Minichalara

Fungalpedia – Note 3030, Minichalara

Citation when using this data: Wenping Wu et al. 2023 – Fungalpedia.

Index Fungorum, Facesoffungi, MycoBank, GenBank, Fig 1

Classification: Neolauriomycetaceae, Helotiales, Leotiomycetidae, Leotiomycetes, Pezizomycotina, Ascomycota, Fungi

Etymology: Refers to its similarity to Chalara in shape of conidiophores, phialide and conidia.

Colonies effuse, pale brown, superficial, hairy. Mycelium partly immersed and partly superficial, composed of pale to medium brown, septate and branched hyphae with smooth and thin walls. Anamorph: Stroma absent. Setae absent. Conidiophores arising from superficial hyphae or aggregated cells, solitary or in small group, erect, straight or slightly curved, simple, consisting of a short basal stalk and a terminal phialide, obclavate, subcylindrical, pale to medium brown, smooth. Conidiogenous cells integrated, terminate, determinate, phialidic, erect, straight, obclavate, lageniform, pale to medium brown, smooth, consisting of a venter and a collarette; transition from venter to collarette abrupt, often marked by a darker and pronounced constriction; venters subcylindrical, long ellipsoidal, lageniform, pale brown; collarettes cylindrical, medium brown, significantly darker in the lower part, smooth. Conidia endogenous, extruded in short chains, cylindrical, with truncated of flattened ends, hyaline, aseptate. Teleomorph: Unknown.

Ecology/substrate/host: Saprobe on dead leaves of plant, and fruitbody of other fungus.

Geographical distribution: China, Czechoslovakia, Netherlands, and USA.

Notes: Morphologically Minichalara is characterized by reduced conidiophores composed of a short basal stalk and a terminal phialide in pale brown color, obclavate to lageniform phialides, abrupt transition from a long venter to a short collarette, and hyaline, aseptate and cylindrical conidia (Nag Raj and Kendrick 1975; McKenzie et al. 2002). It resembles Chalara s. str., Constrictochalara, Cylindrochalara and Stipitochalara, but differs from them in reduced conidiophores, obclavate to lageniform phialides and narrower conidia (<1.5 µm). In addition, these genera are phylogenetically distinct and scattered among different clades in the phylogenetic trees generated from different datasets (Figs. 2, 3; Wenping Wu et al. 2023). Two species, M. aseptata and M. microspora, are accepted under the genus. However, in the phylogenetic trees generated from two integrated LSU and ITS datasets (Figs. 3, 127; Wenping Wu et al. 2023), these two species were not resolved as a monophyletic clade. Furthermore, their ITS sequences had rather low identity (89%). There were treated as one genus for now, however future phylogenetic analysis with involvement of additional gene markers might show they represent two different genera.