Next Article in Journal
Identification and Optimization of Urban Avian Ecological Corridors in Kunming: Framework Construction Based on Multi-Model Coupling and Multi-Scenario Simulation
Previous Article in Journal
The Assembly Mechanisms of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi in Urban Green Spaces and Their Response to Environmental Factors
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Alien Stramenopilous Fungus-like Organisms (Oomycota) Diversity and Distribution in Lithuania

by
Svetlana Markovskaja
Laboratory of Mycology, State Scientific Research Institute Nature Research Centre, LT 08406 Vilnius, Lithuania
Diversity 2025, 17(6), 426; https://doi.org/10.3390/d17060426
Submission received: 10 May 2025 / Revised: 9 June 2025 / Accepted: 14 June 2025 / Published: 16 June 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Microbial Diversity and Culture Collections)

Abstract

:
This paper provides data on non-native fungus-like organisms (Oomycota, kingdom Stramenopila), their diversity, and distribution in Lithuania and is an addition to a previously published checklist of alien true fungi (Chytridiomycota, Ascomycota, and Basidiomycota; kingdom Fungi). All available published data were summarized, and the analysis showed that approximately 25% of recorded Lithuania stramenopilous fungus-like organism species are alien. The compiled list represented herein includes 54 species of alien terrestrial and aquatic stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota). Most alien Oomycota are obligate pathogens of terrestrial plants. Aquatic organisms are represented by one alien dangerous crayfish pathogen, Aphanomyces astaci, which is currently noted as extinct in Lithuania. The taxonomy of the listed alien species of Oomycota has been revised, and the species names have been adjusted to reflect current nomenclature changes. The taxonomical and ecological analysis demonstrated the prevalence of terrestrial parasitic Peronosporales reported in Lithuania Oomycota and the highest diversity of alien species belonging to the Peronospora genus. The chronology of appearance, distribution within the country, and current status of these non-native organisms were assessed, and some of the most economically or ecologically important harmful invasive species were discussed.

1. Introduction

Among known alien and invasive organisms, fungi and oomycetes are poorly investigated groups, but at least 2% of them, approximately 2000 species, are invasive, easily spreading and adapting to new environment conditions [1,2,3]. Oomycetes, formerly classified as fungi, are fungus-like microorganisms belonging to one of the major eukaryotic clades, Stramenopiles, distinct from true fungi [4]. These organisms are widely distributed in various terrestrial, freshwater, and marine habitats [5,6]. The taxonomic rank of oomycetes varied from class to phylum and, along with diatoms, chromophytic algae, and other heterocontic protists, now are placed in the kingdom Stramenopila [4,7,8,9,10] (as Straminipila by Dick [5]), in Stramenopiles lineage of biflagellated “heterokont” organisms within the eukaryotic supergroup Stramenopiles–Alveolata–Rhizaria (SAR) [11,12,13,14,15]. Currently, the phylum Oomycota is separated into two major classes: most aquatic organisms belong to Saprolegniomycetes with two main orders—Leptomitales and Saprolegniales and most terrestrial species to Peronosporomycetes, with four main orders—Albuginales, Pythyales, Peronosporales, and Rhipidiales [5,16]. Phylogenetic studies have also confirmed the division of these fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) into four “crown” orders: Albuginales, Pythiales, Peronosporales, and Saprolegniales [12,15]. However, the taxonomical position and classification of these organisms remain uncertain till the present time, and most scientists still prefer to use the term “oomycetes”.
Evolutionarily stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) had their origins in the sea, and they could have appeared between the late Proterozoic and middle Paleozoic era (0.4 to 0.6 billion years ago) or even earlier, but the terrestrial branch is currently more specialized than the aquatic one [5,8,9,11,13,15,16]. Most of the early diverging marine members are simple holocarpic organisms that lack mycelial organization [6]. The fungal hyphal-like pattern of growth and the quiet complex oogamous sexual reproduction developed after their ancestor’s migration from the sea to freshwater and to land [9,10]. The traits characterizing representatives of Oomycota are mainly based on the features of their reproduction and composition of the cell wall; especially important is the presence of cellulose and other β-glucans in the cell wall [5,9,17]. Chitin or chitosaccharides, characteristic of true fungi, are absent or rarely found in the cell wall of Oomycota, only in some species such as Aphanomyces euteiches and Saprolegnia monoica [5]. Freshwater Saprolegniales and soilborne Pythiales are characterized by asexual reproduction via motile biflagellate zoospores and the production of sterols necessary for the induction of their sexual reproduction [5]. Terrestrial Albuginales and Peronosporales are characterized mainly by asexual reproduction via not motile conidia (except Phytophthora) and their inability to synthesize sterols. During the long-term evolutionary changes, these fungus-like organisms have adapted to a wide range of different lifestyles: saprotrophic, endophytic, facultative necrotrophic/hemibiotrophic/parasitic, or obligate biotrophic/parasitic and employing both sexual and asexual reproduction for propagation and survival [5,8,16]. The main criterion for an “alien species” is the occurrence or introduction into an area of a new, previously undiscovered species that is not native to the area [2]. Alien in Europe and in Lithuania, Albuginales and Peronosporales predominantly are highly specialized obligate plant pathogens, which cause white blister and downy mildew diseases [2,18]. Alien Phytophthora species are facultative pathogens that usually move with their hosts in latent or endophytic stages or with contaminated soil or water and are, therefore, particularly difficult to detect and prevent their introduction into new areas and to a new biogeographical region [19,20,21,22,23]. Different alien species need different periods for adaptation to new habitats and conditions. After adaptation, more aggressive and rapidly spreading alien species, especially Phytopthora spp., may move to other native hosts, change lifestyle, and cause disease outbreaks in native host populations [3,24]. Current increased socio-economic activity, movement and transportation of contaminated seeds or plant material, intensification of aquaculture, and climate change are factors increasing the risk for the emergence and spread of new alien stramenopilous fungus-like pathogens, which can lead to serious environmental or economic problems. In addition, the introduction of new haplotypes of pre-existing oomycetous pathogens from other countries or continents may provide an opportunity for future genetic recombination and hybridization of these pathogens, increasing the risk of the emergence and spread of more virulent strains or the emergence of a new species [25,26], as in the case of the potato late blight pathogen Phytophthora infestans [27,28,29] and alder trees pathogen—Phytophthora alni sensu lato species complex [30,31]. Data on the introduction and spread of alien species of Oomycota, the invasion of new terrestrial, and aquatic pathogens into new regions, the analysis of their ability to adapt and spread rapidly, and the elucidation of the vulnerability of native hosts are very important for the prevention and effective control of many harmful plant diseases, such as downy mildew, spotting, root rot and diseases of crayfish, or fish caused by water molds.
The main goal of this work was to summarize all available published data on alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) detected in Lithuania and to complete the previously published list of 142 species of alien true fungi (Chytridiomycetes, Ascomycetes and Basidiomycetes) found in Lithuania [32] with a new list of alien Oomycota. The specific aims were to evaluate the distribution and current status of listed alien species of Oomycota in our country, discuss the historical data on invasions of the most economically and ecologically important harmful pathogens, and assess the risk of new alien species emergence and adaptation.

2. Data Collection and Determination of the Current Status of Alien Species

Previously published literature data on Oomycota from Lithuania in different languages (Polish, Russian, Lithuanian and English) were used in this review to identify alien species, analyze their distribution and determine their current status in our country. In addition, Data from fungal collections of the BILAS herbarium of the State Scientific Research Institute Nature Research Centre (NRC, Vilnius) and WI herbarium of Vilnius University was used to review existing records on alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms. After revision, only species with a confirmed and well-documented alien status in Europe [2,21,33,34,35] were included in the list. The names of species included in the checklist have been corrected in accordance with the changes in taxonomy and nomenclature adopted by Index Fungorum [36]. The currently used legitimate species names are accompanied by the most common synonyms mentioned in various publications.
The current status is based on the distribution of every alien (non-native) species of stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) and was determined following categories proposed for true fungi in the previously published paper [32]. Categories used in this review were the following: 1—established (the first record more than 15 years ago; currently common in various parts of the country), 2—spreading (the first record less than 15 years ago; currently, the number of localities increase), 3—unknown (one or few records; distribution is unknown or not investigated). Additional categories included the following: 4—extinct (naturally disappeared; currently not found) and 5—eradicated (when infected plans were destructed according to the quarantine requirements and pathogen was not detected more).

3. Alien Stramenopilous Fungus-like Organisms (Oomycota) Recorded in Lithuania

Our study considerably expands the previously published checklist of 142 species of alien true fungi [32]. The analysis showed that approximately 25% of more than 200 stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania [18,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47] can be considered alien, and its number currently reaches 54 species (Table 1).

3.1. Diversity and Distribution of Alien Oomycota

These non-native species are characterized by differences in distribution/current status and in functional capacity/lifestyle (Figure 1). Introduction vectors of most alien Oomycota species are unknown. About half of the species (26) from the list are noted as established and widely spread (Table 1). The first record of most of these species dates to more than 30 years, and currently, they are known from numerous localities around Lithuania. Some of them, such as Phytophthora infestans on Solanum, Albugo candida on various plants of Brassicaceae, Peronospora destructor on Allium, Plasmopara viticola on Vitis, and Pseudoperonospora cubensis on Cucumber can be regarded as invasive, causing considerable damage to the host plants [18]. One species, Phytophthora alni sensu lato, is indicated as spreading (it was recorded for the first time more than 15 years ago, but the number of localities has started to increase only during the last decades). The other species, Phytophthora ramorum, is noted as eradicated (after quarantine regulation), and Aphanomyces astaci was noted as extinct after 1979 (however, currently, its distribution is not investigated in Lithuania). The distribution and current status of the other 25 alien and cryptogenic species are indicated as “unknown” because they were not intensively investigated in Lithuania and were occasionally found once or only several times, and their introduction vectors are unknown (Table 1). Some of them, such as Peronospora sparsa on roses, P. fagopiri on buckwheat, P. ornithopi on serradella, and P. spinaciae on spinach, are sporadically occurring and not very common in Lithuania species [18]. Meantime, Hyaloperonospora camelinae (syn. Peronospora camelinae), P. corydalis-intermediae, P. digitalidis, P. kochiae, Plasmopara angustiterminalis are known as rare species [18].
The compiled list (Table 1) and cumulative graph of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania demonstrated that since the first records in 1830–1886, the number of newly recorded species and the cumulative number of records have been continuously increasing, and the higher increase of alien species records occurred in 1960–1980s and after 2000s (Figure 2).
These data undoubtedly reflect the periods of the highest mycological and phytopathological scientific activities in Lithuania [48] and are like those established in Lithuania for true fungi [32] and, overall, for alien fungi recorded in Europe [2,21,49]. The largest number of new alien species of true fungi in Lithuania was recorded in 1980–2000 [32]. In comparison with true fungi, in 1990–2024, the number of new finds of stramenopilous fungus-like organisms in Lithuania did not increase very much, which can be explained by a decrease in the intensity of taxonomic and ecological studies of this group of organisms in Lithuania. The exponential growth of the curve post-2000s is mainly associated with the increased impact of harmful oomycetes on forestry and the description of new Phytophthora species responsible for tree diseases [20,30,39,40,41,46,47].
Taxonomically, the vast majority of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) established in Lithuania, about 94% (51 species of terrestrial plant pathogens) belong to the largest order Peronosporales, and only 6% of species belong to Albuginales and Saprolegniales (Figure 3).
Alien freshwater Saprolegniales recorded in Lithuania belongs to only one Aphanomyces genus and are represented by two species, waterborne crayfish pathogen Aphanomyces astaci [37,38] and soil-borne Aphanomyces eusteihes, which usually causes root rot of legumes but can also be spread by water [44]. The order Albuginales was represented by a single species, Albugo candida [18], a pathogen of terrestrial plants of the family Brassicaceae. The taxonomical analysis demonstrated high genetic diversity among the reported alien Peronosporales and the highest species diversity (28 species) of the genus Peronospora (Figure 4).

3.2. Terrestrial Alien Peronosporales Trophic Preferences, Spread Vectors, and Specificity to Hosts

Terrestrial alien Peronosporales (Basidiophora entospora, Bremia lactucae, Sclerophthora macrospora, all detected species of Hyaloperonospora, Peronospora, Plasmopara, and Pseudoperonospora genera) are obligate biotrophs/pathogens, which usually overwinters in seeds, leaf litter, soil, and are mainly spread by wind, rain, and contaminated living plant material or soil [18,50,51,52]. Most downy mildew pathogens of Peronospora, Plasmopara, and Hyaloperonospora genera recorded in Lithuania are highly host-specific (Table 1), often at the host genus/species level [18,50]. The importance of alien plant pathogenic species for agriculture is shown by their vide spectrum of host genera established in Lithuania: Allium, Brassica, Cucumis, Fagopyrum, Fragaria, Lactuca, Lycopersicon, Pastinaca, Pisum, Sisymbrium, Solanum, Spinacia, Trifolium, Triticum, Vicia, Vitis (Table 1).
Table 1. List of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania, their host/substrate, the year of first record/current status (based on distribution) and first published reference.
Table 1. List of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania, their host/substrate, the year of first record/current status (based on distribution) and first published reference.
Name of SpeciesHost/SubstrateFirst Record and Current StatusReference
of First Record
Albugo candida (Pers. ex J.F. Gmel.) Roussel sensu lato species complex (A. candida × A. koreana × A. voglmayrii)
(syn. Uredo candida (Pers. ex J.F. Gmel.) Pers.))
Various plants of Brassicaceae1830
established
[53]
Aphanomyces astaci SchikoraAstacus astacus L. (crayfish)1886 (after 1979 extinct)
currently unknown
[37,38]
Aphanomyces eusteihes DrechslerPlant debris in water2005
unknown
[44]
Basidiophora entospora Roze & CornuConyza1964
Unknown
[50]
Bremia lactucae RegelVarious plants of Asteraceae1926
established
[54]
Hyaloperonospora barbareae (Gäum.) Göker, Riethm., Voglmayr, Weiss & Oberw. (syn. Peronospora barbareae Gäum.)Barbareae1962
established
[55]
Hyaloperonospora berteroae (Gäum.) Göker, Riethm., Voglmayr, Weiss & Oberw. (syn. P. berteroae Gäum.)Berteroa1962
unknown
[55]
Hyaloperonospora camelinae (Gäum.) Göker, Voglmayr, Riethm., Weiss & Oberw. (syn. P. camelinae Gäum.)Camelina1937
established
[56]
Hyaloperonospora cochleariae (Gäum.) Göker, Riethm., Voglmayr, Weiss & Oberw.
(syn. P. cochleariae Gäum.)
Armoracia1927
established
[57]
Hyaloperonospora hesperidis (Gäum.) Göker, Riethm., Voglmayr, Weiss & Oberw. (syn. P. hesperidis Gäum.Hesperis1962
unknown
[55]
Hyaloperonospora iberidis (Gäum.) C. Salgado & J.A. Crouch
(syn. P. iberidis Gäum.)
Iberis1984
unknown
[50]
Hyaloperonospora parasitica (Pers.) Constant.
(syn. P. erysimi Gäum.)
Erysimum1962
established
[55]
Peronospora aestivalis Syd.Medicago1960
established
[58]
P. affinis RossmannFumaria1968
unknown
[50]
P. arborescens (Berk.) de BaryPapaver1928
established
[57]
P. buniadis Gäum.Bunias1962
unknown
[55]
P. chorale de BaryEustoma1993
unknown
[18]
P. conglomerata FuckelGeranium1962
unknown
[55]
P. corydalis-intermediae Gäum.Corydalis1984
unknown
[50]
P. destructor (Berk.) Casp. Ex Berk.Allium1928
established
[59]
P. digitalidis Gäum.Digitalis1962
unknown
[55]
P. erodii FuckelErodium1962
unknown
[55]
P. fagopyri ElenevFagopyrum1984
established
[50]
P. grisea (Unger) UngerVeronica1960
established
[58]
Peronospora hyoscyami de Bary
(syn.: P. tabacina D. B. Adam., P. nicotianae Speg.)
Nicotiana1961
established
[55]
P. kochiae-scopariae Kochman & T. MajewskiKochia1984
unknown
[50]
P. lamii (A.Braun) Rabenh.Lamium1960
established
[56]
P. mathiolae Gäum.Matthiola1962
unknown
[55]
P. mayorii Gäum.Vicia1960
established
[58]
P. myosotidis de BaryMyosotis1962
established
[55]
P. obovata Bonord.Spergula1960
established
[56]
P. ornithopi Gäum.Ornithopus1984
Unknown
[50]
P. phyteumatis FuckelPhyteuma1984
unknown
[50]
P. scleranthi Rabenh.Scleranthus1962
unknown
[55]
P. sisymbrii-officinalis Gäum.Sisymbrium1962
established
[55]
P. sparsa Berk.Rosa1984
established
[50]
P. spinaceae LaubertSpinacia1962
unknown
[55]
P. trifoliorum de BaryTrifolium1936
established
[60]
Peronospora viciae (Berk.) Casp.
(syn. P. pisi (Syd.) Gäum.)
Pisum, Vicia1927
established
[57]
P. violae de Bary Viola1928
established
[57]
Phytophthora alni Brasier & S.A. Kirk sensu lato species complex (P. × alni and P. uniformis)Alnus1999
spreading
[30,47]
Ph. cactorum (Leb. et Cohn) Schröt.Rhododendron2004
unknown
[41]
Ph. cinnamomi RandsPinus, Quercus2000
unknown
[39]
Ph. fragariae HickmanFragaria2000
unknown
[40]
Ph. infestans (Mont.) de BarySolanum, Lycopersicon, Petunia1912
established
[61]
Ph. syringae (Kleb.) Kleb.Syringa, Malus1935
unknown
[62]
Ph. ramorum Werres, De Cock & ManRhododendron2007
2019
eradicated
[63]
Plasmopara angustiterminalis Novot.Xanthium1984
unknown
[50]
Pl. pastinacae Săvul. & O. Săvul.Pastinaca1984
unknown
[50]
Pl. viticola (Berk. & M.A. Curtis) Berl. & De ToniVitis1949
established
[58]
Pseudoperonospora cannabina (G.H. Otth)Cannabis1984
established
[50]
Pseudoperonospora cubensis (Berk. & M.A. Curtis) RostovzevCucumis1985
established
[64]
Pseudoperonospora humuli (Miyabe & Takah.) G.W. Wilson
(syn. Peronoplasmopara humuli Miyabe & Takah)
Humulus1927
established
[57]
Sclerophthora macrospora (Sacc.) Thirum., Shaw. et NarasTriticum1989
unknown
[65]

3.3. Waterborne and Soilborne Alien Pathogens Trophic Preferences and Spread Vectors

The waterborne and soilborne representatives of alien Saprolegniales (Aphanomyces spp.) and species of Phytophthora genus (Peronosporales) are plant hemibiotrophs (except Aphanomyces astaci, which is obligate crayfish plague pathogen) and can develop as aquatic and riparian plant biotrophs-pathogens or saprotrophs [5,8,66]. The floating zoospores of Aphanomyces and Phytophthora are easily spread by running water. Streams and rivers, acting as vectors of infection, increase the risk of these pathogens spreading over long distances and represent corridors for the emergence of new invasive species that can be dangerous to various local vulnerable riparian plants and aquatic organisms [67,68,69,70,71].

4. Historical Data on Invasions of Some Economically Important Pathogens into Lithuania

The first report on alien oomycetes in Lithuania appeared in the first part of the 19th century and was about the earliest known obligate biotrophic plant pathogen belonging to the order Albuginales, the causal agent of white blister rust disease Albugo candida.

4.1. The Oldest Obligate Plant Pathogen Albugo candida Sensu Lato

The cryptogenic pathogen Albugo candida sensu lato in Lithuania was found in 1830 by Jundzill and was reported as Uredo candida [53]. Many species previously identified based on morphology have now been found to be a complex of several cryptic species after genetic studies. The Albugo candida sensu lato represents a species complex that infects a wide range of Brassicaceae [72]. Currently, A. candida is widely spread in Lithuania on various plants of Arabis, Berteroa, Camelina, Capsella, Descurainia, Erysimum, Hesperis, Neslia, Roripa, Sisymbrium, and Thlaspi genera [18,50,73]. Recently, based on a polyphasic taxonomic approach, including morphological features of oospore wall ornamentation and various genetic inferences (analyses of ITS, LSU gene regions of rDNA, and cox2 gene region of mtDNA) in A. candida species complex were described three distinct species: A. candida, A. koreana, and A. voglmayrii [74,75,76]. Undoubtedly, Lithuanian collections of A. candida from the BILAS and VU herbariums also represent species complex and need an additional, more detailed taxonomical revision in the future.

4.2. The Crayfish Plague Pathogen Aphanomyces astaci

The introduction of the aquatic pathogen Aphanomyces astaci, the causative agent of the crayfish plague, to Lithuania took place at the end of the 19th century. This water mold first appeared in Europe in the mid-19th century and is currently known as a major causal agent responsible for the decline and massive mortalities of the native in European noble or broad-fingered crayfish (Astacus astacus) populations [37,38,77,78,79,80,81,82]. This rapidly expanding in the inner freshwater ecosystems crayfish plague pathogen usually does not invade in isolation but is dependent on co-invasion by its host. Initially, Aphanomyces astaci was introduced to Lithuania with its host—crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus) in 1886 and strongly reduced the population of native noble crayfish (Astacus astacus) in Duobžeris lake located in Rokiškis district [37]. Later, the spread of this crayfish parasite was especially facilitated by the introduction of the invasive North American crayfish species that serve as its reservoirs and vectors [78,80]. One of these hosts, the signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), was introduced to Lithuania in about 1972 to supplement crayfish diversity and to increase fisheries of crayfish [83]. After its introduction, the crayfish plague epidemic have been recorded in many Lithuanian lakes up to 1979 [38,83]. During this period, native populations of noble crayfish Astacus astacus were practically destroyed in Lithuania, but after 1979, Aphanomyces astaci was not recorded and has been indicated as extinct [84]. The current status of Aphanomyces astaci is indicated as unknown because, nowadays, investigations on this crayfish pathogen are not conducted in Lithuania. However, in the 1990s, in Lithuanian, lakes and rivers appeared and began to spread the other invasive North American spiny-cheek crayfish Orconectes limosus, which is also known as the main host of Aphanomyces astaci [85,86,87]. Currently, the ongoing expansion of this spiny-cheek crayfish in Lithuania [88,89] undoubtedly increases the risk of reintroduction of new genetically distinct strains of Aphanomyces astaci and, as a result, increases the possibility of crayfish plague disease outbreak in Lithuania. Recent studies carried out in central Europe showed that the disease transmission risk may vary substantially between the different populations of native crayfish [90]. The absence of Aphanomyces astaci infection in some coexisting populations of the introduced spiny-cheek crayfish and the native noble crayfish confirmed the suggestion that the long-term coexistence of North American and European crayfish species probably resulted in pathogen virulence reduction in some local European freshwater ecosystems [90]. On the other hand, the immunity in the native noble crayfish populations has probably also increased, and that could have resulted in pathogen extinction. Currently, the crayfish aquarium trade may pose an additional risk of the crayfish plague disease reintroduction to the native water ecosystems. The health status of exotic crayfish kept in private aquaria is usually not monitored, and they can be infected by different, more aggressive, or new Aphanomyces astaci haplotypes [81,82], so control in aquaria is very important.

4.3. The Potato Blight Pathogen Phytophthora infestans and Grape Pathogen Plasmopara viticola

Among terrestrial crop pathogens, Phytophthora infestans is one of the most economically important, oldest, and best-investigated pathogens [27]. It infects Solanum, Lycopersicon, and Petunia plants. This Mexican/Andean species was introduced into Europe from North America in the middle of the 19th century, about 1843–1845 [91,92]. In Lithuania, this harmful and most devastating potato and tomato blight pathogen was recorded for the first time in 1912 [61] and, after that, widely spread across the country, causing epiphytoties and significant losses of potato and tomato yields every year [18,45,93,94,95,96]. The other most investigated in the world downy mildew pathogen, especially in the wine producing countries, the causal agent of grapevine downy mildew, Plasmopara viticola, is known in Europe since 1878, but in Lithuania appeared only in 1949 in Kaunas Botanical Garden. This North American species, after a presumably short adaptation period (less than 10 years), was found in 1955 in Vilnius Botanical Garden and afterward, year after year, showed an increasing tendency of spreading into new regions of Lithuania, affecting Vitis arisonica Engelm and Vitis vinifera L. [18,97]. However, P. viticola is not posing a significant threat to the Lithuanian economy, as there are no large grape plantations in the country.

4.4. The Most Harmful Phytophthora Invaders and Quarantine Species in Lithuania

Recently, three Phytophthora species, Ph. plurivora, Ph. alni, and Ph. cinnamomi, were included in the lists of the most harmful alien species or ‘worst’ invaders in Europe [98]. Two species from this list (Phytophthora alni and Phytophthora cinnamomi) have been found in Lithuania [39,47]. The cryptic alder pathogen Ph. alni is a causal agent of lethal root rot and collar disease of alder trees [31]. This species appeared for the first time in Europe in the United Kingdom in 1993 [30]; in Lithuania, it was detected in about 1999 [30] and is currently noted as spreading [46,47]. Recent taxonomical studies demonstrated that Ph. alni sensu lato represents a species complex composed of three distinct species: Ph. × alni, Ph. × multiformis and Ph. uniformis [31,71]. The parental species Ph. uniformis have possibly been introduced to Europe from North America, but future naturalization and hybridization with previously existing in Europe Ph. × multiformis led to the formation of extremely aggressive novel species Ph. × alni, which nowadays is widely spread in Europe [30,31,99]. Among riparian plants of streams, rivers and lakes, alder trees are highly vulnerable to Ph. alni species complex [71]. In Lithuania, two members of the Ph. alni sensu lato species complex, the novel species Ph. × alni and the oldest Ph. uniformis, are commonly found, infecting wet soil and alder trees growing mainly in moist riparian and alluvial forests [46,47]. The same tendency of Ph. alni sensu lato infection spread has been observed in Polish riparian ecosystems, where the decline of alder trees was commonly caused by Ph. × alni and by Ph. × multiformis [100]. At least 85 of the approximately 200 described Phytophthora species are currently known to have a predominantly saprotrophic aquatic lifestyle and may inhabit aquatic environments as litter decomposers or as potential opportunistic plant pathogens [24]. In Lithuania, Phytophthora spp. infection is commonly found on Alnus, Acer, Quercus, and Betula trees growing along the banks of water bodies in areas with excessive soil moisture and is considered a soilborne pathogen [70]. Phytophthora cinnamomi was discovered in our country around 2000, infecting Pinus and Quercus trees [39], but its distribution in Lithuania currently remains unknown. Notably, Ph. cinnamomi can also infect various fruit trees, nut trees, and other ornamental plants—about 5000 plant species in total [101]. The other species, Phytophthora cactorum, was found for the first time in 2004 in the Kaunas Botanical garden (Central Lithuania) and in the Šiauliai University Botanical garden (Northern Lithuania) in rhododendrons collections. Next year, in 2005, Ph. cactorum was detected on rhododendrons imported from Poland, demonstrating that infected planting material of ornamental plants imported from south-eastern European countries could be the vector of its spread [41]. This pathogen was known in Europe (Germany) from 1870 and has a very broad host range, about 250 plant species [66,102,103]. The large number of potential hosts in such generalist pathogens as Ph. cinnamomi and Ph. cactorum indicates a high risk of their jump on other hosts, successful adaptation and spread in Lithuania in the future.
The invasive quarantine species Ph. fragaria was detected in Lithuania in 2004 on strawberries, and according to the quarantine requirements, all infected plans were destroyed [40,104], but strawberries are widely grown in Lithuania in private gardens, and they are not controlled by phytosanitary inspectors; thus, real Ph. fragaria distribution is unknown. In 2007, the other invasive quarantine species, Ph. ramorum, was detected for the first time on Rhododendron catawbiense plants imported from Poland in the Marijampole region. After eradication until 2019, this pathogen was not detected, but in June 2019, Ph. ramorum was detected again on planted rhododendrons in the garden of the municipality of Dauparai-Kvietiniai, located in Klaipėda region [63]. Currently, these two quarantine pathogens, Ph. fragaria and Ph. ramorum, are under strict control, and the current status of Ph. ramorum in Lithuania is officially declared as ‘present, few occurrences, under eradication’. Meantime, Ph. fragaria is noted as present with restricted distribution in Lithuania [63,104].

5. Adaptation and Spreading Ability of Alien Plant Pathogenic Oomycota

Various alien stramenopilous fungus-like (Oomycota) organisms detected in Lithuania demonstrated different adaptations and spreading abilities to new environmental conditions. All aquatic and soil-inhabiting Phytophthora species are known as rapidly spreading generalists, but terrestrial specialized plant pathogenic Peronospora species are characterized by different adaptation and distribution abilities [24]. The ability of unspecialized and specialized generalist pathogens to become successful invaders is likely due to their ability to infect a wide range of new hosts under suitable environmental conditions and spread over long distances [3]. The emergence and prevalence of specialized plant pathogens also depend on the aggressiveness of the pathogen, as well as on the vulnerability and distribution of its hosts [2]. It is evident that current climate change affects both plants and their pathogens and that environmental disturbances, severe episodes of drought and heat, severe storms, and floods increase stress levels in plants. All of these factors can alter the rate of adaptation of new pathogens, contributing to the emergence of new diseases [105].
To the group of rapidly spreading in Lithuania invasive pathogens, in addition to abovementioned Albugo candida, Phytophthora infestans and Plasmopara viticola, also belong to Pseudoperonospora humuli, the causal agent of hop and hemp downy mildew. This hop pathogen was described in Japan initially as Peronoplasmopara humuli at the beginning of the 20th century [106]. In Europe, Ps. humuli appeared around 1920 [107], and soon in 1927 was found in Lithuania [57]. Then, within a few decades, Ps. humuli spread widely on Humulus lupulus L. throughout the country [18,50]. The other, closely related to Ps. humuli, harmful and rapidly spreading cucumber pathogen Pseudoperonospora cubensis was introduced to Europe from Central America (Cuba) in about 1971; in Lithuania, it appeared in 1985, and in the same year, it spread extremely rapidly across the country, causing epiphytoty on Cucumis sativus L. cultivated in greenhouses and in open soil [18,64]. Starting from 1984, Ps. cubensis has become the most economically important invasive pathogen on various Cucurbitaceae plants in Central Europe—cucumbers, melons, squashes, gourds, and watermelons [108,109,110,111,112]. Ps. cubensis also can infect Cannabaceae and Balsaminaceae plants [75,113]. The genetic studies indicated that the pathogen’s ability to hybridize is one of the most important drivers of invasions and that current epidemics of cucurbits are caused not by a single race but evidently by a recently appeared new subspecies or hyper-virulent hybrids of Ps. cubensis, characterized by a high degree of adaptability and ecological plasticity [114,115].
The rapidly spreading species also belongs to pea downy mildew Peronospora viciae (syn. P. pisi) and onion downy mildew P. destructor. Both pathogens appeared in Lithuania in the first part of the 20th century [57,59] and soon became widely spread over the country. During rainy summers, these pathogens demonstrated very rapid spread, causing serious outbreaks of epiphytotic diseases [50,51,52,64]. The onion downy mildew pathogen P. destructor was recorded on eight Allium species in Lithuania, but A. cepa L. is among the most damaged onion species, which during epidemics could become infected up to 80–100% [18,52]. About the same time, in 1926, the most harmful oomycete pathogen of lettuce was Bremia lactucae [54], which also rapidly spread and soon became very common in Lithuania [18].
Many species of Peronospora and Hyaloperonospora genera, such as P. aestivalis, P. arborescens, P. grisea, P. hyoscyami, P. farinose, P. lamii, P. trifoliorum, and P. violae, as well as H. barbareae, H. berteroae, H. camelinae, H. parasitica, and H. hesperidis, appeared about the middle of the 20th century, but it took more time (several decades) for its adaptation, naturalization, and distribution across the territory of Lithuania [18]. Some species of Peronosporales had been introduced in the end of 20th century: Peronospora chlorae, P. corydalis-intermediae, P. fagopyr, P. ornithopi, P. phyteumatis, P. sparsa, Plasmopara angustiterminalis, Pl. pastinacae Pseudoperonospora cannabina, and Sclerophthora macrospora [18,50,64,65], but in most cases they were not widely spread (Table 1). Notably, Peronospora sparsa and P. fagopiri are sporadically occurring species in different districts of Lithuania [18]. Current investigations of downy mildew in Lithuania are very fragmentary, dealing with some economically important agricultural plants, such as onions, potatoes, tomatoes, grapes, and alfalfa, which are cultivated in our country [45,51,95,96,97,116,117].

6. Conclusions

This study showed a rather large number of alien fungus-like (Oomycota) pathogens registered in Lithuania and revealed their negative impact on native terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, agriculture, forestry, and aquaculture. The great adaptability and efficient dispersal are the main drivers of the new oomycetous pathogen’s successful invasions. Early detection and continuous control of the emergence and spread of alien Oomycota, as well as immediate eradication of new and especially quarantine species, are very important tasks aimed at preventing and reducing the negative impact of these pests on plant health and productivity of native ecosystems. Among detected alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms, Albugo, Bremia, Pseudoperonospora and especially Phytophthora species are the most harmful and rapidly spreading plant pathogens, causing significant economic losses in agriculture and silviculture. The crayfish plague pathogen Aphanomyces astaci requires additional attention, as there is a high probability of reintroduction of its new haplotypes to Lithuania and to other European countries, together with new invasive crayfish species. Not only alien but all oomycetous pathogens require strict control aiming to prevent outbreaks of latent and emerging infectious diseases (EIDs).

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data used for the results of this study are included in this manuscript. The data have been published previously, and collections of Peronosporales are preserved in a publicly accessible repository: BILAS and the VU herbarium.

Acknowledgments

The author expresses gratitude to anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments, which helped to improve the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Pyšek, P.; Richardson, D.M.; Pergi, J.; Jarošík, V.; Sixtová, Z.; Weber, E. Geographical and taxonomic biases in invasion ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2008, 23, 237–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Desprez-Loustau, M.L. Alien fungi of Europe. In DAISIE Handbook of Alien Species in Europe; Drake, J.A., Ed.; Springer Science + Business Media B.V.: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009; pp. 15–28. ISBN 978-1-4020-8279-5. [Google Scholar]
  3. Roy, H.E.; Hesketh, H.; Purse, B.V.; Eilenberg, J.; Santini, A.; Scalera, R.; Stentiford, G.D.; Adriaens, T.; Bacela-Spychalska, K.; Bass, D.; et al. Alien Pathogens on the Horizon: Opportunities for Predicting Their Threat to Wildlife. Conserv. Lett. 2017, 10, 477–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Patterson, D.J. Stramenopiles: Chromophytes from a protistan perspective. In The Chromophyte Algae: Problems and Perspectives; Green, J.C., Leadbeater, B.S.C., Diver, W.L., Eds.; Clarendon Press: Oxford, UK, 1990; pp. 357–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Dick, M. Straminipilous Fungi; Kluwer Academic Publisher: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2001; p. 670. [Google Scholar]
  6. Massana, R.; Castresana, J.; Balague, V.; Guillou, L.; Romari, K.; Groisillier, A.; Valentin, K.; Pedros-Alio, C. Phylogenetic and ecological analysis of novel marine stramenopiles. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004, 70, 3528–3534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lévesque, C.A. Fifty years of oomycetes—From consolidation to evolutionary and genomic exploration. Fungal Divers. 2011, 50, 35–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Beakes, G.W.; Glockling, S.L.; Sekimoto, S. The evolutionary phylogeny of the oomycete “fungi”. Protoplasma 2012, 249, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Beakes, G.W.; Honda, D.; Thines, M. Systematics of the Straminipila: Labyrinthulomycota, Hyphochytriomycota, and Oomycota. In The Mycota VIII-Part A; McLaughlin, D.J., Spatafora, J.W., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 39–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Beakes, G.W.; Thines, M. Hyphochytriomycota and Oomycota. In Handbook of the Protists; Archibald, J., Simpson, A., Slamovits, C., Margulis, L., Melkonian, M., Chapman, D., Corliss, J., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 1–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Adl, S.M.; Simpson, A.G.B.; Farmer, M.A.; Andersen, R.A.; Anderson, O.R.; Barta, J.R.; Bowser, S.S.; Brugerolle, G.; Fensome, R.A.; Fredericq, S.; et al. The new higher-level classification of the eukaryotes with emphasis on the taxonomy of protists. J. Eukaryot. Microbiol. 2005, 52, 399–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Adl, S.M.; Bass, D.; Lane, C.E.; Lukes, J.; Schoch, C.L.; Smirnov, A.; Agatha, S.; Berney, C.; Brown, M.W.; Burki, F.; et al. Revisions to the classification, nomenclature, and diversity of eukaryotes. J. Eukaryot. Microbiol. 2019, 66, 4–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Baldauf, S.L.; Roger, A.J.; Wenk-Siefert, I.; Doolittle, W.F. A kingdom-level phylogeny of eukaryotes based on combined protein data. Science 2000, 290, 972–977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Derelle, R.; López-García, P.; Timpano, H.; Moreira, D. A phylogenomic framework to study the diversity and evolution of stramenopiles (= Heterokonts). Mol. Biol. Evol. 2016, 33, 2890–2898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. McCarthy, C.G.P.; Fitzpatrick, D.A. Phylogenomic reconstruction of the oomycete phylogeny derived from 37 genomes. mSphere 2017, 2, e00095-17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Buaya, A.T.; Thines, M. An overview on the biology and phylogeny of the early-diverging oomycetes. Philipp. J. Syst. Biol. 2020, 14, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Larroque, M.; Barriot, R.; Bottin, A.; Barre, A.; Rougé, P.; Dumas, B.; Gaulin, E. The unique architecture and function of cellulose-interacting proteins in oomycetes revealed by genomic and structural analyses. BMC Genom. 2012, 13, 605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Mazelaitis, J.; Stanevičienė, S. Gleivūnai (Myxomycota) Peronosporiečiai (Peronosporales). Lietuvos grybai I; Mokslo ir Enciklopedijų leidikla: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1995; p. 292. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  19. Palm, M.E.; Rossman, A. Invasion pathways of terrestrial plant-inhabiting fungi. In Invasive Species: Vectors and Management Strategies; Ruiz, G., Carlton, J.T., Eds.; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2003; pp. 31–43. [Google Scholar]
  20. Brasier, C.M. Phytophthora biodiversity: How many Phytophthora species are there? In Phytophthoras in Forests and Natural Ecosystems, Proceedings of the Fourth Meeting of the International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO); Goheen, E.M., Frankel, S.J., Eds.; USDA Forest Service: Albany, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 101–115. [Google Scholar]
  21. Santini, A.; Ghelardini, L.; De Pace, C. Biogeographical patterns and determinants of invasion by forest pathogens in Europe. New Phytol. 2013, 197, 238–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Migliorini, D.; Ghelardini, L.; Tondini, E.; Luchi, N.; Santini, A. The potential of symptomless potted plants for carrying invasive soilborne plant pathogens. Divers. Distrib. 2015, 21, 1218–1229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ghelardini, L.; Pepori, A.L.; Luchi, N.; Capretti, P.; Santini, A. Drivers of emerging fungal diseases of forest trees. For. Ecol. Manag. 2016, 381, 235–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Brasier, C.; Scanu, B.; Cooke, D.; Jung, T. Phytophthora: An ancient, historic, biologically and structurally cohesive and evolutionarily successful generic concept in need of preservation. IMA Fungus 2022, 13, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Callaghan, S.; Guest, D. Globalisation, the founder effect, hybrid Phytophthora species and rapid evolution: New headaches for biosecurity. Australas. Plant Pathol. 2015, 44, 255–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Depotter, J.R.L.; Seidl, M.F.; Woods, T.A.; Thomma, B.P. Interspecific hybridization impacts host range and pathogenicity of filamentous microbes. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2016, 32, 7–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Cooke, D.E.L.; Andersson, B. Phytophthora infestans and potato blight in Europe. In Phytophthora: A Global Perspective; Lamour, K., Ed.; CABI Plant Protection Series, No. 2; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2013; pp. 59–64. [Google Scholar]
  28. Goss, E.M.; Cardenas, M.E.; Myers, K.; Forbes, G.A.; Fry, W.E.; Restrepo, S.; Grünwald, N.J. The plant pathogen Phytophthora andina emerged via hybridization of an unknown Phytophthora species and the Irish potato famine pathogen, P. infestans. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e24543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Puidet, B.; Mabon, R.; Guibert, M.; Kiiker, R.; Soonvald, L.; Hong Le, V.; Eikemo, H.; Dewaegeneire, P.; Guillaume, S.; Chatot, C.; et al. Examining phenotypic traits contributing to the spread in Northern European potato crops of EU_41_A2, a new clonal lineage of Phytophthora infestans. Phytopathology 2022, 112, 414–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Brasier, C.M.; Kirk, S.A.; Delcan, J.; Cooke, D.E.L.; Jung, T.; Man In’t Veld, W.A. Phytophthora alni sp. nov. and its variants: Designation of emerging heteroploid hybrid pathogens spreading on Alnus trees. Mycol. Res. 2004, 108, 1172–1184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Husson, C.; Aguayo, J.; Revellin, C.; Frey, P.; Ioos, R.; Marçais, B. Evidence for homoploid speciation in Phytophthora alni supports taxonomic reclassification in this species complex. Fungal Genet. Biol. 2015, 77, 12–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Motiejūnaitė, J.; Markovskaja, S.; Kutorga, E.; Iršėnaitė, R.; Kasparavičius, J.; Kačergius, A.; Lygis, V. Alien fungi in Lithuania: List of species, current status and trophic structure. Bot. Lith. 2017, 23, 139–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Jones, D.R.; Baker, R.H.A. Introductions of non-native plant pathogens into Great Britain, 1970–2004. Plant Pathol. 2007, 56, 891–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Desprez-Loustau, M.L.; Courtecuisse, R.; Robin, C.; Husson, C.; Moreau, P.-A.; Blancard, D.; Selosse, M.-A.; Lung-Escarmant, B.; Piou, D.; Sache, I. Species diversity and drivers of spread of alien fungi (sensu lato) in Europe with a particular focus on France. Biol. Invasions 2010, 12, 157–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mułenko, W.; Piątek, M.; Wołczańska, A.; Kozłowska, M.; Ruszkiewicz-Michalska, M. Plant parasitic fungi introduced to Poland in Modern times. Alien and invasive species. Biol. Invasions Pol. 2010, 1, 49–71. [Google Scholar]
  36. Index Fungorum. 2025. Available online: https://indexfungorum.org/Index.htm (accessed on 25 April 2025).
  37. Cukerzis, J.M. Biologia Širokopalogo Raka (Astacus astacus L); Mintis: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1970; p. 203. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  38. Mazylis, A.; Grigelis, A. On diseases of Astacus astacus in some Lithuanian lakes. Biol. Rechn. Rakov Vod. Litny. Vilnius 1979, 1979, 121–127. [Google Scholar]
  39. Jovaišienė, Z. Naujos spygliuočių ligos sukėlėja–cinamoninė fitoftora (Phytophthora cinnamomi Rands). Mūsų Girios 2004, 5, 12. [Google Scholar]
  40. Jovaišienė, Z. Phytophthora fragariae, a new fungi species in Lithuania. Bot. Lith. 2004, 10, 233–236. [Google Scholar]
  41. Jovaišiene, Z.; Lane, C. First report of Phytophthora cactorum in Lithuania. Bot. Lith. 2006, 12, 197–199. [Google Scholar]
  42. Markovskaja, S. Saprolegniaceae (Peronosporomycetes) in Lithuania. I. The genera Achlya and Newbya. Bot. Lith. 2004, 10, 141–160. [Google Scholar]
  43. Markovskaja, S. Saprolegniaceae (Peronosporomycetes) in Lithuania. II. The genus Saprolegnia. Bot. Lith. 2006, 12, 97–112. [Google Scholar]
  44. Markovskaja, S. The genus Aphanomyces (Leptolegniaceae, Peronosporomycetes) in Lithuania. Bot. Lith. 2007, 13, 237–244. [Google Scholar]
  45. Ronis, A.; Rainys, K.; Semaškienė, R.; Lazauskas, S. Potato late blight in Lithuania. In Proceedings of the Tenth Workshop of a European Network for Development of an Integrated Control Strategy of Potato Late Blight, Bologna, Italy, 2–5 May 2007; pp. 303–307. [Google Scholar]
  46. Norkutė, G. Characterization of Populations of Invasive Pathogens—Causal Agents of Three Forest Tree Diseases: Alder Decline, Dutch Elm Disease and Ash Dieback. Ph.D. Thesis, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  47. Norkutė, G.; Lygis, V. Occurrence and characterization of Phytophthora alni sensu lato populations in Lithuania. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the European Foundation for Plant Pathology “Healthy Plants—Healthy People”, Krakow, Poland, 8–13 September 2014; p. 266. [Google Scholar]
  48. Kutorga, E. Lietuvos grybų įvairovės pažinimas: Dabartis ir perspektyvos. In Mokslas. Gamtos Mokslų Fakultet Trečiosios Mokslinės Konferencijos Pranešimai; Kilkus, K., Ed.; Mokslas: Vilnius, Lithuania, 2004; pp. 102–112. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  49. Voglmayr, H.; Schertler, A.; Essl, F.; Krisai-Greilhuber, I. Alien and cryptogenic fungi and oomycetes in Austria: An annotated checklist (2nd edition). Biol. Invasions 2023, 25, 27–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Stanevičienė, S. Peronosporovyje Griby Pribaltiki; Mokslas: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1984; p. 207. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  51. Bulovienė, V.; Survilienė, E. Effect of onion leaf surface on the infection with Peronospora destructor (Berk.) Casp. and sporulation. Sodininkystė Daržininkystė 2005, 24, 136–142. [Google Scholar]
  52. Bulovienė, V.; Survilienė, E. Effect of environmental conditions and inoculum concentration on sporulation of Peronospora destructor. Agron. Res. 2006, 4, 147–150. [Google Scholar]
  53. Jundziłł, J. Opisanie Roślin w Litwie, na Wołyniu, Podolu i Ukrainie Dziko Rosnących, iako i Oswoionych: Podłług Wydania Szesnastego Układu Roślin; Józef Zawadzki Własnym Nakładem: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1830. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  54. Vilkaitis, V. Truputis medžiagos Lietuvos grybų florai. Kosmos 1927, 2–3, 97–102. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  55. Stanevičienė (Jarmalavičiutė), S. Nauja medžiaga Lietuvos TSR peronosporainiams grybams (Peronosporales) pažinti. LTSR MA Darb. Ser. C 1962, 3, 13–22. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  56. Trzebiński, J. Przyczynek do Znajomości Grzybów Pasożytniczych Poludniowo-Zachodniej Części Litwy i Północno-Wschodniej Polski. Prace Tow. Przyjacel Nauk w Wilnie; Wydział nauk Matem. I Przyrodn: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1937; Volume 11, pp. 163–170. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  57. Vilkaitis, V. Apie du peronosporainių grybelius. Kosmos 1928, 5–6, 249–251. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  58. Stanevičienė (Jarmalavičiutė), S.; Minkevičius, A. Medžiaga Lietuvos TSR Peronosporainiams Grybams (Peronosporales) Pažinti; Vilniaus Universiteto Mokslo Darbai. Biologija, Geografija, Geologija: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1960; Volume 7, pp. 25–39. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  59. Vilkaitis, V. Augalų Apsaugos Stoties 1927–1932 m. Darbų Apyskaita; Spindulys: Kaunas, Lithuania, 1933; pp. 37–55. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  60. Michalski, A. Grzyby pasożytnicze, zaobserwowane na roślinach dziko rosnąncych, oraz uprawnych na terenie powiatu Wileńsko-Trockiego. Kosmos 1936, 61, 239–279. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  61. Petruscinski, Z.F. Rezultaty Trudov i Opytov Proizvedennyh na Opytnoj Stancii v Baisiogale v 1912; Spindulys: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1914; p. 28. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  62. Brundza, K. Parazitnye Griby Kul’tiviruemyh Rastenij Litovskoj SSR; AN Litovskoj SSR: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1961. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  63. EPPO Reporting Service. Phytophthora ramorum (PHYTRA). Distribution in Lithuania. 2019. Available online: https://gd.eppo.int/taxon/PHYTRA/distribution/LT (accessed on 25 April 2025).
  64. Stanevičienė, S. Svogūnų Veislių Atsparumas Peronosporozei Lietuvos Sąlygomis. Augalų Apsaugos Naujovės; Mokslas: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1988; pp. 45–46. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  65. Špokauskienė, O. Varpinių Augalų Mikromicetai Lietuvoje. Augalų Apsaugos Naujoves; Mokslas: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1989; p. 228. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  66. Erwin, D.C.; Ribeiro, O.K. Phytophthora Diseases Worldwide; APS Press: St. Paul, MN, USA; American Phytopathological Society: St. Paul, MN, USA, 1996; p. 592. [Google Scholar]
  67. Willoughby, L.G. Fungi and Fish Diseases; Pisces Press in Association with the Institute of Aquaculture, University of Stirling, Pisces Press: Stirling, UK, 1994; p. 57. [Google Scholar]
  68. Wicker, E.; Hulle, M.; Rouxel, F. Pathogenic characteristics of isolates of Aphanomyces eusteiches from pea in France. Plant Pathol. 2001, 50, 433–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Van West, P. Saprolegnia parasitica, an oomycete pathogen with a fishy appetite: New challenges for an old problem. Mycologist 2006, 20, 99–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Adomas, V.; Oszako, T.; Nowakowska, J.; Stankevičienė, A. First records of Phytophthora spp. based on DNA analysis in Lithuania. Folia For. Pol. A 2012, 54, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Bjelke, U.; Boberg, J.; Oliva, J.; Tattersdill, K.; McKie, B.G. Dieback of riparian alder caused by the Phytophthora alni complex: Projected consequences for stream ecosystems. Freshw. Biol. 2016, 61, 565–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Biga, M.L.B. Riesaminazione delle specie del genere Albugo in base alla morfologia dei conidi. Sydowia 1955, 9, 339–358. (In Italian) [Google Scholar]
  73. Rouppert, K.; Namyslowski, B. Żmujdzkie Grzyby, Zebrine Przez Prof. dr. E. Janczewskiego; Sprawozdanie Komisji fiziograficznej: Kraków, Poland, 1909; Volume 43, pp. 161–165. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  74. Voglmayr, H.; Riethmüller, A. Phylogenetic relationship of Albugo species (white blister rusts) based on LSU rDNA sequence and oospore data. Mycol. Res. 2006, 110, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Choi, Y.-J.; Hong, S.B.; Shin, H.D. A reconsideration of Pseudoperonospora cubensis and P. humuli based on molecular and morphological data. Mycol. Res. 2005, 109, 841–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Choi, Y.-J.; Shin, H.-D.; Ploch, S.; Thines, M. Evidence for uncharted biodiversity in the Albugo candida complex, with the description of a new species. Mycol. Res. 2008, 112, 1327–1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Alderman, D.J. Geographical spread of bacterial and fungal diseases of crustaceans. Rev. Sci. Tech. (Int. Off. Epizoot.) 1996, 15, 603–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Filipová, L.; Petrusek, A.; Matasová, K.; Delaunay, C.; Grandjean, F. Prevalence of the Crayfish Plague Pathogen Aphanomyces astaci in Populations of the Signal Crayfish Pacifastacus eniusculus in France: Evaluating the Threat to Native Crayfish. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e70157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Maguire, I.; Jelić, M.; Klobučar, G.; Delpy, M.; Delaunay, C.; Grandjean, F. Prevalence of the pathogen Aphanomyces astaci in freshwater crayfish populations in Croatia. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2016, 118, 45–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Kaldre, K.; Paaver, T.; Hurt, M.; Grandjeanet, F. First records of the non-indigenous signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) and its threat to noble crayfish (Astacus astacus) populations in Estonia. Biol. Invasions 2017, 19, 2771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Mrugała, A.; Kozubíková-Balcarová, E.; Chucholl, C.; Cabanillas Resino, S.; Viljamaa-Dirks, S.; Vukić, J.; Petrusek, A. Trade of ornamental crayfish in Europe as a possible introduction pathway for important crustacean diseases: Crayfish plague and white spot syndrome. Biol. Invasions 2015, 17, 1313–1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Panteleit, J.; Keller, N.S.; Kokko, H.; Jussila, J.; Makkonen, J.; Theissinger, K.; Schrimpf, A. Investigation of ornamental crayfish reveals new carrier species of the crayfish plague pathogen (Aphanomyces astaci). Aquat. Invasions 2017, 12, 77–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Cukerzis, J.M. On acclimatization of Pacifastacius leniusculus Dana in an isolated lake. Freshw. Crayfish 1979, 4, 445–450. [Google Scholar]
  84. Cukerzis, J.M. Astacus astacus in Europe. In Freshwater Crayfish—Biology, Managament and Explotation; Holdich, D.M., Lowerly, R.S., Eds.; Croom Helm: London, UK, 1989; pp. 309–340. [Google Scholar]
  85. Koreiva, Č. Orconectes limosus in Lithuania. Crayfish news. IAA Newsl. 1994, 16, 7. [Google Scholar]
  86. Kozubíková, E.; Viljamaa-Dirks, S.; Heinikainen, S.; Petrusek, A. Spiny-cheek crayfish Orconectes limosus carry a novel genotype of the crayfish plague pathogen Aphanomyces astaci. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2011, 108, 214–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Svoboda, J.; Mrugała, A.; Kozubíková-Balcarová, E.; Petrusek, A. Hosts and transmission of the crayfish plague pathogen Aphanomyces astaci: A review. J. Fish. Dis. 2017, 40, 127–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Burba, A. Assessment of crayfish situation in Lithuania and prognosis for the future. Žuvininkystė Liet. 2008, 8, 218–230. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  89. Arbačiauskas, K.; Višinskienė, G.; Smilgevičienė, S.; Rakauskas, V. Non-indigenous macroinvertebrate species in Lithuanian fresh waters, Part 1: Distributions, dispersal and future. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 2011, 402, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Schrimpf, A.; Maiwald, T.; Vrålstad, T.; Schultz, H.K.; Śmietana, P.; Schultz, R. Absence of the crayfish plague pathogen (Aphanomyces astaci) facilitates coexistence of European and American crayfish in central Europe. Freshw. Biol. 2013, 58, 1116–1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Bourke, A. Emergence of Potato Blight, 1843–46. Nature 1964, 203, 805–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Andrivon, D. The origin of Phytophthora infestans populations present in Europe in the 1840s: A critical review of historical and scientific evidence. Plant Pathol. 1996, 54, 1027–1035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Siemaszko, W. Zapiski Grzyboznawcze z Gubernii Wilenskej. Sprawozdania z Posiedzeń Tow. Przuj. Naukow. Warszawskiego; Wydzial nauk Matem i Przyrodn: Vilnius, Lithuania, 1914; Volume 7, pp. 124–128. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  94. Valskyte, A. The resistance of Phytophthora infestans population to metalaxyl in Lithuania. Transactions of the Estonian Agricultural University. Agronomy 2000, 209, 224–226. [Google Scholar]
  95. Asakavičiūtė, R.; Ražukas, A.; Jundulas, J. Susceptibility of new potato varieties to the potato late blight oomycete Phytophthora infestans (Mont.) de Bary in Lithuania. Agrociencia 2009, 43, 625–633. [Google Scholar]
  96. Kiiker, R.; Skrabule, I.; Ronis, A.; Cooke, D.E.L.; Hansen, J.G.; Williams, I.H.; Mänd, M.; Runno-Paurson, E. Diversity of populations of Phytophthora infestans in relation to patterns of potato crop management in Latvia and Lithuania. Plant Pathol. 2019, 68, 1207–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Diliautas, A.; Vynmedžių Grybinės Ligos ir Apsauga nuo jų. Vynmedžių Ligos ir Kenkėjai. 2016. (In Lithuanian). Available online: http://www.vynuoges.lt/ligos-ir-kenkejai/grybines-vynmedziu- (accessed on 16 December 2024).
  98. Nentwig, W.; Bacher, S.; Kumschick, S.; Pyšek, P.; Vila, M. More than “100 worst” alien species in Europe. Biol. Invasions 2018, 20, 1611–1621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Ioos, R.; Andrieux, A.; Marçais, B.; Frey, P. Genetic characterization of the natural hybrid species Phytophthora alni as inferred from nuclear and mitochondrial DNA analyses. Fungal Genet. Biol. 2006, 43, 511–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Oszako, T. Alder decline in Europe. Leśne Pr. Badaw. 2005, 1 (Suppl. 1), 53–63. [Google Scholar]
  101. Hardham, A.R.; Blackman, L.M. Phytophthora cinnamomi. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2018, 19, 260–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Hantula, J.; Lilja, A.; Nuorteva, H.; Parikka, P.; Werres, S. Pathogenicity, morphology, and genetic variation of Phytophthora cactorum from strawberry, apple, rhododendron, and silver birch. Mycol. Res. 2000, 104, 1062–1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Hudler, G.W. Phytophthora cactorum. For. Phytophthoras 2013, 3, 20153142254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. EPPO Reporting Service. Phytophthora fragariae (PHYTFR). Distribution in Lithuania. 2018. Available online: https://gd.eppo.int/taxon/PHYTFR/distribution/LT (accessed on 25 April 2025).
  105. Singh, B.K.; Delgado-Baquerizo, M.; Egidi, E.; Guirado, E.; Leach, J.E.; Liu, H.; Trivedi, P. Climate change impacts on plant pathogens, food security and paths forward. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2023, 21, 640–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Miyabe, K.; Takahashi, Y. A new disease of hopvine caused by Peronoplasmopara humuli n. sp. Trans. Sapporo Nat. Hist. Soc. 1906, 1, 149–157. [Google Scholar]
  107. Purayannur, S.; Gent, D.H.; Miles, T.D.; Radišek, S.; Quesada-Ocampo, L.M. The hop downy mildew pathogen Pseudoperonospora humuli. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2021, 22, 755–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Lebeda, A.; Schwinn, F.J. The downy mildews—An overview of recent research progress. J. Plant Dis. Prot. 1994, 101, 225–254. [Google Scholar]
  109. Lebeda, A.; Gadasová, V. Pathogenic variation of Pseudoperonospora cubensis in the Czech Republic and some other European countries. Acta Hortic. 2002, 588, 137–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Cappelli, C.; Buonaurio, R.; Stravato, V.M. Occurrence of Pseudoperonospora cubensis pathotype 5 on squash in Italy. Plant Dis. 2003, 87, 449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Urban, J.; Lebeda, A. Variation for fungicide resistance in Czech populations of Pseudoperonospora cubensis. J. Phytopathol. 2007, 155, 143–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Polat, İ.; Baysal, Ö.; Mercati, F.; Kitner, M.; Cohen, Y.; Lebeda, A.; Carimi, F. Characterization of Pseudoperonospora cubensis isolates from Europe and Asia using ISSR and SRAP molecular markers. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2014, 139, 641–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Voglmayr, H.; Piątek, M.; Mossebo, D.C. Pseudoperonospora cubensis causing downy mildew disease on Impatiens irvingii in Cameroon: A new host for the pathogen. Plant Pathol. 2009, 58, 394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Voglmayr, H. Progress and challenges in systematics of downy mildews and white blister rusts: New insights from genes and morphology. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2008, 122, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Runge, F.; Choi, Y.-J.; Thines, M. Phylogenetic investigations in the genus Pseudoperonospora reveal overlooked species and cryptic diversity in the P. cubensis species cluster. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2011, 129, 135–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Liatukienė, A.; Liatukas, Ž.; Ruzgas, V. Netikrosios miltligės tyrimai liucernų pasėlyje. Žemės Ūkio Moksl. 2010, 17, 87–92. (In Lithuanian) [Google Scholar]
  117. Liatukienė, A.; Liatukas, Ž. Downy Mildew Reaction of Alfalfa Accessions of Different Geographical Origin under Lithuanian Conditions. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2014, 16, 905–910. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Current status (a) and functional capacity/lifestyle of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania (b).
Figure 1. Current status (a) and functional capacity/lifestyle of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania (b).
Diversity 17 00426 g001
Figure 2. Cumulative graph of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania.
Figure 2. Cumulative graph of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania.
Diversity 17 00426 g002aDiversity 17 00426 g002b
Figure 3. Species diversity of the main taxonomic groups (orders) of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania.
Figure 3. Species diversity of the main taxonomic groups (orders) of alien stramenopilous fungus-like organisms (Oomycota) recorded in Lithuania.
Diversity 17 00426 g003
Figure 4. Taxonomic diversity of alien Peronosporales recorded in Lithuania.
Figure 4. Taxonomic diversity of alien Peronosporales recorded in Lithuania.
Diversity 17 00426 g004
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Markovskaja, S. Alien Stramenopilous Fungus-like Organisms (Oomycota) Diversity and Distribution in Lithuania. Diversity 2025, 17, 426. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17060426

AMA Style

Markovskaja S. Alien Stramenopilous Fungus-like Organisms (Oomycota) Diversity and Distribution in Lithuania. Diversity. 2025; 17(6):426. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17060426

Chicago/Turabian Style

Markovskaja, Svetlana. 2025. "Alien Stramenopilous Fungus-like Organisms (Oomycota) Diversity and Distribution in Lithuania" Diversity 17, no. 6: 426. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17060426

APA Style

Markovskaja, S. (2025). Alien Stramenopilous Fungus-like Organisms (Oomycota) Diversity and Distribution in Lithuania. Diversity, 17(6), 426. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17060426

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop