Tubeufiales » Tubeufiaceae » Tubeufia

Tubeufia tectonae

Tubeufia tectonae Doilom & K.D. Hyde

Synonymy: Tubeufia roseohelicospora Y.Z. Lu, Boonmee & K.D. Hyde, Fungal Diversity 80: 128 (2016)


Saprobic on submerged wood. Sexual morph: Undetermined. Asexual morph: Colonies on natural substratum superficial, effuse, gregarious, hyaline to white. Mycelium composed of partly immersed, hyaline to pale brown, septate hyphae, with masses of crowded, glistening conidia. Conidiophores 40–60 × 5–7 μm, macronematous, mononematous, erect, cylindrical, unbranched, septate, brown, smooth-walled. Conidiogenous cells 15–20 × 4–5.5 µm, holoblastic, polyblastic, integrated, sympodial, terminal or intercalary, subcylindrical, denticulate, brown, smooth-walled. Conidia solitary, acrogenous or acropleurogenous, helicoid, rounded at tip, 80–130 μm diam. and conidial filament 3.5–6.5 μm wide ( = 105 × 5 μm, n = 10), 370–450 μm long, coiled 1.25–2 times, becoming loosely coiled or uncoiled in water, indistinctly multi-septate, guttulate, hyaline, smooth-walled. (Dong et al. 2020)


Culture characteristics: On PDA, colony circular, reaching 30 mm in 20 days at 25 °C, grey to brown from above and below, surface rough, with sparse superficial mycelium, most mycelium immersed in culture, dry, edge undulate.


Material examined: THAILAND, Prachuap Khiri Khan Province, on submerged wood in a stream, 30 July 2015, K.D. Hyde, 34D (MFLU 15-2696), living culture MFLUCC 15-0974.


Notes: Tubeufia tectonae was initially collected from bark of Tectona grandis and characterized by subhyaline to white colonies, mostly loosely coiled conidia (Doilom et al. 2017). Later, a new freshwater species T. roseohelicospora Y.Z. Lu et al. was introduced based on light pink colonies, tightly coiled conidia and wider conidial filaments (Hyde et al. 2016). Lu et al. (2018) found another two isolates of T. roseohelicospora and two isolates of T. tectonae from freshwater habitats, with additional TEF sequence data. However, all isolates of the two species, including our new collection MFLU 15-2696, do not show phylogenetic difference in the phylogenetic tree (Lu et al. 2018; Dong et al. 2020). Furthermore, they have nearly identical TEF sequence data which indicates that they are conspecific. We, therefore, synonymize T. roseohelicospora with T. tectonae. (Dong et al. 2020)


Freshwater distribution: Thailand (Hyde et al. 2016; Lu et al. 2018; Dong et al. 2020)