20 research outputs found

    Phylogenomic analysis of a 55.1 kb 19-gene dataset resolves a monophyletic Fusarium that includes the Fusarium solani Species Complex

    Get PDF
    Scientific communication is facilitated by a data-driven, scientifically sound taxonomy that considers the end-user¿s needs and established successful practice. In 2013, the Fusarium community voiced near unanimous support for a concept of Fusarium that represented a clade comprising all agriculturally and clinically important Fusarium species, including the F. solani species complex (FSSC). Subsequently, this concept was challenged in 2015 by one research group who proposed dividing the genus Fusarium into seven genera, including the FSSC described as members of the genus Neocosmospora, with subsequent justification in 2018 based on claims that the 2013 concept of Fusarium is polyphyletic. Here, we test this claim and provide a phylogeny based on exonic nucleotide sequences of 19 orthologous protein-coding genes that strongly support the monophyly of Fusarium including the FSSC. We reassert the practical and scientific argument in support of a genus Fusarium that includes the FSSC and several other basal lineages, consistent with the longstanding use of this name among plant pathologists, medical mycologists, quarantine officials, regulatory agencies, students, and researchers with a stake in its taxonomy. In recognition of this monophyly, 40 species described as genus Neocosmospora were recombined in genus Fusarium, and nine others were renamed Fusarium. Here the global Fusarium community voices strong support for the inclusion of the FSSC in Fusarium, as it remains the best scientific, nomenclatural, and practical taxonomic option availabl

    Jos\ue9 Tadeo Monagas: Auge y consolidaci\uf3n de un caudillo

    No full text

    Phylogenomic analysis of a 55.1-kb 19-gene dataset resolves a monophyletic fusarium that includes the fusarium solani species complex

    No full text
    Scientific communication is facilitated by a data-driven, scientifically sound taxonomy that considers the end-user’s needs and established successful practice. In 2013, the Fusarium community voiced near unanimous support for a concept of Fusarium that represented a clade comprising all agriculturally and clinically important Fusarium species, including the F. solani species complex (FSSC). Subsequently, this concept was challenged in 2015 by one research group who proposed dividing the genus Fusarium into seven genera, including the FSSC described as members of the genus Neocosmospora, with subsequent justification in 2018 based on claims that the 2013 concept of Fusarium is polyphyletic. Here, we test this claim and provide a phylogeny based on exonic nucleotide sequences of 19 orthologous protein-coding genes that strongly support the monophyly of Fusarium including the FSSC. We reassert the practical and scientific argument in support of a genus Fusarium that includes the FSSC and several other basal lineages, consistent with the longstanding use of this name among plant pathologists, medical mycologists, quarantine officials, regulatory agencies, students, and researchers with a stake in its taxonomy. In recognition of this monophyly, 40 species described as genus Neocosmospora were recombined in genus Fusarium, and nine others were renamed Fusarium. Here the global Fusarium community voices strong support for the inclusion of the FSSC in Fusarium, as it remains the best scientific, nomenclatural, and practical taxonomic option available.Fil: Geiser, David M.. State University of Pennsylvania; Estados UnidosFil: Al-Hatmi, Abdullah M.S.. Ministry Of Health Oman; OmánFil: Aoki, Takayuki. National Agriculture and Food Research Organization; JapónFil: Arie, Tsutomu. Tokyo University Of Agriculture And Technology; JapónFil: Balmas, Virgilio. Università Degli Studi Di Sassari; ItaliaFil: Barnes, Irene. University Of Pretoria; SudáfricaFil: Bergstrom, Gary C.. Cornell University; Estados UnidosFil: Bhattacharyya, Madan K.. IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY (ISU);Fil: Blomquist, Cheryl L.. California Department Of Food And Agriculture; Estados UnidosFil: Bowden, Robert L.. United States Department of Agriculture. Agriculture Research Service; Estados UnidosFil: Brankovics, Balazs. University of Agriculture Wageningen; Países BajosFil: Brown, Daren W.. United States Department of Agriculture. Agriculture Research Service; Estados UnidosFil: Burgess, Lester W.. University of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Bushley, Kathryn. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Busman, Mark. United States Department of Agriculture. Agriculture Research Service; Estados UnidosFil: Cano Lira, Jose F.. Universitat Rovira I Virgili; EspañaFil: Carrillo, Joseph D.. University of Florida; Estados UnidosFil: Chang, Hao Xun. National Taiwan University; ChinaFil: Chen, Chi Yu. National Chung Hsing University; ChinaFil: Chen, Wanquan. Chinese Academy Of Agricultural Sciences; ChinaFil: Chilvers, Martin. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Chulze, Sofia Noemi. Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Fisicoquímicas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigación en Micología y Micotoxicología. - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigación en Micología y Micotoxicología; ArgentinaFil: Coleman, Jeffrey J.. Auburn University.; Estados UnidosFil: Cuomo, Christina A.. Broad Institute; Estados UnidosFil: de Beer, Z. Wilhelm. University Of Pretoria; SudáfricaFil: Sybren de Hoog, G.. Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen; Países BajosFil: Castillo Munera, Johanna Del. University of California at Davis; Estados UnidosFil: Del Ponte, Emerson M.. Universidade Federal de Viçosa; BrasilFil: Dieguez Uribeondo, Javier. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Real Jardín Botánico; EspañaFil: Pietro, Antonio Di. Universidad de Córdoba; Españ

    Gustatory System

    No full text
    corecore