Endophytic and Endolichenic Fungal Diversity in Maritime Antarctica Based on Cultured Material and Their Evolutionary Position Amongdikarya

Home , Acarospora bullata, Acarospora schleicheri, Acarosporina, Apiospora, Arachniotus, Arthoniomycetes

VOLUME 2 DECEMBER 2018 Fungal Systematics and Evolution PAGES 263–272

doi.org/10.3114/fuse.2018.02.07

Endophytic and endolichenic fungal diversity in maritime Antarctica based on cultured material and their evolutionary position amongDikarya

N.H. Yu1,2#, S.-Y. Park3#, J.A. Kim4, C.-H. Park1, M.-H. Jeong1, S.-O. Oh5, S.G. Hong6, M. Talavera7, P.K. Divakar8*, J.-S. Hur1*

1Korean Lichen Research Institute, Sunchon National University, Suncheon, Korea 2Division of Applied Bioscience and Biotechnology, Institute of Environmentally Friendly Agriculture, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Chonnam National University, Gwangju, Korea 3Department of Plant Medicine, College of Life Science and Natural Resources, Sunchon National University, Suncheon, Korea 4National Institute of Biological Resources, Incheon, South Korea 5Division of Forest Biodiversity, Korea National Arboretum, Pocheon, Korea 6Division of Polar Life Sciences, Korea Polar Research Institute, Incheon, Korea 7Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain 8Departamento de Biología Vegetal II, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

*Corresponding authors: [email protected], [email protected] #These authors contributed equally to this work.

Key words: Abstract: Fungal endophytes comprise one of the most ubiquitous groups of plant symbionts. They live bryophytes asymptomatically within vascular plants, bryophytes and also in close association with algal photobionts endophytes inside lichen thalli. While endophytic diversity in land plants has been well studied, their diversity in lichens lichens and bryophytes are poorly understood. Here, we compare the endolichenic and endophytic fungal multi-locus molecular phylogeny communities isolated from lichens and bryophytes in the Barton Peninsula, King George Island, Antarctica. A Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. total Box of 85167, 93 3508 fungal AD Utrecht, isolates The Netherlands.were collected from lichens and bryophytes. In order to determine their identities E-mail: [email protected] and evolutionary relationships, DNA sequences of the nuclear internal transcribed spacer (ITS), nuclear ribosomal small subunit (nuSSU), nuclear large subunit (nuLSU), and mitochondrial SSU (mtSSU) rDNA were obtained and protein coding markers of the two largest subunit of RNA polymerase II (RPB1 and RPB2) were generated. Multilocus phylogenetic analyses revealed that most of the fungal isolates were distributed in the following six classes in the phylum Ascomycota: Dothideomycetes, Eurotiomycetes, Lecanoromycetes, Leotiomycetes, Pezizomycetes and Sordariomycetes. For the first time we report the presence of subphylum Mortierellomycotina that may belong to an undescribed order in endophytic fungi. Taken together, our results imply that lichens and bryophytes provide similar niches and harbour a selection of these fungi, indicating generalists within the framework of evolutionary adaptation.

Published online: 10 August 2018.

INTRODUCTION (Narisawa et al. 2002, Davey and Currah, 2006). The habitat range of these fungi is also broad; they have been isolated from many The kingdom Fungi is comprised of a diverse range of organisms different land plants from all terrestrial ecosystems ranging from engaged in parasitic, saprophytic, symbiotic, endoparasitic and the tropics to the Polar Regions (Arnold et al. 2009, Zhang et al. endophytic lifestyles (Mueller et al. 2004, Crespo et al. 2014). 2013, Yu et al. 2014). Lichen thalli can also harbour endolichenic Current estimates for the global number of fungal species fungi that are typically found as endophytes in plants (Girlanda have risen from 2.2 million to as many as 3.8 million species et al. 1997, Li et al. 2007, Arnold et al. 2009, Kannangara et al. (Hawksworth & Lucking 2017). Fungal endophytes are an 2009, U’Ren et al. 2010). These fungi also live in close association ecologically diverse group, residing within plant tissues without with algal photobionts inside apparently healthy lichen thalli, causing any apparent symptoms of infection (Petrini 1991, forming persistent and symptomless infections. Wilson 1995, Zhang et al. 2013). While most studies of fungal The importance of these endolichenic fungi remains unknown. endophytes have focused on those species that live in vascular However, abundant endolichenic fungi are present within lichen plants, endophytes also live in nonvascular plants including thalli, and their presence is presumed to play an important ecological bryophytes (i.e., mosses, liverworts, and hornworts), which are role, such as assisting lichen formation, growth and protecting functionally important (Upson et al. 2007, Hoshino et al. 2009, against insect herbivores by producing bioactive substances (Li et U’Ren et al., 2010, Siciŉski et al. 2011, Zhang et al. 2013). These al. 2007, Paranagama et al. 2007). In addition, fungal endophytes fungi affect the host in diverse ways: promoting greater tolerance are a phylogenetically diverse group. The vast majority of known to extreme pH, vegetative growth and resistance to pathogens endophytic and endolichenic fungi belong to the phylumAscomycota ,

distributed among the Arthoniomycetes, Sordariomycetes, question: are endolichenic and endophytic fungal communities Dothideomycetes, Lecanoromycetes, Leotiomycetes, Pezizomycetes, in Barton Peninsula, King George Island different from each other and Eurotiomycetes (Arnold et al. 2009, Park et al. 2015). or overlapping, forming flexible symbiotic relationships in both King George Island is the largest island in the South Shetland bryophytes and lichens? And lastly, do these fungal communities Islands belonging to the maritime Antarctic zone where the flourish through a host-specific evolutionary process? climate is milder due to oceanic influences (Kanda & Komárková Here we compare the endolichenic fungi with endophytic 1997, Sancho & Pintado 2004, Li et al. 2007). While invasive fungal communities isolated from lichens and bryophytes at

plant species have increased recently (Chown et al. 2012), the same location on the Barton Peninsula, King George Island. Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] only two native species of flowering plants, Antarctic hair grass Furthermore, in order to resolve the evolutionary relationships, (Deschampsia antarctica) and Antarctic pearlwort Colobanthus( we prepared a five-locus dataset (nuSSU, nuLSU, mtSSU, RPB1 quitensis), are found so far. Vegetation is predominantly made and RPB2) of selected taxa in phylum Ascomycota. up of lichens and bryophytes, which are specially adapted to survive in this area. Furthermore, several performance indicators show that this region is an excellent habitat for MATERIALS AND METHODS lichens and bryophytes (Øvstedal & Lewis-Smith 2001, Kim et al. 2006, Green et al. 2012). In addition, several black meristematic Study site and lichen sample collection fungi were reported in Antarctic lichens (Selbmann et al. 2013). Thus, we selected King George Island as a model to explore the Sixty-one lichen samples growing on soil, rock and moss diversity of endophytic and endolichenic fungal communities were collected from the Barton Peninsula, King George Island associated with lichens and bryophytes. Since they lack visible located in the Antarctic (Fig. 1) and preserved at -20 °C in sterile reproductive structures and other distinctive phenotypic traits polyethylene tubes to prevent contamination from airborne for classification, DNA sequence-based sample identification is fungal species (Supplementary Table S1). Lichen samples were prerequisite for objective exploration of the species diversity. identified by macro- and micro-morphological characteristics We gathered DNA sequences of the nuclear internal transcribed and chemical contents according to the species definition as region (ITS), nuclear ribosomal short subunit (nuSSU) and large described by Øvstedal & Lewis-Smith (2001). subunit (nuLSU), mitochondrial ribosomal short subunit (mtSSU) rDNA, and the two largest subunits of RNA polymerase II (RPB1 Isolation of endolichenic fungi and RPB2). Endolichenic fungi resemble fungal endophytes of plants in taxonomy, mode of transmission procedure, and Isolation of the internal fungi was performed as previously evolutionary history (U’Ren et al. 2010). Then we pose the described by Li et al. (2007). The surface of the lichen thalli was

Fig. 1. Study area on Barton and Weaver Peninsula, King George Island in Antarctica (marked by red arrow).

cut into 0.5 cm2 and the lichen thalli fragments were washed for because morphology-based species circumscriptions have 3 h in streaming water, then immersed in 75 % ethanol for 1 min, been shown to be inadequate for characterisation of species- in 2 % sodium hypochlorite for 3 min and then in 75 % ethanol for level diversity (Arnold et al. 2009), we used the Automatic 30 s. Finally, each fragment was gently rinsed with sterilised Barcode Gap Discovery method (ABGD; Puillandre et al. 2012) distilled water and the water was subsequently analysed by PCR to circumscribe OTUs representing candidate species. ABGD to check for fungal contamination of the thalli surface. Sterilised employs a genetic distance-based approach to detect a ‘barcode samples were then dried with sterile paper towels and then plated gap’, separating OTUs based on non-overlapping values of on PDA with 0.01 % streptomycin and incubated at 15 °C. Fungi intra- and interspecific genetic distances and is independent of

Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] growing from each fragment were isolated into pure cultures on any topology (Hebert et al. 2003, Puillandre et al. 2012). This 2 % malt extract broth (ME, Difco, Sparks, USA) solid medium. method infers a model-based confidence limit for intraspecific All endolichenic fungi were grouped into different morphotypes divergence and then detects the barcode gap as a first significant based on the following culture phenotypic characteristics: colony gap beyond this limit to infer primary partitions. The primary colour, texture, growth rates and cell shape on ME solid medium. data partitions are then recursively split to obtain finer partitions This is because endolichenic fungi rarely produce spores, therefore using the same approach until no further gaps can be detected morphological features for identification is very limited (Choi et (Puillandre et al. 2012). We used the ABGD web server (http:// al. 1999). All fungal isolates were deposited at the Korea Lichen wwwabi.snv.jussieu.fr/public/abgd/abgdweb.html) to identify and Allied Bioresources Center (KOLABIC) at the Korea Lichen barcode gaps in the ITS of endophytic and endolichenic fungi as Research Institute (KoLRI) of Sunchon National University. well as the RPB1 data matrix. Puillandre et al. (2012) suggested

that implementing amax P value of 0.01 provides the most DNA extraction, amplification and sequencing accurate estimate for the number of groups based on empirical comparisons of groupings inferred using ABGD with data from Fungal DNA extraction was performed using a DNeasy Plant previous studies where species groups are well-characterised. Mini Kit according to the manufacturer’s protocols (Qiagen, Genetic distances were calculated using the JC69 model (default Hilden, Germany). We amplified and sequenced the following parameter), and other model parameters were set using default six markers: nuSSU using primers NS1 (White et al. 1990) and parameter values as follows, with the exception of themax P

NS24 (Gargas & Taylor 1992), nuLSU using primers LR0R (Rehner value: Pmin = 0.001, Pmax = 0.01, steps = 10and Nb bins = 20. We & Samuels 1994) and LR7 (Vilgalys & Hester 1990), mtSSU using implemented a range of values for the gap width (X) between mrSSU1 and mrSSU3R (Zoller et al. 1999), RPB1 using RPB1-AFasc 0.1 and 1.5, to assess the consistency of the inferred groups and RPB1-6R1asc2 (Hofstetter et al. 2007), RPB2 using fRPB2- under varying gap width values. 7cF and fRPB2-11aR (Liu et al. 1999), and ITS using ITS4 and ITS5 (White et al. 1990). In the case of endophytic fungal isolates Phylogenetic analyses from bryophytes living in King George Island, ITS sequences were used for analysis as described by Yu et al. (2014). Individual gene topologies were reconstructed using the program RAxML v. 8.1.11 (Stamatakis 2006, Stamatakis et al. Sequence assembly and multiple sequence alignments 2008), as implemented on the CIPRES Web Portal, with the GTR-GAMMA model as described below. Support values were Sequences were assembled and edited using the software assessed using the “rapid bootstrapping” option with 1 000 CodonCode Aligner (CodonCode Corp., Dedham, MA, USA). replicates. We compared individual gene topologies to identify Sequence identity was assessed using the mega-BLAST search conflicting nodes, statistically supported (i.e. ≥ 70 % bootstrap). function in GenBank (Sayers et al. 2011). We used the program Incongruence among clades with bootstrap values < 70 % was MAFFT v. 7 (Katoh & Toh 2008) to align DNA sequences considered statistically insignificant (Divakar et al. 2012, Wiens of 418 samples (Supplementary Table S1 and S3) for each 1998). Without evidence of conflicting evolutionary histories, gene region. For all six loci, we applied the G-INS-I alignment independent markers were combined to achieve maximum algorithm (recommended for sequences with global homology), phylogenetic resolution and support. Two concatenated datasets ‘200PAM/K = 2’ scoring matrix, and offset value = 0.0, with were prepared: a two-gene (nuSSU and nuLSU) dataset of 362 the remaining parameters set to default values. To improve samples representing Dikarya and member of Mortierellales, the accuracy of the ITS and RPB2 alignments for downstream and a five-gene (nuSSU, nuLSU, mtSSU, RPB1 and RPB2) dataset OTU (operational taxonomic units) delimitation, only the newly of 150 samples representing major groups ofAscomycota . As ITS generated sequences of endophytic and endolichenic fungi data were impossible to align across Dikarya and Zygomycota, isolated from bryophytes and lichens on the King George Island this locus was excluded from the concatenated dataset. In were included. Multiple sequence alignments were performed order to evaluate the phylogenetic relation of two samples in MAFFT using the same parameters as described above. The (EFOMIA09 and EFOMIA10) grouping with Mortierellomycotina program Gblocks v. 0.91b (Talavera & Castresana 2007) was used an additional two gene larger dataset published in Wagner et al. to remove ambiguously aligned regions, using options for a “less (2013) was used. stringent” selection on the Gblocks web server (http://molevol. The ML analyses of all the three concatenated data sets cmima.csic.es/castresana/Gblocks_server.html) for subsequent were performed in RAxML with the GTR-GAMMA model, a phylogenetic analyses. parameter (Γ) for rate heterogeneity among sites and without a parameter for estimating the proportion of invariable sites. We OTU delimitation analyses used locus-specific model partitions treating all loci as separate partitions, and evaluated nodal support using 1 000 bootstrap Since endophytic and endolichenic fungi lack visible reproductive pseudoreplicates. An alternative partition strategy was inferred structures and other distinctive phenotypic traits, and moreover, via PartitionFinder v. 1.1.1 (Lanfear et al. 2012). The best-

Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected]

Fig. 2. A total of 32 representative endophytic fungal cultures from 32 OTUs based on theRBP2 gene sequences. The OTU number is in the upper left corner and the name of the fungus is on the bottom centre of the photographs. The endophytic fungi were cultured on potato dextrose agar media or malt-yeast extract media. The three endophytic fungi, EFOMIA09, EFOMIA10, and EFOMIA16, were cultured on PDA supplemented with 30 µg/mL of Rose Bengal to prohibit bacterial contamination.

fitting partition scheme was selected from a total of 16 initial The ML phylogeny estimated from the concatenated two- pre-defined partitions, corresponding to the complete nuSSU gene and five-gene data matrixes are depicted as a cartoon region, the complete nuLSU region, the complete mtSSU region, tree in Fig. 4 (full tree in Supplementary Fig. S1) and Fig. 5, the first, second and third codon positions of two coding region respectively. Of the 93 isolates from the studied area, almost in the RPB1, two introns in the RPB1, two intronic regions in the all were in phylum Ascomycota, two were in Basidiomycota and RPB1, the first, second and third codon positions of the coding another two belonged to Mortierellales (Mortierellomycotina). region in the RPB2, and an intron in the RPB2. In Basidiomycota, isolates clustered only in the order Boletales In order to validate the ability of ABGD to infer evolutionarily of Agaricomycetes. However, in Ascomycota they were

Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] independent species-level lineages from ITS and RPB2 sequences, spread throughout the tree. Within Ascomycota, the largest we analysed sequence data from the nuclear and mitochondrial number of isolates grouped with Leotiomycetes, followed by genomes within a phylogenetic framework to identify OTUs that Sordariomycetes and Dothideomycetes. Three isolates belonged exhibited genealogical exclusivity across independent loci (Avise to Eurotiomycetes whereas one isolate each were assigned to & Ball 1990). Lecanoromycetes and Pezizomycetes. All the OTUs discovered in ABGD analysis were found to be monophyletic in multilocus phylogenies. RESULTS

Endolichenic fungal isolation and OTU delimitation DISCUSSION

A total of 61 endolichenic fungal isolates were collected from 45 Lichens and bryophytes are important components of current Antarctic lichen samples. Among these, 21 lichen species were ecosystems, particularly in the Antarctic King George Island. identified, belonging to 10 families:Candelariaceae, Cladoniaceae, Many genera of fungi commonly found as endophytes also occur Lecanoraceae, Parmeliaceae, Physciaceae, Pilocarpaceae, within asymptomatic lichens and bryophytes (Kannangara et al. Ramalinaceae, Sphaerophoraceae, Stereocaulaceae, and 2009, U’Ren et al. 2010, U’Ren et al. 2012, Zhang et al. 2013, Yu Teloschistaceae (Supplementary Table S1). In addition, 32 et al. 2014). Endophytic fungi largely lack reproductive structures endophytic fungal isolates were obtained, including 16 that have and other visible phenotypic features, therefore traditional been previously described (Yu et al. 2014), were isolated from morphology-based species circumscriptions have shown to be 13 bryophytes (Supplementary Table S1). Representatives of inadequate to objectively characterise species-level diversity in endolichenic and endophytic fungal isolates are shown in Fig. 2. this group of fungi (Arnold et al. 2009, Wagner et al. 2013, Oono The sample identities were confirmed by analyses of the ITS1-5.8S et al. 2014, Chen et al. 2015). Here we used multilocus DNA and ITS2 rDNA region (ITS region) sequences. sequence data for accurate sample identification and applied the barcode gap detection approach (Puillandre et al. 2012) to Sequences: Endolichenic and endophytic isolates were grouped objectively circumscribe candidate species of endophytic fungi. into 33 OTU in ABGD analyses of the ITS region and 34 OTUs from In this study, we reveal the endolichenic and endophytic analysing a single copy gene RPB2 (Fig. 3 and Supplementary fungal diversity in dominant lichen and bryophyte species in the Table S1). Since results of both datasets were similar, only the Barton Peninsula of King George Island. Sixty-one endolichenic cluster of the RPB2 marker is shown in Fig. 3. Of these, only fungal isolates (numbered ELXXXXXX) were successfully seven OTUs were closely related to known fungal species with obtained from 44 lichen samples belonging to 21 lichen species. higher than 97 % sequence similarity. They were identified as The isolation frequency and diversity of 61 endolichenic fungi Anthostomella leucospermi, Chaetomium globosum, Peziza were compared with their host lichen family. Interestingly, varia, Phoma herbarum, and Phoma violacea with 98 % sequence endolichenic fungal isolation frequency was not related with the similarity cut-off (Supplementary Table S2), ABGD clustering and diversity of host lichen species. Namely, the number of lichen monophyletic relationship. For OTU validation, nuSSU, nuLSU species in Parmeliaceae and Stereocaulaceae was higher than in and mtSSU loci exhibited significantly less variability than the other families but the isolation frequency of endolichenic fungi ITS region, and the two protein coding markers RPB1 and RPB2. was not significantly different among the families. The comparison between OTUs inferred from the ITS and RPB2 In ABGD analyses, we circumscribed 34 candidate species sequences revealed high levels of genealogical concordance (OTUs) for the 93 samples isolated from common lichen and between the ITS and the protein coding markers. Relationships bryophytes species of Antarctic King George Island. The results among OTUs are shown in maximum likelihood (ML) topology in of endophytic fungi isolated from bryophytes species have Fig. 4 and Supplementary Fig. S1. been published in our previous study and here we focus on the endolichenic fungi (Yu et al. 2014). Since the obtained sequences Molecular phylogeny are from axenic cultures of isolated fungi, these could be used as reference sequences for identification of environmental and soil A total of 508 sequences were newly generated for this study, fungi and also for detection of cryptic species. The species-level including 73 ITS, 92 nuSSU, 92 nuLSU, 91 mtSSU, 72 RPB1 and OTUs detected in this study were numbered OTU1 to OTU34 88 RPB2 sequences (Supplementary Table S1). The two gene (Fig. 3). It is interesting to note that most of the OTUs from the (nuSSU and nuLSU) data matrix contained 362 taxa with 2 185 isolates of Antarctic King George Island represent undescribed unambiguously aligned nucleotide positions (Supplementary species. Candidate species level OTU9 was the most common Table S1 and S3). The five gene data matrix contained 150 taxon in Antarctic King George Island, followed by OTU26 and taxa with 4 643 unambiguously aligned nucleotide positions OTU29 (Fig. 3). (Supplementary Table S3). Topologies of single-locus analyses Moreover, the candidate species-level OTUs numbers 1, 2, did not conflict and hence combined analyses were performed. 15 and 19 were present in both lichen and bryophyte samples

Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected]

Fig. 3. Candidate species-level OTUs inferred from Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD) analysis of the RPB2 dataset. OTUs are numbered from 1 to 34 and the numbers in parentheses represents isolates clustered in each OTU. Endolichenic fungi isolated from lichen thalli are indicated in black, and endophytic fungi isolated from bryophytes are marked in blue.

collected from the same area, indicating generalists in the demonstrate that also in the Antarctic, a high percentage of same ecological niches. Judging from the estimated total endophytic (endolichenic) fungal species remain undescribed. of 1.5 million (Hawksworth 1991) to as many as 5.1 million Similar results have been reported in tropical endophytes fungal species (Blackwell 2011, Rosling et al. 2011), our results (Arnold & Lutzoni 2007). A detailed morphological study of the

EL002640 EL002634 EL002630 EL002643 EL002649 EL002636 EL002641 98 EL002631 EL003499_2 EL003487 EL003498_2 EL003491 EL003500 EL003475 97 EL003488 EL002625 100 EL002638 EL002644 EL003474 EL002648

EL001122 Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands. 100 EL001112 E-mail: [email protected] EL001114 EL001117 EL001113 EFOMIA15 100 100 EL003497 EL003480 EL001116 EL001131 100 EM000026 EFOMIA08 100 EL003477 EFOMIA06 Leotia lubrica Crinula caliciiformis Helotiales 94 EL003479 EL003471 100 Leotiomycetes EL003501 99 EL003496 EL001119 100 EFOMIA07 Erysiphe mori Erysiphales Chlorociboria aeruginosa Helotiales 84 EL003473 EFOMIA11 100 EL003481 100 EL003486 100 EL003478 72 EL003484 Cudoniella clavus Lachnum virgineum Helotiales EM000007 EM000008 EM000014 EM000009 EM000016 EFOMIA03 EM000013 61 EM000011 EM000015 EM000012 84 64 EM000006 100 EM000002 EFOMIA01 EL001126 EL002647 Mollisia cinerea 100 Botryotinia fuckeliana Helotiales Monilinia laxa 50 Dermea acerina Coccomyces dentatus Rhytismatales 59 Potebniamyces pyri Phacidiales 100 100 EL003493 EL003485 100 EFOMIA12 100 EFOMIA16 100 EM000004 99 EFOMIA02 EFOMIA04 98 EM000020 100 94 EM000021 Cephalotheca sulfurea 100 Chaetomium globosum Sordariales Sordariomycetes 99 100 EL001118 Neurospora crassa 99 100 Diaporthe eres Gnomonia gnomon Diaporthales 100 Microascus trigonosporus Microascales 88 EL003472 69 EL002624 100 Xylaria hypoxylon 100 Xylaria acuta Xylariales EL003495 55 EL002629 100 EL002650 100 EL002646 100 53 Pleospora herbarum Dothideomycetes Cochliobolus heterostrophus 100 88 Westerdykella cylindrica Pleosporales 96 Trematosphaeria heterospora EFOMIA05 100 EL003490 54 EL003489 100 Dendrographa leucophaea f minor 99 Roccella fuciformis Arthoniales Arthoniomycetes 78 63 Simonyella variegata 95 EL003498 95 Piedraia hortae Capnodiales Dothidea insculpta Dothideales Dothideomycetes Trypethelium sp 95 Ramichloridium anceps Capnodiales 100 87 Capronia pilosella 94 Exophiala pisciphila Chaetothyriales 100 EL003476 100 EL001127 100 EL001121 95 Dermatocarpon miniatum Eurotiomycetes 77 Endocarpon pallidulum Verrucariales 90 100 Staurothele frustulenta Agonimia sp. 87 Pyrgillus javanicus Pyrenula pseudobufonia Pyrenulales 82 Mycoblastus sanguinarius 100 100 Lecanora hybocarpa Lecanorales Canoparmelia caroliniana 59 Peltigera degenii Peltigerales 72 Umbilicaria mammulata 98 EL003494 94 Umbilicariales Hypocenomyce scalaris Lecanoromycetes Trapelia placodioides Trapeliales 57 Acarosporina microspora Ostropales 91 97 64 Pertusaria dactylina Dibaeis baeomyces Pertusariales 100 Acarospora laqueata 100 Acarospora schleicheri Acarosporales Pleopsidium chlorophanum 100 74 Peltula umbilicata Peltula auriculata Lichinales Lichinomycetes Geoglossum nigritum Geoglossomycetes Geoglossomycetes 67 Disciotis venosa 100 Gyromitra californica 100 82 Morchella esculenta Pyronema domesticum Pezizales Pezizomycetes 100 Peziza vesiculosa EL002628 Ascobolus crenulatus Orbilia auricolor Orbiliales Orbiliomycetes Saccharomyces cerevisiae Candida albicans Saccharomycetales Saccharomycetes

0.2 Fig. 4. Maximum Likelihood analysis based on concatenated five-locus dataset of small and large subunit (nuSSU and nuLSU) rDNA, mitochondrial small subunit (mtSSU) rDNA, and protein coding RPB1 and RPB2 markers of 62 taxa representing major lineages of Ascomycota. Two taxa of Saccharomycetes are used as outgroup. Node support ≥ 70 % is given on the branches. Taxon labels starting with “EL” in red represents endolichenic fungal isolates from lichen, and endophytic fungal isolates from bryophytes are labelled starting with “EF” or “EM” in blue.

cultures may aid in the formal description of these taxa in an which authors showed low specificity of endolichenic fungi integrative framework. However, developing robust hypotheses segregated from lichen taxa growing in an alpine habitat of species identification continues to be a ‘work-in-progress’ (Fernández‐Mendoza et al. 2017). While we establish the for examining species diversity in an unexplored area. Here, we phylogenetic relations of most of the isolates in different orders assessed evolutionary independence of OTUs inferred from the of Pezizomycotina, the relationship of the isolates EL001127 ITS and RPB2 markers, using mitochondrial and protein coding and EL001121 in Eurotiomycetes, and EL003489 and EL003490 loci. Results from independent and concatenated datasets in Dothideomycetes remains unclear. These may belong to

supported to large extent monophyly of OTUs inferred from undescribed orders and a detailed study focusing especially Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] ITS and RPB2 sequences (Fig. 4 and Supplementary Fig. S1). on these two classes is needed in order to fix their systematic This validation approach suggests that species level diversity positions. assessed in the ABGD program likely provides a reasonable The host lichens are Usnia antarctica, Cladonia borealis, estimate of species diversity in the studied area. Moreover, and Psilolechia lucida, mainly growing on moss mats in the the method implemented in our study for discovering species- island. Therefore, it is highly possible that some endophytes can level diversity based on OTUs is routinely used for organisms facultatively select their hosts between lichens and bryophytes where morphological features are scarce or absent, such as at a given location. This result is consistent with a previous study bacteria (reviewed in Yarza et al. 2014). Similar to the previous (Furbino et al. 2014). If it is true, we might rule out the hypothesis studies (Arnold et al. 2009, U’Ren et al. 2012, Chen et al. 2015), that in Antarctica, these endophytes colonise lichen thalli to our results demonstrate that most of the endophytic and obtain their carbon sources from photobionts (symbiotic algae). endolichenic fungal isolates from the Antarctic King George Rather, lichens could be serving a more important function as a Island belonged to classes Dothideomycetes, Eurotiomycetes, shelter for the endophytes in extreme environmental conditions. Lecanoromycetes, Leotiomycetes, Pezizomycetes and Sordariomycetes of Ascomycota. Only two samples belonged to Basidiomycota and another two to Mortierellomycotina ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (Fig. 4 and Supplementary Fig. S1). A detailed analysis of Mortierellomycotina including a larger dataset revealed that the This work was supported by a grant from the Korea National Research two isolates EFOMIA09 and EFOMIA10, belong to a sister clade Resource Center Program, Korean Polar Research Institute, Korea of Mortierellales (Supplementary Fig. S1, 2). This relationship (grant PE13030 and PE14020) and the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e was strongly supported (bootstrap 90 %). Currently with six Innovación (CGL2013-42498-P). genera belonging to the Mortierellaceae family, they are accepted members of Mortierellomycotina, and these fungi are commonly found as soil inhabiting saprobic organisms on REFERENCES decaying organic matter (Wagner et al. 2013). This is the first report of endophytic fungi inMortierellomycotina and the sister Arnold AE, Lutzoni F (2007). Diversity and host range of foliar fungal relation of our two isolates to the order Mortierellales suggest endophytes: are tropical leaves biodiversity hotspots? Ecology 88: that these samples may belong to an undescribed order within 541–549. this group. A detailed morphological study of the cultures is Arnold AE, Miadlikowska J, Higgins KL, et al. (2009). A phylogenetic needed to formally describe this lineage as a new order within estimation of trophic transition networks for ascomycetous Mortierellomycotina. fungi: are lichens cradles of symbiotrophic fungal diversification? Using a five-locus dataset phylogeny, we establish the Systematic Biology 58: 283–297. evolutionary relation of 89 Ascomycete endophytic and Avise JC, Ball RM (1990). Principles of genealogical concordance in endolichenic fungi isolated from common bryophytes and species concepts and biological taxonomy. Oxford Surveys in lichen species of Antarctic King George Island. Our results Evolutionary Biology 7: 45–67. demonstrate that these fungi were distributed in 10 orders in Blackwell M (2011). The fungi: 1, 2, 3 ... 5.1 million species? American Pezizomycotina (Fig. 4). In accordance with previous studies, Journal of Botany 98: 426–438. endophytic fungi isolated from different hosts and geographic Chen KH, Miadlikowska J, Molnar K, et al. (2015). Phylogenetic analyses regions such as arctic, boreal, temperate and tropical, were of eurotiomycetous endophytes reveal their close affinities to mostly grouped with Pezizomycotina (Arnold et al. 2009, Chaetothyriales, Eurotiales, and a new order - Phaeomoniellales. Gazis et al. 2012, U’Ren et al. 2012, Chen et al. 2015). While Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 85: 117–130. Leotiomycetes and Sordariomycetes predominated the Choi YW, Hyde KK, Ho WH (1999). Single spore isolation of fungi.Fungal studied area, the Pezizomycetes and Lecanoromycetes were Diversity 3: 29–38. the least common, with only a single isolate each. Although, Chown SL, Huiskes AH, Gremmen NJ, et al. (2012). Continent-wide Antarctic endophyte (including endolichenic) assemblages risk assessment for the establishment of nonindigenous species in were especially dominated by species belonging to the order Antarctica. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA Helotiales (Leotiomycetes), orders Sordariales and Xylariales 109: 4938–4943. (Sordariomycetes), these were least common in tropical and Crespo A, Divakar PK, Lumbsch HT (2014). Fungi: hyperdiversity closer temperate areas (see e.g. Arnold & Lutzoni 2007). Indeed, to animals than to plants. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc. Lecanoromycetes included the major lineages of lichen forming Davey ML, Currah RS (2006). Interactions between mosses (Bryophyta) fungi (Miadlikowska et al. 2014, Jaklitsch et al. 2016). Our and fungi. Canadian Journal of Botany 84: 1509–1519. results demonstrate that of the 61 endolichenic fungal isolates Divakar PK, Del-Prado R, Lumbsch HT, et al. (2012). Diversification of from lichen thalli just one was grouped as Umbilicariales the newly recognized lichen-forming fungal lineage Montanelia (Lecanoromycetes), suggesting no host specificity. These (Parmeliaceae, Ascomycota) and its relation to key geological and data are in agreement with a recent metabarcoding study, in climatic events. American Journal of Botany 99: 2014–2026.

Furbino LE, Godinho VM, Santiago IF, et al. (2014). Diversity patterns, Øvstedal DO, Lewis-Smith RI (2001). Lichens of Antarctica and South ecology and biological activities of fungal communities associated Georgia: A Guide to their Identification and Ecology. Cambridge, with the endemic macroalgae across the Antarctic Peninsula. UK: Cambridge University Press. Microbial ecology 67: 775–787. Paranagama PA, Wijeratne EM, Burns AM, et al. (2007). Heptaketides Gargas A, Taylor JW (1992). Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) primers for from Corynespora sp. inhabiting the cavern beard lichen, Usnea amplifying and sequencing nuclear 18S rDNA from lichenized fungi. cavernosa: first report of metabolites of an endolichenic fungus. Mycologia 84: 589–592. Journal of Natural Products 70: 1700–1705. Gazis R, Miadlikowska J, Lutzoni F, et al. (2012). Culture-based study Park CH, Kim KM, Elvebakk A, et al. (2015). Algal and fungal diversity in

Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] of endophytes associated with rubber trees in Peru reveals a new Antarctic lichens. The Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology 62: 196- class of Pezizomycotina: Xylonomycetes. Molecular Phylogenetics 205. and Evolution 65: 294–304. Petrini O (1991). Fungal endophytes of tree leaves. Springer New York. Girlanda M, Isocrono D, Bianco C, et al. (1997). Two foliose lichens as Puillandre N, Lambert A, Brouillet S, et al. (2012). ABGD, Automatic microfungal ecological niches. Mycologia 89: 531–536. Barcode Gap Discovery for primary species delimitation. Molecular Green TGA, Brabyn L, Beard C, et al. (2012). Extremely low lichen Ecology 21: 1864–1877. growth rates in Taylor Valley, Dry Valleys, continental Antarctica. Rehner SA, Samuels GJ (1994). Taxonomy and phylogeny of Gliocladium Polar Biology 35: 535–541. analysed from nuclear large subunit ribosomal DNA sequences. Hawksworth DL (1991). The fungal dimension of biodiversity: Mycological Research 95: 625–634. magnitude, significance, and conservation. Mycological Research Rosling A, Cox F, Cruz-Martinez K, et al. (2011). Archaeorhizomycetes: 95: 641–655. unearthing an ancient class of ubiquitous soil fungi. Science 333: Hawksworth DL, Lucking R (2017). Fungal Diversity Revisited: 2.2 to 876–879. 3.8 Million Species. Microbiology Spectrum 5(4):FUNK-0052-2016. Sancho LG, Pintado A (2004). Evidence of high annual growth rate for doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.FUNK-0052-2016. lichens in the maritime Antarctic. Polar Biology 27: 312–319. Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL (2003). Biological identifications Sayers WE, Barrett T, Benson DA, et al. (2011). Data resources of the through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. National Center for Biotechnology Information. Nucleic Acids Series B: Biological Sciences 270: 313–321. Research 39: D38–D51. Hofstetter V, Miadlikowska J, Kauff F, et al. (2007). Phylogenetic Siciŉski J, Jażdżewski K, Broyer CD, et al. (2011). Admiralty bay benthos comparison of protein-coding versus ribosomal RNA-coding diversity - A census of a complex polar ecosystem. Deep Sea sequence data: a case study of the Lecanoromycetes (Ascomycota). Research Part II 58: 30–48. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 44: 412–426. Stamatakis A (2006). RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based Hoshino T, Xiao N, Tkachenko OB (2009). Cold adaptation in the phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. phytopathogenic fungi causing snow molds. Mycoscience 50: 26–38. Bioinformatics 22: 2688–2690. Kanda H, Komárková V (1997). Antarctic terrestrial ecosystems. Stamatakis A, Hoover P, Rougemont J (2008). A rapid bootstrap Amsterdam: Elsevier. algorithm for the RAxML Web servers. Systematic Biology 57: 758– Kannangara BT, Rajapaksha RS, Paranagama PA (2009). Nature and 771. bioactivities of endolichenic fungi in Pseudocyphellaria sp., Talavera G, Castresana J (2007). Improvement of phylogenies after Parmotrema sp. and Usnea sp. at Hakgala montane forest in Sri removing divergent and ambiguously aligned blocks from protein Lanka. Letters in Applied Microbiology 48: 203–209. sequence alignments. Systematic Biology 56: 564–577. Katoh K, Toh H (2008). Recent developments in the MAFFT multiple U’ren JM, Lutzoni F, Miadlikowska J, et al. (2010). Community analysis sequence alignment program. Briefings in Bioinformatics9 : 286–298. reveals close affinities between endophytic and endolichenic fungi Kim JH, Ahn IY, Hong SG, et al. (2006). Lichen flora around the Korean in mosses and lichens. Microbial Ecology 60: 340–353. Antarctic Scientific Station, King George Island, Antarctic.Journal of U’ren JM, Lutzoni F, Miadlikowska J, et al. (2012). Host and geographic Microbiology 44: 480–491. structure of endophytic and endolichenic fungi at a continental Lanfear R, Calcott B, Ho SY, et al. (2012). Partitionfinder: combined scale. American Journal of Botany 99: 898–914. selection of partitioning schemes and substitution models for Upson R, Read DJ, Newsham KK (2007). Widespread association phylogenetic analyses. Molecular Biology and Evolution 29: 1695– between the ericoid mycorrhizal fungus Rhizoscyphus ericae and 1701. a leafy liverwort in the maritime and sub-Antarctic. The New Li WC, Zhou J, Guo SY, et al. (2007). Endophytic fungi associated with phytologist 176: 460–471. lichens in Baihua mountain of Beijing, China. Fungal Diversity 25: Vilgalys R, Hester M (1990). Rapid genetic identification and mapping of 69–80. enzymatically amplified ribosomal DNA from several Cryptococcus Liu YJ, Whelen S, Hall BD (1999). Phylogenetic relationships among species. Journal of Bacteriology 172: 4238–4246. Ascomycetes: evidence from an RNA polymerse II subunit. Wagner L, Stielow B, Hoffmann K, et al. (2013). A comprehensive Molecular Biology and Evolution 16: 1799–1808. molecular phylogeny of the Mortierellales (Mortierellomycotina) Mueller GM, Schmitt JP, Leacock PR, et al. (2004). Global diversity and based on nuclear ribosomal DNA. Persoonia 30: 77–93. distribution of macrofungi. Biodiversity and Conservation 16: 37– White TJ, Bruns TD, Lee SB, et al. (1990). Amplification and direct 48. sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics In: Narisawa K, Kawamata H, Currah RS, et al. (2002). Suppression of PCR Protocols: a guide to methods and application (Innis MA, Verticillium wilt in eggplant by some fungal root endophytes. Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ, eds.): 315–322. San Diego, European Journal of Plant Pathology 108: 103–109. California: Academic Press. Oono R, Lutzoni F, Arnold AE, et al. (2014). Genetic variation in Wiens JJ (1998). Combining data sets with different phylogenetic horizontally transmitted fungal endophytes of pine needles reveals histories. Systematic Biology 47: 568–581. population structure in cryptic species. American Journal of Botany Wilson D (1995). Endophyte: the evolution of a term, and clarification 101: 1362–1374. of its use and definition. Oikos 73: 274–276.

Yarza P, Yilmaz P, Pruesse E, et al. (2014). Uniting the classification of cultured and uncultured bacteria and archaea using 16S rRNA gene sequences. Nature Reviews Microbiology 12: 635–645. Yu NH, Kim JA, Jeong MH, et al. (2014). Diversity of endophytic fungi associated with bryophyte in the maritime Antarctic (King George Island). Polar Biology 37: 27–36. Zhang T, Zhang YQ, Liu HY, et al. (2013). Diversity and cold adaptation

of culturable endophytic fungi from bryophytes in the fildes region, Editor-in-Chief Prof. dr P.W. Crous, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] King George Island, maritime Antarctica.FEMS Microbiology Letters 341: 52–61. Zoller S, Scheidegger C, Sperisen C (1999). PCR primers for the amplification of mitochondrial small subunit ribosomal DNA of lichen-forming ascomycetes. Lichenologist 31: 511–516.

Supplementary Material: http://fuse-journal.org/

Table S1. Endolichenic and endophytic fungal isolated from the Antartic lichen and moss samples. Table S2. Blast search results from endolichenic fungal isolates using ITS region sequences. Table S3. A total 324 taxa and the retrieved nuSSU, nuLSU, mtSSU, RPB1, and RPB2 sequences from GenBank. Figure S1. Maximum Likelihood analysis based on concatenated two- locus dataset of small and large subunit (nuSSU and nuLSU) rDNA of 272 taxa (2 and 10 ingroup taxa of Dikarya and Mortierellomycotina, respectively) and 1 outgroup taxon Umbelopsis as member of the Mucorales); representing major lineages. Node support equal and or above 70 % is given on the branches. Taxon labels starting with “EL” in red represents endolichenic fungal isolates from lichen thalli, while labels starting with “EF” or “EM” in blue indicate endophytic fungal isolates of bryophytes. Figure S2. Maximum Likelihood analysis of the Mortierellomycotina dataset published in Wagner et al. (2013), showing phylogenetic relation of the isolates EFOMIA09 and EFOMIA10. Node support equal and or above 70 % is given on the branches.

272 © 2018 Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute EM000008 EM000011 EM000009 EM000015 EM000007 EFOMIA03 Figure S1. Maximum Likelihood EM000016 EM000014 EM000013 100 analysis based on concatenated EM000012 92 EM000006 two-locus dataset of small 100 EM000002 EFOMIA01 and large subunit (nuSSU and Chlorociboria cf. aeruginosa Lachnum virgineum Helotiales EL003496 nuLSU) rDNA of 272 taxa (2 and 92 EL003479 79 EL003471 10 ingroup taxa of Dikarya and 69 83 EL003501 EL001119 Mortierellomycotina, respectively) 97 EFOMIA07 55 72 Erysiphe friesii var. dahurica and 1 outgroup taxon Umbelopsis 53 Erysiphe mori 98 83 Leveillula taurica as member of the Mucorales); Phyllactinia moricola Erysiphales 99 Golovinomyces orontii representing major lineages. Node Podosphaera xanthii Rhytisma acerinum Rhytismatales support equal and or above 70 % is EFOMIA11 EL003481 given on the branches. Taxon labels 100 EL003473 EL003478 82 EL003486 starting with “EL” in red represents EL003484 Cudoniella clavus endolichenic fungal isolates from Mollisia cinerea EL002647 lichen thalli, while labels starting EL001126 Monilinia laxa Helotiales with “EF” or “EM” in blue indicate 100 Monilinia fructicola Botryotinia fuckeliana 71 endophytic fungal isolates of Dermea acerina Neofabraea malicorticis Leotiomycetes bryophytes. EL003498_2 EL003491 EL002638 EL002649 EL002634 EL003475 EL003500 EL002644 EL002625 EL002641 EL002631 EL002643 EL002630 EL003488 EL002636 EL003474 EL002640 100 EL003487 EL003499_2 EL002648 EL001116 EL001112 100 EL001122 EL001114 EL001131 EL001117 99 EL001113 EFOMIA15 EL003497 79 EL003480 100EFOMIA08 EM000026 100 EL003477 70 EFOMIA06 Crinula caliciiformis Helotiales 100 Spathularia flavida 72 Cudonia circinans 100 Rhytismatales Coccomyces dentatus Tryblidiopsis pinastri Chaetomella acutiseta Helotiales Potebniamyces pyri Phacidiales EL003493 98 EFOMIA12 83 EL003485 94 EFOMIA16 100 EFOMIA02 100 EM000004 EFOMIA04 98 EM000021 100 EM000020 Cephalotheca sulfurea 85 Farrowia seminuda 95 85 Farrowia longicollea 100 Chaetomium globosum 100 EL001118 Sordariales 99 Sordaria macrospora 100 99 Sordaria fimicola Neurospora crassa 97 Camarops microspora Boliniales Menispora tortuosa Chaetosphaeriales 98 99 Gnomonia setacea 92 Gnomonia gnomon 75 100 Plagiostoma euphorbiae 100 Discula destructiva 60 Melanconis marginalis Diaporthales 100 Cryphonectria havanensis 95 Cryptodiaporthe corni 77 100 Diaporthe eres Diaporthe phaseolorum Gaeumannomyces graminis var. graminis Magnaporthales Thyridium vestitum EL002624 Halorosellinia oceanica 75 Xylaria acuta 66 50 EL003495 Rosellinia necatrix 95 84 Astrocystis cocoes 54 EL003472 Xylaria hypoxylon Fasciatispora petrakii 51 99 Cainia graminis Xylariales 75 Seynesia erumpens Hypoxylon fragiforme Cryptosphaeria eunomia var. eunomia Hyponectria buxi Sordariomycetes Microdochium nivale 82 64 100 Apiospora sinensis Arthrinium phaeospermum Oxydothis frondicola 100 50 Cordyceps cylindrica Cordyceps irangiensis Cordyceps sinensis Cordyceps khaoyaiensis Torrubiella luteorostrata 66 Emericellopsis terricola Hydropisphaera erubescens 50 Cordyceps tuberculata Hypocreales 94 Cordyceps pseudomilitaris Cordyceps militaris 98 Cordyceps crassispora 85 87 Nectria cinnabarina 100 Hypocrea americana Hypomyces polyporinus 100 100 Corollospora maritima Varicosporina ramulosa 87 Halosarpheia marina Microascales 99 Magnisphaera stevemossago 63 Microascus trigonosporus Chaetosphaeriales Microascus trigonosporus Carpoligna pleurothecii Chaetosphaeriales 92 Lulworthia grandispora Sordariomycetes 100 Lindra thalassiae Lulworthiales Lulworthia fucicola Leotia_lubrica Helotiales 100 Gyalecta hypoleuca 77 Gyalecta jenensis Gyalecta ulmi Figure S1. (Continued). 100 Dimerella lutea 69 Coenogonium leprieurii 70 Diploschistes scruposus Ostropales 100 Graphina poitiaei 83 53 Diploschistes ocellatus Petractis luetkemuelleri 74 81 Acarosporina microspora Stictis radiata 99 Placopsis perrugosa 100 Orceolina kerguelensis 100 Trapelia placodioides Trapeliales Trapelia involuta 52 100 Maronea chilensis 100 Maronea constans Umbilicariales Fuscidea lygaea Hymenelia lacustris Hymeneliales Baeomyces placophyllus Baeomycetales 78 Lepolichen coccophorus 100 Coccotrema cucurbitula 60 Coccotrema pocillarium 100 Pertusaria scaberula 100 Pertusaria erythrella 79 Pertusaria amara 95 Ochrolechia szatalaensis Pertusariales Lecanoromycetes 79 78 Ochrolechia parella 95 Ochrolechia juvenalis Pertusaria dactylina 100 Thamnolia subuliformis Dibaeis baeomyces 62 Lecanora hybocarpa Mycoblastus sanguinarius Lecanorales 100 Xanthoria elegans Xanthomendoza fallax Teloschistales 89 Stereocaulon paschale 58 Cladonia caroliniana Canoparmelia caroliniana Lecanora A oncolor Lecanorales 77 Scoliciosporum umbrinum 50 Sphaerophorus globosus 100 Peltigera canina 98 Peltigera degenii Lobaria quercizans Peltigerales Placynthium nigrum 97 Leptogium cyanescens 81 Sporastatia polyspora 100 73 Sporastatia testudinea Rhizocarpales Rhizocarpon disporum Porpidia albocaerulescens Lecanorales 97 Capronia mansonii 64 Exophiala dermatitidis Exophiala jeanselmei Chaetothyriales Eurotiomycetes 65 Capronia pilosella Ramichloridium anceps Capnodiales Dothideomycetes EL003476 Exophiala pisciphila Chaetothyriales Eurotiomycetes 98 Ceramothyrium carniolicum 59 Glyphium elatum Patellariales Dothideomycetes 100 EL001127 EL001121 100 72 Dermatocarpon luridum Dermatocarpon miniatum Agonimia sp. 99 Verrucariales 95 55 Staurothele frustulenta Endocarpon pallidulum Verrucaria pachyderma 84 Pyrenula cruenta 92 Pyrgillus javanicus Pyrenuales Pyrenula pseudobufonia 91 92 Monascus purpureus 90 Penicillium freii Eurotiomycetes 92 Hamigera avellanea Eurotiales Byssochlamys nivea Spiromastix warcupii 88 Eremascus albus 62 Ascosphaera apis 100 Paracoccidioides brasiliensis 58 100 Auxarthron zuffianum Onygenales 98 Aphanoascus fulvescens Arthroderma curreyi 62 Arachniotus rube Strangospora pinicola 78 Umbilicaria muehlenbergii Umbilicaria mammulata Lasallia pennsylvanica Umbilicariales Hypocenomyce scalaris EL003494 95 Sarcogyne regularis var. regularis 73 Acarospora canadensis 76 Acarospora macrospora subsp. macrospora 59 Polysporina simplex Thelocarpella gordensis Lecanoromycetes Acarospora cervina 81 Acarospora laqueata Sarcogyne similis Acarosporales 91 Acarospora clauzadeana Glypholecia scabra Acarospora schleicheri Acarospora complanata 54 99 Acarospora hilaris Acarospora bullata Pleopsidium chlorophanum EL002650 EL002629 96 EL002646 76 Phoma glomerata 60 Phaeosphaeria avenaria Ampelomyces quisqualis 60 Setomelanomma holmii 82 Cochliobolus heterostrophus Setosphaeria monoceras Curvularia brachyspora 76 Pyrenophora phaeocomes 89 100 Pyrenophora tritici-repentis 90 Pleosporales Pleospora herbarum Bimuria novae-zelandiae 62 Byssothecium circinans 100 Westerdykella cylindrica 100 Preussia terricola 100 89 Trematosphaeria heterospora EFOMIA05 91 Lojkania enalia Botryosphaeria ribis Botryosphaeriales 75 Schismatomma decolorans 66 Dendrographa leucophaea f. minor Dothideomycetes 100 100 Roccella fuciformis Arthoniales Roccella boergesenii Lecanactis abietina 59 Stylodothis puccinioides Dothidea ribesia 98 Dothidea insculpta 57 Dothidea sambuci Dothideales Sydowia polyspora 93 93 Delphinella strobiligena Discosphaerina fagi Myriangium duriaei Myriangiales 78 100 Capnodium coffeae Microxyphium citri 73 Raciborskiomyces longisetosum Capnodiales Piedraia hortae 55 EL003498 Trypethelium sp. Trypetheliales 100 EL003489 EL003490 Phaeotrichum benjaminii Pleosporales Sarea_resinae Pleosporales Sarea_resinae 99 Peltula auriculata 78 Peltula umbilicata 100 Lichinomycetes Peltula obscurans Lichinales 54 Lempholemma polyanthes 95 Sarcosagium campestre Biatoridium monasteriense Lecanorales Lecanoromycetes Thelocarpon laureri Figure S1. (Continued). 100 Geoglossum nigritum Trichoglossum hirsutum Geoglossales Geoglossomycetes 100 Orbilia auricolor Orbiliales Orbilia vinosa Orbiliomycetes 54 Peziza proteana f. sparassoides 78 Peziza vesiculosa 84 EL002628 100 Peziza succosa 77 Sarcosphaera crassa 100 Peziza quelepidotia 100 Morchella cf. esculenta 69 Morchella cf. elata 99 Disciotis venosa 65 Verpa conica Gyromitra esculenta 98 Pezizales Pezizomycetes 46 62 Gyromitra californica 58 Gyromitra cf. melaleucoides Caloscypha fulgens 95 Helvella cf. compressa 58 Aleuria aurantia Otidea onotica 61 Cheilymenia stercorea 100 Scutellinia scutellata 75 56 Pyronema domesticum 99 Sarcoscypha coccinea 100 Ascobolus carbonarius Ascobolus crenulatus 100 Candida albicans Saccharomycetales Saccharomyces cerevisiae Saccharomycetes 100 Taphrina communis 100 97 Protomyces inouyei Taphrinales Taphrinomycetes 52 Saitoella complicata Schizosaccharomyces pombe Schizosaccharomycetales Schizosaccharomycetes 100 EM000033 68 100 EFOMIA14 Strobilomyces floccopus 100 Boletales Agaricomycetes Coltricia perennis Hymenochaetales Agaricostilbum hyphaenes Agaricos�lbales Agaricostilbomycetes 98 Dissophora decumbens 75 Dissophora ornata Gamsiella multidivaricata Mortierella kuhlmanii Lobosporangium transversale Mortierellales 100 Modicella malleola 95 50 Modicella reniformis 91 Mortierella antarctica 90 Mortierella rishikesha Mortierella elongatula 100 EFOMIA09 EFOMIA10 Umbelopsis changbaiensis Mucorales

0.2 Pilaira sp. kH13 61 Pilaira sp. kH15 Figure S2. Maximum Likelihood analysis Pilaira caucasica kH17 of the Mortierellomycotina dataset Pilaira caucasica kH16 published in Wagner et al. (2013), 69 Pilaira caucasica kH18 showing phylogenetic relation of the Pilaira caucasica kH14 68 isolates EFOMIA09 and EFOMIA10. Node Pilaira sp. kH20 support equal and or above 70 % is given Pilaira anomala kH19 on the branches. Pilaira caucasica KH21 88 Pilaira caucasica P171a Pilaira anomala P171 Pirella circinans P172 56 Helicostylum elegans P160 Thamnidium elegans P178 Helicostylum pulchrum P160b Helicostylum pulchrum P160c Pilaira anomala kH22 Zygorhynchus heterogamus P180a 100 Mucor moelleri P180b 73 Mucor hiemalis P169c 95 Mucor irregularis P135c Mucor mucedo P168 Mucor moelleri P180 Dicranophora fulva P156 Actinomucor elegans P137 Hyphomucor assamensis P162 Mucor ctenidius kH4 Mucor ctenidius kH3

85Mucor ctenidius kH2 Mucor ctenidius P141 64 Ellisomyces anomalus P157 Mucor ramosissimus P169f 54 Mucor circinelloides f. lusitanicus P169b 97 Mucor circinelloides f. circinelloides P169h Mucor circinelloides P152 Mucor circinelloides f. circinelloides P169 98 100 Chaetocladium brefeldii P146 Chaetocladium brefeldii P146a 65 Parasitella parasitica P170 Chaetocladium jonesii P146b 85 Mucor racemosus P169e 59 Mucor plumbeus P169j Mucor plumbeus P169i

97 Kirkomyces cordensis P164 Kirkomyces cordensis P160a

72 Mucor indicus P169d Mucor amphibiorum P169a

90 Blakeslea trispora P114 77 Poitrasia cicinans P120 100 Choanephora infundibulifera P115 Gilbertella persicaria P119 Mycotypha microspora P182 100 Mycotypha africana P182a

97 Cokeromyces recurvatus P154a 100 Cokeromyces recurvatus P154 Benjaminiella poitrasii P143 Pilobolus umbonatus KH32 Pilobolus umbonatus kH27 Pilobolus umbonatus kH24 53 Pilobolus umbonatus kH26 Pilobolus umbonatus P186 Pilobolus roridus KH31 63 Pilobolus longipes KH30 100 Pilobolus longipes KH29 Pilobolus longipes kH28 100 96 Pilobolus crystallinus kH25 100 Pilobolus sp. kH23

100 Utharomyces epallocaulus P189 Utharomyces epallocaulus NRRL3168 Backusella circina kH1 Backusella circina kH9 65 Backusella circina kH12

96 Backusella circina kH11 Backusella circina kH10 Backusella recurva kH6 89 Figure S2. (Continued). Backusella recurva kH7 Backusella recurva 100 kH8 Backusella recurva kH5 Backusella recurva P169g Backusella circina P140 Syzygites megalocarpus P215 100 Rhizopus stolonifer P176e

86 Sporodiniella umbellata P213 Rhizopus arrhizus P205a

99 Rhizopus arrhizus P205 Rhizopus arrhizus P175 100 Rhizopus microsporus var. microsporus P176 Rhizopus microsporus var. microsporus P176b Rhizopus microsporus var. rhizopodiformis P176d Rhizopus microsporus var. azygosporus P176a 100 Rhizopus microsporus var. oligosporus P176c

100 Dichotomocladium robustum P194c 93 Dichotomocladium robustum P194d 79 Dichotomocladium ﬂoridanum P194e

52 Dichotomocladium hesseltinei P194b Dichotomocladium elegans P194

100 Dichotomocladium elegans P194a 100 Dichotomocladium sphaerosporum P194g Dichotomocladium sphaerosporum P194f Dichotomocladium sphaerosporum 2 P194h 99 100 Dichotomocladium sphaerosporum 3 P194i

100 Lichtheimia corymbifera P134 Lichtheimia corymbifera P134a Lichtheimia hyalospora P134d 100 98 79 Lichtheimia hyalospora P134b

54 Lichtheimia ramosa P134c 100 Circinella sp. P151a

100 Circinella sp. P151b Circinella umbellata P151 99 Phascolomyces articulosus P197 85 100 Phascolomyces articulosus P197a 100 Zychaea mexicana P201 90 Fennellomyces linderi P195 100 Thamnostylum piriforme P200 Rhizomucor pusillus P135 97 Rhizomucor pusillus P135b Rhizomucor miehei P135d 100 100Rhizomucor miehei P135a 91 Rhizomucor pusillus P135e Thermomucor indicae-seudaticae P136 53 100 Syncephalastrum monosporum P199 100 Syncephalastrum racemosum P199a Syncephalastrum monosporum var. pluriproliferum P199b

100 Protomycocladus faisalabadensis P198a

100 Protomycocladus faisalabadensis P198

64 Absidia caerulea P121a 100 Absidia macrospora P121e 72 Absidia californica P121f 85 Chlamydoabsidia padenii P123 Absidia glauca P121b 96 81 Absidia psychrophilia P121d 100 Absidia repens P121 80 89 Absidia spinosa P121c Halteromyces radiatus P126

94 Cunninghamella bainierii P124a 99 100 Cunninghamella echinulata P124

97 Cunninghamella bertholletiae P124b

100 Gongronella butleri P125 Hesseltinella vesiculosa P127 Radiomyces spectabilis P191

100 Apophysomyces elegans P190 100 Apophysomyces elegans P190a

92 Saksenaea vasiformis P193

100 Phycomyces blakesleeanus P183 Spinellus fusiger P184 Spinellus fusiger P184 Lentamyces zychae P216a

99 Umbelopsis ramanniana P202b

99 Umbelopsis isabellina P202a Umbelopsis nana P202c 74 Figure S2. (Continued). 99 Umbelopsis sp. P202 Mortierella longicollis P111 Endogone pisiformis P011

81 Gamsiella multidivaricata P108 73 Dissophora decumbens P106

52 Echinosporangium transversale P107 Mortierella verticillata P110 99 Mortierella verticillata KH001 EFOMIA09 100 EFOMIA10 Archaeorhizomyces ﬁnlayi KV5 52 Saccharomyces bayanus P248 Agaricus bisporus P249 Glomus intraradices P253

99 Schizangiella serpentis P007 55 Basidiobolus ranarum P006 Neocallimastix sp. P252

100 Piptocephalis corymbifera P234 Kuzuhaea moniliformis P230 Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis P250

53 Capniomyces stellatus P057 Zygopolaris ephemeridarum P087 Smittium culisetae P080 Plecopteromyces sp. P076 68 Bojamyces repens P056

100 Pennella simulii P075 52 Genistellospora homothallica P066 51 100 Harpella melusinae P048 53 Genistelloides hibernus P065

100 88 Furculomyces boomerangus P062 Austrosmittium biforme P053 Harpellomyces sp. P049

100 Coemansia reversa P088

98 Spirodactylon aureum P100 95 Kickxella alabastrina P092 88 Linderina pennispora P093

72 Dipsacomyces acuminosporus P091 Martensiomyces pterosporus P095 100 Pinnaticoemansia coronantispora P089 Myconymphaea yatsukahoi P097

96 Entomophthora muscae P025

96 Massospora cicadina P030

95 Entomophaga maimaiga P024 89 Eryniopsis caroliniana P027

86 Erynia radicans P026 55 100 Pandora neoaphidis P033

91 Zoophthora radicans P037 Batkoa major P021 63 Conidiobolus coronatus P017 Blastocladiella emersonii P251

99 Palavascia patagonica KV4 100 Taeniellopsis sp. KV3 Enteromyces callianassae KV2 Enterobryus sp. KV1

0.2