Australasian Plant Pathology

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 161–165 | Cite as

Development of microsatellite and mating type markers for the pine needle pathogen Lecanosticta acicola

  • J. JanoušekEmail author
  • S. Krumböck
  • T. Kirisits
  • R. E. Bradshaw
  • I. Barnes
  • L. Jankovský
  • C. Stauffer


Lecanosticta acicola is an ascomycete that causes brown spot needle blight of pine species in many regions of the world. This pathogen is responsible for a major disease of Pinus palustris in the USA and is a quarantine organism in Europe. In order to study the genetic diversity and patterns of spread of L. acicola, eleven microsatellite markers and two mating type markers were developed. An enrichment protocol was used to isolate microsatellite-rich DNA regions, and 18 primer pairs were designed to flank these regions, of which eleven were polymorphic. A total of 93 alleles were obtained across all loci from forty isolates of L. acicola from the USA with an allelic diversity range of 0.095 to 0.931 per locus. Cross-species amplification with some of the markers was obtained with L. gloeospora, L. guatemalensis and Dothistroma septosporum, but not with D. pini. Mating type (MAT) markers amplifying both idiomorphs were also developed to determine mating type distribution in populations. These markers were designed based on alignments of both idiomorphs of nine closely related plant pathogens, and a protocol for multiplex PCR amplification of the MAT loci was optimised. The MAT markers are not species specific and also amplify the MAT loci in Dothistroma septosporum, D. pini, L. gloeospora and L. guatemalensis. Both types of genetic markers developed in this study will be valuable for future investigations of the population structure, genetic diversity and invasion history of L. acicola on a global scale.


Mycosphaerella dearnessii Mating type markers Microsatellite Cross-species amplification Fungi Forest pathogen 



The authors thank Carole Flyger and Dagmar Palovčíková for technical assistance; Dana Nelson for needle samples, and Coralie Bertheau, Hannes Schuler, Erhard Halmschlager and Tuan Duong for useful comments on the work. We acknowledge financial support to Josef Janoušek from the AKTION Czech Republic – Austria (project 58p23), the Scholarship Foundation of the Republic of Austria (OeAD-GmbH, Austria), the Hlavka Foundation (Czech Republic; for internship at Massey University, New Zealand) and the Intern Grant Agency of the Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology (Mendel University in Brno, Czech Republic). The project was supported financially by COST CZ LD12031 (DIAROD), the FPS COST Action FP1102 (DIAROD) and the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme FP7 2007–2013 (KBBE 2009–3) under grant agreement 245268 ISEFOR.

Supplementary material

13313_2013_256_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (62 kb)
Online Resource 1 Positions of the specific mating type primers. Primer positions are indicated (arrows) in full-length idiomorphs of the putative MAT gene of D. pini (GenBank No.: DQ915449.1, DQ915451.1) as the complete L. acicola MAT region sequences are not available. Putative genes (alpha domain-containing and HMG domain-containing) are represented by grey boxes; coding sequences are represented by black boxes. (PDF 62 kb)
13313_2013_256_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (66 kb)
Online Resource 2 PCR amplicons of parts of the MAT1-1-1 and MAT1-2 idiomorphs of Lecanosticta acicola obtained using the MAT primers in multiplex PCR. (PDF 67 kb)


  1. Agapow P-M, Burt A (2001) Indices of multilocus linkage disequilibrium. Mol Ecol Notes 1:101–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anonymous (2008) Mycosphaerella dearnessii and Mycosphaerella pini. EPPO Bull 46:349–362Google Scholar
  3. Arie T et al (1997) Efficient cloning of ascomycete mating type genes by PCR amplification of the conserved MAT HMG Box. Fungal Genet Biol 21:118–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arthofer W et al (2007) Lessons from a beetle and an ant: coping with taxon-dependent differences in microsatellite development success. J Mol Evol 65:304–307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Evans HC (1984) The genus Mycosphaerella and its anamorphs. Mycol Pap 153:1–103Google Scholar
  6. Fontaine MC et al (2013) History of the invasion of the anther smut pathogen on Silene latifolia in North America. New Phytol 198:946–956PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gibson IAS (1980) Two pine needle fungi new to Colombia. Trop Pest Manag 26:38–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hall TA (1999) BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symp Ser 41:95–98Google Scholar
  9. Huan Z-Y, Smalley EB, Guries RP (1995) Differentiation of Mycosphaerella dearnessii by cultural characters and RAPD analysis. Phytopathology 85:522–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nei M (1973) Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 70:3321–3323PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Quaedvlieg W et al (2012) DNA barcoding of Mycosphaerella species of quarantine importance to Europe. Persoonia 29:101–115PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sinclair W, Lyon HH (2005) Diseases of trees and shrubs. 2nd ed. Cornell University PressGoogle Scholar
  13. Smith DR, Stanosz GR (1995) Confirmation of two distinct populations of Sphaeropsis sapinea in the North Central United States using RAPDs. Phytopathology 85:699–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Suto Y, Ougi D (1998) Lecanosticta acicola, causal fungus of brown spot needle blight in Pinus thunbergii, new to Japan. Mycoscience 39:319–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Untergasser A, et al. (2007) Primer3Plus, an enhanced web interface to Primer3. Nucleic acids research, 35(Web Server issue), pp. W71–4Google Scholar
  16. Zane L, Bargelloni L, Patarnello T (2002) Strategies for microsatellite isolation: a review. Mol Ecol 11:1–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Australasian Plant Pathology Society Inc. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Janoušek
    • 1
    Email author
  • S. Krumböck
    • 2
  • T. Kirisits
    • 2
  • R. E. Bradshaw
    • 3
  • I. Barnes
    • 4
  • L. Jankovský
    • 1
  • C. Stauffer
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Forest Protection and Wildlife ManagementFaculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in BrnoBrnoCzech Republic
  2. 2.Institute of Forest Entomology, Forest Pathology and Forest Protection, Department of Forest and Soil SciencesUniversity of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU)ViennaAustria
  3. 3.Bio-Protection Research Centre, Institute of Fundamental Sciences, College of SciencesMassey UniversityPalmerston NorthNew Zealand
  4. 4.Department of GeneticsForestry and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute (FABI), University of PretoriaPretoriaSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations