Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 280

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 412 of the 412 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Colletotrichum species and complexes: geographic distribution, host range and conservation status

Open access
Talhinhas, Pedro, Baroncelli, Riccardo·2021·Fungal Diversity

Abstract

The taxonomy of the genus Colletotrichum has undergone tremendous changes over the last decade, with over 200 species being currently recognised and species complexes being informally used to cluster those species. Many of these species are important plant pathogens, some rather polyphagous and others host-specific, but several occur seldomly and some may in fact be ecologically endangered. Based mainly on literature from the past decade, in this work we review the occurrence, geographic distribution and host spectrum of currently recognised Colletotrichum species under phylogenetic, pathological/agronomic and ecological perspectives, providing a list arranged by Colletotrichum species and species complexes. A total of 257 species are listed and grouped into 15 species complexes. In this work we have recorded 1353 unique host species- Colletotrichum species association records from 720 hosts, with the Fabaceae as the family with higher number of hosts (52 host species) but with the Rosaceae as the family with the highest number of host species- Colletotrichum species association records (118 association records). According to occurrence data, 88 species are common in nature, 128 were considered as data deficient and 41 are threatened, some of which are likely extinct from nature and preserved only in culture collections. Several species are relevant plant pathogens, in some cases geographically confined and thus of potential quarantine relevance. Based on the major changes that occurred on Colletotrichum taxonomy over the last decade, this work provides a comprehensive overview of occurrence data of Colletotrichum species, compiling host range and geographical distribution, with relevance for plant pathology and conservation mycology. The current taxonomic framework in Colletotrichum is revealing numerous species but poses challenges to the employment of standard criteria for the evaluation of biological conservation of these fungi. We advocate that conservation mycology and taxonomy should find common routes simultaneously enabling the correct delimitation of species of Colletotrichum and the implementation of feasible criteria for the evaluation of conservation. The employment of new technologies, such whole genome sequencing (WGS), will help and support the description of new species and to gain a better understanding of the genetic bases of speciation processes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13225-021-00491-9

Cites

412 of 412 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 412 references

Cited by

See all 280

Metadata

Authors
Talhinhas, P., & Baroncelli, R.
Venue
Fungal Diversity
Published
2021-09
Volume
110
Issue
1
Pages
109-198
ISSN
  • 1560-2745 (ISSN-L)
  • 1878-9129
OpenAlex
W3203662871
Cited by
280
References
412
FWCI
20.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Colletotrichum species and complexes: geographic distribution, host range and conservation status. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s13225-021-00491-9
The paper
Talhinhas, P., & Baroncelli, R. (2021). Colletotrichum species and complexes: geographic distribution, host range and conservation status. Fungal Diversity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-021-00491-9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.