Novel taxa of thermally dimorphic systemic pathogens in the Ajellomycetaceae (Onygenales) 1,2 1,2,3 1,4 5 Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific1,6 K2P distances 1,6 1,6 1,2 Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances Karolina Dukik , Yanping Jiang , Peiying Feng , Lynne Sigler , J. Benjamin0.13 Stielow , Joanna Freeke , Azadeh Jamalian , Sybren de Hoog Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances 1.0 0.45 Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances 0.6 0.12 0.20 0.8 0.25 1.0 0.04 0.20 0.35 0.11 0.4 0.15 0.6 0.20 0.8 Distance 0.15 Proportion 0.10 Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zeroDistance non−conspecific K2P distances 0.10 0.16 Distance 0.2 0.4 Proportion Proportion 0.25 0.15 0.6 Mean K2P distance of each window0.02 Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances 0.10 0.09 Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2PMean distances K2P distance of each window ProportionMean of K2P zero distance non−conspecific of each window K2P distances Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances Distance 1.0 0.2 Distance 0.05 Proportion 0.10 Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances 0.4 0.45 Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances 0.0 0.12 0.15 0.05 1.0 0.13 1.0 1 2 0.20 3 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.05 0.00 0.00 0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250 0.15 0.45 0.13 1.0 0.6 Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P distances0.35 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 0.12 0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400 0.8 0.8 0.0 Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University0.00 of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Dermatology, The Affiliated Hospital, Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, 0.6 0.08 Window position 0.15 Window position 0.00 0.20 Mean K2P distance of each window Proportion of zero non−conspecific K2P 0.6 distances 0.04 0.04 0.12 0.8 0.10 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Window0 position200 400 600 800 1000 Window position 0.15 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 Window100 position200 300 400 500 Window position 0.35 0.6 0.11 0.6 0.25 0.4 Distance 0.4 0.20 Proportion 0.15 0.10 Distance Proportion 0.25 0.25 0.6 0.11 Window position Window position 0.4 Distance Window position Window position 0.20 Proportion Distance 0.20 0.4 Distance 0.10 0.05 0.10 0.4 Proportion Proportion Distance 0.2 0.02 Proportion 0.02 0.2 0.10 0.20 0.05 Distance 4 5 Distance 6 0.4 Proportion 0.25 0.10 Proportion 0.16 0.15 0.2 0.2 0.09 0.15 0.2 0.16 0.0 0.15 0.05 0.00 China; Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China; University of Alberta Microfungus Collection and Herbarium0.05 and Biological Sciences, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Thermo Fisher Scientific, Landsmeer, The Netherlands 0.00 0.2 0.09 Distance 0.0 Proportion 0.10 Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Congruence of NJ trees 0.0 Distance 0.0 0.15 0 100 200 300 400 500 0.00 0 100 200 300 400 500 Proportion 0.12 0.10 0.00 0 100 200 300 400 0.0 0 100 200 300 400 Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Congruence of NJ trees 0 50 100 150 200 Proportion250 of0.0 zero cells in K2P distance0 50 matrix100 150 200 250 Congruence of NJ trees 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.05 0 100 200 300 400Window500 position 0 100100 200200 300300 400400Window500500 position 0 100 200 300 400 500 Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Congruence of NJ trees0 50 100 150 0.05 200Window 250position 0 50 100 150 200Window position250 0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 0 Proportion400 100 of200 zero cells300 in K2P400 distance500 matrix 0 100Congruence200 of 300NJ trees400 500 0.9 Window position Window position 0.00 1.0 Window position Window position 0.08 Window position Window position 0.00 0.08 Window position Window position 0.08 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Window0 position200 400 600 800 1000 Window position Window position Window position 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.08 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0.10 0.8 Window position Window position 0.8 0.9 0.06 Window position Window position 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.08 0.06 0.6 0.6 Proportion Proportion 0.8 0.04 0.6 0.4 Proportion Proportion Proportion Proportion 0.4 0.06 0.4 Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Congruence of NJ trees 0.4 0.2 Proportion Proportion Proportion of zero cells in K2P distanceProportion matrix Congruence of NJProportion trees 0.04 Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Congruence of NJ trees 0.5 0.7 0.2 0.02 Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Congruence of NJ trees 0.04 Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Congruence of NJ trees 0.2 0.2 Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Proportion of zero cells in K2PCongruence distance matrixof NJ treesProportion0.2 of zero cells in CongruenceK2P distance ofmatrix NJ trees Congruence of NJ trees 1.0 0.02 0.0 Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Congruence of NJ trees 0.0 0.6 RPB2 TUB2 TEF3 ITS LSU 0.9 0.02 0.8 0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250 0.8 Introduction and purpose Proportion of zero cells in K2P distance matrix Congruence of NJ trees 0.0 Methods 0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.08 0.08 0.9 0.8 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 100 200 300 400 500 100 200 300 400 500 0.6 Window position Window position 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 Window position Window position 0.6 Window position Window position 0.08 0.10 0.6 0.8 Window position 0.08 Window position Window position Window position 0.8 0.9 0.06 0.06 0.4 0.10 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.6 Ajellomycetaceae Blastomyces, Emmonsia, Histoplasma 0.4 Strain selection 0.6 Until recently the thermally dimorphic fungi of the onygenalean family have been classified in and 0.4 0.4 0.08 Proportion Proportion 0.4 0.6 0.06 Proportion Proportion 0.7 Proportion Proportion 0.08 0.8 Proportion Proportion 0.06 0.04 0.6 0.4 0.04 0.8 0.4 Proportion Proportion 0.4 0.2 0.06 Proportion Proportion 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2 Proportion Proportion Proportion Proportion Proportion Proportion 0.04 0.2 0.6 0.06 0.7 0.5 Proportion Proportion 0.02 0.2 Paracoccidioides 0.04 . These fungi are environmental pathogens, i.e. have a dual life cycle, residing as a mold in the environment and switch into a specialized0.04 pathogenic A In total 109 reference strains were taken for phylogenetic analysis. Representative strains from all old and newly 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.02 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.04 Sum of diagnostic nucleotides Proportion of species that are monophyletic 0.0 0.5 Sum of diagnostic nucleotides 0.02 Proportion of species that are monophyletic Sum of diagnostic nucleotides Proportion of species that are monophyletic 0.6 Sum of diagnostic nucleotides Proportion of species that are monophyletic 0.02 Sum of diagnostic nucleotides Proportion of species that are monophyletic 0 100 200 300 400 500 0.0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 3000.0 400 0.6 0.02 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 0 250100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 0.02 25 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 0.8 200 100 300 200400Window300500 position 400 500 0 100 200 300 Window400 position500 Blastomyces, Histoplasma Paracoccidioides Emmonsia 25 Window position Window position form in the host: yeast-like cells in and , and large, non-replicating adiaspores in . Recent discoveries of novel 0.9 established genera and species were further analyzed for their morphology and physiology.