The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Biodiversity in the Cladosporium herbarum complex (Davidiellaceae, Capnodiales), with standardisation of methods for Cladosporium taxonomy and diagnostics
Open accessAbstract
The Cladosporium herbarum complex comprises five species for which Davidiella teleomorphs are known. Cladosporium herbarum s. str. (D. tassiana), C. macrocarpum (D. macrocarpa) and C. bruhnei (D. allicina) are distinguishable by having conidia of different width, and by teleomorph characters. Davidiella variabile is introduced as teleomorph of C. variabile, a homothallic species occurring on Spinacia, and D. macrospora is known to be the teleomorph of C. iridis on Iris spp. The C. herbarum complex combines low molecular distance with a high degree of clonal or inbreeding diversity. Entities differ from each other by multilocus sequence data and by phenetic differences, and thus can be interpreted to represent individual taxa. Isolates of the C. herbarum complex that were formerly associated with opportunistic human infections, cluster with C. bruhnei. Several species are newly described from hypersaline water, namely C. ramotenellum, C. tenellum, C. subinflatum, and C. herbaroides. Cladosporium pseudiridis collected from Iris sp. in New Zealand, is also a member of this species complex and shown to be distinct from C. iridis that occurs on this host elsewhere in the world. A further new species from New Zealand is C. sinuosum on Fuchsia excorticata. Cladosporium antarcticum is newly described from a lichen, Caloplaca regalis, collected in Antarctica, and C. subtilissimum from grape berries in the U.S.A., while the new combination C. ossifragi, the oldest valid name of the Cladosporium known from Narthecium in Europe, is proposed. Standard protocols and media are herewith proposed to facilitate future morphological examination of Cladosporium spp. in culture, and neotypes or epitypes are proposed for all species treated.
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
Cited by
Commensal Fungi in Health and Disease
Limon, J. J., Skalski, J. H., & Underhill, D. M. (2017) · Cell Host & Microbe · doi:10.1016/j.chom.2017.07.002 · Cited by 336
Fungal Planet description sheets: 951–1041
Crous, P. W., Wingfield, M. J., Lombard, L., Roets, F., Swart, W. J., Alvarado, P., Carnegie, A. J., Moreno, G., Luangsa-Ard, J., Thangavel, R., et al. (2019) · Persoonia - Molecular Phylogeny and Evolution of Fungi · doi:10.3767/persoonia.2019.43.06 · Cited by 217
Self-citationJayawardena, R. S., Hyde, K. D., Chen, Y. J., Papp, V., Palla, B., Papp, D., Bhunjun, C. S., Hurdeal, V. G., Senwanna, C., Manawasinghe, I. S., et al. (2020) · Fungal Diversity · doi:10.1007/s13225-020-00460-8 · Cited by 122
Water- and Air-Distributed Conidia Differ in Sterol Content and Cytoplasmic Microviscosity
Van Leeuwen, M. R., Van Doorn, T. M., Golovina, E. A., Stark, J., & Dijksterhuis, J. (2010) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.01632-09 · Cited by 52
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Schubert, K., Groenewald, J. Z., Braun, U., Dijksterhuis, J., Starink, M., Hill, C. F., Zalar, P., de Hoog, G. S., & Crous, P. W.
- Venue
- Studies in Mycology
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 58
- Pages
- 105-156
- ISSN
- 0166-0616 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2157445415
- Cited by
- 300
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.08
- 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
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.