trees were used to calculate the posterior probabilities.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Consensus phylogram of 4 522 trees resulting from a Bayesian analysis of the combined ITS, CAL, GAPDH, ACT, TUB2, CHS-1 and HIS3 sequence alignments of the Colletotrichum boninense species complex. Bootstrap support values and Bayesian posterior probability values are indicated at the nodes. The asterisk symbol (*) represents full support (1/100). Substrate and country of origin, where known, are listed next to the strain numbers. In red the novel species. The tree was rooted to Colletotrichum acutatum (CBS 112996).

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Fig. 3

Consensus phylogram of 9 782 trees resulting from a Bayesian analysis of the combined ITS, CAL, GAPDH, ACT, TUB2, CHS-1 and HIS3 sequence alignments of Colletotrichum acutatum and C. gloeosporioides species complex. Bootstrap support values and Bayesian posterior probability values are indicated at the nodes. The asterisk symbol (*) represents full support (1/100). Substrate and country of origin, where known, are indicated next to the strain numbers. The tree was rooted to Moniolochaetes infuscans (CBS 896.96).

In the C. boninense species complex analysis 19 Citrus isolates clustered with six reference strains of C. karstii, whilst five isolates clustered with the ex-type of C. novae-zelandiae. Moreover, three isolates were identified as C. catinaense and a further three as C. limonicola, forming two highly supported subclades (1.00/100) which are embedded in the same clade with C. novae-zelandiae. In the other analyses two isolates clustered with the ex-type strain of C. acutatum s.str. and 44 isolates with the ex-type strain and other reference strains of C. gloeosporioides s.str. Furthermore, two isolates were identified as C. hystricis (closely related to C. alienum) and four as C. helleniense (close to C. kahawae subspecies) within the C. gloeosporioides species complex.

The individual alignments and trees of the seven single genes in both analyses, were compared as well with respect to their performance in species recognition. In the C. boninense species complex analysis, TUB2 differentiated all the taxa. Moreover, the single loci CAL and GAPDH, clearly separated C. catinaense and C. limonicola, respectively. In the other analyses, all the Colletotrichum species collected from citrus in this study differed in GAPDH sequences. Furthermore, C. helleniense was separated also by CAL and TUB2, whilst ACT and CHS-1 distinguished C. hystricis.

Taxonomy

Morphological observations, supported by phylogenetic inference, were used to identify four known species (C. gloeosporioides, C. novae-zelandiae, C. karstii and C. acutatum) and to describe four novel species. Culture characteristics were assessed, and the colour of upper and lower surfaces of Petri dishes determined as shown in Fig. 4, 5, 6, 7. Hyphal appressoria were abundantly observed on the reverse side of colonies growing on SNA plates. Based on the results of both the phylogenetic and morphological analyses, the four distinct novel species are described below.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Colletotrichum catinaense (CBS 142417). a–b. Colonies on PDA above and below; c–d. conidiomata; e. conidia; f–g. conidiophores; h. appressoria; i. seta (a–g, i from PDA; h from SNA). — Scale bars = 10 μm.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Colletotrichum helleniense (CBS 142418). a–b. Colonies on PDA above and below; c. conidiomata; d. conidia; e–g. conidiophores; h. appressoria; i. seta (a–f, i from PDA; g–h from SNA). — Scale bars = 10 μm.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Colletotrichum hystricis (CBS 142411). a–b. Colonies on PDA above and below; c. conidiomata; d. conidiophores; e–f. conidia; g–h. appressoria; i. seta (a–g, i from PDA; h from SNA). — Scale bars = 10 μm.

Fig. 7.

Fig. 7

Colletotrichum limonicola (CBS 142410). a–b. Colonies on PDA above and below; c. conidiomata; d–e. conidia; f. appressoria; g. seta; h–i. conidiophores (a–e, g–i from PDA; f from SNA). — Scale bars = 10 μm.

Colletotrichum catinaense Guarnaccia & Crous, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB820247; Fig. 4

Etymology. Named after the city where the first strain was collected, Catania (ancient Latin name, Catina).

Asexual morph on SNA. Vegetative hyphae hyaline, septate, branched, 1–9 μm diam. Conidiomata, chlamydospores and setae absent. Conidiophores hyaline, smooth-walled, septate, branched, to 40 μm long, formed from hyphae. Conidiogenous cells hyaline, smooth-walled, cylindrical to inflated, 5–18 × 4–5 μm. Conidia hyaline, smooth-walled, aseptate, cylindrical, rounded apex and base, contents granular and guttulate, 11.5–15 × 4–5.5 μm, mean ± SD = 13.5 ± 0.9 × 4.8 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 2.7. Appressoria medium to dark brown, roundish with an undulate margin, single, 3.5–6 × 3–5.5 μm, mean ± SD = 4.8 ± 0.9 × 4.2 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 1.2.

Asexual morph on PDA. Conidiomata acervular, conidiophores and setae formed on a cushion of pale brown, thick-walled, angular cells, 3.5–7 μm diam. Setae brown, smooth, 2–3-septate, 50–120 μm long, base conical or inflated, dark brown, tip rounded. Conidiophores hyaline, smooth-walled, septate and branched, to 40 μm long. Conidiogenous cells hyaline, smooth-walled, cylindrical, 5–16 × 4–5 μm. Conidia hyaline, smooth-walled, aseptate, cylindrical, rounded apex and base, contents granular and guttulate, 13–16 × 4.5–6 μm, mean ± SD = 14.3 ± 1 × 5.5 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 2.6.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on SNA flat with entire margin, hyaline, 35–37 mm diam in 7 d (49–52 mm in 10 d). Colonies on PDA flat with entire margin, buff honey in the centre to green olivaceous at the margin, partly covered with floccose white aerial mycelium and with black conidiomata. Conidia present in orange to pale brown mass. Reverse buff, pale luteous to isabelline, dark green in the margin, 66–68 mm diam in 7 d (75–76 mm diam in 10 d).

Materials examined. Italy, Mineo, Catania, from leaf lesion of Citrus reticulata (mandarin), 23 Sept. 2015, V. Guarnaccia (CBS H-23024 holotype, culture ex-type CBS 142417 = CPC 27978). – Portugal, Mesquita, from fruit tear-stain of Citrus sinensis (orange), 7 Oct. 2015, V. Guarnaccia (culture CBS 142416 = CPC 28019).

Notes — Colletotrichum catinaense was isolated from several hosts in Italy and Portugal. The isolation of this species from multiple combinations of organ/host demonstrates its ability to colonise different citrus tissues. This species is phylogenetically close to but clearly differentiated from C. novaezelandiae in CAL and TUB sequences. Colletotrichum novae-zelandiae formed a separate lineage/cluster in all single-gene phylogenies (Damm et al. 2012b) before this study. Based on multi-locus phylogenetic analyses performed in this study (Fig. 2), C. catinaense together with C. limonicola (described below) are new species belonging to the same clade of C. novaezelandiae within the C. boninense species complex. This species is morphologically indistinguishable from the other two species of the same clade.

Colletotrichum helleniense Guarnaccia & Crous, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB820249; Fig. 5

Etymology. Named after the country where it was collected, Greece (ancient name, Hellas).

Asexual morph on SNA. Vegetative hyphae hyaline, septate, branched, 1–8 μm diam. Conidiomata, chlamydospores and setae absent. Conidiophores formed from hyphae, hyaline, smooth to finely verruculose, septate, branched, to 50 μm long. Conidiogenous cells are hyaline, smooth-walled, cylindrical to inflated, 5–15 × 4–5 μm. Conidia hyaline, smooth-walled, aseptate, straight, cylindrical, rounded apex and base, contents granular or guttulate, 11–14.5 × 4–5.5 μm, mean ± SD = 12.2 ± 0.7 × 4.7 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 2.6. Appressoria medium to dark brown, roundish or irregular in shape, single or in small groups, 5–10 × 7–15 μm.

Asexual morph on PDA. Conidiomata acervular, conidiophores and setae formed on a cushion of pale brown, thick-walled, angular cells, 3.5–7 μm diam. Setae brown, smooth, 2-septate, 55–90 μm long, base conical or inflated, dark brown, tip rounded. Conidiophores hyaline, smooth to undulate walled, septate and branched, to 35 μm long. Conidiogenous cells hyaline, smooth-walled, cylindrical, 5–15 × 4–5.5 μm. Conidia hyaline, smooth-walled, aseptate, cylindrical, rounded apex and base, contents granular or guttulate, 11.5–14.5 × 4–5.5 μm, mean ± SD = 12.7 ± 0.8 × 4.7 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 2.7.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on SNA flat with entire margin, hyaline, 40–46 mm diam in 7 d (54–59 mm diam in 10 d). Colonies on PDA with entire margin, green to grey in the centre and white to pale buff in the margin, entirely covered with floccose to dense, white to grey aerial mycelium and with black conidiomata. Conidia present in pinkish orange mass. Reverse grey to buff, pale luteous, 59–62 mm diam in 7 d (72–75 mm diam in 10 d).

Materials examined. Greece, Arta, from wither-tip twigs of Poncirus trifoliata (citrumelo), 20 May 2015, V. Guarnaccia (CBS H-23025 holotype, culture ex-type CBS 142418 = CPC 26844); from fruit lesions of C. reticulata (mandarin), 20 May 2015, V. Guarnaccia (culture CBS 142419 = CPC 27107).

Notes — Colletotrichum helleniense was isolated from Citrus reticulata fruit lesions and from Poncirus trifoliata wither-tip twigs in Greece. Poncirus is an allied genus of Citrus, in the Rutaceae, containing species mostly used as rootstock for citrus. These results show the ability of C. helleniense to colonise tissues of different genera within the Rutaceae. This species is phylogenetically close to but clearly differentiated from C. kahawae based on GAPDH, CAL and TUB2. Two subspecies of C. kahawae were described in the past; C. kahawae subsp. kahawae and C. kahawae subsp. ciggaro (Weir et al. 2012). Recently, the legitimacy of this distinction has been supported by Batista et al. (2016), who accepted the two subspp. as two cryptic species. Colletotrichum helleniense is clearly separate from both C. kahawae subspecies and from further species such as C. aotearoa, C. clidemiae, C. cordylinicola, C. jiangxiense, C. psidii, C. rhexiae (data not shown) belonging to the same clade (Diao et al. 2017, Weir et al. 2012). Therefore, C. helleniense represents a new species in the C. kahawae clade, belonging to the C. gloeosporioides species complex.

Colletotrichum hystricis Guarnaccia & Crous, sp. nov. –– MycoBank MB820252; Fig. 6

Etymology. In reference to its occurrence on Citrus hystrix.

Asexual morph on SNA. Vegetative hyphae hyaline, septate, 1–7 μm diam. Conidiomata, chlamydospores and setae absent. Conidiophores formed from hyphae, hyaline, smooth-walled, septate, branched, to 40 μm long. Conidiogenous cells hyaline, smooth-walled, cylindrical, 5–10 × 4–5 μm. Conidia hyaline, smooth-walled, aseptate, straight, cylindrical to obovoidal, rounded apex and base, contents granular, 13–15 × 4–5.5 μm, mean ± SD = 14 ± 1.3 × 4.8 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 2.8. Appressoria dark brown, globose to irregular shape, single, with irregular lobes, 3.5–8 × 3–5.5 μm, mean ± SD = 6 ± 0.9 × 4.2 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 1.4.

Asexual morph on PDA. Conidiomata acervular, conidiophores and setae formed on a cushion of pale brown, thick-walled, angular cells, 3.5–7 μm diam. Setae brown, smooth, 2–3-septate, curved, 50–100 μm long, base conical, dark brown, tip rounded. Conidiophores hyaline, smooth-walled, septate, branched, to 50 μm long. Conidiogenous cells hyaline, smooth-walled to undulate, cylindrical, 5–20 × 3–5 μm. Conidia hyaline, smooth-walled, cylindrical to obovoidal, aseptate, rounded apex and base, contents granular, 14–16 × 4.5–6 μm, mean ± SD = 13.8 ± 1 × 5.1 ± 0.4 μm, L/W ratio = 2.7.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on SNA flat with entire margin, hyaline, 60–61 mm diam in 7 d (72–75 mm diam in 10 d). Colonies on PDA flat with entire margin, buff honey to pinkish, green to grey in the margin, entirely covered with white aerial mycelium and with black conidiomata. Conidia present in orange mass. Reverse buff, pale luteous to dark green, 69–71 mm diam in 7 d (80–82 mm diam in 10 d).

Materials examined. Italy, Mascali, Catania, from leaf lesion of Citrus hystrix, 30 Jan. 2016, V. Guarnaccia (CBS H-23026 holotype, culture ex-type CBS 142411 = CPC 28153); ibid., (culture CBS 142412 = CPC 28154).

Notes — Colletotrichum hystricis was isolated from Citrus hystrix leaf lesions in Sicily, Italy. This species differs from closely related species in GAPDH, ACT and CHS-1 sequences. Colletotrichum hystricis is similar to C. alienum and other species such as C. aenigma, C. conoides and C. nupharicola (Weir et al. 2012, Diao et al. 2017) but represents a distinct taxon, supported also by morphological differences. Colletotrichum hystricis differs from C. alienum in having obovoidal conidia (also on SNA) and a slower growth rate.

Colletotrichum limonicola Guarnaccia & Crous, sp. nov. — MycoBank MB820254; Fig. 7

Etymology. In reference to its occurrence on Citrus limon.

Asexual morph on SNA. Vegetative hyphae hyaline, septate, branched, 1–10 μm diam. Conidiomata, chlamydospores and setae absent. Conidiophores formed from hyphae, hyaline, smooth-walled, septate, branched, to 50 μm long. Conidiogenous cells are hyaline, smooth-walled, cylindrical to inflated, 5–20 × 4–5 μm. Conidia hyaline, smooth-walled, aseptate, straight, cylindrical, rounded apex and base, contents granular, 9–15 × 4–6 μm, mean ± SD = 12.2 ± 1.3 × 6 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 2.5. Appressoria medium to dark brown, roundish, single, 3–6 × 3–5.5 μm, mean ± SD = 4.5 ± 0.9 × 4.2 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 1.1.

Asexual morph on PDA. Conidiomata acervular, conidiophores and setae formed on a cushion of pale brown, thick-walled, angular cells, 3.5–7 μm diam. Setae brown, smooth, 2–3-septate, 45–100 μm long, base conical or inflated, dark brown, tip rounded. Conidiophores hyaline, smooth walled, septate and branched, to 50 μm long. Conidiogenous cells hyaline, smooth-walled, cylindrical, 7–16 × 4–5.5 μm. Conidia hyaline, smooth-walled, aseptate, cylindrical, rounded apex and base, contents granular, 9.5–15.5 × 4–6 μm, mean ± SD = 12.7 ± 1.3 × 5 ± 0.5 μm, L/W ratio = 2.5.

Culture characteristics — Colonies on SNA flat with entire margin, hyaline, 44–46 mm diam in 7 d (58–60 mm diam in 10 d). Colonies on PDA flat with entire margin, buff honey in the centre to green olivaceous in the margin, entirely covered with floccose white aerial mycelium and with black conidiomata. Conidia present in orange to pale brown mass. Reverse buff, pale luteous to dark green, 64–66 mm diam in 7 d (75–76 mm diam in 10 d).

Materials examined. Malta, Gozo, from wither-tip twigs of Citrus limon (lemon), 11 July 2016, V. Guarnaccia (CBS H-23027 holotype, culture ex-type CBS 142410 = CPC 31141); from leaf lesions of C. limon, 22 Sept. 2015, V. Guarnaccia (culture CBS 142409 = CPC 27861).

Notes — Colletotrichum limonicola was isolated from leaf lesions and twigs with wither-tip symptoms on Citrus limon in Malta. This species is phylogenetically close to but clearly differentiated from C. novae-zelandiae based on GAPDH and TUB. Colletotrichum limonicola and C. catinaense (described above) are new species belonging to the same clade of C. novaezelandiae in the C. boninense species complex.

Pathogenicity

All tested isolates except that of C. acutatum were pathogenic to most of the detached orange fruits (Table 2). Both Citrus sinensis clones tested developed typical brown lesions around the fruit wounds after 10 d (Fig. 8). Colletotrichum gloeosporioides and C. karstii, respectively, showed the highest and the weakest aggressiveness among the eight species inoculated. Clone ‘Tarocco Scirè’ was more susceptible. The inoculated Colletotrichum isolates were re-isolated from the symptomatic tissues, fulfilling Koch’s postulates. No symptoms developed on the negative controls.

Fig. 8.

Fig. 8

Pathogenicity test of selected Colletotrichum isolates on Citrus sinensis fruits after 10 d. Fruits inoculated with: a–d. C. gloeosporioides (CBS 142408); e. C. catinaense (CBS 142417); f. C. limonicola (CBS 142410); g. C. novae-zelandiae (CBS 142414); h. C. hystricis (CBS 142411); i. C. helleniense (CBS 142418); j. C. karstii (CBS 142415).

DISCUSSION

Recent studies of phylogenetic analyses in the genus Colletotrichum revealed species to cluster in 11 major clades, as well as a number of small clusters and isolated species (Cannon et al. 2012, Marin-Felix et al. 2017). Four of these major clades represent important species complexes (C. acutatum, C. boninense, C. gloeosporioides and C. truncatum) (Damm et al. 2009, 2012a, b, Weir et al. 2012), which include very important plant pathogenic species. In these studies, a large number of taxa were differentiated and described. The recent revision and epitypification of the main Colletotrichum species complexes (Damm et al. 2009, 2012a, b, 2013, 2014, Weir et al. 2012, Liu et al. 2014), as well as several studies that focussed on citrus diseases (Peng et al. 2012, Huang et al. 2013, Aiello et al. 2015, Perrone et al. 2016), facilitated the description of several new species on Citrus and allied genera in this study (Table 3).

Table 3.

Global distribution of Colletotrichum species occurring in Citrus hosts and allied genera.

Species complex Species Host Organ Geographical distribution Reference(s)
C. acutatum C. abscissum Citrus sinensis Flower Brazil, USA Crous et al. (2015),
Bragança et al. (2016)
C. acutatum Citrus limon Leaf Italy This study
Citrus sinensis Leaf
C. citri Citrus aurantiifolia Twig China Huang et al. (2013)
C. godetiae Citrus aurantium Fruit Unknown Damm et al. (2012a)
C. johnstonii Citrus sp. Fruit New Zealand Damm et al. (2012a)
C. limetticola Citrus aurantiifolia Twig Cuba, USA Clausen (1912),
Damm et al. (2012a)
C. simmondsii Citrus reticulata Fruit China Peng et al. (2012),
Phoulivong et al. (2012)
Murraya sp. Leaf
C. boninense C. boninense Citrus medica Leaf China Peng et al. (2012)
C. catinaense Citrus aurantiifolia Twig Italy, Malta, Portugal This study
Citrus reticulata Leaf
Citrus sinensis Fruit
C. citricola Citrus unchiu Leaf China Huang et al. (2013)
C. constrictum Citrus limon Fruit New Zealand Damm et al. (2012b)
C. karstii Citrus grandis Leaf, twig China, Europe, New Zealand, South Africa Damm et al. (2012b), Peng et al. (2012), Huang et al. (2013), This study
Citrus limon Fruit, leaf, twig
Citrus paradisi Twig
Citrus reticulata Leaf, twig
Citrus sinensis Fruit, leaf, twig
Fortunella margarita Fruit
Murraya paniculata Leaf
C. limonicola Citrus limon Leaf Malta This study
C. novae-zelandiae Citrus medica Fruit Greece, Malta, New Zealand Damm et al. (2012b), This study
Citrus limon Leaf, twig
Citrus paradisi Leaf
Citrus sinensis Twig
C. gloeosporioides C. fructicola Citrus reticulata Leaf China Huang et al. (2013)
Fortunella margarita Branch
C. gloeosporioides Atlantia citroides Leaf Brazil, China, Ethiopia, Ghana, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Spain, New Zealand, Tunisia, USA Lima et al. (2011), Weir et al. (2012), Huang et al. (2013), Honger et al. (2016), Moges et al. (2016), Rhaeim & Taylor (2016), This study
Citrus bergamia Fruit
Citrus digitata Leaf
Citrus floridana Fruit
Citrus grandis Leaf
Citrus limon Fruit, leaf, twig
Citrus maxima Twig
Citrus medica Leaf
Citrus paradisi Leaf, twig
Citrus reticulata Fruit, leaf, twig
Citrus sinensis Flower, fruit, leaf, twig
Citrus unchiu Branch, leaf
Fortunella margarita Twig
Microcitrus australasica Twig
C. helleniense Citrus reticulata Fruit Greece This study
Poncirus trifoliata Twig
C. hystricis Citrus hystrix Leaf Italy This study
C. kahawae subsp. ciggaro Citrus reticulata Leaf Italy Perrone et al. (2016)
C. siamense Murraya sp. Leaf China Liu et al. (2016)
C. truncatum C. truncatum Citrus flamea Twig China Huang et al. (2013)
Citrus limon Leaf
C. brevisporum Citrus medica Leaf China Peng et al. (2012)
C. tropicicola Citrus maxima Leaf Thailand Liu et al. (2014)

Colletotrichum spp. are frequently associated with several citrus diseases worldwide (Timmer et al. 2000), such as PFD on sweet orange, KLA on lime and wither-tip, leaf spot, pre- and post-harvest anthracnose on different hosts (Brown et al. 1996, Timmer et al. 2000, Peres et al. 2008, Lima et al. 2011, McGovern et al. 2012). Before the multi-gene analysis era, C. acutatum was identified as the only species responsible for PFD (Peres et al. 2008) and KLA (Brown et al. 1996). Similarly, C. gloeosporioides was reported as the only Colletotrichum species to cause citrus fruit anthracnose (Brown 1975, Timmer et al. 2000). During the last decade a polyphasic approach was used in several Colletotrichum studies, revealing new species involved with citrus diseases, such as C. abscissum and C. gloeosporioides associated with PFD (Lima et al. 2011, Crous et al. 2015, Silva et al. 2016).

During the last years Colletotrichum spp. affected several commercial orchards in the main citrus producing areas of Mediterranean, causing a broad variety of symptoms and, consequently, losses of marketable fruits (Aiello et al. 2015, Ramos et al. 2016, Rhaiem & Taylor 2016). Therefore, the need for a large-scale investigation of Colletotrichum spp. associated with citrus infections in Europe was needed. This study provides the first molecular characterisation of Colletotrichum diversity related to citrus production in Europe, combined with morphological characterisation.

We performed single gene and multilocus DNA sequence analyses combining seven loci (ITS, CAL, GAPDH, ACT, TUB2, CHS-1 and HIS3) commonly used in previous phylogenetic studies of the C. gloeosporioides, C. acutatum and C. boninense species complexes (Damm et al. 2012a, b, Weir et al. 2012, Bragança et al. 2016). These species complexes incorporate several taxa (Damm et al. 2012a, b, Weir et al. 2012). However, only the closest taxa to the eight Colletotrichum species recovered in this study, were selected based on BLAST searches of NCBIs GenBank nucleotide database and included in the analyses. The final phylogenetic trees clearly distinguished each of these eight species.

We surveyed several citrus orchards, plant nurseries, private gardens and collections in five Mediterranean European countries. We further investigated host plant members of Citrus-allied genera, also economically important as ornamental (Atlantia, Murraya) or rootstock plants (Poncirus), and also for fruit production (Fortunella, Microcitrus). We obtained 174 Colletotrichum single spore strains from symptomatic tissues. Based on multi-locus data we found species allocated in three species complexes. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides in the C. gloeosporioides species complex, and C. karstii in the C. boninense species complex were the predominant species. However, C. gloeosporioides was found in all the countries investigated, whereas C. karstii was not isolated from samples collected in Greece. Moreover, C. acutatum s.str., part of the C. acutatum species complex, was recovered only on the Aeolian Islands (Italy), a volcanic archipelago to the north of Sicily. Colletotrichum novae-zelandiae was recovered in association with leaf spot on grapefruit in Greece and with twig cankers in orange and lemon trees in Malta. In addition, four new species were detected and described. Colletotrichum catinaense was associated with multiple symptoms on different hosts in Italy and Portugal. Colletotrichum helleniense was isolated from Citrus reticulata fruit anthracnose and from leaf lesions on Poncirus trifoliata in Greece. Colletotrichum hystricis was associated with leaf lesions of young plants of Citrus hystrix cultivated in a greenhouse located on Sicily and C. limonicola was recovered on Malta from leaf lesions on lemon plants.

Pathogenicity of all the species isolated from citrus samples collected in Europe was preliminarily tested on two clones of Citrus sinensis. Representative isolates were selected and artificially inoculated on orange fruits of clones ‘Tarocco Scirè’ and ‘Tarocco Nucellare’ (Rapisarda & Russo 2003). All of the Colletotrichum species tested, except C. acutatum, developed lesions on fruits. These results demonstrated a cross-infection potential between multiple species on fruits of two clones of species as already reported by a previous study on Colletotrichum (Freeman et al. 1998). However, our pathogenicity experiments were conducted under extreme conditions commonly applied in artificial inoculations, and it remains to be seen how easily the symptoms development will happen under natural conditions.

The pathogenicity test performed in this study confirmed that C. acutatum is not able to cause symptoms on citrus fruits. However, the establishment of the PFD disease caused by C. acutatum in Europe should be a focus in future surveys. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides was the most aggressive species, causing typical brown lesions that involved the skin and the albedo tissues. Although C. karstii showed the lowest aggressiveness, the pathogenicity test demonstrated its ability to cause lesions on fruits, which was also true for the remaining species, C. catinaense, C. helleniense, C. hystricis, C. limonicola and C. novae-zelandiae. The clone ‘Tarocco Scirè’ appeared more susceptible than ‘Tarocco Nucellare’ as Aiello et al. (2015) recently demonstrated for C. gloeosporioides and C. karstii.

Colletotrichum acutatum s.lat. is a common pathogen of several crops, including citrus, worldwide (Damm et al. 2012a). In Europe it has been detected on different hosts such as strawberry (Garrido et al. 2008), strawberry tree (Polizzi et al. 2011), olives (Moral et al. 2008), but never on citrus. Furthermore, C. novae-zelandiae was previously recovered from grapefruit and chili in New Zealand (Damm et al. 2012b). Thus, this study represents the first report of C. acutatum associated with citrus in Europe and the first detection of C. novae-zelandiae outside of New Zealand. Colletotrichum karstii, a member of the C. boninense species complex, has been reported on many host plants with a wide geographical distribution (Damm et al. 2012b). This species has been reported on citrus in South Africa, New Zealand and China (Damm et al. 2012b, Peng et al. 2012, Huang et al. 2013) as well as in Europe, where it was reported as citrus pathogen in Italy and Portugal (Aiello et al. 2015, Ramos et al. 2016). In Europe, C. karstii has been detected also on other hosts such as tropical fruits, cotton and lupine plants (Damm et al. 2012b, Ismail et al. 2015). Colletotrichum gloeosporioides was largely dominant in our investigation, in agreement with recent global results (Lima et al. 2011, Huang et al. 2013, Aiello et al. 2015, Honger et al. 2016, Ramos et al. 2016, Rhaiem & Taylor 2016). Colletotrichum gloeosporioides was isolated from all the citrus organs sampled (leaves, flowers, fruit and twigs), and proved to be the most aggressive Colletotrichum species. This species is reported as pathogen of the main cultivated citrus species worldwide (Huang et al. 2013) and to our knowledge the present study represents the first report of C. gloeosporioides associated with citrus flower disease in Europe, previously reported in Brazil (Lima et al. 2011). Colletotrichum catinaense and C. limonicola represent new species in the C. novae-zelandiae clade within the C. boninense species complex. Colletotrichum catinaense was recovered associated with infections of diverse Citrus species, whereas C. limonicola has been isolated only from lemon leaf lesions. Thus, more surveys are needed to investigate distribution and host specificity of this new species. Colletotrichum helleniense was isolated from Citrus reticulata and from Poncirus trifoliata, a member of the Rutaceae family largely cultivated in nurseries as citrus rootstock due to its economically useful traits, including cold temperature and poor soil tolerance, and Citrus Tristeza Virus resistance (Garnsey & Barrett 1987). This report shows the ability of C. helleniense to colonise tissues of different genera within the Rutaceae. Recently, Batista et al. (2016) supported the distinc-tion of two C. kahawae subspp. as two cryptic species. Colletotrichum kahawae subsp. ciggaro, one of these subspecies, has also recently been recorded by Perrone et al. (2016) as a pathogen of mandarin (Citrus reticulata). However, C. helle-niense is phylogenetically close to both C. kahawae subspecies, but clearly differentiated based on multi-locus phylogenetic analyses. As such it thus represents a new species in the C. kahawae clade in the C. gloeosporioides species complex. Colletotrichum hystricis was isolated from lesions on leaves of Citrus hystrix. This Citrus species is commonly cultivated, has a pleasant smell, and is referred to as medicinal lime (Yaacob & Subhadrabandhu 1995). The fruit is not appreciated, but is economically important for the extraction of essential oil used for cooking and cosmetics (Allen 1967). Colletotrichum hystricis is close to but clearly differentiated from C. alienum, which is commonly associated with cultivated fruits (Weir et al. 2012). In the present study it is described as a distinct taxon, supported also by morphological differences such as having obovoidal conidia and a slower growth rate in culture. Moreover, C. alienum is characterised by the development of perithecia in culture, whereas the two strains of C. hystricis did not produce perithecia on artificial media in this study.

The present study provides the first overview of Colletotrichum diversity associated with several disease symptoms on citrus fruits and plants in Europe, and provides useful information for pathogenicity evaluation and effective disease control. Preliminary inoculations also demonstrated the ability of all the Colletotrichum spp. found in Europe to cause infections on orange fruits. Further studies are thus required to resolve the host range and pathogenicity of the Colletotrichum species reported on other Citrus spp. and different plant organs.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Arien van Iperen (cultures), Marjan Vermaas (photo plates) and Mieke Starink-Willemse (DNA isolation, amplification and sequencing) for their technical assistance. V.G. would like to thank Antonino Azzaro, Dimitrios Dimou, Amilcar Duarte, Pietro Formica, Anna Guglielmo, Ioannis Livieratos, Leonardo Velasco, Antonio Vicent and Anthony Zammit for the kind support with specimen collection at several sites.

REFERENCES

  1. Aiello D, Carrieri R, Guarnaccia V, et al. 2015. Characterization and pathogenicity of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides and C. karstii causing preharvest disease on Citrus sinensis in Italy. Journal of Phytopathology 163: 168–177. [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen BM. 1967. Malayan fruits an introduction to the cultivated species. Singapore, Donald Moore Press Ltd. [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson JM, Aitken EAB, Dann EK, et al. 2013. Morphological and molecular diversity of Colletotrichum spp. causing pepper spot and anthracnose of lychee (Litchi chinensis) in Australia. Plant Pathology 62: 279–288. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bailey JA, Jeger MJ. 1992. Colletotrichum. Biology, pathology and control. CABI, Wallingford, UK. [Google Scholar]
  5. Baroncelli R, Zapparata A, Sarocco S, et al. 2015. Molecular diversity of anthracnose pathogen populations associated with UK strawberry production suggests multiple introductions of three different Colletotrichum species. PLoS One 10(6): e0129140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Batista D, Silva DN, Vieira A, et al. 2016. Legitimacy and implications of reducing Colletotrichum kahawae to subspecies in plant pathology. Frontiers in Plant Science 7: 2051. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Benyahia H, Jrifi A, Smaili C, et al. 2003. First report of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides causing withertip on twigs and tear stain on fruit of citrus in Morocco. Plant Pathology 52: 798. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bernstein B, Zehr EI, Dean RA, et al. 1995. Characteristics of Colletotrichum from peach, apple, pecan and other hosts. Plant Disease 79: 478–482. [Google Scholar]
  9. Bragança CA, Damm U, Baroncelli R, et al. 2016. Species of the Colletotrichum acutatum complex associated with anthracnose diseases of fruit in Brazil. Fungal Biology 120: 547–561. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Brown AE, Sreenivasaprasad S, Timmer LW. 1996. Molecular characterization of slow-growing orange and key lime anthracnose strains of Colletotrichum from citrus as C. acutatum. Phytopathology 86: 523–527. [Google Scholar]
  11. Brown GE. 1975. Factors affecting post-harvest development of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides in citrus fruits. Phytopathology 65: 404–409. [Google Scholar]
  12. Cai L, Hyde KD, Taylor PWJ, et al. 2009. A polyphasic approach for studying Colletotrichum. Fungal Diversity 39: 183–204. [Google Scholar]
  13. Cannon PF, Bridge PD, Monte E. 2000. Linking the past, present, and future of Colletotrichum systematics. In: Prusky D, Freeman S, Dickman MB. (eds), Colletotrichum: Host specificity, pathology, and host pathogen interaction: 1–20. APS Press, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA. [Google Scholar]
  14. Cannon PF, Buddie AG, Bridge PD. 2008. The typification of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides. Mycotaxon 104: 189–204. [Google Scholar]
  15. Cannon PF, Damm U, Johnston PR, et al. 2012. Colletotrichum – current status and future directions. Studies in Mycology 73: 181–213. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Carbone I, Kohn LM. 1999. A method for designing primer sets for speciation studies in filamentous ascomycetes. Mycologia 91: 553–556. [Google Scholar]
  17. Clausen RE. 1912. A new fungus concerned in whiter tip of varieties of Citrus medica. Phytopathology 2: 217–239. [Google Scholar]
  18. Cristóbal-Martínez AL, De Jesús Yáñez-Morales M, Solano-Vidal R, et al. 2017. Diversity of Colletotrichum species in coffee (Coffea arabica) plantations in Mexico. European Journal of Plant Pathology 147: 605–614. [Google Scholar]
  19. Crouch JA, Beirn LA, Cortese LM, et al. 2009. Anthracnose disease of switch-grass caused by the novel fungal species Colletotrichum navitas. Mycological Research 113: 1411–1421. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Crous PW, Gams W, Stalpers JA, et al. 2004a. MycoBank: an online initiative to launch mycology into the 21st century. Studies in Mycology 50: 19–22. [Google Scholar]
  21. Crous PW, Groenewald JZ, Risede JM, et al. 2004b. Calonectria species and their Cylindrocladium anamorphs: species with sphaeropedunculate vesicles. Studies in Mycology 50: 415–430. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Crous PW, Groenewald JZ, Slippers B, et al. 2016a. Global food and fibre security threatened by current inefficiencies in fungal identification. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 371: 1709. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Crous PW, Verkley GJM, Groenewald JZ, et al. 2009. Fungal biodiversity. CBS Laboratory manual series 1. Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, Utrecht, Netherlands. [Google Scholar]
  24. Crous PW, Wingfield MJ, Guarro J, et al. 2015. Fungal Planet description sheets: 320–370. Persoonia 34: 167–266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Crous PW, Wingfield MJ, Richardson DM, et al. 2016b. Fungal Planet description sheets: 400–468. Persoonia 36: 316–458. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Damm U, Cannon PF, Liu F, et al. 2013. The Colletotrichum orbiculare species complex: Important pathogens of field crops and weeds. Fungal Diversity 61: 29–59. [Google Scholar]
  27. Damm U, Cannon PF, Woudenberg JHC, et al. 2012a. The Colletotrichum acutatum species complex. Studies in Mycology 73: 37–113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Damm U, Cannon PF, Woudenberg JHC, et al. 2012b. The Colletotrichum boninense species complex. Studies in Mycology 73: 1–36. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Damm U, O’Connell RJ, Groenewald JZ, et al. 2014. The Colletotrichum destructivum species complex – hemibiotrophic pathogens of forage and field crops. Studies in Mycology 79: 49–84. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Damm U, Woudenberg JHC, Cannon PF, et al. 2009. Colletotrichum species with curved conidia from herbaceous hosts. Fungal Diversity 39: 45–87. [Google Scholar]
  31. De Silva DD, Ades PK, Crous PW, et al. 2017. Colletotrichum species associated with chili anthracnose in Australia. Plant Pathology 66: 254–267. [Google Scholar]
  32. Dean R, Van Kan JAL, Pretorius ZA, et al. 2012. The top 10 fungal pathogens in molecular plant pathology. Molecular Plant Pathology 13: 414–430. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Deising HB, Werner S, Wernitz M. 2000. The role of fungal appressoria in plant infection. Microbes and Infection 2: 1631–1641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Diao YZ, Zhang C, Liu F, et al. 2017. Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose disease of chili in China. Persoonia 38: 20–37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. FAO - Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome , 2016. Citrus fruits fresh and processed: annual statistics. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5558e.pdf.
  36. Farr DF, Aime MC, Rossman AY, et al. 2006. Species of Colletotrichum on Agavaceae. Mycological Research 110: 1395–1408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Farr DF, Rossman AY. 2017. Fungal databases, systematic mycology and microbiology laboratory, ARS, USDA. Retrieved February 26.
  38. Freeman S, Katan T, Shabi E. 1998. Characterization of Colletotrichum species responsible for anthracnose diseases of various fruits. Plant Disease 82: 596–605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Freeman S, Shabi E. 1996. Cross-infection of subtropical and temperate fruits by Colletotrichum species from various hosts. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology 49: 395–404. [Google Scholar]
  40. Garnsey DJ, Barrett SM. 1987. Identification of citrus tristeza virus resistance in citrus relatives and its potential applications. Phytophylactica 19: 187–192. [Google Scholar]
  41. Garrido C, Carbú M, Fernández-Acero FJ, et al. 2008. Isolation and pathogenicity of Colletotrichum spp. causing anthracnose of strawberry in south west Spain. European Journal of Plant Pathology 120: 409–415. [Google Scholar]
  42. Glass NL, Donaldson G. 1995. Development of primer sets designed for use with PCR to amplify conserved genes from filamentous ascomycetes. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 61: 1323–1330. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Guarnaccia V, Vitale A, Cirvilleri G, et al. 2016. Characterisation and pathogenicity of fungal species associated with branch cankers and stem-end rot of avocado in Italy. European Journal of Plant Pathology 146: 963–976. [Google Scholar]
  44. Guerber JC, Liu B, Correll JC, et al. 2003. Characterization of diversity in Colletotrichum acutatum sensu lato by sequence analysis of two gene introns, mtDNA and intron RFLPs, and mating compatibility. Mycologia 95: 872–895. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Hillis DM, Bull JJ. 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Systematic Biology 42: 182–192. [Google Scholar]
  46. Honger JO, Offei SK, Oduro KA, et al. 2016. Identification and molecular characterisation of Colletotrichum species from avocado, citrus and pawpaw in Ghana. South African Journal of Plant and Soil 33: 177–185. [Google Scholar]
  47. Huang F, Chen GQ, Hou X, et al. 2013. Colletotrichum species associated with cultivated citrus in China. Fungal Diversity 61: 61–74. [Google Scholar]
  48. Ismail AM, Cirvilleri G, Yaseen T, et al. 2015. Characterisation of Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose disease of mango in Italy. Journal of Plant Pathology 97: 167–171. [Google Scholar]
  49. Katoh K, Standley DM. 2013. MAFFT Multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30: 772–780. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Kaur R, Rewal HS, Sethi A. 2007. Pre-harvest stem-end rot in citrus cultivars due to Colletotrichum gloeosporioides. European Journal of Horticultural Science 72: 20–25. [Google Scholar]
  51. Klotz J. 1961. Color handbook of Citrus diseases. University of California, California, USA. [Google Scholar]
  52. Lima WG, Sposito MB, Amorim L, et al. 2011. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, a new causal agent of citrus post-bloom fruit drop. European Journal of Plant Pathology 131: 157–165. [Google Scholar]
  53. Liu F, Cai L, Crous PW, et al. 2014. The Colletotrichum gigasporum species complex. Persoonia 33: 83–97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Liu F, Damm U, Cai L, et al. 2013. Species of the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides complex associated with anthracnose diseases of Proteaceae. Fungal Diversity 61: 89–105. [Google Scholar]
  55. Liu F, Wang M, Damm U, et al. 2016. Species boundaries in plant pathogenic fungi: a Colletotrichum case study. BMC Evolutionary Biology 16: 81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Liu F, Weir BS, Damm U, et al. 2015. Unravelling Colletotrichum species associated with Camellia: employing ApMat and GS loci to resolve species in the C. gloeosporioides complex. Persoonia 35: 63–86. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Lubbe CM, Denman S, Cannon PF, et al. 2004. Characterization of Colletotrichum species associated with diseases of Proteaceae. Mycologia 96: 1268–1279. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. MacKenzie SJ, Peres NA, Barquero MP, et al. 2009. Host range and genetic relatedness of Colletotrichum acutatum isolates from fruit crops and leatherleaf fern in Florida. Phytopathology 99: 620–631. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Marcelino J, Giordano R, Gouli S, et al. 2008. Colletotrichum acutatum var. fioriniae (teleomorph: Glomerella acutata var. fioriniae var. nov.) infection of a scale insect. Mycologia 100: 353–374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Marin-Felix Y, Groenewald JZ, Cai L, et al. 2017. Genera of phytopathogenic fungi: GOPHY 1. Studies in Mycology, doi: 10.1016/j.simyco.2017.04.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  61. McGovern RJ, Seijo TE, Hendricks K, et al. 2012. New report of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides causing postbloom fruit drop on citrus in Bermuda. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology 34: 187–194. [Google Scholar]
  62. Moges AD, Admassu B, Belew D, et al. 2016. Development of microsatellite markers and analysis of genetic diversity and population structure of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides from Ethiopia. PLoS ONE 11(3): e0151257. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Moral J, Bouhmidi K, Trapero A. 2008. Influence of fruit maturity, cultivar susceptibility, and inoculation method on infection of olive fruit by Colletotrichum acutatum. Plant Disease 92: 1421–1426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Moriwaki J, Sato T, Tsukiboshi T. 2003. Morphological and molecular characterization of Colletotrichum boninense sp. nov. from Japan. Mycoscience 44: 47–53. [Google Scholar]
  65. Nirenberg HI. 1976. Untersuchungen über die morphologische und biologische Differenzierung in der Fusarium-Sektion Liseola. Mitteilungen aus der Biologischen Bundesanstalt für Land- und Forstwirtschaft Berlin-Dahlem 169: 1–117. [Google Scholar]
  66. Nylander JAA. 2004. MrModeltest v. 2. Program distributed by the author. Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University. [Google Scholar]
  67. O’Donnell K, Cigelnik E. 1997. Two divergent intragenomic rDNA ITS2 types within a monophyletic lineage of the fungus Fusarium are nonorthologous. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 7: 103–116. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. O’Donnell K, Nirenberg HI, Aoki T, et al. 2000. A multigene phylogeny of the Gibberella fujikuroi species complex: Detection of additional phylogenetically distinct species. Mycoscience 41: 61–78. [Google Scholar]
  69. Peng LJ, Yang YL, Hyde KD, et al. 2012. Colletotrichum species on Citrus leaves in Guizhou and Yunnan provinces, China. Cryptogamie Mycologie 33: 267–283. [Google Scholar]
  70. Peres N, MacKenzie S, Peever T, et al. 2008. Postbloom fruit drop of citrus and key lime anthracnose are caused by distinct phylogenetic lineages of Colletotrichum acutatum. Phytopathology 98: 345–352. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Perfect SE, Hughes HB, O’Connell RJ, et al. 1999. Colletotrichum: a model genus for studies on pathology and fungal – plant interactions. Fungal Genetics and Biology 27: 186–198. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Perrone G, Magistà D, Ismail AM. 2016. First report of Colletotrichum kahawae subsp. ciggaro on mandarin in Italy. Journal of Plant Pathology 98: 12. [Google Scholar]
  73. Phoulivong S, Cai L, Parinn N, et al. 2010. A new species of Colletotrichum from Cordyline fruticosa and Eugenia javanica causing anthracnose disease. Mycotaxon 114: 247–257. [Google Scholar]
  74. Phoulivong S, Mckenzie EHC, Hyde KD. 2012. Cross infection of Colletotrichum species; a case study with tropical fruits. Current Research in Environmental & Applied Mycology 2: 99–111. [Google Scholar]
  75. Polizzi G, Aiello D, Guarnaccia V, et al. 2011. First report of damping-off on strawberry tree caused by Colletotrichum acutatum and C. simmondsii in Italy. Plant Disease 95: 1588. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Ramos AP, Talhinhas P, Sreenivasaprasad S, et al. 2016. Characterization of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, as the main causal agent of citrus anthracnose, and C. karstii as species preferentially associated with lemon twig dieback in Portugal. Phytoparasitica 44: 549–561. [Google Scholar]
  77. Rapisarda P, Russo G. 2003. Fruit quality of five ‘Tarocco’ selections grown in Italy. In: Proceedings of the International Society of Citriculture. 9th Congress, 3–7 December 2000 International Society of Citriculture, 2: 1149–1153. Riverside, CA, USA. [Google Scholar]
  78. Rayner RW. 1970. A mycological colour chart. CMI and British Mycological Society, Kew, Surrey, England. [Google Scholar]
  79. Rhaiem A, Taylor PW. 2016. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides associated with anthracnose symptoms on citrus, a new report for Tunisia. European Journal of Plant Pathology 146: 219–224. [Google Scholar]
  80. Ronquist F, Teslenko M, Van der Mark P, et al. 2012. MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Systematic Biology 61: 539–542. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Shivas RG, Tan YP. 2009. A taxonomic reassessment of Colletotrichum acutatum, introducing C. fioriniae comb. et stat. nov. and C. simmondsii sp. nov. Fungal Diversity 39: 111–122. [Google Scholar]
  82. Silva AO, Savi DC, Gomes FB, et al. 2016. Identification of Colletotrichum species associated with postbloom fruit drop in Brazil through GAPDH sequencing analysis and multiplex PCR. European Journal of Plant Pathology 147: 731–748 [Google Scholar]
  83. Sutton BC. 1980. The coelomycetes. Fungi imperfecti with pycnidia, acervuli and stromata: 1–696. Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew, Surrey, England. [Google Scholar]
  84. Sutton BC. 1992. The genus Glomerella and its anamorph Colletotrichum. In: Bailey JA, Jeger MJ. (eds), Colletotrichum: biology, pathology and control: 1–26. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. [Google Scholar]
  85. Swofford DL. 2003. PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), v. 4.0b10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts. [Google Scholar]
  86. Talhinhas P, Mota-Capitão C, Martins S, et al. 2011. Epidemiology, histopathology and aetiology of olive anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum acutatum and C. gloeosporioides in Portugal. Plant Pathology 60: 483–495. [Google Scholar]
  87. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, et al. 2013. MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30: 2725–2729. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Timmer LW, Garnsey SM, Graham JH. 2000. Compendium of Citrus diseases (second edition). The American Phytopathological Society. [Google Scholar]
  89. Udayanga D, Manamgoda DS, Liu X, et al. 2013. What are the common anthracnose pathogens of tropical fruits? Fungal Diversity 61: 165–179. [Google Scholar]
  90. Von Arx JA. 1957. Die Arten der Gattung Colletotrichum Cda. Phytopathologische Zeitschrift 29: 413–468. [Google Scholar]
  91. Weir BS, Johnston PR, Damm U. 2012. The Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex. Studies in Mycology 73: 115–180. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. White TJ, Bruns T, Lee S, et al. 1990. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, et al. (eds), PCR Protocols: a guide to methods and applications: 315–322. Academic Press, San Diego, California. [Google Scholar]
  93. Yaacob O, Subhadrabandhu S. 1995. The production of economic fruits in South East Asia: 156. Oxford University Press, Kuala Lumpur. [Google Scholar]
  94. Yang YL, Liu ZY, Cai L, et al. 2009. Colletotrichum anthracnose of Amaryllidaceae. Fungal Diversity 39: 123–146. [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES