The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Resolving the Phoma enigma
Open accessAbstract
The Didymellaceae was established in 2009 to accommodate Ascochyta,Didymella and Phoma, as well as several related phoma-like genera. The family contains numerous plant pathogenic, saprobic and endophytic species associated with a wide range of hosts.Ascochyta and Phoma are morphologically difficult to distinguish, and species from both genera have in the past been linked to Didymella sexual morphs. The aim of the present study was to clarify the generic delimitation in Didymellaceae by combing multi-locus phylogenetic analyses based on ITS, LSU,rpb2 and tub2, and morphological observations. The resulting phylogenetic tree revealed 17 well-supported monophyletic clades in Didymellaceae, leading to the introduction of nine genera, three species, two nomina nova and 84 combinations. Furthermore, 11 epitypes and seven neotypes were designated to help stabilise the taxonomy and use of names. As a result of these data,Ascochyta,Didymella and Phoma were delineated as three distinct genera, and the generic circumscriptions of Ascochyta,Didymella,Epicoccum and Phoma emended. Furthermore, the genus Microsphaeropsis, which is morphologically distinct from the members of Didymellaceae, grouped basal to the Didymellaceae, for which a new family Microsphaeropsidaceae was introduced.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 6.0
Tamura, K., Stecher, G., Peterson, D., Filipski, A., & Kumar, S. (2013) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/mst197 · Cited by 47,205
MAFFT Multiple Sequence Alignment Software Version 7: Improvements in Performance and Usability
Katoh, K., & Standley, D. M. (2013) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/mst010 · Cited by 46,209
Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics
White, T. J., Bruns, T., Lee, S., & Taylor, J. (1990) · PCR Protocols · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-372180-8.50042-1 · Cited by 36,648
MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference and Model Choice Across a Large Model Space
Ronquist, F., Teslenko, M., van der Mark, P., Ayres, D. L., Darling, A., Höhna, S., Larget, B., Liu, L., Suchard, M. A., & Huelsenbeck, J. P. (2012) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/sys029 · Cited by 27,843
PCR protocols — A guide to methods and applications
U.G. (1990) · Trends in Biochemical Sciences · doi:10.1016/0968-0004(90)90252-7 · Cited by 11,702
Vilgalys, R., & Hester, M. (1990) · Journal of Bacteriology · doi:10.1128/jb.172.8.4238-4246.1990 · Cited by 5,958
Phylogenetic relationships among ascomycetes: evidence from an RNA polymerse II subunit
Liu, Y. J., Whelen, S., & Hall, B. D. (1999) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026092 · Cited by 3,751
MrModeltest 2.2. Program Distributed by the Author
Nylander, J. A. A., Nylander, J., & Nylander, J. A. A. (2004) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,648
Rayner, R. W. (1970) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,342
Taxonomy and phylogeny of Gliocladium analysed from nuclear large subunit ribosomal DNA sequences
Rehner, S. A., & Samuels, G. J. (1994) · Mycological Research · doi:10.1016/s0953-7562(09)80409-7 · Cited by 1,119
Cited by
Fungal diversity notes 111–252—taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions to fungal taxa
Ariyawansa, H. A., Hyde, K. D., Jayasiri, S. C., Buyck, B., Chethana, K. W. T., Dai, D. Q., Dai, Y. C., Daranagama, D. A., Jayawardena, R. S., Lücking, R., et al. (2015) · Fungal Diversity · doi:10.1007/s13225-015-0346-5 · Cited by 751
Fungal Planet description sheets: 469-557
Crous, P. W., Wingfield, M. J., Burgess, T. I., Hardy, G. E. S. J., Crane, C., Barrett, S., Cano-Lira, J. F., Leroux, J. J., Thangavel, R., Guarro, J., et al. (2016) · Persoonia - Molecular Phylogeny and Evolution of Fungi · doi:10.3767/003158516x694499 · Cited by 398
“Closest hits using the ITS sequence are Ascochyta medicaginicola (GenBank EU167575; Identities = 550/558 (99 %), gaps 3/558), Leptosphaerulina australis (GenBank JN712494; Identities = 537/542 (99 %), gaps 1/542).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationWijayawardene, N. N., Hyde, K. D., Rajeshkumar, K. C., Hawksworth, D. L., Madrid, H., Kirk, P. M., Braun, U., Singh, R. V., Crous, P. W., Kukwa, M., et al. (2017) · Fungal Diversity · doi:10.1007/s13225-017-0386-0 · Cited by 331
Self-citationFungal diversity notes 603–708: taxonomic and phylogenetic notes on genera and species
Hyde, K. D., Norphanphoun, C., Abreu, V. P., Bazzicalupo, A., Thilini Chethana, K. W., Clericuzio, M., Dayarathne, M. C., Dissanayake, A. J., Ekanayaka, A. H., He, M.-Q., et al. (2017) · Fungal Diversity · doi:10.1007/s13225-017-0391-3 · Cited by 307
Hyde, K. D., Tennakoon, D. S., Jeewon, R., Bhat, D. J., Maharachchikumbura, S. S. N., Rossi, W., Leonardi, M., Lee, H. B., Mun, H. Y., Houbraken, J., et al. (2019) · Fungal Diversity · doi:10.1007/s13225-019-00429-2 · Cited by 287
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, Q., Jiang, J. R., Zhang, G. Z., Cai, L., & Crous, P. W.
- Venue
- Studies in Mycology
- Published
- 2015-09-01
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 137-217
- ISSN
- 0166-0616 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2175236252
- Cited by
- 379
- References
- 57
- FWCI
- 10.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Resolving the Phoma enigma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.simyco.2015.10.003
- The paper
- Chen, Q., Jiang, J. R., Zhang, G. Z., Cai, L., & Crous, P. W. (2015). Resolving the Phoma enigma. Studies in Mycology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simyco.2015.10.003
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.
