Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Anther smuts of Caryophyllaceae: Molecular characters indicate host-dependent species delimitation

  • Published:
Mycological Progress Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Phylogenetic relationships of Microbotryum species (Urediniomycetes, Basidiomycota) inhabiting anthers of Caryophyllaceae were investigated by molecular analyses using internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequences and collections from different host plants. The data show that the current taxonomy of Microbotryum on Caryophyllaceae is only partly satisfactory. Microbotryum violaceum is confirmed to be a paraphyletic grouping and is split up in monophyletic groups. Microbotryum silenesinflatae and M. violaceo-verrucosum appear as polyphyletic. Host data are in good agreement with molecular results. Two new species, Microbotryum chloranthae-verrucosum and M. saponariae, are described based on morphological, ecological, and molecular characteristics. An emended circumscription of Microbotryum dianthorum is given. The name Ustilago major (= Microbotryum major) is lectotypified.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Almaraz T, Roux C, Maumont S, Durrieu G (2002) Phylogenetic relationships among smut fungi parasitizing dicotyledons based on ITS sequence analysis. — Mycological Research 106: 541–548.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Antonovics J, Hood M, Partain J (2002) The ecology and genetics of a host shift: Microbotryum as a model system. — American Naturalist 160: S40–S53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker FK, Lutzoni F (2002) The Utility of the Incongruence Length Difference Test. — Systematic Biology 51: 625–637.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Begerow D, Lutz M, Oberwinkler F (2002) Implications of molecular characters for the phylogeny of the genus Entyloma. — Mycological Research 106: 1392–1399.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bucheli E, Gautschi B, Shykoff JA (2000) Host-specific differentiation in the anther smut fungus Microbotryum violaceum as revealed by microsatellites. — Journal of Evolutionary Biology 13: 188–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buhr H (1964) Bestimmungstabellen der Gallen (Zoo-und Phytocecidien) an Pflanzen Mittel-und Nordeuropas. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham JL (1972) A miracle mounting fluid for permanent whole-mounts of microfungi. — Mycologia 64: 906–911.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Candolle AP (1815) Flore française. Ed. 3, vol. 6. Desray, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deml G, Oberwinkler F (1982) On Ustilago violacea (Pers.) Rouss. from Saponaria officinalis L. — Phytopathologische Zeitschrift 104: 345–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denchev C, Sharkova S (1997) Taxonomic revision of Microbotryum (Ustilaginales) on Dianthus. — Phytologia Balcanica 3: 105–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durrieu G, Zambettakis C (1973) Les Ustilago parasites des Caryophyllacées. Apports de la microscopie électronique. — Bulletin de la Société Mycologique de France 89: 283–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris JS, Källersjö M, Kluge AC, Bult C (1995) Testing significance of incongruence. — Cladistics 10: 315–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman AB, Doung KK, Shi T, Hughes CF, Perlin MH (2002) Isolates of Microbotryum violaceum from North American host species are phylogenetically distinct from their European host-derived counterparts. — Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 23: 158–170.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giard A (1889) Sur la castration parasitaire du Lychnis dioica L. par Ustilago antherarum Fr. — Bulletin scientifique de la France et de la Belgique III, 2: 153–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassan A, Macdonald JA (1971) Ustilago violacea on Silene dioica. — Transactions of the British Mycological Society 56: 451–461.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennig W (1965) Phylogenetic systematics. — Annual Review of Entomology 10: 97–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist FR (2001) MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. — Bioinformatics 17: 754–755.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Huelsenbeck JP, Larget B, Miller RE, Ronquist F (2002) Potential applications and pitfalls of Bayesian inference of phylogeny. — Systematic Biology 51: 673–688.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Inácio J, Rodrigues MG, Sobral P, Fonseca I (2004) Characterisation and classification of phylloplane yeasts from Portugal related to the genus Taphrina and description of five novel Lalaria species. — FEMS Yeast Research 4: 541–555.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jennersten O (1983) Butterfly visitors as vectors of Ustilago violacea spores between Caryophyllaceous plants. — Oikos 40: 125–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennersten, O (1988) Insect dispersal of fungal disease: effects of Ustilago infection on pollinator attraction in Viscaria vulgaris. — Oikos 51: 163–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katoh K, Misawa K, Kuma K, Miyata T (2002) MAFFT: a novel method for rapid multiple sequence alignment based on fast Fourier transform. — Nucleic Acids Research 30: 3059–3066.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee JA (1981) Variation in the infection of Silene dioica (L.) Clairv. by Ustilago violacea (Pers.) Fuckel in North West England. — New Phytologist 87: 81–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy LA, Castlebury LM, Carris LJ, Meyer R, Pimentel G (2001) Internal transcribed spacer sequence-based phylogeny and polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism differentiation of Tilletia walkeri and T. indica. — Phytopathology 91: 935–940.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lindeberg B (1959) Ustilaginales of Sweden. — Symbolae Botanicae Upsalienses 16: 1–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liro JI (1924) Die Ustilagineen Finnlands I. — Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae, Series A 17: 1–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lutz M, Bauer R, Begerow D, Oberwinkler F, Triebel D (2004) Tuberculina, rust relatives attack rusts. — Mycologia 96: 614–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller Alexander H, Antonovics J (1995) Spread of anther-smut disease (Ustilago violacea) and character correlations in a genetically variable experimental population of Silene alba. — Journal of Ecology 83: 783–794.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller Alexander H, Thrall PH, Antonovics J, Jarosz AM, Oudemans PV (1996) Population dynamics and genetics of plant disease: A case study of anther-smut disease. — Ecology 77: 990–996.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell K, Cigelnik E, Nirenberg HI (1998) Molecular systematics and phylogeography of the Gibberella fujikuroi complex. — Mycologia 90: 165–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlin MH (1996) Pathovars or formae speciales of Microbotryum violaceum differ in electrophoretic caryotype. — International Journal of Plant Sciences 157: 447–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perlin MH, Hughes C, Welch J, Akkaraju S, Steinecker D, Kumar A, Smith B, Garr SS, Brown SA, Andom T (1997) Molecular approaches to differentiate subpopulations or formae speciales of the fungal phytopathogen Microbotryum violaceum. — International Journal of Plant Sciences 158: 568–574.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Posada D, Crandall KA (1998) MODELTEST: testing the model of DNA substitution. — Bioinformatics 14: 817–818.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roux C, Almaraz T, Durrieu G (1998) Phylogénie de champignons responsables des charbons des végétaux à partir de l’-analyse des séquences ITS. — Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences. Série III-Vie. Académie des Sciences, Paris 321: 603–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schröter J (1887) Ustilaginei. In COHN F (ed) Kryptogamen-Flora von Schlesien 3(1): 261–291. JU Kern’s Verlag, Breslau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scorzetti G, Fell JW, Fonseca A, Statzell-Tallman A (2002) Systematics of basidiomycetous yeasts: a comparison of large subunit D1/D2 and internal transcribed spacer rDNA regions. — FEMS Yeast Research 2: 495–517.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Swofford DL (2001) PAUP* Phylogenetic Analysis Using parsimony (*and Other Methods). Version 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swofford DL, Olsen GJ, Waddell PJ, Hillis DM (1996) Phylogenetic Inference. In Hillis DM, Moritz C, Mable BK (eds) Molecular Systematics, pp. 407–514. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor JW, Jacobson DJ, Kroken S, Kasuga T, Geiser DM, Hibbett DS, Fisher MC (2000) Phylogenetic species recognition and species concepts in fungi. — Fungal Genetics and Biology 31: 21–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thrall TY, Biere A, Antonovics J (1993) Plant life-history and disease susceptibility: the occurence of Ustilago violacea on different species within the Caryophyllaceae. — Journal of Ecology 81: 489–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vánky K (1985) Carpathian Ustilaginales. — Symbolae Botanicae Upsalienses 24(2): 1–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vánky K (1994) European smut fungi. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart, Jena, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vánky K (1998) The genus Microbotryum (smut fungi). — Mycotaxon 67: 33–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vánky K (2004) Anther smuts of Caryophyllaceae. Taxonomy, nomenclature, problems in species delimitation. — Mycologia Balcanica 1: 189–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • White TJ, Bruns TD, Lee S, Taylor JW (1990) Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ (eds) PCR protocols, a guide to methods and applications, PP. 315–322. Academic Press, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lehrstuhl für Spezielle Botanik und Mykologie, Botanisches Institut, Universität Tübingen, Auf der Morgenstelle 1, D-72076, Tübingen, Germany

    Matthias Lutz, Markus Göker, Martin Kemler, Dominik Begerow & Franz Oberwinkler

  2. Department of Mycology, W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Lubicz 46, PL-31-512, Kraków, Poland

    Marcin Piatek

Authors
  1. Matthias Lutz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Markus Göker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marcin Piatek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Martin Kemler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Dominik Begerow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Franz Oberwinkler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthias Lutz.

Additional information

Part 226 in the series „Studies in heterobasidiomycetes“ from the Botanical Institute, University of Tübingen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lutz, M., Göker, M., Piatek, M. et al. Anther smuts of Caryophyllaceae: Molecular characters indicate host-dependent species delimitation. Mycol Progress 4, 225–238 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11557-006-0126-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11557-006-0126-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation