Phylogenetic diversity of 200+ isolates of the ectomycorrhizal fungus Cenococcum geophilum associated with Populus trichocarpa soils in the Pacific Northwest, USA and comparison to globally distributed representatives.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
20
03
2020
accepted:
18
11
2020
entrez:
6
1
2021
pubmed:
7
1
2021
medline:
20
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The ectomycorrhizal fungal symbiont Cenococcum geophilum is of high interest as it is globally distributed, associates with many plant species, and has resistance to multiple environmental stressors. C. geophilum is only known from asexual states but is often considered a cryptic species complex, since extreme phylogenetic divergence is often observed within nearly morphologically identical strains. Alternatively, C. geophilum may represent a highly diverse single species, which would suggest cryptic but frequent recombination. Here we describe a new isolate collection of 229 C. geophilum isolates from soils under Populus trichocarpa at 123 collection sites spanning a ~283 mile north-south transect in Western Washington and Oregon, USA (PNW). To further understanding of the phylogenetic relationships within C. geophilum, we performed maximum likelihood and Bayesian phylogenetic analyses to assess divergence within the PNW isolate collection, as well as a global phylogenetic analysis of 789 isolates with publicly available data from the United States, Japan, and European countries. Phylogenetic analyses of the PNW isolates revealed three distinct phylogenetic groups, with 15 clades that strongly resolved at >80% bootstrap support based on a GAPDH phylogeny and one clade segregating strongly in two principle component analyses. The abundance and representation of PNW isolate clades varied greatly across the North-South range, including a monophyletic group of isolates that spanned nearly the entire gradient at ~250 miles. A direct comparison between the GAPDH and ITS rRNA gene region phylogenies, combined with additional analyses revealed stark incongruence between the ITS and GAPDH gene regions, consistent with intra-species recombination between PNW isolates. In the global isolate collection phylogeny, 34 clades were strongly resolved using Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian approaches (at >80% MLBS and >0.90 BPP respectively), with some clades having intra- and intercontinental distributions. Together these data are highly suggestive of divergence within multiple cryptic species, however additional analyses such as higher resolution genotype-by-sequencing approaches are needed to distinguish potential species boundaries and the mode and tempo of recombination patterns.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33406078
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231367
pii: PONE-D-20-08095
pmc: PMC7787446
doi:
Substances chimiques
DNA, Fungal
0
RNA, Ribosomal
0
Soil
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0231367Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
Références
Mol Biol Evol. 2018 Jun 1;35(6):1547-1549
pubmed: 29722887
Biotechnol J. 2015 Apr;10(4):510-24
pubmed: 25676392
Microbiome. 2018 Feb 12;6(1):31
pubmed: 29433554
Front Microbiol. 2018 Feb 13;9:141
pubmed: 29487573
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Nov 6;115(45):11573-11578
pubmed: 30337484
PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e48946
pubmed: 23145035
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2015 Oct;91(10):
pubmed: 26347080
New Phytol. 2005 Apr;166(1):263-71
pubmed: 15760369
Mol Biol Evol. 2008 Nov;25(11):2251-4
pubmed: 18728073
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2014 Dec;90(3):708-17
pubmed: 25229424
Am Nat. 2008 Jan;171(1):44-58
pubmed: 18171150
Mycologia. 2002 Sep-Oct;94(5):772-80
pubmed: 21156551
PLoS One. 2013 Jul 29;8(7):e69885
pubmed: 23922841
J Microbiol Methods. 2017 Nov;142:76-78
pubmed: 28923689
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2011 Feb;75(2):313-20
pubmed: 21114502
New Phytol. 2015 Mar;205(4):1424-1430
pubmed: 25422041
Int J Parasitol. 2002 May;32(5):527-31
pubmed: 11943225
New Phytol. 2018 Oct;220(2):502-516
pubmed: 29992670
Nat Genet. 2014 Oct;46(10):1089-96
pubmed: 25151358
Nucleic Acids Res. 2014 Jan;42(Database issue):D26-31
pubmed: 24225321
Genome. 2013 Apr;56(4):205-13
pubmed: 23706073
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Jan 23;93(2):770-3
pubmed: 8570632
Mycorrhiza. 2016 Aug;26(6):529-40
pubmed: 26968743
New Phytol. 2014 Jul;203(2):535-553
pubmed: 24750093
Bioinformatics. 2001 Aug;17(8):754-5
pubmed: 11524383
BMC Bioinformatics. 2010 Jan 05;11:7
pubmed: 20051126
Mycologia. 2007 Nov-Dec;99(6):812-9
pubmed: 18333505
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 17;13(8):e0202519
pubmed: 30118526
Nat Commun. 2016 Sep 07;7:12662
pubmed: 27601008
Bioinformatics. 2012 Jun 15;28(12):1647-9
pubmed: 22543367
Trends Plant Sci. 2012 Aug;17(8):478-86
pubmed: 22564542
Nucleic Acids Res. 2014 Jan;42(Database issue):D699-704
pubmed: 24297253
Fungal Biol Rev. 2017 Mar;31(2):99-112
pubmed: 31649746
Phytopathology. 1969 Apr;59(4):411-7
pubmed: 5811914
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013 Apr;79(8):2519-26
pubmed: 23377949
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Apr 17;109(16):6241-6
pubmed: 22454494
Mol Ecol. 2014 Jul;23(13):3356-70
pubmed: 24894495
Curr Genet. 2007 Nov;52(5-6):191-201
pubmed: 17768627
Mycol Res. 2008 Sep;112(Pt 9):1069-79
pubmed: 18692376
PLoS One. 2011;6(9):e25126
pubmed: 21949867
Sci Rep. 2017 May 12;7(1):1831
pubmed: 28500332
Science. 2006 Sep 15;313(5793):1596-604
pubmed: 16973872
Tree Genet Genomes. 2019 Feb;15(1):
pubmed: 30546292
Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2004 Jan-Feb;6(1):2-4
pubmed: 15095128
Mycorrhiza. 2014 Jan;24(1):13-20
pubmed: 23754539
New Phytol. 2002 Jun;154(3):651-659
pubmed: 33873469
Int J Parasitol. 1996 Oct;26(10):1123-6
pubmed: 8982795