Discover hidden taxa of Erysiphe section Erysiphe fungi (Ascomycota, Erysiphaceae) based on morphology and multilocus phylogeny in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Erysiphe sect. Erysiphe, a taxonomically significant group within the genus Erysiphe , is distinguished from other Erysiphe sections by its mycelioid chasmothecial appendages. While approximately half of the known species in this section occur in China, our preliminary assessments suggest that a substantial number of cryptic taxa remain undetected. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a comprehensive phylogeographic survey evaluating 78 specimens collected from 18 provinces (municipalities/autonomous regions) across China. Our integrative approach combined morphological characterization with molecular phylogenetic analyses using five DNA loci: internal transcribed spacer (ITS), 28S rDNA, intergenic spacer (IGS), RNA polymerase II subunit 2 ( RPB2 ), and β-tubulin ( TUB ). This study led to the discovery of three newly described species ( E. clematidis sp. nov. on Clematis spp., E. limoniicola sp. nov. on Limonium spp., and E. paeoniae-suffruticosae sp. nov. on Paeonia × suffruticosa and two newly recorded species from China ( E. malvae on Malva pusilla and E. punicae on Punica granatum ). Notably, our phylogenetic framework demonstrates that incorporating IGS, RPB2 , and TUB markers substantially enhances species-level resolution and provides critical insights into cryptic speciation within powdery mildews.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".