Skip to main content
IMA Fungus logoLink to IMA Fungus
. 2018 Mar 20;9(1):49–73. doi: 10.5598/imafungus.2018.09.01.05

Ustilago species causing leaf-stripe smut revisited

Julia Kruse 1,2,, Wolfgang Dietrich 3, Horst Zimmermann 4, Friedemann Klenke 5, Udo Richter 6, Heidrun Richter 6, Marco Thines 1,2,4,
PMCID: PMC6048562  PMID: 30018872

Abstract

Leaf-stripe smuts on grasses are a highly polyphyletic group within Ustilaginomycotina, occurring in three genera, Tilletia, Urocystis, and Ustilago. Currently more than 12 Ustilago species inciting stripe smuts are recognised. The majority belong to the Ustilago striiformis-complex, with about 30 different taxa described from 165 different plant species. This study aims to assess whether host distinct-lineages can be observed amongst the Ustilago leaf-stripe smuts using nine different loci on a representative set. Phylogenetic reconstructions supported the monophyly of the Ustilago striiformis-complex that causes leaf-stripe and the polyphyly of other leaf-stripe smuts within Ustilago. Furthermore, smut specimens from the same host genus generally clustered together in well-supported clades that often had available species names for these lineages. In addition to already-named lineages, three new lineages were observed, and described as new species on the basis of host specificity and molecular differences: namely Ustilago jagei sp. nov. on Agrostis stolonifera, U. kummeri sp. nov. on Bromus inermis, and U. neocopinata sp. nov. on Dactylis glomerata.

Keywords: DNA-based taxonomy, host specificity, molecular species discrimination, multigene phylogeny, new taxa, species complex, Ustilaginaceae

INTRODUCTION

The term “stripe smut” is commonly used to refer to Ustilaginomycotina species that cause dark brown to black linear sori of varying length in the leaves of grasses (Poaceae). Black spore masses are released after the spores have matured beneath the epidermis in the mesophyll of the host leaves (Fischer 1953, Vánky 2012). The spore release process of sori is unknown, but may be facilitated either by the withering of dead epidermal cells or by enzymatic action, as in the white blister rusts (Heller & 2009). Of the smut genera that infect grasses, Ustilago is the most prevalent (Stoll et al. 2003, 2005, Vánky 2012).

The term stripe smut does not reflect phylogenetic relatedness, as at least two other genera, Tilletia and Urocystis, contain species that manifest similar symptoms. The vast majority of leaf-stripe smuts belong to Ustilago, including U. agropyri, U. bahuichivoensis, U. bethelii, U. calamagrostidis, U. calcarea, U. davisii, U. deyeuxiicola, U. echinata, U. filiformis, U. phlei, U. scrobiculata, U. serpens s. lat., U. sporoboli-indici, U. striiformis s. lat., U. trebouxii, U. trichoneurana, and U. ulei (Vánky 2012). Of these species, U. striiformis s. lat., with the type species described on Holcus lanatus, is a complex occurring on 164 species of Poaceae representing 44 different genera (Achnatherum, Agropyron, Agrostis, Alopecurus, Ammophila, Anthoxanthum, Arctagrostis, Arrhenatherum, Avena, Beckmannia, Brachypodium, Briza, Bromus, Calamagrostis, Cleistogenes, Cynosurus, Dactylis, Danthonia, Deschampsia, Deyeuxia, Elymus, Festuca, Helictotrichon, Hierochloë, Holcus, Hordeum, Hystrix, Koeleria, Leymus, Lolium, Melica, Milium, Pennisetum, Phalaris, Phleum, Piptatherum, Poa, Polypogon, Puccinellia, Sesleria, Setaria, Sitanion, Trisetaria, and Trisetum). Based on host specificity and minor differences in spore size and surface ornamentation, approximately 30 different taxa have been described in the U. striiformis species complex on various host plants (Vánky 2012, Savchenko et al. 2014a). Ustilago serpens probably represents an overlooked species complex, occuring on five host genera: Agropyron, Brachypodium, Bromus, Elymus, and Leymus. Whether other species with large warts on their spores also belong to this complex, such as U. echinata and U. scrobiculata, is currently unclear.

Ustilago striiformis s. lat. on Alopecurus pratensis has often been the sole representative of this group in phylogenetic analyses (Stoll et al. 2005, Begerow et al. 2006, McTaggart et al. 2012a). Stoll et al. (2005) supported the recognition of U. calamagrostidis, a parasite of several species of Calamagrostis, as separate from U. striiformis. The morphological difference was mainly in spore size and ornamentation. Savchenko et al. (2014a) provided a more detailed analysis of the U. striifomis species complex using several host-fungus combinations and phylogenetic reconstructions based on the nrITS and partial LSU regions. However, while two additional species were proposed as distinct in the U. striiformis-complex, the phylogenetic resolution was too low to draw further conclusions regarding host specificity and potential species boundaries. To resolve undescribed lineages within this species complex, Savchenko et al. (2014a) suggested that several additional gene loci and host-fungus combinations should be included. However, in line with Vánky (2012), Savchenko et al. (2014a) suggested that it would be difficult to distinguish between these lineages based on morphological characters. DNA-based characteristics, such as diagnostic SNPs, along with host specificity might be a solution towards characterizing and describing previously-named and new species (Denchev et al. 2009, Piątek et al. 2013). The aim of this study was to use a multigene phylogeny to infer the phylogenetic differentiation in the leaf stripe smuts in the genus Ustilago, particularly those in the U. striiformis species complex.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Plant and fungal material

Specimens used in the study are listed in Table 1. The names of the hosts and fungi was derived from the latest version of The International Plant Names Index (www.ipni.org), Index Fungorum (www.indexfungorum.org/) and Vánky (2012), and partly following a broad generic concept for Ustilago (Thines 2016). A majority of the samples were collected in Germany (about 76) and most collections were not older than 20 years. Samples are deposited in Herbarium Senckenbergianum Görlitz (GLM). All host identifications were confirmed by ITS sequences.

Table 1.

Smut specimens used for phylogenetic analysis.

DNA-no. Species Host Collection details
gene loci
Location Date Collector Fungarium no. ITS atp2 ssc1 map myosin rpl4A rpl3 sdh1 tif2
2354 Sporisorium aff. inopiatum (Langdonia) Aristida adscensionis Zambia 12 Apr. 2001 C., T. & K. Vánky M-0215944 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929824 KY929964 KY930127
474 Ustilago agrostidis-palustris Agrostis cf. gigantea Germany, Bavaria 22 Jun. 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F105832 KY929551 KY930157 KY929994 KY929709 KY929639 KY929849 KY929779 KY929919 KY930082
1374 Agrostis gigantea Switzerland 9 Jul. 2004 V. Kummer GLM-F107425 KY929582 KY930188 KY930025 KY929729 KY929659 KY929869 KY929799 KY929939 KY930102
2395 Agrostis sp. Germany, Lower Saxony 12 Jul. 2014 J. Kruse & H. Jage GLM-F107439 KY929596 KY930202 KY930039 KY929739 KY929669 KY929879 KY929809 KY929949 KY930112
2287 Ustilago airae-caespitosae Deschampsia caespitosa Polen 13 Jul. 1994 H. Scholz B 70 0014901 KY929526 KY930132 KY929969 KY929688 KY929618 KY929828 KY929758 KY929898 KY930061
2401 Deschampsia caespitosa Austria, Upper Austria 15 Aug. 2014 J. Kruse GLM-F107444 KY929601 KY930207 KY930044 KY929744 KY929674 KY929884 KY929814 KY929954 KY930117
2402 Deschampsia caespitosa Austria, Upper Austria 15 Aug. 2014 J. Kruse GLM-F107445 KY929602 KY930208 KY930045 KY929745 KY929675 KY929885 KY929815 KY929955 KY930118
477 Ustilago alopecurivora Alopecurus pratensis Germany, Hesse 22 May 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F105834 KY929553 KY930159 KY929996 KY929711 KY929641 KY929851 KY929781 KY929921 KY930084
1376 Alopecurus pratensis Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 20 May 2013 H. Jage GLM-F107426 KY929583 KY930189 KY930026
1822 Ustilago aff. andropogonis (Sporisorium) Bothriochloa ischaemum Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 25 Jul. 2004 H. Jage & H. John GLM-F062665 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929764 KY929904 KY930067
432 Ustilago perennans Arrhenatherum elatius Germany, Schleswig-Holstein 21 Jun. 2007 J. Kruse GLM-F105817 KY929536 KY930142 KY929979 KY929697 KY929627 KY929837 KY929767 KY929907 KY930070
2398 Ustilago brizae Briza media Austria, Tirol 21 Jul. 2014 J. Kruse GLM-F107442 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929812 KY929952 KY930115
2399 Briza media Germany, Bavaria 19 Jul. 2014 J. Kruse GLM-F107443 KY929600 KY930206 KY930043 KY929743 KY929673 KY929883 KY929813 KY929953 KY930116
498 Ustilago bromina Bromus inermis Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 04 Jun. 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F105843 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929785 KY929925 KY930088
500 Bromus inermis Germany, Thuringia 15 Jun. 2013 J. Kruse GLM-F105844 KY929563 KY930169 KY930006 KY929716 KY929646 KY929856 KY929786 KY929926 KY930089
1180 Bromus inermis Germany, Berlin May 1983 H. Scholz HUV No 498 (TUB) KY929613 KY930219 KY930056
2070 Bromus inermis Germany, Berlin Aug. 1892 P. Sydow B 70 0014775 KY929525
2275 Bromus inermis Germany, Brandenburg 17 Jul. 2005 H. & I. Scholz B 70 0014755 KY929524 KY930131 KY929968
2276 Bromus inermis Germany, Thuringia 10 Sep. 1999 I. Scholz B 70 0021843 KY929527 KY930133 KY929970
1591 Ustilago aff. bromivora Bromus rigidus Greece 23 Apr. 2013 C. & F. Klenke GLM-F107429 KY929586 KY930192 KY930029 KY929731 KY929661 KY929871 KY929801 KY929941 KY930104
3370 Bromus sterilis Spain, Andalusia 2 May 2015 J. Kruse GLM-F107449 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929818 KY929958 KY930121
442 Ustilago calamagrostidis Calamagrostis epigejos Germany, Lower Saxony 03 Aug. 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F105818 KY929537 KY930143 KY929980
445 Calamagrostis epigejos Germany, Baden-Württemberg 20 Jul. 2013 J. Kruse GLM-F105819 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929768 KY929908 KY930071
1383 Calamagrostis epigejos Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 29 Jun. 2013 H. Zimmermann, U. Richter GLM-F107427 KY929584 KY930190 KY930027 KY929730 KY929660 KY929870 KY929800 KY929940 KY930103
1912 Calamagrostis epigejos Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 09 Aug. 1996 H. Jage GLM-F048100 KY929530 KY930136 KY929973 KY929691 KY929621 KY929831 KY929761 KY929901 KY930064
1182 Ustilago corcontica Calamagrostis villosa Germany, Saxony 22 Aug. 1987 W. Dietrich HUV No 794 (TUB) KY929615 KY930221 KY930058
1611 Calamagrostis villosa Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 26 Jul. 2003 H. & U. Richter GLM-F107434 KY929591 KY930197 KY930034
1825 Ustilago cruenta (Sporisorium) Sorghum bicolor Greece 11 May 2006 H-W, Otto GLM-F078871 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929766 KY929906 KY930069
3375 Ustilago cynodontis Cynodon dactylon Spain, Andalusia 3 May 2015 J. Kruse GLM-F107450 KY929607 KY930213 KY930050 KY929749 KY929679 KY929889 KY929819 KY929959 KY930122
3376 Cynodon dactylon Spain, Andalusia 3 May 2015 J. Kruse GLM-F107451 KY929608 KY930214 KY930051 KY929750 KY929680 KY929890 KY929820 KY929960 KY930123
1596 Ustilago aff. dactyloctaenii (Sporisorium) Dactyloctenium australe South-Africa 22 Feb. 2000 V. Kummer GLM-F107430 KY929587 KY930193 KY930030 KY929732 KY929662 KY929872 KY929802 KY929942 KY930105
478 Ustilago denotarisii Arrhenatherum elatius Germany, Schleswig-Holstein 13 May 2007 J. Kruse GLM-F105835 KY929554 KY930160 KY929997
481 Arrhenatherum elatius Germany, Rhineland-Palatinate 23 May 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F105836 KY929555 KY930161 KY929998
483 Arrhenatherum elatius Germany, Lower Saxony 31 Jul. 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F105837 KY929556 KY930162 KY929999
486 Arrhenatherum elatius Germany, Thuringia 04 Jun. 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F105838 KY929557 KY930163 KY930000
488 Arrhenatherum elatius Germany, Bavaria 16 May 2013 J. Kruse GLM-F105839 KY929558 KY930164 KY930001
447 Ustilago echinata Phalaris arundinacea Germany, Lower Saxony 01 Jul. 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F105820 KY929539 KY930145 KY929982 KY929699 KY929629 KY929839 KY929769 KY929909 KY930072
449 Phalaris arundinacea Germany, Lower Saxony 29 Aug. 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F105821 KY929540 KY930146 KY929983 KY929700 KY929630 KY929840 KY929770 KY929910 KY930073
1914 Phalaris arundinacea Switzerland, St. Gallen 26 Jul. 2000 H. Jage GLM-F048338 KY929531 KY930137 KY929974 KY929692 KY929622 KY929832 KY929762 KY929902 KY930065
451 Ustilago aff. filiformis Glyceria fluitans Germany, Lower Saxony 17 May 2007 J. Kruse GLM-F105822 KY929541 KY930147 KY929984 KY929701 KY929631 KY929841 KY929771 KY929911 KY930074
454 Glyceria fluitans Germany, Bavaria 24 Jun. 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F105823 KY929542 KY930148 KY929985 KY929702 KY929632 KY929842 KY929772 KY929912 KY930075
455 Glyceria fluitans Germany, Bavaria 10 May 2013 J. Kruse GLM-F105824 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929773 KY929913 KY930076
456 Ustilago filiformis Glyceria maxima Germany, Lower Saxony 01 Jul. 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F105825 KY929544 KY930150 KY929987 KY929704 KY929634 KY929844 KY929774 KY929914 KY930077
472 Ustilago jagei sp. nov. Agrostis rupestris Switzerland, Grisons 02 Aug. 2009 J. Kruse GLM-F105830 KY929549 KY930155 KY929992
473 Agrostis stolonifera Germany, Bavaria 20 May 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F105831 KY929550 KY930156 KY929993
476 Agrostis stolonifera Germany, Hesse 22 May 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F105833 KY929552 KY930158 KY929995 KY929710 KY929640 KY929850 KY929780 KY929920 KY930083
551 Agrostis sp. Germany, Lower Saxony 11 Jun. 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F107423 KY929580 KY930186 KY930023 KY929727 KY929657 KY929867 KY929797 KY929937 KY930100
2396 Agrostis stolonifera Germany, Bavaria 20 Jul. 2014 J. Kruse GLM-F107440 KY929597 KY930203 KY930040 KY929740 KY929670 KY929880 KY929810 KY929950 KY930113
2397 Agrostis stolonifera Germany, Hesse 27 Jun. 2014 J. Kruse GLM-F107441 KY929598 KY930204 KY930041 KY929741 KY929671 KY929881 KY929811 KY929951 KY930114
494 Agrostis sp. Germany, Bavaria 04 Jul. 2013 J. Kruse GLM-F105841 KY929560 KY930166 KY930003 KY929713 KY929643 KY929853 KY929783 KY929923 KY930086
1375 Agrostis stolonifera Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 16 Sep. 2001 H. Jage GLM-F047379 KY929528 KY930134 KY929971 KY929689 KY929619 KY929829 KY929759 KY929899 KY930062
1612 Ustilago kummeri sp. nov. Bromus inermis Germany, Brandenburg 19 Jun. 2010 V. Kummer GLM-F107435 KY929592 KY930198 KY930035 KY929736 KY929666 KY929876 KY929806 KY929946 KY930109
1948 Bromus inermis Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 17 Jul. 2001 H. Jage, W. Lehman GLM-F047380 KY929529 KY930135 KY929972 KY929690 KY929620 KY929830 KY929760 KY929900 KY930063
501 Ustilago loliicola Lolium perenne Germany, Bavaria 14 May 2013 J. Kruse GLM-F105845 KY929564 KY930170 KY930007
2288A Festuca pratensis Germany, Hesse 25 May 2014 J. Kruse GLM-F107437 KY929594 KY930200 KY930037
3386 Festuca arundinacea Germany, Hesse 02 Nov. 2014 J. Kruse GLM-F107454 KY929611 KY930217 KY930054 KY929753 KY929683 KY929893 KY929823 KY929963 KY930126
2815A Ustilago maydis Zea mays Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 10 Jul. 2007 H. Jage GLM-F107446 KY929603 KY930209 KY930046 KY929746 KY929676 KY929886 KY929816 KY929956 KY930119
1404 Ustilago milii Milium effusum Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 02 Jun. 2002 H. Jage GLM-F107428 KY929585 KY930191 KY930028
2303 Milium effusum Germany, Saxony 03 Jun. 2012 W. Dietrich GLM-F107438 KY929595 KY930201 KY930038 KY929738 KY929668 KY929878 KY929808 KY929948 KY930111
3385 Milium effusum Germany, Hesse 11 Jun. 2015 J. Kruse GLM-F107453 KY929610 KY930216 KY930053 KY929752 KY929682 KY929892 KY929822 KY929962 KY930125
503 Ustilago neocopinata sp. nov. Dactylis glomerata Germany, Lower Saxony 01 Jul. 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F105846 KY929565 KY930171 KY930008
505 Dactylis glomerata Germany, Bavaria 20 Jun. 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F105847 KY929566 KY930172 KY930009
506 Dactylis glomerata Germany, Lower Saxony 19 May 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F105848 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929787 KY929927 KY930090
508 Dactylis glomerata Germany, Bavaria 19 Jul. 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F105849 KY929568 KY930174 KY930011 KY929718 KY929648 KY929858 KY929788 KY929928 KY930091
510 Dactylis glomerata Germany, Bavaria 24 May 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F105850 KY929569 KY930175 KY930012 KY929719 KY929649 KY929859 KY929789 KY929929 KY930092
512 Dactylis glomerata Germany, Bavaria 15 Jun. 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F107413 KY929570 KY930176 KY930013
521 Dactylis glomerata Germany, Thuringia 15 Jun. 2013 J. Kruse GLM-F107414 KY929571 KY930177 KY930014
463 Ustilago nuda Hordeum vulgare Germany, Bavaria 12 May 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F105826 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929775 KY929915 KY930078
884 Sporisorium aff. occidentale Andropogon gerardii USA 30 Jul. 1989 not known HUV No 758 (TUB) Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929825 KY929965 KY930128
471 Ustilago salweyi Holcus mollis Germany, Bavaria 11 Jun. 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F105829 KY929548 KY930154 KY929991 KY929708 KY929638 KY929848 KY929778 KY929918 KY930081
489 Holcus mollis Germany, Bavaria 16 May 2013 J. Kruse GLM-F105840 KY929559 KY930165 KY930002 KY929712 KY929642 KY929852 KY929782 KY929922 KY930085
523 Holcus lanatus Germany, Lower Saxony 24 May 2009 J. Kruse GLM-F107415 KY929572 KY930178 KY930015 KY929720 KY929650 KY929860 KY929790 KY929930 KY930093
524 Holcus lanatus Germany, Lower Saxony 22 May 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F107416 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929791 KY929931 KY930094
525 Holcus lanatus Germany, Lower Saxony 27 May 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F107417 KY929574 KY930180 KY930017 KY929722 KY929652 KY929862 KY929792 KY929932 KY930095
531 Holcus lanatus Germany, Bavaria 17 May 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F107418 KY929575 KY930181 KY930018
541 Holcus mollis Germany, Saxony 03 Jun. 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F107419 KY929576 KY930182 KY930019 KY929723 KY929653 KY929863 KY929793 KY929933 KY930096
543 Holcus mollis Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 05 Jun. 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F107420 KY929577 KY930183 KY930020 KY929724 KY929654 KY929864 KY929794 KY929934 KY930097
544 Holcus mollis Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 05 Jun. 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F107421 KY929578 KY930184 KY930021 KY929725 KY929655 KY929865 KY929795 KY929935 KY930098
545 Holcus mollis Germany, Lower Saxony 17 Aug. 2011 J. Kruse GLM-F107422 KY929579 KY930185 KY930022 KY929726 KY929656 KY929866 KY929796 KY929936 KY930099
497 Ustilago scaura Helictotrichon pubescens Germany, Rhineland-Palatinate 23 May 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F105842 KY929561 KY930167 KY930004 KY929714 KY929644 KY929854 KY929784 KY929924 KY930087
3384 Helictotrichon pubescens Germany, Hesse 10 Jun. 2015 J. Kruse GLM-F107452 KY929609 KY930215 KY930052 KY929751 KY929681 KY929891 KY929821 KY929961 KY930124
1359 Ustilago aff. schroeteriana (Sporisorium) Paspalum virgatum Costa Rica 15 Mar. 1991 T. & K. Vánky HUV No 888 (TUB) Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929826 KY929966 KY930129
1608 Ustilago scrobiculata Calamagrostis epigejos Germany, Brandenburg 17 Aug. 2011 V. Kummer & C. Buhr GLM-F107431 KY929588 KY930194 KY930031 KY929733 KY929663 KY929873 KY929803 KY929943 KY930106
1609 Calamagrostis epigejos Germany, Thuringia 27 May 2010 V. Kummer GLM-F107432 KY929589 KY930195 KY930032 KY929734 KY929664 KY929874 KY929804 KY929944 KY930107
1610 Calamagrostis epigejos Germany, Brandenburg 24 Jun. 2007 V. Kummer GLM-F107433 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929805 KY929945 KY930108
467 Ustilago serpens Elymus repens Germany, Schleswig-Holstein 31 Jul. 2012 J. Kruse GLM-F105827 KY929546 KY930152 KY929989 KY929706 KY929636 KY929846 KY929776 KY929916 KY930079
469 Elymus repens Germany, Thuringia 15 Jun. 2013 J. Kruse GLM-F105828 KY929547 KY930153 KY929990 KY929707 KY929637 KY929847 KY929777 KY929917 KY930080
3110 Elymus repens Germany, Brandenburg 29 Jun. 2014 V. Kummer GLM-F107447 KY929604 KY930210 KY930047
1305 Ustilago aff. sorghi (Sporisorium) Sorghum plumosum Australia 20 Feb. 1996 A. A. Mitchell, C. & K. Vánky HUV No 970 (TUB) Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929827 KY929967 KY930130
1951 Ustilago aff. syntherismae Digitaria sanguinalis Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 01 Oct . 2004 H. Jage GLM-F064759 KY929534 KY930140 KY929977 KY929695 KY929625 KY929835 KY929765 KY929905 KY930068
1617 Digitaria sanguinalis Germany, Brandenburg 11 Aug. 2001 V. Kummer GLM-F107436 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929807 KY929947 KY930110
553 Ustilago trichophora Echinochloa crus-galli Germany, North Rhine-Westphalia 04 Oct . 2010 J. Kruse GLM-F107424 Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b Kruse et al. 2017b KY929798 KY929938 KY930101
1957 Echinochloa crus-galli Germany, Saxony-Anhalt 01 Oct . 2003 H. Jage GLM-F062638 KY929532 KY930138 KY929975 KY929693 KY929623 KY929833 KY929763 KY929903 KY930066
3347 Ustilago aff. vanderystii (Sporisorium) Hyparrhenia hirta Spain, Andalusia 22 Apr. 2015 J. Kruse GLM-F107448 KY929605 KY930211 KY930048 KY929747 KY929677 KY929887 KY929817 KY929957 KY930120

Type specimens are printed in bold face.

DNA extraction and PCR

About 2–20 mg of infected plant tissue was taken from fungarium samples, placed in 2 mL plastic reaction tubes and homogenized in a mixer mill (MM2, Retsch) using a combination of three to five 1 mm and two 3 mm metal beads at 25 Hz for 5–10 min. Genomic DNA was extracted using the BioSprint 96 DNA Plant Kit (Qiagen, Hilden) loaded to a KingFisher Flex robot (Thermo Scientific, Dreieich).

The complete nrITS of all DNA extracts were amplified using PCR following the procedure of White et al. (1990). The primer pairs M-ITS1 (Stoll et al. 2003) / ITS4 (White et al. 1990) or M-ITS1 / smITS-R1 (Kruse et al. 2017a) were used as the reverse and forward primers, respectively. For DNA samples from historic specimens, including type specimens, the Ustilaginaceae-optimised reverse primer ITS-US3R (5’TATCAAAACCCGGCAGGGAAG3’), located at the ITS2 region, was used.

The NL1 and NL4 primer pair (O’Donnell 1993) were used to amplify the Large Subunit (LSU) of the nrDNA with an annealing temperature of 53 °C. For other loci, the following regions were amplified with their respective primer pairs and annealing temperatures in brackets: myosin R0.5/F3 (55 °C), map R6/F2 (56 °C), rpl3 R1/F1 (53 °C), tif2 R3/F3 (53 °C), ssc1 R1/F2 (53 °C), sdh1 R3/F2 (53 °C), rpl4A R1/F4 (53 °C), and atp2 R4/F6 (53 °C) (Kruse et al. 2017b).

The plant ITS was amplified using the primer pair ITS1P and ITS4 (Ridgway et al. 2003) at 53 °C annealing temperature. The cycling reaction was performed in a thermocycler (Eppendorf Mastercycler 96 vapo protect; Eppendorf, Hamburg) with an initial denaturation at 95 °C for 4 min, 36 PCR cycles of denaturation at 95 °C for 40 s, annealing between 53–56 °C (depending on the specific primer pair) for 40 s and elongation at 72 °C for 60 s, followed by a final elongation at 72 °C for 4 min. For DNA samples older than 50 years, PCR cycles were increased to 46 cycles and a larger amount of DNA (1.5 μL of extracted DNA in a reaction volume of 11 μL) was used. The resulting amplicons were sequenced at the Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (BiK-F) laboratory using the abovementioned PCR primers. However, amplicons from M-ITS1/smITS-R1 were sequenced using the ITS4 reverse primer. The resulting sequences were deposited in GenBank (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/, Table 1).

Alignments and phylogenetic tree reconstruction

We used 93 samples (including 62 of the Ustilago striiformis-complex) for the phylogenetic analysis; 93 had sequences from nrITS, atp2 (ATP synthase subunit 2) and ssc1 (member of the heat shock proteins), and 70 had additional sequences from myosin (myosin group I), map (methionine aminopeptidase), rpl3 (ribosomal protein L3), tif2 (initial translation factor of elF4A), sdh1 (succinate dehydrogenase ubiquinone flavoprotein), and rpl4A (ribosomal protein L4-A) (Table 1). About two thirds of the samples (62) belonged to the U. striiformis species complex. Sporisorium inopinatum (syn. Langdonia inopinata) was chosen as outgroup, according to the findings of McTaggart et al. (2012a).

Alignments were made on individual loci using mafft v. 7 (Katoh & Standley 2013) using the G-INS-i algorithm. Both leading and trailing gaps of the alignments were removed manually. Two different sets of concatenated alignments for the phylogenetic constructions were generated. The first multigene-alignment includes three loci (ITS, atp2, and ssc1) from 93 smut samples. The resulting total alignment was 1502 bp (ITS: 643 bp, atp2: 595 bp, ssc1: 264 bp). The second multigene-alignment included nine genes with a final alignment of 3156 bp (ITS: 643 bp, atp2: 595 bp, ssc1 264 bp, map: 251 bp, myosin: 257 bp, rpl4A: 415 bp, rpl3: 218 bp, sdh1: 269 bp, tif2: 244 bp).

The diagnostic bases for the U. striiformis species complex for all gene markers were determined using the above mentioned alignments. One further ITS alignment was created (443 bp), with the sequence of the type specimen of U. bromina (Table 1), the U. bromina sequences from GenBank (KF381006-8) and sequences from the same host-fungus-combination from this study, to check if all specimens were sequence-identical with the type collection of U. bromina on Bromus inermis (data not shown).

For phylogenetic tree constructions, Minimum Evolution (ME) analysis was done using Mega 6.06 (Tamura et al. 2013) with the Tamura-Nei substitution model and assuming complete deletion at 80 % cut-off with 1000 bootstrap replicates. All other parameters were set to default values. Maximum Likelihood (ML) analysis was done using RAxML (Stamatakis 2014) with parameters set to default values and Bayesian analysis was done using MrBayes 3.2 (Ronquist & Huelsenbeck 2003) running five times with model 6 (GTR) using four incrementally heated chains for 10 million generations, sampling every 1000th tree discarding the first 30 % of the obtained trees, all other parameters were set to default on the TrEase webserver (http://www.thines-lab.senckenberg.de/trease).

To account for potentially deviating evolutionary properties, the analysis in ME was done also on a partitioned concatenated dataset. As no supported differences within the topology of the trees were observed in comparison with the un-partitioned dataset, the other analyses were carried out without partitioning.

Morphological examination

For light microscopy, fungarium specimens (GLM-F107417, GLM-F105836, GLM-F107435, GLM-F107413, GLM-F047379, GLM-F105827) were transferred to 60 % lactic acid on a slide. Morphological examination was carried out using a Zeiss Imager M2 AX10 microscope (Carl Zeiss, Göttingen). Measurements of the spores were performed at x400. The measurements are reported as maxima and minima in parentheses, and the mean plus and minus the standard deviation of a number of measurements is given in parenthesis. The means are placed in italics.

RESULTS

Phylogenetic inference

The LSU sequence data were excluded from further analysis since sequences were identical for all members of the Ustilago striiformis species complex (data not shown). All other loci showed SNPs within the U. striiformis cluster. The diagnostic bases (SNPs) with their specific positions are given in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6.

Alignment consensus sequences for the alignments used in this study with positions of diagnostic bases highlighted in bold face.

There were no supported conflicts in the topology of the trees of the single loci and the concatenated trees. Thus, the datasets were combined and used as concatenated for further analysis. The multigene tree based on nine different loci (Fig. 1) showed strong to maximum support for a monophyly of the U. striiformis species complex. If multiple specimens from one host species were included, these grouped together with strong to maximum support, except for the clades corresponding to U. scaura s. lat. (ME 64, ML 63, BA 0.99), U. brizae (ME 63, ML 68, BA 0.99), and U. agrostidis-palustris (ME 71, ML 68, BA 0.99), which received weak to strong support (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Phylogenetic tree based on Minimum Evolution analysis of nine loci (ITS, myosin, map, rpl3, tif2, ssc1, sdh1, rpl4A, atp2). Numbers on branches denote support in Minimum Evolution, Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Analyses, in the respective order. Values below 55 % are denoted by ‘-‘. The bar indicates the number of substitutions per site.

A phylogenetic reconstruction (Fig. 2) with an additional 21 specimens but based on only half of the characters per specimen (ITS, atp2, and ssc1) revealed the same groups as the double-sized alignment, but expectedly with weaker statistical support. For example, the three weak to strongly supported lineages shown in Fig. 1 still grouped together, but with no or weak support (U. brizae – ME 64, ML -, BA 0.79; U. scaura s. lat. – ME -, ML -, BA 0.79; U. agrostidis-palustris – no support), highlighting the importance of gene selection.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Phylogenetic tree based on Minimum Evolution analysis of three loci (ITS, ssc1, atp2). Numbers on branches denote support in Minimum Evolution, Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Analyses, in the respective order. Values below 55 % are denoted by ‘-‘.. The bar indicates the number of substitutions per site.

In the phylogenetic reconstruction based on fewer genes (Fig. 2) additional specimens were included, which further supported the high degree of genetic differentiation in conjunction with the host species infected. Specimens from Festuca and Lolium grouped together with strong support, while the monophyly of the clade containing samples from Alopecurus species was unsupported to weakly supported (ME 64, ML -, BA -). Two monophyletic groups were absent from the tree with more loci (Fig. 1): one on Calamagrostis villosa and another on Arrhenatherum elatius. Both of these groups were highly supported (Calamagrostis: ME 76, ML 94, BA 0.99; Arrhenatherum: ME 92, ML 99, BA 1) in the tree based on fewer loci (Fig. 2).

In both phylogenetic trees (Figs 1,2), U. cynodontis was inferred as the sister species to the whole U. striiformis species complex. To illustrate the relationships within this species complex further, two additional phylogenetic trees with a reduced sampling and U. cynodontis as outgroup are shown in Figs 3 (9 loci) and 4 (3 loci). The support values and the topology were comparable to the phylogenetic reconstructions in Figs 12. In both phylogenetic trees, U. serpens on Elymus repens and on Bromus inermis grouped together with high to maximum support. This group clustered with two further lineages with larger echinulate spores compared to the U. striiformis species complex, which is considered a synapomorphy of this lineage.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3.

Phylogenetic tree based on Minimum Evolution analysis of nine loci (ITS, myosin, map, rpl3, tif2, ssc1, sdh1, rpl4A, atp2) detailed showing the Ustilago striiformis-complex with the outgroup U. cynodontis. Numbers on branches denote support in Minimum Evolution, Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Analyses, in the respective order. Values below 55 % are denoted by ‘-‘. The bar indicates the number of substitutions per site.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4.

Phylogenetic tree based on Minimum Evolution analysis of three loci (ITS, ssc1, atp2) detailed showing the Ustilago striiformis-complex with the outgroup U. cynodontis. Numbers on branches denote support in Minimum Evolution, Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Analyses, in the respective order. Values below 55 % are denoted by ‘-‘. The bar indicates the number of substitutions per site.

The resolution on the backbone was rather low, as highlighted also by the ambiguous placement of U. maydis, which was resolved as a sister group to the pathogens on the majority of panicoid hosts in the tree based on 9 loci (Fig. 1) with moderate to maximum support, while being inferred as a sister to the clade containing the U. species complex as well as the U. nuda species group with lacking to maximum support in the tree based on three loci (Fig. 2).

Morphology

The degree of overlap in morphological characteristics was too high in both species complexes to provide easily accessible characteristics for species delimitation (Fig. 5). The individual measurements are included in the species descriptions below and summarized in Table 3.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5.

Sori and spores of Ustilago jagei (A–B), U. denotarisii (C–D), U. neocopinata (E–F), U. salweyi (G–H), U. kummeri (I–J), and U. serpens s. str. (K–L). A. Sori of U. jagei on Agrostis stolonifera (GLM-F047379); B. Teliospores seen by LM; C. Sori of U. denotarisii on Arrhenatherum elatius (GLM-F105836); D. Teliospores seen by LM; E. Sori of U. neocopinata on Dactylis glomerata (GLM-F107413); F. Teliospores seen by LM; G. Sori of U. salweyi on Holcus lanatus (GLM-F107417); H. Teliospores seen by LM; I. Sori of U. kummeri on Bromus inermis (GLM-F107435); J. Teliospores seen by LM; K. Sori of U. serpens s. str. on Elymus repens (GLM-F105827); and L. Teliospores seen by LM.

Table 3.

Measurements from 100 teliospores for four different species of the Ustilago striiformis-complex on Agrostis stolonifera, Dactylis glomerata, Arrhenatherum elatius, and Holcus lanatus, as well as two species of the Ustilago serpens-complex on Elymus repens and Bromus inermis.

Ustilago striiformis-complex Ustilago serpens-complex
U. jagei sp. nov. U. denotarisii U. neocopinata sp. nov. U. salveii U. serpens U. kummeri sp. nov.
on Agrostis stolonifera on Arrhenatherum elatius on Dactylis glomerata on Holcus lanatus on Elymus repens on Bromus inermis
spores spores spores spores spores spores
No. length width l/b length width l/b length width l/b length width l/b length width l/b length width l/b
1 10.5 9.5 1.11 10 9 1.11 11 10.5 1.05 11.5 10.5 1.1 11 10.5 1.05 14 13 1.08
2 10 7.5 1.33 11.5 9 1.28 9.5 9.5 1 11.5 10 1.15 12 10 1.2 13.5 11 1.23
3 10.5 8.5 1.24 9 8 1.13 11 10 1.1 10 9.5 1.05 12.5 10 1.25 14.5 12 1.21
4 13.5 9.5 1.42 10 8 1.25 10.5 9.5 1.11 11 9.5 1.16 13 12 1.08 14 12.5 1.12
5 11 9 1.22 10.5 8.5 1.24 10.5 10 1.05 12 9.5 1.26 12.5 10.5 1.19 14 12 1.17
6 11 10 1.1 11.5 9 1.28 11 9.5 1.16 12 9 1.33 13 12.5 1.04 11.5 11.5 1
7 9.5 8 1.19 10.5 9.5 1.11 10 8.5 1.18 11 9 1.22 12.5 11.5 1.09 14 12 1.17
8 11 8 1.38 10.5 9.5 1.11 10.5 10 1.05 10.5 9 1.17 12.5 9.5 1.32 14 13.5 1.04
9 10.5 10 1.05 11.5 10 1.15 10.5 10 1.05 10 10 1 13.5 11 1.23 13 12.5 1.04
10 11.5 9 1.28 11.5 8.5 1.35 10.5 10.5 1 10.5 9.5 1.11 13 11 1.18 13.5 13.5 1
11 11.5 10 1.15 11 8 1.38 11 10 1.1 10.5 9.5 1.11 14.5 13.5 1.07 13.5 11.5 1.17
12 11.5 8 1.44 11 10 1.1 11 11 1 10.5 10 1.05 14.5 12 1.21 12.5 11 1.14
13 12 8 1.5 10.5 9 1.17 12 10.5 1.14 12.5 9 1.39 15.5 11 1.41 13.5 12.5 1.08
14 12 10.5 1.14 12 9 1.33 10 10 1 10 8 1.25 13 12.5 1.04 12 12 1
15 10 8.5 1.18 10.5 9 1.17 10.5 10.5 1 11 10 1.1 12.5 12 1.04 13.5 12.5 1.08
16 12 11.5 1.04 10.5 9.5 1.11 10.5 9.5 1.11 10.5 9.5 1.11 13 12.5 1.04 12 11.5 1.04
17 11 8 1.38 12 9 1.33 10 9 1.11 10 9 1.11 12 11.5 1.04 13.5 13 1.04
18 11 9.5 1.16 12.5 10.5 1.19 10 9.5 1.05 11.5 9.5 1.21 13 10.5 1.24 14.5 13 1.12
19 11 9 1.22 10 9 1.11 10.5 9.5 1.11 10 9 1.11 13 11.5 1.13 13 11.5 1.13
20 12 9.5 1.26 12.5 11 1.14 11 10.5 1.05 10.5 9.5 1.11 13 12 1.08 13.5 13 1.04
21 11 9.5 1.16 12.5 11.5 1.09 10.5 10 1.05 10.5 9 1.17 12.5 11 1.14 14.5 12 1.21
22 13 9.5 1.37 13.5 12 1.13 11.5 10.5 1.1 10 8.5 1.18 12 11.5 1.04 13.5 12.5 1.08
23 12.5 10 1.25 13.5 10 1.35 11 11 1 11.5 9 1.28 13 11.5 1.13 13 12.5 1.04
24 11.5 10 1.15 11.5 10.5 1.1 10 9.5 1.05 10 9.5 1.05 13.5 12 1.13 12.5 12 1.04
25 10.5 8.5 1.24 11.5 9.5 1.21 11 10.5 1.05 11 9.5 1.16 13 10.5 1.24 15 13.5 1.11
26 10.5 10 1.05 12.5 11 1.14 11 10.5 1.05 9.5 9 1.06 12 10.5 1.14 13 11.5 1.13
27 11 9 1.22 12.5 11.5 1.09 11 10 1.1 10.5 9 1.17 12.5 12 1.04 13.5 13.5 1
28 10.5 10.5 1 11 10.5 1.05 10.5 9 1.17 10 9.5 1.05 13 12 1.08 13.5 11.5 1.17
29 11 9.5 1.16 11 11 1 11 11 1 10 9 1.11 14 12.5 1.12 13.5 11.5 1.17
30 10.5 7.5 1.4 11 9.5 1.16 10 10 1 10 9 1.11 12 11 1.09 13 12.5 1.04
31 10.5 9 1.17 11 9 1.22 10 9.5 1.05 10 9 1.11 12.5 11.5 1.09 13 11 1.18
32 10 8.5 1.18 11.5 10.5 1.1 10 9.5 1.05 11 10 1.1 14.5 12.5 1.16 14 13 1.08
33 10.5 9.5 1.11 11 8.5 1.29 10.5 10.5 1 10 9 1.11 13 11.5 1.13 14 13 1.08
34 10.5 9.5 1.11 11.5 9 1.28 10.5 10.5 1 11 8.5 1.29 14 12.5 1.12 14 13 1.08
35 11.5 10 1.15 12.5 9.5 1.32 11 10 1.1 11 10 1.1 12 11.5 1.04 12.5 12 1.04
36 12 9 1.33 10.5 8.5 1.24 10.5 9.5 1.11 10 9 1.11 14.5 11.5 1.26 13 11 1.18
37 11 9.5 1.16 12.5 10.5 1.19 11 10.5 1.05 10 8.5 1.18 12.5 11.5 1.09 15 13.5 1.11
38 10.5 9 1.17 11 9.5 1.16 10.5 10 1.05 10.5 9.5 1.11 14 12 1.17 14 13 1.08
39 9.5 9 1.06 10.5 10 1.05 11 10 1.1 10.5 10.5 1 13 10 1.3 14 13.5 1.04
40 10 8.5 1.18 12.5 10.5 1.19 10.5 9.5 1.11 10 9 1.11 11.5 11 1.05 13 13 1
41 10.5 9.5 1.11 11 9.5 1.16 10 9.5 1.05 10 9 1.11 13.5 10.5 1.29 14.5 12.5 1.16
42 11.5 10.5 1.1 11.5 11 1.05 10 10 1 10.5 10 1.05 12.5 9.5 1.32 13 12 1.08
43 11 10.5 1.05 10 10 1 10.5 9.5 1.11 10.5 9.5 1.11 13.5 11 1.23 13.5 11.5 1.17
44 10 9 1.11 11 9.5 1.16 10.5 10 1.05 10 10 1 14 12 1.17 14 11.5 1.22
45 10.5 8.5 1.24 11.5 10 1.15 10.5 9.5 1.11 12 10 1.2 13.5 10.5 1.29 13 11.5 1.13
46 10.5 8 1.31 11.5 11.5 1 10.5 9.5 1.11 10.5 10 1.05 14 12 1.17 13.5 12 1.13
47 12.5 10.5 1.19 11 10.5 1.05 9.5 8.5 1.12 9.5 9.5 1 12 11.5 1.04 12.5 11.5 1.09
48 11 9.5 1.16 10.5 10 1.05 10 10 1 11.5 10 1.15 13.5 12 1.13 13.5 11.5 1.17
49 11 9.5 1.16 11.5 9.5 1.21 10.5 9.5 1.11 10.5 10 1.05 13 11.5 1.13 13 12 1.08
50 10 9.5 1.05 11.5 9.5 1.21 11 10.5 1.05 10.5 8 1.31 13.5 12 1.13 13 12.5 1.04
51 10 9.5 1.05 10 8.5 1.18 10 9 1.11 11 9 1.22 14 11.5 1.22 12.5 10.5 1.19
52 10.5 8.5 1.24 10.5 8 1.31 10 11 0.91 10.5 10.5 1 13.5 10.5 1.29 14.5 12 1.21
53 12 9.5 1.26 10 8.5 1.18 9 9 1 11.5 10 1.15 14 11.5 1.22 14 12 1.17
54 10.5 10.5 1 11 8.5 1.29 10 9.5 1.05 10.5 9 1.17 13 12 1.08 13.5 12 1.13
55 10.5 10.5 1 12 9.5 1.26 10 9.5 1.05 10 10 1 12 11 1.09 14 12 1.17
56 11 10 1.1 9.5 9 1.06 9.5 9.5 1 10.5 10.5 1 12 12 1 13 13 1
57 10.5 9 1.17 10 8.5 1.18 11.5 10.5 1.1 11 9.5 1.16 13 10.5 1.24 14 13 1.08
58 10 10 1 11.5 9.5 1.21 10 9 1.11 10.5 10 1.05 14.5 10.5 1.38 13 12.5 1.04
59 11 10 1.1 11 10 1.1 10 7.5 1.33 10.5 9.5 1.11 13 11.5 1.13 13.5 12 1.13
60 10.5 10.5 1 12 9.5 1.26 10 10 1 10 9.5 1.05 13 12 1.08 14.5 12 1.21
61 10.5 8.5 1.24 11 10 1.1 10.5 10 1.05 10.5 9.5 1.11 13.5 10 1.35 14.5 13 1.12
62 11.5 9 1.28 10.5 10 1.05 11 9 1.22 10.5 10 1.05 13 11.5 1.13 14.5 13 1.12
63 10.5 8.5 1.24 10.5 9.5 1.11 10.5 9.5 1.11 9.5 9.5 1 12.5 12 1.04 13.5 12 1.13
64 10.5 9.5 1.11 10.5 10 1.05 11 10.5 1.05 10 9.5 1.05 12.5 12 1.04 14 12.5 1.12
65 10 10 1 10 8.5 1.18 10.5 10.5 1 11 9 1.22 14.5 10.5 1.38 13 12.5 1.04
66 10.5 8.5 1.24 11.5 11 1.05 11 11 1 10.5 8.5 1.24 11.5 10.5 1.1 13 12.5 1.04
67 11 10.5 1.05 11 9.5 1.16 11.5 10 1.15 11 9.5 1.16 15 12 1.25 13.5 12.5 1.08
68 10.5 8.5 1.24 11 9.5 1.16 11 11 1 10.5 9.5 1.11 12.5 11 1.14 14 13 1.08
69 10 10 1 11.5 10.5 1.1 11.5 11 1.05 10 9 1.11 14 11 1.27 14.5 14 1.04
70 10 10 1 11.5 11 1.05 10 9.5 1.05 11 10 1.1 12 11 1.09 13.5 12.5 1.08
71 11 9 1.22 11 10 1.1 9 9 1 10.5 9 1.17 13 10.5 1.24 13 12.5 1.04
72 10 10 1 10.5 10 1.05 10 9.5 1.05 11 10.5 1.05 13 12 1.08 13.5 12.5 1.08
73 10 10 1 13 10 1.3 11 10 1.1 9.5 9 1.06 11.5 11.5 1 13.5 13 1.04
74 10.5 8 1.31 11 9 1.22 10.5 9.5 1.11 11 9.5 1.16 14 11 1.27 13.5 13 1.04
75 10 9.5 1.05 11.5 10 1.15 10.5 9.5 1.11 10.5 10.5 1 12 10.5 1.14 15.5 13.5 1.15
76 11.5 9 1.28 12 10.5 1.14 11 9.5 1.16 10.5 10 1.05 11.5 9 1.28 13 12.5 1.04
77 11 10 1.1 10.5 10 1.05 9 9 1 11.5 9.5 1.21 12.5 11 1.14 14 12.5 1.12
78 11.5 9.5 1.21 10.5 10 1.05 9.5 9.5 1 9.5 8.5 1.12 11 10.5 1.05 14.5 12 1.21
79 11 9 1.22 11.5 8.5 1.35 11 10 1.1 10 9 1.11 13 11 1.18 13.5 12 1.13
80 11.5 9.5 1.21 10.5 9.5 1.11 10 8.5 1.18 11 8.5 1.29 11.5 11 1.05 13.5 12.5 1.08
81 9.5 9.5 1 11 9.5 1.16 10.5 10 1.05 11.5 9 1.28 11.5 11 1.05 13.5 10.5 1.29
82 11 9.5 1.16 10.5 10 1.05 11 9.5 1.16 10.5 10 1.05 12.5 11 1.14 13 13 1
83 10.5 10.5 1 11.5 9 1.28 11.5 9.5 1.21 11 9.5 1.16 12.5 12 1.04 14.5 13 1.12
84 11.5 10 1.15 11 9 1.22 10 9.5 1.05 10 9.5 1.05 12 9.5 1.26 13.5 12.5 1.08
85 11 10 1.1 10 10 1 11 9.5 1.16 10 8 1.25 13.5 11 1.23 14 13 1.08
86 11 9 1.22 10.5 9.5 1.11 11.5 11 1.05 9.5 7.5 1.27 14 9.5 1.47 14 12 1.17
87 11 10.5 1.05 10.5 9 1.17 11.5 10.5 1.1 11 8.5 1.29 12.5 12 1.04 15 13.5 1.11
88 11 9 1.22 11 9.5 1.16 10 9 1.11 10 9 1.11 12 12 1 12.5 12.5 1
89 10 7.5 1.33 11.5 8.5 1.35 9.5 9 1.06 10 9.5 1.05 15 12.5 1.2 13.5 11.5 1.17
90 11 9.5 1.16 10 9.5 1.05 11 9.5 1.16 11 10 1.1 14.5 12 1.21 12 12 1
91 10.5 9 1.17 13.5 11 1.23 11 9.5 1.16 11 10.5 1.05 12 11.5 1.04 13.5 13 1.04
92 10.5 9 1.17 13.5 10.5 1.29 9.5 9.5 1 11.5 10 1.15 14 11 1.27 13 12 1.08
93 10 8.5 1.18 13 10.5 1.24 9.5 7.5 1.27 11.5 9.5 1.21 13.5 11 1.23 14 12.5 1.12
94 11 9.5 1.16 11.5 10.5 1.1 11 11 1 10.5 9.5 1.11 13 11 1.18 13.5 11.5 1.17
95 10.5 9 1.17 11 11 1 11 10 1.1 10.5 10 1.05 14.5 12 1.21 14.5 12 1.21
96 10.5 7.5 1.4 12 10.5 1.14 10.5 8.5 1.24 10.5 9.5 1.11 12.5 10.5 1.19 14.5 13 1.12
97 11.5 9.5 1.21 11 11 1 10.5 10 1.05 10.5 9.5 1.11 12.5 11.5 1.09 13 11 1.18
98 11.5 9.5 1.21 11 9 1.22 13 11 1.18 11 10 1.1 11.5 11 1.05 13.5 11.5 1.17
99 13.5 11.5 1.17 10.5 10 1.05 10 9 1.11 10.5 9.5 1.11 12.5 11.5 1.09 14.5 13.5 1.07
100 10.5 9.5 1.11 11 10 1.1 10 10 1 11 9.5 1.16 13.5 12.5 1.08 13.5 11.5 1.17

TAXONOMY

Based on our phylogenetic analyses, the following nomenclature and taxonomic changes are proposed for leaf stripe smuts caused by species of Ustilago. The positions given for the diagnostic bases refer to specific positions in the alignments as highlighted in the alignment consensus sequences in Fig. 4. Only selected synonyms are given here. For a complete synonymy reference should be made to Vánky (2012) and references therein.

Ustilago agrostidis-palustris W. H. Davis ex Ciferri, Ann. Mycol. 29: 54 (1931).

Type: USA: Wisconsin: Madison, on cultivated ‘redtop’ (i.e. Agrostispalustris Huds.”, now Agrostis gigantea), 8 July 1921, W. H. & J. J. Davis (BPI 166994 lectotype designated here, MBT 380628).

Confirmed host: Agrostis gigantea.

Confirmed distribution: Germany and USA.

Notes: Ustilago agrostidis-palustris can be distinguished from other leaf stripe smuts of the U. striiformis species complex based on its host specific occurrence on Agrostis gigantea s. lat. Furthermore, it differs in one diagnostic base from all other species of the U. striiformis-complex included in this study – in the sdh1 gene there is a C instead of a T at position 138 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Table 2.

Diagnostic bases within the Ustilago striiformis and the Ustilago serpens complexes.

Gen Loci
atp2 map ssc1 myosin rpl4A rpl3 sdh1 tif2 ITS
U. striiformis-complex Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base
on Agrostis gigantea x x x x x x x x x x x x 138 C / T x x x x
on Agrostis stolonifera and A. rupestris 466 A / G x x x x x x x x 92 A / G x x x x x x
on Alopecurus pratensis 358 A / G 192 G / T x x 83 T / C x x x x x x x x x x
on Arrhenatherum elatius 346 A / G x x 182 A / C x x x x x x x x x x x x
on Bromus inermis 191, 244 G / A x x 232 C / T x x 228, 311
292
A / G
x x x x 23 A / G 621 C / T
on Calamagrostis epigejos 91 A / G x x x x x x x x x x x x 65 T / C 102 T / C
on Calamagrostis villosa 535 T / C x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
on Dactylis glomerata x x x x 69, 198 A / G x x 120 T / C 40 A / G x x x x 617 A / G
on Deschampsia caespitosa 22, 94 A / G 227 T / C x x 133 A / G x x 199 T / C x x x x 576 A / G
on Festuca spp. and Lolium spp. x x x x 210, 214, 231
243
A / G
x x x x x x x x x x x x
on Holcus spp. x x x x x x x x 85 T / C 133 T / C x x x x 103 A / G
on Milium effusum 301 A / G x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 206 T / C
U. serpens-complex Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base Pos. Base
on Bromus inermis x x X x x x x x x x x x x x x x 260
629
C / T
G / A
on Calamagrostis epigejos 175 G / A 92 A / C 88, 99 C / G 70 A / G 7 C / G 28 G / T 13 G / A x x 215 C / T
181, 429, 496 T / C 203 C / T 93 G / A 225 T / C 91 T / C 25 G / T 522 T / -
352 A / G 255 G / T 187 G / T 100 A / G 597 A / T
606 A / G
on Elymus repens x x x x x x 93 A / G 232 T / C x x x x x x 157
170
A / G
C / T
on Phalaris arundinacea 85 G / A 208 A / G x x 141 C / A x x 91 T / C 58, 256 A / G x x 19 C / A
156 T / C 146 A / G 38 C / T
186, 596 A / -
188, 604 G / A

Slash (/) = instead of, x = no diagnostic bases.

Ustilago airae-caespitosae (Lindr.) Liro, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn., ser. A 17 (1): 71 (1924).

Basionym: Tilletia airae-caespitosae Lindr., Acta Soc. Fauna Flora Fenn. 26:15 (1904).

Type: Finland: Nyland: Helsingfors, Hagasund, on Aira caespitosa (i.e. Deschampsia caespitosa), 10 Aug. 1902, J. I. Lindroth [Vestergren, Micr. Rar. Sel. no. 806; Sydow, Ustil. no. 316] (M-0236198 – lectotype designated here, MBT 380628; from one of the several duplicate collections treated as “lectotype” by Lindeberg, Symb. Bot. Upsal. 16 (2): 135, 1959).

Confirmed host: Deschampsia caespitosa.

Confirmed distribution: Austria and Finland.

Notes: Within the Ustilago striiformis species complex, U. airae-caespitosae can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Deschampsia caespitosa. Furthermore, it differs in six diagnostic bases from all other species within the U. striiformis species complex included in this study – in the atp2 gene it has an A instead of a G at position 22 and 94, in the map gene there is a T instead of a C at position 227, in the myosin gene there is an A instead of a G at position 133, in the rpl3 gene a T instead of a C at position 199, and an A instead of a G at position 576 in the ITS region (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Ustilago alopecurivora (Ule) Liro, Ann. Acad. Sci. fenn., ser. A 17 (1): 72 (1924).

Basionym: Tilletia alopecurivora Ule, Hedwigia 25: 113 (1886).

Synonyms: Uredo longissima var. megalospora Riess, in Rabenhorst, Herb. Viv. Myc. no. 1897 (1854).

Ustilago megalospora (Riess) Cif., Nuovo Giorn. Bot. Ital. 40: 261 (1933).

Type: Germany: Bavaria: Coburg, Hofgarten, on Alopecurus pratensis, June 1879, E. Ule (B – holotype lost); Berlin: Charlottenburg-Nord, Kolonie Königsdamm, slope of ditch, 9 Aug. 1988, H. Scholz (B 70 0014985 – neotype designated here, MBT 380629).

Confirmed host: Alopecurus pratensis.

Confirmed distribution: Germany.

Notes: Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. alopecurivora can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Alopecurus pratensis. Furthermore, U. alopecurivora differs in three diagnostic bases from all other species within the U. striiformis species complex included in this study – in the atp2 gene, there is an A instead of a G at position 358, in the map gene there is a G instead of a T at position 192, and in the myosin gene there is a T instead of a C at position 83 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Ustilago brizae (Ule) Liro, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn., Ser. A 17 (1): 74 (1924).

Basionym: Tilletia brizae Ule, Verh. Bot. Ver. Prov. Brandenb. 25: 214 (1884).

Type: Germany: Bavaria: Coburg, Rögener Berg, on Briza media, July 1879, E. Ule [Rabenhorst, Fungi Eur. no. 3604] (M-0147750 – lectotype designated here, MBT 380630; from one of the several duplicate collections treated as “lectotype” by Lindeberg, Symb. Bot. Upsal. 16(2): 135, 1959).

Confirmed hosts: Briza media.

Confirmed distribution: Austria and Germany.

Notes: Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. brizae can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Briza media. Furthermore, U. brizae differs in one diagnostic base from all other species within the U. striiformis species complex included in this study, except U. bromina on Bromus inermis, in having a C instead of a T at position 621 in the ITS region, and differs from U. bromina by having an A instead of a G at position 223 in the ITS region (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Ustilago corcontica (Bubák) Liro, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn., Ser. A 17 (1): 383 (1924).

Basionym: Tilletia corcontica Bubák, Houby Ceské, Hemibasidii 2: 47 (1912).

Type: Czech Republic: on the crest of Riesengebirge Mts, on Calamagrostis halleriana (i.e. C. villosa), 20 July 1872, J. Gerhardt (BPI 172761 – lectotype designated here, MBT 380631; one of the “isolectotypes” of Lindeberg, Symb. Bot. Upsal. 16(2): 114, 1959).

Confirmed host: Calamagrostis villosa.

Confirmed distribution: Czech Republic and Germany.

Notes: Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. corcontica can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Calamagrostis villosa. Furthermore, U. corcontica differs in one diagnostic bases from all other species within the U. striiformis species complex included in this study – in the atp2 gene there is an T instead of a C at position 535 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Ustilago denotarisii A. A. Fischer v. Waldheim, Aperҁu Syst. Ustil.: 22 (1877); as “de Notarisii”.

Type: Italy: on Arrhenatherum spp. (not located but could also not be confirmed as lost; a neotype may need to be designated for this species in the future).

Confirmed hosts: Arrhenatherum species.

Confirmed distribution: Germany and Italy.

Notes: Spores globose to ovoid, standard range (9.0–)10.5– (av. 11.2)–12.0 (–13.5) × (8.0–) 9.0–(av. 9.7)–10.5(–12.0) μm, length/breadth ratio of 1.10- (av. 1.20) -1.38, olive-brown, and finely echinulate. Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. denotarisii can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Arrhenatherum species. Furthermore, U. denotarisii differs in two diagnostic bases from all other species within the U. striiformis species complex included in this study – in the atp2 gene there is an A instead of a G at position 346, and in the gene ssc1 there is an A instead of a C at position 182 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Ustilago echinata J. Schröt., Abh. Schles. Ges. Vaterl. Kult., Abth. Naturwiss.: 48: 4 (1870 [“1869”].

Type: Poland: Silesia: ‘Schwarzwasserbruch’, near Legnica, on Phalaris arundinacea, June 1869, W. G. Schneider [Rabenhorst, Fungi Eur. no. 1497] (FR – lectotype designated here, MBT 380632; one of the several duplicate collections previously treated as “lectotype” in Rabenhorst, Fungi Eur. No. 1497).

Reported hosts: Glyceria grandis, Phalaris arundinacea, and Scolochloa festucacea.

Confirmed host: Phalaris arundinacea.

Known distribution: Asia, North America, and Europe.

Notes: This species shares one sequence motif (AACCCAAC) at positions 20–27 in the ITS region with other coarsely ornamented stripe smuts (U. serpens clade in Fig. 1), and many SNPs which distinguish U. echinata from species of the U. striiformis-complex. Within the U. serpens-complex, U. echinata can be distinguished from other species based on its host-specific occurrence on Phalaris arundinacea (type host). Whether the other hosts of a similar ecotype are infected by the same species could not be clarified in the current study, but the high degree of host specificity observed in Ustilago renders it possible that specimens from other host genera will have to be described as new species. Furthermore, U. echinata differs in eight diagnostic bases from all other species within the U. serpens species complex included in this study – in the atp2 gene there is a G instead of an A at position 85, in the map gene there is an A instead of a G at position 208, in the myosin gene there is a C instead of an A at position 141 and a T instead of a C at position 156, in the rpl3 gene there is a T instead of a C at position 91 and an A instead of a G at position 146, in the sdh1 gene there is an A instead of a G and at positions 58 and 256, and in the ITS locus there is a C instead of an A at position 19, a C instead of a T at position 38, an A instead of a gap at position 186 and 596 and a G instead of an A at positions 188 and 604 (Tab. 2, Fig. 6).

Due to the generally narrow host specificity of smut fungi, it is conceivable that U. echinata will be revealed to be a species group.

Ustilago jagei J. Kruse & Thines, sp. nov.

MycoBank MB819627

(Fig. 5A–B)

Etymology: Named after mycologist Horst Jage from Kemberg (Germany), who has made significant contributions to the knowledge of phytopathogenic fungi and has enabled well-sampled phylogenetic investigations in various plant pathogens by his outstanding collections.

Diagnosis: Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. jagei can be distinguished from other species based on its host-specific occurrence on Agrostis stolonifera s. lat. Furthermore, U. jagei differs in two diagnostic bases from all other species within the U. striiformis species complex included in this study – in the atp2 gene there is an A instead of a G at position 466 and in the gene rpl3 there is an A instead of a G at position 92 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Type: Germany: Saxony-Anhalt: Dessau, Kühnauer Sea, southern shore east-southeast of Großkuhnau, wayside, on Agrostis stolonifera, 16 Sept. 2001, H. Jage (GLM-F047379 – holotype).

Description: Sori as long narrow streaks parallel to vascular bundles, mostly in the leaves, rarely ascending into the inflorescence, initially covered by the epidermis of the plants, which soon frays. Spore mass dark brown to almost black, powdery. Infection systemic, infected plants usually sterile. Spores globose to ovoid, (9.5–) 10.0–(av. 10.9) –11.5(–13.5) x (7.5–) 8.5–(av. 9.3)–10.0(–11.5) μm, length/breadth ratio 1.04-(av. 1.24)-1.5, olive-brown, finely echinulate (Table 3, Figs 34).

Confirmed hosts: Agrostis rupestris and A. stolonifera.

Confirmed distribution: Germany and Switzerland.

Notes: It seems possible that U. jagei on Agrostis stolonifera s. lat. represents a species complex, and further investigations with more specimens and additional gene loci are needed to clarify this situation.

Ustilago kummeri J. Kruse & Thines, sp. nov.

MycoBank MB819628

(Fig. 5I–J)

Etymology: Named after the mycologist Volker Kummer from Potsdam (Germany), who has made significant contributions to the knowledge of phytopathogenic fungi and has enabled well-sampled phylogenetic investigations in various plant pathogens by his outstanding ability to recognise easily overlooked plant pathogens.

Diagnosis: Differs from species of the U. striiformis species complex in the larger spores and taller warts. Furthermore, U. kummeri shares one sequence motif at positions 20-27 (AACCCAAC) with other coarsely ornamented stripe smuts, and many SNPs distinguishing it from species of the U. striiformis species complex. Within the U. serpens-complex, U. kummeri can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Bromus inermis. Furthermore, U. kummeri differs in two diagnostic bases from U. serpens on Elymus repens – in the ITS region there is an C instead of a G at position 260 and G instead of an A at position 629 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Type: Germany: Brandenburg: Middlemark, Uetz: Hinterer Werder, southwest corner between Sacrow-Paretzer-Channel und Havel-Channel, on Bromus inermis, 19 June 2010, V. Kummer (GLM-F107435 – holotype; VK 2577/17 – isotype).

Description: Sori as long, narrow streaks parallel to vascular bundles, mostly in the leaves, rarely ascending to the inflorescence, initially covered by the epidermis of the plants, which soon frays. Spore mass dark brown, powdery. Infection systemic, infected plants mostly sterile. Spores ovoid to globose, (11.0-) 12.0- (av. 13.0) -14.0 (-15.5) × (9.0-) 10.5- (av. 11.5) -12.0 (-13.5), length/breadth ratio 1.04- (av. 1.15) -1.41, olive-brown, coarsely verrucose to echinulate (Table 3, Figs 56).

Confirmed host: Bromus inermis.

Confirmed distribution: Germany.

Notes: It seems likely that additional species will be discovered in the U. serpens clade once more stripe-smuts with coarse spore ornamentation will be scrutinised.

Ustilago loliicola Ciferri, Fl. Ital. Crypt., Par. I. Fungi, Fasc. 17: 345 (1938).

Type: Germany: Berlin: Berlin-Weissensee, on Lolium perenne, Sept. 1877, E. Ule [Rabenhorst, Fungi Eur. no. 2491] (FR – lectotype designated here, MBT 380633; from one of the several duplicate collections treated as “lectotype” by Lindeberg, Symb. Bot. Upsal. 16 (2): 136, 1959).

Confirmed hosts: Festuca arundinacea s. lat. and Lolium perenne.

Confirmed distribution: Germany.

Notes: Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. loliicola can be distinguished from other species based on the specific occurrence on the closely related hosts Festuca arundinacea s. lat. and Lolium perenne. Furthermore, U. loliicola differs in four diagnostic bases from all other species within the U. striiformis species complex included in this study – in the ssc1 locus there is an A instead of a G at positions 210, 214 and 231, and a T instead of a C at position 243 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Ustilago milii (Fuckel) Liro, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn., ser. A 17 (1): 78 (1924).

Basionym: Tilletia milii Fuckel, Jb. nassau. Ver. Naturk. 23–24: 40 (1870).

Type: Germany: Hesse: Rabenkopf Mt., near Oestrich, on Milium effusum, L. Fuckel [Fungi Rhenani no. 2410] (FR – lectotype designated here, MBT 380634, from one of the several duplicate collections treated as “lectotype” in Fuckel, Fungi Rhenani no. 2410).

Confirmed host: Milium effusum.

Confirmed distribution: Germany.

Notes: Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. milii can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Milium effusum. Furthermore, U. milii differs in two diagnostic bases from all other species within the U. striiformis species complex included in this study – in the atp2 gene there is an A instead of a G at position 301, and in the ITS there is a T instead of a C at position 206 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Ustilago neocopinata J. Kruse & Thines, sp. nov.

MycoBank MB819630

(Fig. 5E–F)

Etymology: Highlights the unexpected finding that there are several distinct and host-specific species within the U. striiformis species complex.

Diagnosis: Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. neocopinata can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Dactylis glomerata. Furthermore, U. neocopinata differs in five diagnostic bases from all other species within the U. striiformis species complex included in this study – in the ssc1 gene there is an A instead of a G at positions 69 and 198, in the rpl4A gene there is a T instead of a C at position 120, in the rpl3 gene there is an A instead of a G at position 40, and in the ITS region there is an A instead of a G at position 617 (Table 2, Figs 56).

Type: Germany: Bavaria: Upper Franconia, Kronach county, Wallenfels, in the direction of the sewage treatment plant downstream of Stumpfenschneidmühle, on Dactylis glomerata, 15 July 2012, J. Kruse (GLM-F107413 – holotype).

Description: Sori as long small streaks parallel to vascular bundles, mostly in the leaves, very rarely ascending to the inflorescence, initially covered by the epidermis of the plants, which soon frays. Spore mass dark brown to almost black, powdery. Infection systemic, infected plants mostly sterile. Spores mostly globose, rarely ovoid, (9.0–) 10.0– (av. 10.5)11.0 (–13.0) × (7.5–) 9.0– (av. 9.8) –10.5 (–11) μm, length/breadth ratio 1.00- (av. 1.07) -1.18, olive-brown, finely echinulate (Table 3, Figs 56).

Notes: As the host is widespread throughout the Holarctic region, it is conceivable that the species will prove to have a much wider distribution range than currently known.

Ustilago salweyi Berk. & Broome, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 5: 463 (1850).

(Fig. 5G–H)

Type: UK: Channel Islands: Guernsey, St Martin’s, on Holcus lanatus [originally misidentified as Dactylis glomerata fide Hubbard, in Stevenson, PIant Dis. Rep. 30: 57, 1946], 1847, T. Salwey (K-M – holotype; K-M00022071 – isotype).

Synonyms: Uredo striiformis Westend., Bull. Acad. R. Sci. Belg., cl. sci. 18: 406 (1852); as “striaeformis”.

Uredo salveii (Berk. & Broome) Oudem., Prodromus Florae Bataviae, 2nd edn,4: 180 (1866).

Tilletia debaryana A.A. Fisch. Waldh., in Rabenhorst, Fungi eur. no. 1097 (1867).

Tilletia striiformis (Westend.) Magnus, Malpighia 1: 8 (1875).

Ustilago striiformis (Westend.) Niessl, Hedwigia 15: 1 (1876).

Tilletia salveii (Berk. & Broome) P. Karst., Bidrag. Kännedom. Finlands Naurt. Folk. 6: 102 (1884).

Confirmed hosts: Holcus lanatus and H. mollis.

Confirmed distribution: Belgium, Germany, and UK.

Notes: Spores globose to ovoid, standard range (9.5–)10.0–(av. 10.6) –11.0 (–12.5) × (7.5–) 9.0–(av. 9.4)–10.0(–10.5) μm, finely echinulate, length/breadth ratio 1.00–(av. 1.15)–1.39. Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. salweyi can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Holcus lanatus and H. mollis. Furthermore, U. salweyi differs in three diagnostic bases from all other species within the striiformis species complex included in this study – in the rpl4A gene there is a T instead of a C at position 85, in rpl3 there is a T instead of a C at position 133, and in the ITS region there is an A instead of a G at positions 103 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

The original host was misidentified as Dactylis glomerata, but this was found to be incorrect and actually Holcus lanatus by the leading grass specialist C.E. Hubbard (in Stevenson 1946). David Hawksworth also studied the type materials in K-M and concurs. Hosts in their vegetative stage can be misidentified, as some characteristics, such as leaf shape, ligula, and general habit can be modified as a consequence of infection.

Ustilago scaura Liro s. lat. , Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn., ser. A, 17(1): 73 (1924).

Replaced name: Tilletia avenae Ule, Verh. Bot. Vereins Prov. Brandenburg 25: 214 (1884).

Type: Germany: Bavaria: Coburg, Fortress, on Avena pratensis (i.e. Helictotrichon pratense), June 1879, E. Ule (s. n. – lost); Hesse: county Tann/Rhön, at Galgenmount, on Avena pubescens [now, Helictotrichon pubescens], 16 Sept. 1990, H. Scholz (B 70 0014830 – neotype designated here, MBT 380637).

Non Ustilago avenae (Pers.) Rostrup, Overs. K. danske Vidensk. Selsk. Forh. Medlemmers Arbeider: 13 (1890).

Confirmed host: Helictotrichon pubescens, H. pratense?

Confirmed distribution: Germany.

Notes: Within the U. striiformis species complex, U. scaura s. lat. can be distinguished from other species based on the host-specific occurrence on Helictotrichon pratense and H. pubescens. Furthermore, U. scaura s. lat. differs in one diagnostic base from all other species within the U. salweyi species complex included in this study, except U. denotarisii on Arrhenatherum spp., in having a T instead of a C at position 628 in the ITS region, and from U. denotarisii on Arrhenatherum elatius in having a 13 nucleotide deletion at positions 222-241 in the ITS alignment (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Since the type has been lost, we designate a neotype for Ustilago scaura with material on the closely related H. pubescens.

Ustilago scrobiculata Liro, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn., ser. A 17(1): 68 (1924).

Type: Finland: Nyland: Pornainen, Kirveskoski, on Calamagrostis arundinacea, 9 Aug. 1916, T. Putkonen & J. I. Liro (H – lectotype, designated by Lindeberg, Symb. Bot. Upsal. 16 (2): 130 (1959).

Synonym: ? Ustilago deyeuxiae L. Guo, Mycosystema 6: 51 (1993).

Reported hosts: Calamagrostis spp. (see Vánky 2012: 1265).

Reported distribution: Asia and Europe.

Notes: This species shares one sequence motif with other coarsely ornamented stripe smuts (AACCCAAC at positions 20–27), which distinguishes it from species of the Ustilago striiformis species complex, and many additional single SNPs. Within the U. serpens species complex, U. scrobiculata differs in 21 diagnostic bases from other species (Table 2, Fig. 6). It seems possible that U. deyeuxiae has not been sampled on Calamagrostis arundinacea, as the host of U. deyeuxiae is given as “Deyeuxia arundinacea” by Guo (1993), which is often seen as a synonym of D. pyramidalis in Asian literature (e.g. Shenglian et al. 2006). Thus, it seems possible that the species needs to be reconsidered as independent from U. scrobiculata once sequence data from the type specimen become available.

Ustilago serpens (P. Karst.) B. Lindeb., Symb. Bot. Upsal. 16(2): 133 (1959).

Basionym: Tilletia serpens P. Karst., Fungi Fenn. Exs., fasc. 6 : no. 599 (1866).

Type: Finland: Merimasku, on “Dactylis glomerata” [re-determined as Elymus repens by Lindeberg, Symb. Bot. Upsal. 16(2): 133, 1959], July 1862, P. Karsten [Fungi Fenn. Exs no. 599] (HUV 10432 – lectotype designated here; MBT 380638 from one of the several duplicate collections treated as “lectotype” by Lindeberg, Symb. Bot. Upsal. 16(2): 133, 1959).

Confirmed host: Elymus repens.

Confirmed distribution: Finland and Germany.

Notes: The spores are small to medium sized, (11.5–) 13.0– (av. 13.5) –14.5 (–15.5) × (10.5–) 11.5 (av. 12.5) –13.0 (–14.0) μm, with a length/breadth ratio of 1.00–(av. 1.09)–1.23 and with coarsely verrucose ornamentation. This species shares one sequence motif with other coarsely ornamented stripe smuts (AACCCAAC at position 20–27), which distinguishes it from species of the U. striiformis species complex and many additional SNPs. Within the U. serpens-complex, U. serpens can be distinguished from other species based on four diagnostic bases: in the myosin gene there is an A instead of G at position 93, in rpl4A gene there is a T instead of a C at position 232 and in the ITS locus there is a C instead of a T at position 260, and a G instead of an A at position 629 (Table 2, Fig. 6).

Vánky (2012) lists several additional hosts for U. serpens. Due to the narrow specialization of stripe-smut revealed in this study, however, it seems likely that these harbour several distinct species. Until sequence data become available for these host-pathogen combinations, Ustilago on these other hosts is probably best referred to as U. serpens s. lat.

DISCUSSION

In this study, the closely related species of the Ustilago striiformis-complex and some other leaf stripe Ustilago smuts were investigated using multigene phylogenetic reconstructions to clarify their relationships. In total, 62 specimens of the U. striiformis species complex (incl. U. calamagrostidis) and four other leaf stripe smuts (U. echinata, U. filiformis, U. scrobiculata, and U. serpens s. lat.) were studied.

Phylogenetic analyses provided strong support for the polyphyly of the leaf-stripe smuts within Ustilago. However, the multilocus-based phylogenetic trees support the monophyly of the U. striiformis species complex, in contrast to the analysis by Savchenko et al. (2014a), where it was concluded that the U. striiformis group was polyphyletic and the segregation of two species was necessary to render it monophyletic. That interpretation was mainly based on a combined LSU-ITS tree of U. striiformis species, where U. bromina and U. nunavutica were located outside the U. striiformis s. lat. clade. Because of this conflicting result, the ITS region of the type specimen of U. bromina was sequenced (Table 1) and compared with the deposited GenBank sequences of Savchenko et al. (2014a). The type specimen of U. bromina on Bromus inermis had an ITS sequence nearly identical (except for a base exchange in a poly A/T region) with the other specimens identified as this species in the current study. It differed in nine bases compared to the three sequences labelled as U. bromina in Savchenko et al. (2014a). It is conceivable that these specimens belong to another undescribed smut species (the three sequences were obtained from material from Israel and USA, while the type collection was from Germany), or the quality of the sequences was not optimal; almost all differences in the sequences from Savchenko et al. (2014a) in comparison to the sequences from this study were located behind a poly A/T site, which necessitated re-sequencing for several of the specimens used in this study. Furthermore, misidentification of the host plant seems also possible, as no records were found for the occurrence of Bromus inermis in the floras of Israel (http://flora.org.il/en/plants/) or Palestine (Feinbrun-Dothan 1986).

Ustilago nunavutica was the second species that led Savchenko et al. (2014a) to assume that the U. striiformis species complex was polyphyletic. Comparing the ITS and LSU sequences of U. nunavutica with sequences from the current study, the LSU sequence used by Savchenko et al. (2014a) showed several SNPs (data not shown), while all other U. striiformis samples investigated in this study were identical in the LSU region. In contrast, the ITS sequence of U. nunavutica has only few SNPs in comparison to other members of the U. striiformis species complex and is identical with U. neocopinata. It seems possible that the LSU sequence of U. nunavutica either was of bad quality or shows the amplification of a contaminant smut fungus. However, as the genera Puccinellia and Dactylis are not closely related (Schneider et al. 2009) and very high host specificity has been revealed for the closely related species of the U. striiformis species complex in this study, it is unlikely that U. neocopinata and U. nunavutica are conspecific.

In agreement with Stoll et al. (2005) and Spooner & Legon (2006), we found that U. calamagrostidis and U. corcontica belonged to the U. striiformis species complex. However, further resolution within the U. striiformis species complex was only achieved when the protein-coding loci introduced by Kruse et al. (2017b) were employed. The trees revealed a host genus or host species specific occurrence for almost all lineages within the U. striiformis species complex, thus they should be treated as distinct species, supported by the observations of Liro (1924). All specimens from a single host species formed a clade according to the host species (or the host genus, in case of Holcus), with the exception of the rather closely related species Lolium perenne and Festuca arundinacea (Malik & Thomas 1966, Catalán et al. 2004, Hand et al. 2010). As most of these clades received high to maximum support, they should be considered to represent distinct species, which can be distinguished based on the host and diagnostic SNPs (Fig. 6). For most of the 14 lineages of the U. striiformis species complex validly published names are available, necessitating the description of only two new species in this complex, U. neocopinata on Dactylis glomerata and U. jagei on Agrostis stolonifera s. lat. Vánky (2012) and Savchenko et al. (2014a) mentioned that different species on different hosts within this complex vary remarkably in spore shape, size, and ornamentation. However, morphological variation was observed to be high even within the same host species in the current study and also by Vánky (2012). Thus it is difficult to distinguish these closely related species based on morphology, necessitating the consideration of hosts and SNPs for diagnosis. The host range of at least two species of Ustilago parasitic to Agrostis could not be inferred with certainty, as both ITS and chloroplast loci did not resolve closely related species in the A. stolonifera and A. gigantea clusters (Amundsen & Warnke 2012).

While investigating synonymies of the U. striiformis species complex, it was found that the name U. salweyi is the correct name for the stripe smut on Holcus lanatus. Stevenson (1946) flagged U. salweyi as a “nomen ambiguum”, although no action was taken to formally reject the name. Following the ICN (McNeill et al. 2012), the name U. salweyi has priority over Uredo striiformis as it was published two years earlier (Berkeley & Broome 1850: 463). Although the group generally referred to as the U. striiformis-group does not contain a species with that as the correct name, as it is still included as a synonym we feel that it is best to continue to use “U. striiformis-group” or “species complex” for these fungi as it is so well established and recalls the symptoms all species of the complex exhibit, although this feature is shared by some leaf-stripe smuts not belonging to this complex.

The species within the U. striiformis species complex have sometimes been recognised as special forms based on infection trials (Liro 1924, Davis 1930, 1935, Fischer 1940). However, it has been shown for various biotrophic pathogens that the special form concept, in which there is a population continuum with somewhat specialised forms, cannot be upheld (Göker et al. 2004, Lutz et al. 2005, Kemler et al. 2009, Thines et al. 2009, Ploch et al. 2011, Savchenko et al. 2014b, Choi & Thines 2015).

Similar to the situation in the U. striiformis species complex, Ustilago serpens s. lat. on different hosts clustered in phylogenetically distinct subgroups. As the type host for U. serpens is Elymus repens, the collections from Bromus inermis warrants recognition as a new species. Ustilago serpens is another example illustrating the narrow host specialization among smut fungi. As for both the coarsely ornamented stripe-smuts (U. serpens clade) and the finely ornamented stripe smuts (U. striiformis clade) only a subset of the known hosts could be included in the current study. It is therefore conceivable that some older names published for specific host-pathogen combinations in these groups warrant recognition and several new species await discovery.

With respect to the global phylogeny of Ustilago it is noteworthy that even based on nine loci the backbone of the phylogenetic tree was only poorly resolved. Conflicting supported topologies were inferred with respect to the phylogenetic position of U. maydis in the reconstructions based on three (sister to a clade comprising, among others, the U. nuda and the U. salweyi clade) and nine loci (sister to a clade comprising the majority of smuts on panicoid grasses).

This highlights the high degree of uncertainty that there still is with respect to the global phylogeny of Ustilago s. lat. (Thines 2016). Considering the diversity of anatomical characteristics and disease syndromes caused, many of which have arisen several times independently (such as the stripe-smut habit; McTaggart et al. 2012a, b, c), any splitting of Ustilago s. lat. into smaller genera as suggested by McTaggart et al. (2012a, 2016) is probably premature and might become obsolete due to the high degree of parallel evolution and associated homoplasy.

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by the LOEWE research funding programme in the framework of the Cluster for Integrative Fungal Research (IPF). We are grateful to the curators of B (Berlin), GLM (Görlitz), M (Munich), and TUB (Tübingen) for allowing the investigation of specimens in their keeping, and David Hawksworth for important information on Ustilago salweyi types in K-M (Kew fungarium) and nomenclatural corrections. We furthermore want to thank the curators of B (Berlin), HBG (Hamburg) and L (Leiden) for searching for the type collection of Ustilago scaura. We thank the private collectors Horst Jage and Volker Kummer for allowing us to include some of their collections in this study. We want to thank Bagdevi Mishra for the opportunity to use TrEase (thines-lab@senckenberg.de/trease) for phylogenetic analysis. Furthermore, we are grateful to Y.-J. Choi for help with the primer design for an internal ITS primer and to Reuel Bennett for proof-reading an initial draft of the manuscript. MT and JK conceived the study; JK made collection trips; FK, HJ, HR, HZ, UR, WD, and VK provided material; JK performed laboratory experiments and microscopy, and also analysed the data; JK and MT interpreted the data and prepared the manuscript with contributions from the other authors.

REFERENCES

  1. Amundsen K, Warnke S. (2012) Agrostis species relationships based on trnL-trnF and atpI-atpH Intergenic Spacer Regions. Hortscience 47: 18–24. [Google Scholar]
  2. Begerow D, Stoll M, Bauer R. (2006) A phylogenetic hypothesis of Ustilaginomycotina based on multiple gene analyses and morphological data. Mycologia 98: 906–916. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Berkeley MJ, Broome CE. (1850) Notices of British fungi. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 5: 455–467. [Google Scholar]
  4. Catalán P, Torrecilla P, Ángel J, Rodríguez L, Olmstead RG. (2004) Phylogeny of the festucoid grasses of subtribe Loliinae and allies (Poeae, Pooideae) inferred from ITS and trnL–F sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 31: 517–541. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Choi Y-J, Thines M. (2015) Host jumps and radiation, not co-divergence drives diversification of obligate pathogens: a case study in downy mildews and Asteraceae. PLoS ONE 10(7): e0133655. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Davis WH. (1930) Two physiologic forms of Ustilago striaeformis (Westd.) Niessl. Phytopathology 20: 65–74. [Google Scholar]
  7. Davis WH. (1935) Summary of investigations with Ustilago striaeformis parasitizing some common grasses. Phytopathology 25: 810–817. [Google Scholar]
  8. Denchev C, Giraud T, Hood ME. (2009) Three new species of anthericolous smut fungi on Caryophyllaceae. Mycologia Balcanica 6: 79–84. [Google Scholar]
  9. Feinbrun-Dothan N. (1986) Flora Palaestina. Vol. 4. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Section of Sciences. [Google Scholar]
  10. Fischer GW. (1940) Fundamental studies on the stripe smut of grasses (Ustilago striaeformis) in the Pacific Northwest. Phytopathology 30: 93–118. [Google Scholar]
  11. Fischer GW. (1953) Manual of the North American Smut Fungi. New York: Ronald Press. [Google Scholar]
  12. Göker M, Riethmüller A, Voglmayr H, Weiss M, Oberwinkler F. (2004) Phylogeny of Hyaloperonospora based on nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer sequences. Mycological Progress 3: 83–94. [Google Scholar]
  13. Guo L. (1993) Ustilago deyeuxiae sp. nov. and three smut species new to China. Mycosystema 6: 51–55. [Google Scholar]
  14. Hand ML, Cogan NOC, Stewart AV, Forster JW. (2010) Evolutionary history of tall fescue morphotypes inferred from molecular phylogenetics of the Lolium-Festuca species complex. BMC Evolutionary Biology 10: 303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Heller A, Thines M. (2009) Evidence for the importance of enzymatic digestion of epidermal walls during subepidermal sporulation and pustule opening in white blister rusts (Albuginaceae). Mycological Research 113: 657–667. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. 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]
  17. Kemler M, Lutz M, Göker M, Oberwinkler F, Begerow D. (2009) Hidden diversity in the non-caryophyllaceous plant-parasitic members of Microbotryum (Pucciniomycotina: Microbotryales). Systematics and Biodiversity 7: 297–306. [Google Scholar]
  18. Kruse J, Choi Y-J, Thines M. (2017a) New smut-specific primers for the ITS barcoding of Ustilaginomycotina. Mycological Progress 16: 213–221. [Google Scholar]
  19. Kruse J, Mishra B, Choi Y-J, Sharma R, Thines M. (2017b) New smut-specific primers for multilocus genotyping and phylogenetics of Ustilaginaceae. Mycological Progress 16: 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  20. Liro JI. (1924) Die Ustilagineen Finnlands. Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae, series A 17(1): 1–636. [Google Scholar]
  21. Lutz M, Göker M, Piatek M, Kemler M, Begerow D, Oberwinkler F. (2005) Anther smuts of Caryophyllaceae: molecular characters indicate host-dependent species delimitation. Mycological Progress 4: 225–238. [Google Scholar]
  22. Malik CP, Thomas PT. (1966) Karyotypic studies in some Lolium and Festuca species. Caryologia 19: 167–196. [Google Scholar]
  23. McNeill J, Barrie FR, Buck WR, Demoulin V, Greuter W, et al (2012) International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code) adopted by the Eighteenth International Botanical Congress Melbourne, Australia, July 2011. [Regnum Vegetabile No. 154.] Königstein: Koeltz Scientific Books. [Google Scholar]
  24. McTaggart AR, Shivas RG, Geering AD, Callaghan B, Vánky K, Scharaschkin T. (2012a) Soral synapomorphies are significant for the systematics of the Ustilago-Sporisorium–Macalpinomyces complex (Ustilaginaceae). Persoonia 29: 63–77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. McTaggart AR, Shivas RG, Geering ADW, Vánky K, Scharaschkin T. (2012b) A review of the Ustilago–Sporisorium–Macalpinomyces complex. Persoonia 29: 55–62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. McTaggart AR, Shivas RG, Geering ADW, Vánky K, Scharaschkin T. (2012c) Taxonomic revision of Ustilago, Sporisorium and Macalpinomyces. Persoonia 29: 116–132. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. McTaggart AR, Shivas RG, Boekhout T, Oberwinkler F, Vánky K, et al (2016) Mycosarcoma (Ustilaginaceae), a resurrected generic name for corn smut (Ustilago maydis) and its close relatives with hypertrophied, tubular sori. IMA Fungus 7: 309–315. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. O’Donnell K. (1993) Fusarium and its near relatives. In: The Fungal Holomorph: mitotic, meiotic and pleomorphic speciation in fungal systematics (Reynolds DR, Taylor JW, eds.): 225–233. Wallingford: CAB International. [Google Scholar]
  29. Piątek M, Lutz M, Chater AO. (2013) Cryptic diversity in the Antherospora vaillantii complex on Muscari species. IMA Fungus 4: 5–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Ploch S, Telle S, Choi Y-J, Cunnington J, Priest M, et al (2011) The molecular phylogeny of the white blister rust genus Pustula reveals a case of underestimated biodiversity with several undescribed species on ornamentals and crop plants. Fungal Biology 115: 214–219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Ridgway KP, Duck JM, Young JPW. (2003) Identification of roots from grass swards using PCR-RFLP and FFLP of the plastid trnL (UAA) intron. BMC Ecology 3(8): 1–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP. (2003) MRBAYES 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19: 1572–1574. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Savchenko KG, Carris LM, Castlebury LA, Heluta VP, Wasser SP, Nevo E. (2014a) Stripe smuts of grasses: one lineage or high levels of polyphyly? Persoonia 33: 169–181. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Savchenko KG, Carris LM, Castlebury LA, Heluta VP, Wasser SP, Nevo E. (2014b) Revision of Entyloma (Entylomatales, Exobasidiomycetes) on Eryngium. Mycologia 106: 797–810. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Schneider J, Döring E, Hilu KW, Röser M. (2009) Phylogenetic structure of the grass subfamily Pooideae based on comparison of plastid matK gene–3’trnK exon and nuclear ITS sequences. Taxon 58: 405–424. [Google Scholar]
  36. Shenglian L, Wenli C, Phillips SM. (2006) 87. Deyeuxia Clarion ex P. Beauvois, Ess. Agrostogr. 43. 1812. In: Flora of China (Zhengyi W, Raven PH, Deyuan H, eds) 22: 348–359. Beijing: Science Press. [Google Scholar]
  37. Spooner BM, Legon NW. (2006) Additions and amendments to the list of British smut fungi. Mycologist 20: 90–96. [Google Scholar]
  38. Stamatakis A. (2014) RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30: 1312–1313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Stevenson JA. (1946) A nomenclatorial discussion of Ustilago striiformis. PIant Disease Reporter 30: 53–59. [Google Scholar]
  40. Stoll M, Begerow D, Oberwinkler F. (2005) Molecular phylogeny of Ustilago, Sporisorium, and related taxa based on combined analyses of rDNA sequences. Mycological Research 109: 342–356. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Stoll M, Piepenbring M, Begerow D, Oberwinkler F. (2003) Molecular phylogeny of Ustilago and Sporisorium species (Basidiomycota, Ustilaginales) based on internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequences. Canadian Journal of Botany 81: 976–984. [Google Scholar]
  42. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S. (2013) MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30: 2725–2729. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Thines M. (2016) Proposal to conserve the name Ustilago (Basidiomycota) with a conserved type. Taxon 65: 1170–1171. [Google Scholar]
  44. Thines M, Choi Y-J, Kemen E, Ploch S, Holub EB, Shin H-D, Jones JDG. (2009) A new species of Albugo parasitic to Arabidopsis thaliana reveals new evolutionary patterns in white blister rusts (Albuginaceae). Persoonia 22: 123–128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Vánky K. (2012) Smut Fungi of the World. St Paul, MN: American Phytopathological Society Press. [Google Scholar]
  46. Vánky K. (2007) Taxonomic studies on Ustilaginomycetes – 27. Mycotaxon 99: 1–70. [Google Scholar]
  47. White TJ, Bruns T, Lee S, Taylor J. (1990) Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA sequences for phylogenetics. In: PCR Protocols: a guide to methods and applications (Innis N, Gelfand D, Sninsky J, White T, eds): 315–322. San Diego: Academic Press. [Google Scholar]

Articles from IMA Fungus are provided here courtesy of The International Mycological Association

RESOURCES