Cited by 64Yeasts and Rust Fungi StudiesFungal and yeast genetics researchPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases

Ribosomal DNA polymorphisms in the yeast Geotrichum candidum

Alper, Iraz, Frenette, Michel, Labrie, Steve·2011·Fungal Biology

Abstract

The dimorphic yeast Geotrichum candidum (teleomorph: Galactomyces candidus) is commonly used to inoculate washed-rind and bloomy-rind cheeses. However, little is known about the phylogenetic lineage of this microorganism. We have sequenced the complete 18S, 5.8S, 26S ribosomal RNA genes and their internal transcribed spacers (ITS1) and ITS2 regions (5126 nucleotides) from 18 G. candidum strains from various environmental niches, with a focus on dairy strains. Multiple sequence alignments revealed the presence of 60 polymorphic sites, which is generally unusual for ribosomal DNA (rDNA) within a given species because of the concerted evolution mechanism. This mechanism drives genetic homogenization to prevent the divergent evolution of rDNA copies within individuals. While the polymorphisms observed were mainly substitutions, one insertion/deletion (indel) polymorphism was detected in ITS1. No polymorphic sites were detected downstream from this indel site, that is, in 5.8S and ITS2. More surprisingly, many sequence electrophoregrams generated during the sequencing of the rDNA had dual peaks, suggesting that many individuals exhibited intragenomic rDNA variability. The ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 regions of four strains were cloned. The sequence analysis of 68 clones revealed 32 different ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 variants within these four strains. Depending on the strain, from four to twelve variants were detected, indicating that multiple rDNA copies were present in the genomes of these G. candidum strains. These results contribute to the debate concerning the use of the ITS region for barcoding fungi and suggest that community profiling techniques based on rDNA should be used with caution.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.funbio.2011.09.002

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 63 · Cited by 64

Authors
Alper, I., Frenette, M., & Labrie, S.
Affiliations
Université Laval (CA)
Corresponding author
Labrie, Steve
Venue
Fungal Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-12
Volume
115
Issue
12
Pages
1259-1269
ISSN
1878-6146 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2045813938
Cited by
64
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Fungal Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Yeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Plant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Keywords
Geotrichum candidum, ITS region, concerted evolution, insertion/deletion polymorphism, ITS barcoding, fungal phylogeny, cheese starter cultures, dimorphic yeast, rDNA copy number
MeSH terms
Animals, Base Sequence, Cattle, Cheese, Zea mays, DNA, Fungal, DNA, Ribosomal, Geotrichum, Milk, Molecular Sequence Data, Phylogeny, Polymorphism, Genetic, Evolution, Molecular

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