The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diversity and phylogenetic affinities of foliar fungal endophytes in loblolly pine inferred by culturing and environmental PCR
Abstract
We examined endophytic fungi in asymptomatic foliage of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) in North Carolina, U.S.A., with four goals: (i) to evaluate morphotaxa, BLAST matches and groups based on sequence similarity as functional taxonomic units; (ii) to explore methods to maximize phylogenetic signal for environmental datasets, which typically contain many taxa but few characters; (iii) to compare culturing vs. culture-free methods (environmental PCR of surface sterilized foliage) for estimating endophyte diversity and species composition; and (iv) to investigate the relationships between traditional ecological indices (e.g. Shannon index) and phylogenetic diversity (PD) in estimating endophyte diversity and spatial heterogeneity. Endophytes were recovered in culture from 87 of 90 P. taeda leaves sampled, yielding 439 isolates that represented 24 morphotaxa. Sequence data from the nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) for 150 isolates revealed 59 distinct ITS genotypes that represented 24 and 37 unique groups based on 90% and 95% sequence similarity, respectively. By recoding ambiguously aligned regions to extract phylogenetic signal and implementing a conservative phylogenetic backbone constraint, we recovered well supported phylogenies based on ca. 600 bp of the nuclear ribosomal large subunit (LSUrDNA) for 72 Ascomycota and Basidiomycota, 145 cultured endophytes and 33 environmental PCR samples. Comparisons with LSUrDNA-delimited species showed that morphotaxa adequately estimated total species richness but rarely corresponded to biologically meaningful groups. ITS BLAST results were variable in their utility, but ITS genotype groups based on 90% sequence similarity were concordant with LSUrDNA-delimited species. Environmental PCR yielded more genotypes per sampling effort and recovered several distinct clades relative to culturing, but some commonly cultured clades were never found (Sordariomycetes) or were rare relative to their high frequency among cultures (Leotiomycetes). In contrast to traditional indices, PD demonstrated spatial heterogeneity in endophyte assemblages among P. taeda trees and study plots. Our results highlight the need for caution in designating taxonomic units based on gross cultural morphology or ITS BLAST matches, the utility of phylogenetic tools for extracting robust phylogenies from environmental samples, the complementarity of culturing and environmental PCR, the utility of PD relative to traditional ecological indices, and the remarkably high diversity of foliar fungal endophytes in this simplified temperate ecosystem.
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
Thompson, J. (1997) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/25.24.4876 · Cited by 38,993
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
PAUP^* : Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (and other methods) 4.0b8
Swofford, D. L. (2001) · Cited by 12,789
GARDES, M., & BRUNS, T. D. (1993) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.1993.tb00005.x · Cited by 10,480
EMBOSS: the European molecular biology open software suite.
Rice, P., Longden, I., & Bleasby, A. (2000) · Trends in Genetics · doi:10.1016/s0168-9525(00)02024-2 · Cited by 9,466
Base-Calling of Automated Sequencer Traces Using Phred. I. Accuracy Assessment
Ewing, B., Hillier, L., Wendl, M. C., & Green, P. (1998) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.8.3.175 · Cited by 6,967
Vilgalys, R., & Hester, M. (1990) · Journal of Bacteriology · doi:10.1128/jb.172.8.4238-4246.1990 · Cited by 5,958
Self-citationConservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity
Faith, D. P. (1992) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/0006-3207(92)91201-3 · Cited by 5,693
MacClade 4.0: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution
(2001) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.39-2183 · Cited by 5,554
Base-Calling of Automated Sequencer Traces Using Phred. II. Error Probabilities
Ewing, B., & Green, P. (1998) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.8.3.186 · Cited by 5,439
Cited by
Jumpponen, A., & Jones, K. L. (2009) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02990.x · Cited by 432
Endophytic bacterial and fungal microbiota in sprouts, roots, and stems of rice (Oryza sativa L.)
Wang, W., Zhai, Y., Cao, L., Tan, H., & Zhang, R. (2016) · Microbiological Research · doi:10.1016/j.micres.2016.04.009 · Cited by 136
Metadata
- Authors
- Arnold, A. E., Henk, D. A., Eells, R. L., Lutzoni, F., & Vilgalys, R.
- Venue
- Mycologia
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-03
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 185-206
- ISSN
- 0027-5514 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-2536
- OpenAlex
- W2069053317
- Cited by
- 438
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 9.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Diversity and phylogenetic affinities of foliar fungal endophytes in loblolly pine inferred by culturing and environmental PCR. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/15572536.2007.11832578
- The paper
- Arnold, A. E., Henk, D. A., Eells, R. L., Lutzoni, F., & Vilgalys, R. (2007). Diversity and phylogenetic affinities of foliar fungal endophytes in loblolly pine inferred by culturing and environmental PCR. Mycologia. https://doi.org/10.1080/15572536.2007.11832578
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.