Multilocus Phylogenetic Identification and Fruit Pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia Isolates Obtained from Mango Branches with Dieback and Fruits with Stem-End Rot in Mexico
by
, , , , , , and
Juan Manuel Tovar-Pedraza
1
,
Guillermo Estrada-Arroyo
2,
Rafael Macedo-Arzate
2,
Sami J. Michereff
3,
Kamila C. Correia
3,
Santos Gerardo Leyva-Mir
2,
José Antonio Mora-Aguilera
4,
Moisés Camacho-Tapia
2,
Guillermo Márquez-Licona
5 and
Alma Rosa Solano-Báez
5,* 1
Laboratorio de Fitopatología, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, Subsede Culiacán, Culiacán 80110, Mexico
2
Departamento de Parasitología Agricola, Universidad Autónoma Chapingo, Texcoco 56230, Mexico
3
Centro de Ciências Agrárias e da Biodiversidade, Universidade Federal do Cariri, Crato 63130-025, Brazil
4
Fitopatología, Colegio de Postgraduados, Campus Montecillo, Texcoco 56230, Mexico
5
Centro de Desarrollo de Productos Bióticos, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Yautepec 62731, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Fungi 2026, 12(5), 370; https://doi.org/10.3390/jof12050370
Submission received: 3 April 2026
/
Revised: 11 May 2026
/
Accepted: 12 May 2026
/
Published: 16 May 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fungal Diseases of Fruit and Woody Plants)
Abstract
Mango (Mangifera indica L.) represents one of the most significant fruit crops cultivated across multiple regions of Mexico. In recent years, cases of stem-end rot and dieback have been observed in mango-producing areas. This research aimed to characterize the diversity of Lasiodiplodia species associated with these symptoms, determine their geographic distribution in five Mexican states, and evaluate their pathogenicity on mango fruits. During 2014, samples exhibiting dieback and stem-end rot symptoms were collected from 27 commercial orchards located in five states, resulting in the obtention of 87 Lasiodiplodia isolates. From these, 36 representative isolates were selected and identified through phylogenetic analyses (ITS, tef1-α, tub2), employing the Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Inference approach. Eight Lasiodiplodia species were resolved: L. brasiliense, L. laeliocattleyae, L. subglobosa, L. theobromae, L. iraniensis, L. mexicanensis, L. hyalina, and L. pseudotheobromae. Among them, L. brasiliense, L. laeliocattleyae, L. subglobosa, L. iraniensis, L. mexicanensis, and L. hyalina are reported for the first time in association with mango tissues in Mexico. Pathogenicity tests conducted on detached mango fruits using the mycelial plug inoculation method demonstrated that all species were capable of inducing necrotic lesions. However, L. laeliocattleyae and L. brasiliense exhibited the highest levels of aggressiveness, while L. mexicanensis, L. hyalina, and L. pseudotheobromae were the least aggressive.
1. Introduction
The mango (Mangifera indica L.) ranks among the top five fruit crops of greatest economic relevance globally, cultivated extensively throughout tropical and subtropical regions [1,2]. Mexico stands as the world’s fifth-largest producer and the leading exporter of this fruit [3]. Although mango cultivation occurs in 23 Mexican states, production is mainly concentrated in ten: Sinaloa, Guerrero, Nayarit, Chiapas, Oaxaca, Michoacán, Jalisco, Veracruz, Colima, and Tamaulipas [3].
The Botryosphaeriaceae family comprises 24 genera [4,5] and 280 species [6,7] of a diverse group of endophytic, necrotrophic pathogens, and saprophytic fungi that colonize the inner tissues of woody plants and are increasingly associated with dieback events globally [8,9,10]. Several Botryosphaeriaceae species have been previously associated with mango diseases, including Botryosphaeria spp. [11,12,13], Fusicoccum spp. [13,14], Neofusicoccum spp. [11,12,14,15,16], Neoscytalidium spp. [13], and Lasiodiplodia spp. [11,14,15,17,18,19,20,21,22].
Accurate identification of plant pathogenic species is essential for elucidating their epidemiological behavior and for designing efficient management and control strategies [23]. The distinction of Lasiodiplodia species by morphological characterization is not reliable, and it is necessary to use DNA sequence data, preferably combining sequences from multiple loci such as ITS, tef1-α, and tub2, for accurate identification [17,24,25,26,27,28,29].
At present, no fewer than ten Lasiodiplodia species have been reported in association with mango tissues worldwide [30]. Nevertheless, in Mexico, only L. theobromae and L. pseudotheobromae have been documented as causal agents of stem-end rot and dieback in mango, respectively [16]. This study aimed to elucidate the diversity of Lasiodiplodia species linked to these diseases through phylogenetic analysis, assess their geographic distribution across mango-producing regions, and evaluate their aggressiveness on mango fruits.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Field Surveys
From May to November 2014, surveys were conducted in 27 commercial mango orchards distributed in the states of Sinaloa, Guerrero, Veracruz, Chiapas, and Tabasco, in Mexico. Mango branches with dieback, as well as fruits with stem-end rot symptoms, were collected from various mango cultivars (Manila, Tommy Atkins, Haden, Ataulfo, Kent, and Keitt).
2.2. Isolation, Purification, and Preservation of Fungi
Tissue fragments taken from the transition zone between necrotic and healthy areas of branches and fruits were surface-disinfested in 1% sodium hypochlorite for 1 min, rinsed three times with sterile distilled water, and dried on sterile absorbent paper. The disinfected pieces were then placed on Petri dishes containing potato dextrose agar (PDA; Difco®, Sparks, MD, USA) supplemented with 0.5 g L−1 streptomycin sulfate (Sigma-Aldrich®, St. Louis, MO, USA) and incubated in darkness at 25 °C. Pure cultures were obtained by transferring hyphal tips from the actively growing margins of colonies onto fresh PDA. All isolates used in this investigation were preserved in the Culture Collection of Phytopathogenic Fungi “Professor Maria Menezes” (CMM), Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil, under accession numbers CMM3106–CMM3201.
2.3. DNA Extraction, PCR Amplification, and Sequencing
For each Lasiodiplodia isolate, a small portion of aerial mycelium was collected from six-day-old cultures using a sterile 10 µL pipette tip. Genomic DNA from 87 isolates was extracted with the Multisource Genomic DNA Miniprep Kit (Axygen Scientific®, Union City, CA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. Amplification of partial fragments of the tef1-α EF1-688F/EF1-1251R [31]. To confirm species, amplification of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region and partial fragments of the tub2 genes was performed using the primer pairs ITS1/ITS4 [32] and Bt2A/Bt2B [33], respectively. Each 50 µL PCR reaction contained 21 µL of PCR-grade water, 4 µL of DNA template, 2.5 µL each primer (10 μM of each primer), and 20 µL of 2× PCR Master Mix [0.05 U µL−1 Taq DNA polymerase, reaction buffer, 4 mM MgCl2, and 0.4 mM of each dNTP] (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Amplifications were carried out in a Biocycler MJ96 thermocycler (Applied Biosystems, Carlsbad, CA, USA). PCR products were resolved on 1.5% agarose gels stained with ethidium bromide (0.5 µg mL−1) and visualized under ultraviolet light. The resulting amplicons were purified using the AxyPrep PCR Purification Kit (Axygen, Union City, CA, USA) and bidirectionally sequenced by Macrogen® (Seoul, Republic of Korea) employing the same primers used in the amplification reactions.
2.4. Phylogenetic Analysis
Chromatograms obtained from sequencing the ITS region and partial tef1-α and tub2 gene fragments were examined and assembled using the Staden Package version 2.0 [34]. Sequence alignments were generated with ClustalX v1.83 [35] integrated in the MEGA v7.0 software [36], with manual adjustments applied when necessary to improve alignment quality. Reference sequences of Lasiodiplodia species retrieved from GenBank were incorporated into the alignments for comparative analysis. Phylogenetic relationships were inferred using the Maximum Likelihood (ML), first for the tef1-α locus, selecting isolates that represented the greatest diversity of possible species. The concatenated datasets (ITS, tef1-α, and tub2) of the selected isolates were then analyzed. The resulting sequences were compared with type and reference isolates based on the most recent taxonomic studies of Lasiodiplodia. ML analyses were carried out in IQ-TREE v2.3.5 [37], with the optimal nucleotide substitution models determined by ModelFinder V2.3.5 [38,39]. Each ML run included 1000 bootstrap replications using the ultrafast bootstrapping algorithm implemented in IQ-TREE. Additionally, a Bayesian Inference (BI) analysis was conducted in MrBayes v.3.1.2 [40], using nucleotide substitution models selected by the BIC criterion (HKY + G for ITS and tub2 and GTR + I + G for tef1-α). Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) simulations with 2 × 106 generations were performed to estimate posterior probabilities. Trees were sampled every 1000 generations, and 25% of the trees produced during the burn-in phase were discarded.
2.5. Pathogenicity and Aggressiveness on Detached Fruits
Pathogenicity assays were performed on detached fruits of the mango cv. Ataulfo at the second color-break stage of ripening. The fruits were first washed thoroughly under running tap water, then surface-sterilized in 1% sodium hypochlorite for 3 min, immersed in 70% ethanol for 1 min, rinsed twice with sterile distilled water, and air-dried inside a laminar flow hood. Each fruit was wounded to a depth of approximately 3 mm using a sterile toothpick, and a 5 mm mycelial disk taken from the actively growing edge of a 5-day-old PDA culture was placed onto each wound. For control treatments, agar plugs without fungal growth were applied to ten fruits. All fruits were incubated at 25 °C under a 12 h light/12 h dark cycle in plastic trays lined with two layers of moistened sterile paper towels and sealed within plastic bags to maintain humidity. Three days after inoculation, disease severity was quantified by measuring lesion diameters to assess isolate aggressiveness. Each isolate was tested on three fruits, and the experiment was conducted twice. Differences in aggressiveness among Lasiodiplodia species were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and mean separations were determined by Fisher’s LSD test at a 5% significance level with SAS software version 9.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).
3. Results
3.1. Fungal Isolates
A total of 87 Lasiodiplodia isolates were obtained from mango symptomatic tissues (branches and fruits) collected from 27 orchards distributed in five states of Mexico (Sinaloa, Guerrero, Veracruz, Chiapas, and Tabasco).
3.2. Phylogenetic Analysis
All 87 isolates were previously identified as Lasiodiplodia spp. based on a phylogenetic analysis of the tef1-α gene. To confirm the species identity of the isolates, the ITS region and partial tub2 gene sequences were obtained for 36 isolates representing isolates (Table 1). Multilocus sequence analysis was conducted using concatenated sequences of the three genetic markers, and sequences of ex-type isolates of Lasiodiplodia species from GenBank were included in the analysis together with isolates obtained in this study (Table 2). The ITS and tef1-α genetic alignments contained 77 taxa, and the tub2 genetic alignment contained 71 taxa, including Diplodia mutila (CMW7060) and Diplodia seriata (CBS112555) as outgroups. According to multilocus analysis, the 36 representative isolates were distributed among eight previously described Lasiodiplodia species (Figure 1). These species presented significant support in the ML analysis (85–100% SH-alrt bootstrap support) and in the BI analysis (0.86–1 posterior probability). Eleven isolates were grouped within each of the L. iraniensis and L. brasiliense clades, while three isolates clustered in each of the L. theobromae, L. subglobosa, and L. laeliocattleyae clades. Two isolates were grouped within each of the L. hyalina and L. mexicanensis clades. While the isolate CMM3183 clustered with L. pseudotheobromae.
3.3. Distribution of Lasiodiplodia Species
Out of the 36 isolates phylogenetically identified in this study, L. brasiliense and L. iraniensis were the most frequently isolated species, each representing 30.5% of the isolates from symptomatic mango tissues. Lasiodiplodia theobromae (8.3%), L. subglobosa (8.3%), L. laeliocattleyae (8.3%), L. mexicanensis (5.5%), L. hyalina (5.5%), and L. pseudotheobromae (2.7%) were identified less frequently. The distribution of Lasiodiplodia species varied among the mango-growing states in Mexico (Figure 2). Lasiodiplodia brasiliense was the most widely distributed species, being found in four out of the five states. The states of Sinaloa and Guerrero exhibited the highest species diversity, with four species each, followed by Chiapas with three species and Veracruz with two. In contrast, Tabasco exhibited the lowest species diversity, with only L. brasiliense detected.
3.4. Pathogenicity and Aggressiveness on Fruits
Three days after inoculation, all isolates representing the eight Lasiodiplodia species identified in this study proved pathogenic on mango fruits when tested using the mycelial plug method. Inoculated fruits developed irregular, necrotic lesions on the pericarp, whereas no symptoms were observed on the control fruits. Fungal reisolation from symptomatic tissues consistently yielded Lasiodiplodia spp., while none were recovered from control fruits, thereby satisfying Koch’s postulates. Since no significant differences were detected between the two experimental runs (p = 0.05), the data were pooled for subsequent statistical analyses. The combined results of both trials are presented in Figure 3, showing the mean lesion diameters produced by each Lasiodiplodia species.
Significant variation (p ≤ 0.05) in lesion size was observed among the species tested. The most extensive lesions (>28 mm in diameter) were caused by L. laeliocattleyae, indicating its high aggressiveness, followed by L. brasiliense (25 mm). Lasiodiplodia iraniensis, L. mexicanensis, L. subglobosa, L. theobromae, and L. hyalina displayed moderate aggressiveness, producing lesions ranging from 15 to 21 mm, whereas L. pseudotheobromae was the least aggressive, with mean lesions smaller than 10 mm (Figure 3).
4. Discussion
This study showed findings of eight Lasiodiplodia species associated with mango trees in Mexico. The phylogenetic analyses of combined ITS, tef1-α, and tub2 sequence datasets revealed that L. brasiliense, L. laeliocattleyae, L. subglobosa, L. theobromae, L. iraniensis, L. mexicanensis, L. hyalina, and L. pseudotheobromae were associated with symptoms of dieback and stem-end rot in mango orchards. Thus, this study represents the first report of L. brasiliense, L. laeliocattleyae, L. subglobosa, L. iraniensis, L. mexicanensis, and L. hyalina associated with mango tissues in Mexico. Additionally, this is the first global report of L. subglobosa, L. mexicanensis, and L. hyalina as causal agents of mango diseases.
A comprehensive morphological characterization of the Lasiodiplodia isolates was not undertaken, since morphological features alone are unreliable for species delimitation within the Botryosphaeriaceae. Such features are useful primarily for distinguishing genera and for complementing molecular phylogenetic analyses when describing novel taxa [9,17,24,41,42]. The most robust approach for discriminating species in this family relies on DNA sequence data, ideally incorporating multilocus datasets from different genetic markers to ensure accurate identification [19,24,29,41,43]. The diversity of Lasiodiplodia species found in our study was consistent with the diversity reported from mango samples in Peru [19]. This is because both in Peru and Mexico, the species L. brasiliense, L. laeliocattleyae, L. iraniensis, L. pseudotheobromae, and L. theobromae were identified. However, the predominant species in Mexico were L. brasiliense and L. iraniensis, whereas in Peru it was L. theobromae.
Regarding the aggressiveness of isolates from different Lasiodiplodia spp., there was considerable variation between the species reported in Peru [19] and those in our study. This variation may be attributed to the different number of isolates evaluated per species, as well as to the fact that in the study conducted in Peru [19]; the aggressiveness was assessed on mango branches, whereas in our study, it was evaluated on mango fruits.
Lasiodiplodia brasiliense and L. iraniensis were the most frequently isolated pathogens causing diseases in mango orchards in our study. However, L. brasiliense was the most widely distributed species and was found in four of the populations analyzed. This fungal species has been previously reported to cause diseases in mango in Peru [19], China [44], Burkina Faso [45], and Ivory Coast [46].
Lasiodiplodia iraniensis has been frequently recovered from mango tissues exhibiting symptoms of dieback and stem-end rot in various regions around the world [11,15,19,20,22,47]. In our pathogenicity experiments, isolates of L. iraniensis showed high aggressiveness, which agrees with the results reported for L. iraniensis isolates obtained from mango in Brazil [20].
Lasiodiplodia theobromae is a common pathogen in mango, recorded in several countries [30]. Our findings on aggressiveness agree with those found by Marques et al. (2013) [13], Munirah et al. (2017) [20], and Rodríguez-Gálvez et al. (2017) [19], who determined that L. theobromae was more virulent than L. pseudotheobromae on mango.
Lasiodiplodia laeliocattleyae (syn. Lasiodiplodia egyptiacae) was previously reported as a causal agent of mango diseases in Peru [19]. It is important to note that this fungal species was the most aggressive among the eight species evaluated in our pathogenicity tests conducted in mango fruits.
Lasiodiplodia pseudotheobromae was the less common species among the isolates obtained in this study from symptomatic mango tissues in Mexico. This species has been reported to cause mango diseases in Australia [11], Brazil [22], Egypt [15], Malaysia [20], Peru [19], Pakistan [48], and Burkina Faso [45]. Results of our pathogenicity tests showed that L. pseudotheobromae was less aggressive than L. laeliocattleyae. However, Ismail et al. (2012) [15] and Marques et al. (2013) [22] determined that L. pseudotheobromae isolates were more aggressive than L. laeliocattleyae isolates when inoculated to mango seedlings and fruits, respectively.
In summary, this research demonstrates that mango production in Mexico, like in other fruit crops, is affected by a considerable diversity of Lasiodiplodia species. The outcomes of this study are of broad significance for understanding the etiology and epidemiology of the disease, as precise identification of closely related Lasiodiplodia taxa is essential for mapping their geographic distribution and preventing their dissemination to new cultivation areas. Moreover, the presence of this Lasiodiplodia species complex poses a serious challenge to the mango industry. Therefore, additional investigations focusing on their pathogenic impact, fungicide sensitivity, and comparative epidemiology are required to develop effective strategies for the integrated management of mango diseases including branch dieback and stem-end rot in Mexico.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, J.M.T.-P., S.G.L.-M., J.A.M.-A., S.J.M. and A.R.S.-B.; methodology, J.M.T.-P., G.E.-A., K.C.C. and R.M.-A.; investigation, G.E.-A., R.M.-A., J.M.T.-P., M.C.-T. and G.M.-L.; data curation, K.C.C., S.J.M. and M.C.-T.; writing—original draft, J.M.T.-P., J.A.M.-A. and S.G.L.-M.; writing—review and editing, A.R.S.-B., G.M.-L. and J.M.T.-P.; supervision, J.M.T.-P. and A.R.S.-B.; project administration, J.M.T.-P. and A.R.S.-B.; funding acquisition, J.A.M.-A., J.M.T.-P. and A.R.S.-B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Acknowledgments
Sami J. Michereff and Kamila C. Correia express their gratitude to the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq, Brazil) for the research fellowship support.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- Mukherjee, S.K.; Litz, R.E. Introduction: Botany and importance. In The Mango: Botany, Production and Uses; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2009; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Paul, R.E.; Duarte, O. Tropical Fruits, 2nd ed.; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2011; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
- Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera. Panorama Agroalimentario. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/siap (accessed on 10 January 2026).
- Hyde, K.D.; Noorabadi, M.T.; Thiyagaraja, V.; He, M.Q.; Johnston, P.R.; Wijesinghe, S.N.; Armand, A.; Biketova, A.Y.; Chethana, K.W.T.; Erdoğdu, M.; et al. The 2024 outline of fungi and fungus-like taxa. Mycosphere 2024, 15, 5142–6239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Thiyagaraja, V.; Hyde, K.D.; Piepenbring, M.; Davydov, E.A.; Dai, D.Q.; Abdollahzadeh, J.; Bundhun, D.; Chethana, K.W.T.; Crous, P.W.; Gajanayake, A.J.; et al. Orders of Ascomycota. Mycosphere 2025, 16, 536–1411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Garcia, J.F.; Lawrence, D.P.; Morales-Cruz, A.; Travadon, R.; Minio, A.; Hernandez-Martinez, R.; Rolshausen, P.E.; Baumgartner, K.; Cantu, D. Phylogenomics of Plant-Associated Botryosphaeriaceae Species. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 652802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Batista, E.; Lopes, A.; Alves, A. What Do We Know about Botryosphaeriaceae? An Overview of a Worldwide Cured Dataset. Forests 2021, 12, 313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Slippers, B.; Wingfield, M.J. Botryosphaeriaceae as endophytes and latent pathogens of woody plants: Diversity, ecology and impact. Fungal Biol. Rev. 2007, 21, 90–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Osorio, J.A.; Crous, C.J.; de Beer, Z.W.; Wingfield, M.J.; Roux, J. Endophytic Botryosphaeriaceae, including five new species, associated with mangrove trees in South Africa. Fungal Biol. 2017, 121, 361–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Laurent, B.; Marchand, M.; Chancerel, E.; Saint-Jean, G.; Capdevielle, X.; Poeydebat, C.; Bellée, A.; Comont, G.; Villate, L.; Desprez-Loustau, M.-L. A Richer Community of Botryosphaeriaceae Within a Less Diverse Community of Fungal Endophytes in Grapevines than in Adjacent Forest Trees Revealed by a Mixed Metabarcoding Strategy. Phytobiomes J. 2020, 4, 252–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Sakalidis, M.L.; Ray, J.D.; Lanoiselet, V.; Hardy, G.E.S.; Burgess, T.I. Pathogenic Botryosphaeriaceae associated with Mangifera indica in the Kimberley Region of Western Australia. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2011, 130, 379–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Abdollahzadeh, J.; Zare, R.; Phillips, A.J.L. Phylogeny and taxonomy of Botryosphaeria and Neofusicoccum species in Iran, with description of Botryosphaeria scharifii sp. nov. Mycologia 2013, 105, 210–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Marques, M.W.; Lima, N.B.; de Morais, M.A.; Michereff, S.J.; Phillips, A.J.L.; Câmara, M.P.S. Botryosphaeria, Neofusicoccum, Neoscytalidium and Pseudofusicoccum species associated with mango in Brazil. Fungal Divers. 2013, 61, 195–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- de Oliveira Costa, V.S.; Michereff, S.J.; Martins, R.B.; Gava, C.A.T.; Mizubuti, E.S.G.; Câmara, M.P.S. Species of Botryosphaeriaceae associated on mango in Brazil. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2010, 127, 509–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Ismail, A.M.; Cirvilleri, G.; Polizzi, G.; Crous, P.W.; Groenewald, J.Z.; Lombard, L. Lasiodiplodia species associated with dieback disease of mango (Mangifera indica) in Egypt. Australas. Plant Pathol. 2012, 41, 649–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Sandoval-Sánchez, M.; Nieto-Ángel, D.; Sandoval-Islas, J.S.; Téliz-Ortiz, D.; Orozco-Santos, M.; Silva-Rojas, H.V. Hongos asociados a pudrición del pedúnculo y muerte descendente del mango (Mangifera indica L.). Agrociencia 2013, 47, 61–73. [Google Scholar]
- de Silva, N.I.; Phillips, A.J.L.; Liu, J.-K.; Lumyong, S.; Hyde, K.D. Phylogeny and morphology of Lasiodiplodia species associated with Magnolia forest plants. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 14355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Al-Sadi, A.M.; Al-Wehaibi, A.N.; Al-Shariqi, R.M.; Al-Hammadi, M.S.; Al-Hosni, I.A.; Al-Mahmooli, I.H.; Al-Ghaithi, A.G. Population Genetic Analysis Reveals Diversity in Lasiodiplodia Species Infecting Date Palm, Citrus, and Mango in Oman and the UAE. Plant Dis. 2013, 97, 1363–1369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Rodríguez-Gálvez, E.; Guerrero, P.; Barradas, C.; Crous, P.W.; Alves, A. Phylogeny and pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia species associated with dieback of mango in Peru. Fungal Biol. 2017, 121, 452–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Munirah, M.; Azmi, A.; Syc, Y.; NurAinIzzati, M. Characterization of Lasiodiplodia theobromae and L. pseudotheobromae causing fruit rot on pre-harvest mango in Malaysia. Plant Pathol. Quar. 2017, 7, 202–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Sharma, G.; Elazar, M.; Maymon, M.; Meshram, V.; Freeman, S. Identification and pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia and Neoscytalidium species associated with mango (Mangifera indica) dieback disease in Israel. Phytoparasitica 2024, 52, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Marques, M.W.; Lima, N.B.; de Morais, M.A., Jr.; Barbosa, M.A.G.; Souza, B.O.; Michereff, S.J.; Phillips, A.J.; Câmara, M.P. Species of Lasiodiplodia associated with mango in Brazil. Fungal Divers. 2013, 61, 181–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Nuñez-García, P.R.; Rebollar-Alviter, A.; García-Estrada, R.S.; Correia, K.C.; Mora-Romero, G.A.; Ramírez-Gil, J.G.; Solano-Báez, A.R.; Léón-Félix, J.; Tovar-Pedraza, J.M. Unraveling the Diversity and Pathogenicity of Botryosphaeriales Species Causing Stem Blight and Dieback of Blueberries in Sinaloa, Mexico. Plant Dis. 2026, 110, 604–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Phillips, A.J.L.; Alves, A.; Abdollahzadeh, J.; Slippers, B.; Wingfield, M.J.; Groenewald, J.Z.; Crous, P.W. The Botryosphaeriaceae: Genera and species known from culture. Stud. Mycol. 2013, 76, 51–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Machado, A.R.; Pinho, D.B.; Pereira, O.L. Phylogeny, identification and pathogenicity of the Botryosphaeriaceae associated with collar and root rot of the biofuel plant Jatropha curcas in Brazil, with a description of new species of Lasiodiplodia. Fungal Divers. 2014, 67, 231–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Slippers, B.; Roux, J.; Wingfield, M.J.; van der Walt, F.J.; Jami, F.; Mehl, J.W.; Marais, G.J. Confronting the constraints of morphological taxonomy in the Botryosphaeriales. Persoonia 2014, 33, 155–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Rosado, A.W.C.; Machado, A.R.; Freire, F.d.C.O.; Pereira, O.L. Phylogeny, Identification, and Pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia Associated with Postharvest Stem-End Rot of Coconut in Brazil. Plant Dis. 2016, 100, 561–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Coutinho, I.B.L.; Freire, F.C.O.; Lima, C.S.; Lima, J.S.; Gonçalves, F.J.T.; Machado, A.R.; Silva, A.M.S.; Cardoso, J.E. Diversity of genus Lasiodiplodia associated with perennial tropical fruit plants in northeastern Brazil. Plant Pathol. 2017, 66, 90–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Bautista-Cruz, M.A.; Almaguer-Vargas, G.; Leyva-Mir, S.G.; Colinas-León, M.T.; Correia, K.C.; Camacho-Tapia, M.; Robles-Yerena, L.; Michereff, S.J.; Tovar-Pedraza, J.M. Phylogeny, Distribution, and Pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia Species Associated With Cankers and Dieback Symptoms of Persian Lime in Mexico. Plant Dis. 2018, 103, 1156–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Farr, D.F.; Rossman, A.Y.; Castlebury, L.A. United States National Fungal Databases. Available online: https://fungi.ars.usda.gov (accessed on 10 January 2026).
- Alves, A.; Crous, P.W.; Correia, A.; Phillips, A.J.L. Morphological and molecular data reveal cryptic speciation in Lasiodiplodia theobromae. Fungal Divers. 2008, 28, 13. [Google Scholar]
- White, T.J.; Bruns, T.D.; Lee, S.B.; Taylor, J.W. Amplification and Direct Sequencing of Fungal Ribosomal RNA Genes for Phylogenetics: PCR Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications; Innis, M.A., Gelfand, D.H., Sninsky, J.J., White, T.J., Eds.; Academic Press, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Glass, N.L.; Donaldson, G.C. Development of primer sets designed for use with the PCR to amplify conserved genes from filamentous ascomycetes. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1995, 61, 1323–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Staden, R.; Beal, K.F.; Bonfield, J.K. The Staden package. Methods Mol. Biol. 1998, 132, 115–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Thompson, J.D.; Gibson, T.J.; Plewniak, F.; Jeanmougin, F.; Higgins, D.G. The CLUSTAL_X Windows Interface: Flexible Strategies for Multiple Sequence Alignment Aided by Quality Analysis Tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997, 25, 4876–4882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Tamura, K. MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 7.0 for Bigger Datasets. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2016, 33, 1870–1874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Nguyen, L.-T.; Schmidt, H.A.; von Haeseler, A.; Minh, B.Q. IQ-TREE: A Fast and Effective Stochastic Algorithm for Estimating Maximum-Likelihood Phylogenies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2014, 32, 268–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Kalyaanamoorthy, S.; Minh, B.Q.; Wong, T.K.F.; von Haeseler, A.; Jermiin, L.S. ModelFinder: Fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates. Nat. Methods 2017, 14, 587–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Minh, B.Q.; Schmidt, H.A.; Chernomor, O.; Schrempf, D.; Woodhams, M.D.; von Haeseler, A.; Lanfear, R. IQ-TREE 2: New Models and Efficient Methods for Phylogenetic Inference in the Genomic Era. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2020, 37, 1530–1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Ronquist, F.; Huelsenbeck, J.P. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 2003, 19, 1572–1574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Slippers, B.; Boissin, E.; Phillips, A.J.; Groenewald, J.Z.; Lombard, L.; Wingfield, M.J.; Postma, A.; Burgess, T.; Crous, P.W. Phylogenetic lineages in the Botryosphaeriales: A systematic and evolutionary framework. Stud. Mycol. 2013, 76, 31–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Correia, K.C.; Silva, M.A.; de Morais, M.A., Jr.; Armengol, J.; Phillips, A.J.L.; Câmara, M.P.S.; Michereff, S.J. Phylogeny, distribution and pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia species associated with dieback of table grape in the main Brazilian exporting region. Plant Pathol. 2016, 65, 92–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Dissanayake, A.J.; Phillips, A.J.L.; Li, X.H.; Hyde, K.D. Botryosphaeriaceae: Current status of genera and species. Mycosphere 2016, 7, 1001–1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zhang, H.; Wei, Y.; Yanxiang, Q.; Pu, J.; Liu, X. First report of Lasiodiplodia brasiliense associated with stem-end rot of mango in China. Plant Dis. 2018, 102, 679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Dianda, O.Z.; Wonni, I.; Ouédraogo, L.; Sankara, P.; Tollenaere, C.; Del Ponte, E.M.; Fernandez, D. Lasiodiplodia species associated with mango (Mangifera indica L.) decline in Burkina Faso and influence of climatic factors on the disease distribution. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2023, 126, 102041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Yéo, Y.S.; Dembélé, D.D.; Camara, B.; Amari, E.G.L.D.; Rey, J.Y.; Koné, D.; Fernandez, D. First report of Lasiodiplodia brasiliense causing mango dieback in Côte d’Ivoire. New Dis. Rep. 2024, 50, e12299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Trakunyingcharoen, T.; Cheewangkoon, R.; To-anun, C.; Crous, P.W.; van Niekerk, J.M.; Lombard, L. Botryosphaeriaceae associated with diseases of mango (Mangifera indica). Australas. Plant Pathol. 2014, 43, 425–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Alam, M.W.; Malik, A.; Rehman, A.; Sarwar, M.; Ahmad, S.; Shafeeq, T.; Hameed, A.; Rajput, N.A.; Atiq, M. First Report of Lasiodiplodia pseudotheobromae Causing Stem End Rot of Mango Fruit in Pakistan. Plant Dis. 2021, 105, 2249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Figure 1.
Phylogenetic tree of Lasiodiplodia species based on concatenated sequences of ITS region, tef1-α, and tub2 genes using the Maximum Likelihood method. The isolates from this study are indicated in bold. Maximum Likelihood bootstrap values above 85 with 1000 replications, followed by Bayesian posterior probabilities, are shown at the branch. The tree is rooted to Diplodia seriata (CBS112555) and D. mutila (CMW7060).
Figure 1.
Phylogenetic tree of Lasiodiplodia species based on concatenated sequences of ITS region, tef1-α, and tub2 genes using the Maximum Likelihood method. The isolates from this study are indicated in bold. Maximum Likelihood bootstrap values above 85 with 1000 replications, followed by Bayesian posterior probabilities, are shown at the branch. The tree is rooted to Diplodia seriata (CBS112555) and D. mutila (CMW7060).
Figure 2.
Collection sites of eight Lasiodiplodia spp. associated with mango dieback in five states in Mexico. Circles represent association frequency of each species with mango trees exhibiting symptoms of dieback in each population sampled; “s” is the number of commercial orchards sampled in each population and “n” is the number of isolates analyzed in each population.
Figure 2.
Collection sites of eight Lasiodiplodia spp. associated with mango dieback in five states in Mexico. Circles represent association frequency of each species with mango trees exhibiting symptoms of dieback in each population sampled; “s” is the number of commercial orchards sampled in each population and “n” is the number of isolates analyzed in each population.
Figure 3.
Necrotic lesion length (mm) of eight Lasiodiplodia species inoculated in detached mango fruit. Data is lesion diameter measured three days after inoculation with mycelium-colonized agar plugs inserted into wounded mango fruits. Bars above columns are the standard errors of the means. Columns with the same letter do not differ significantly, according to Fisher’s LSD test (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 3.
Necrotic lesion length (mm) of eight Lasiodiplodia species inoculated in detached mango fruit. Data is lesion diameter measured three days after inoculation with mycelium-colonized agar plugs inserted into wounded mango fruits. Bars above columns are the standard errors of the means. Columns with the same letter do not differ significantly, according to Fisher’s LSD test (p ≤ 0.05).
Table 1.
Lasiodiplodia spp. isolates collected from branch dieback and stem-end rot of mango orchards in Mexico and included in this study.
Table 1.
Lasiodiplodia spp. isolates collected from branch dieback and stem-end rot of mango orchards in Mexico and included in this study.
| Species | Isolate | Mango Cultivar | Organ | Locality | GenBank Accession No. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITS | Tef1α | Tub2 | |||||
| L. brasiliense | CMM3106 | Manila | Stem | Cazones, Veracruz | PV590619 | PV575859 | PV5954651 |
| CMM3111 | Manila | Fruit | Cazones, Veracruz | PV590620 | PV575860 | PV5954652 | |
| CMM3118 | Manila | Stem | Cazones, Veracruz | PV590621 | PV575861 | PV5954653 | |
| CMM3119 | Haden | Fruit | Frontera, Tabasco | PV590622 | PV575862 | PV5954654 | |
| CMM3120 | Haden | Stem | Frontera, Tabasco | PV590623 | PV575863 | PV5954655 | |
| CMM3121 | Tommy Atkins | Stem | Frontera, Tabasco | PV590624 | PV575864 | PV5954656 | |
| CMM3129 | Tommy Atkins | Fruit | Cutzamala, Guerrero | PV590629 | PV575865 | PV5954649 | |
| CMM3130 | Tommy Atkins | Stem | Cutzamala, Guerrero | PV590630 | PV575866 | PV5954650 | |
| CMM3133 | Ataulfo | Stem | Tonala, Chiapas | PV590633 | PV575867 | PV5954646 | |
| CMM3134 | Ataulfo | Stem | Metapa, Chiapas | PV590634 | PV575868 | PV5954647 | |
| CMM3141 | Ataulfo | Stem | Tonala, Chiapas | PV590635 | PV575869 | PV5954648 | |
| L. hyalina | CMM3109 | Manila | Fruit | Cazones, Veracruz | PV590617 | PV582999 | PV5954644 |
| CMM3110 | Manila | Stem | Cazones, Veracruz | PV590618 | PV583000 | PV5954645 | |
| L. iraniensis | CMM3152 | Kent | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590639 | PV583001 | PV5954674 |
| CMM3158 | Kent | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590640 | PV583006 | PV5954675 | |
| CMM3159 | Kent | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590641 | PV583003 | PV5954676 | |
| CMM3161 | Kent | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590643 | PV583007 | PV5954677 | |
| CMM3166 | Kent | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590644 | PV583008 | PV5954678 | |
| CMM3186 | Keitt | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590646 | PV583010 | PV5954668 | |
| CMM3188 | Keitt | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590647 | PV583009 | PV5954669 | |
| CMM3191 | Keitt | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590648 | PV583004 | PV5954673 | |
| CMM3199 | Keitt | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590650 | PV583011 | PV5954670 | |
| CMM3200 | Keitt | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590651 | PV583002 | PV5954671 | |
| CMM3201 | Keitt | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590652 | PV583005 | PV5954672 | |
| L. laeliocattleyae | CMM3128 | Tommy Atkins | Stem | Cutzamala, Guerrero | PV590628 | PV583015 | PV5954663 |
| CMM3131 | Tommy Atkins | Fruit | Cutzamala, Guerrero | PV590631 | PV583016 | PV5954664 | |
| CMM3132 | Tommy Atkins | Stem | Cutzamala, Guerrero | PV590632 | PV583017 | PV5954665 | |
| L. mexicanensis | CMM3143 | Ataulfo | Fruit | Tonala, Chiapas | PV590636 | PV583018 | PV5954666 |
| CMM3150 | Ataulfo | Stem | Metapa, Chiapas | PV590638 | PV583019 | PV5954667 | |
| L. pseudotheobromae | CMM3183 | Keitt | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590645 | PV583020 | PV5954679 |
| L. subglobosa | CMM3124 | Tommy Atkins | Stem | Cutzamala, Guerrero | PV590625 | PV583012 | PV5954658 |
| CMM3125 | Tommy Atkins | Fruit | Cutzamala, Guerrero | PV590626 | PV583013 | PV5954655 | |
| CMM3192 | Keitt | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590649 | PV583014 | PV5954657 | |
| L. theobromae | CMM3126 | Tommy Atkins | Fruit | Cutzamala, Guerrero | PV590627 | PV582996 | PV5954661 |
| CMM3144 | Manililla | Stem | Pijijiapan, Chiapas | PV590637 | PV582997 | PV5954662 | |
| CMM3160 | Kent | Stem | Ahome, Sinaloa | PV590642 | PV58298 | PV5954660 | |
Table 2.
GenBank accession numbers of DNA sequences of reference isolates used for phylogenetic analyses.
Table 2.
GenBank accession numbers of DNA sequences of reference isolates used for phylogenetic analyses.
| Species | Isolate Code | Host | Origin | GenBank Accession Number | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITS | tef1-α | tub2 | ||||
| Diplodia mutila | CMW7060 | Fraxinus excelsior | Netherlands | CMW7060 | AY236955 | AY236904 |
| D. seriata | CBS112555 | Vitis vinifera | Portugal | AY259094 | AY573220 | ------ |
| Lasiodiplodia avicenniae | CMW41467 | Avicennia marina | South Africa | KP860835 | KP860680 | KP860758 |
| L. avicenniae | LAS199 | Avicennia marina | South Africa | KU587957 | KU587947 | KU587868 |
| L. brasiliense | CMM4015 | Mangifera indica | Brazil | JX464063 | JX464049 | ------ |
| L. brasiliense | CMW35884 | A. madagascariensis | Madagascar | KU887094 | KU886972 | KU887466 |
| L. bruguierae | CMW41470 | Bruguiera gymnorrhiza | South Africa | KP860832 | KP860677 | KP860755 |
| L. bruguierae | CMW42480 | Bruguiera gymnorrhiza | South Africa | KP860834 | KP860679 | KP860757 |
| L. chiangraiensis | MFLUCC-21-0003 | ------ | Thailand | MW760854 | MW815630 | MW815628 |
| L. chiangraiensis | GZCC-21-0003 | ------ | Thailand | MW760853 | MW815629 | MW815627 |
| L. fujianensis | CGMCC-3-19593 | Vaccinium uliginosum | China | MK802164 | MK887178 | MK816337 |
| L. gravistriata | CMM4564 | Anacardium humile | Brazil | KT250949 | KT250950 | ------ |
| L. gravistriata | CMM4565 | Anacardium sp. | Brazil | KT250947 | KT266812 | ------ |
| L. hormozganensis | IRAN1500C | Olea sp. | Iran | GU945355 | GU945343 | KU887515 |
| L. hormozganensis | IRAN1498C | Mangifera indica | Iran | GU945355 | GU945344 | KU887514 |
| L. hyalina | CGMCC3.17975 | Acacia confusa | China | KX499879 | KX499917 | KX499992 |
| L. iraniensis | IRAN1502C | Juglans sp. | Iran | GU945347 | GU945335 | KU887517 |
| L. iraniensis | IRAN1520C | Salvadora persica | Iran | GU945348 | GU945336 | KU887516 |
| L. iraniensis | CMM3610 | Jatropha curcas | Brazil | KF234544 | KF226690 | KF254927 |
| L. iraniensis | CMW36237 | Adansonia digitata | Mozambique | KU887121 | KU886998 | KU887499 |
| L. iraniensis | CMW36239 | Adansonia digitata | Mozambique | KU887123 | KU887000 | KU887501 |
| L. laeliocattleyae | CBS 167.28 | Laeliocattleyae sp. | Italy | KU507487 | KU507454 | ------ |
| L. laeliocattleyae | BOT 29 | Mangifera indica | Egypt | JN814401 | JN814428 | ------ |
| L. laeliocattleyae | CBS130992 | Mangifera indica | Egypt | JN814397 | JN814424 | KU887508 |
| L. macrospora | CMM3833 | Jatropha curcas | Brazil | KF234557 | KF226718 | KF254941 |
| L. mediterranea | BL1 | Quercus ilex | Italy | KJ638312 | KJ638331 | ------ |
| L. mediterranea | BL101 | Vitis sp. | Italy | KJ638311 | KJ638330 | ------ |
| L. mexicanensis | AGQMy 0014 | Chamaedorea seifrizii | Mexico | MW274151 | MW604234 | MW604243 |
| L. mexicanensis | AGQMy0015 | Chamaedorea seifrizii | Mexico | MW274150 | MW604233 | MW604242 |
| L. pseudotheobromae | CBS116459 | Gmelina arborea | Costa Rica | EF622077 | EF622057 | EU673111 |
| L. pseudotheobromae | CGMCC-3-18047 | Pteridium sp. | China | KX499876 | KX499914 | KX499989 |
| L. subglobosa | CMM3872 | Jatropha curcas | Brazil | KF234558 | KF226721 | KF254942 |
| L. subglobosa | CMM4046 | Jatropha curcas | Brazil | KF234560 | KF226723 | KF254944 |
| L. swieteniae | MFLUCC-18-0244 | Swietenia mahagoni | Thailand | MK347789 | MK340870 | MK412877 |
| L. thailandica | B0041 | Phyllanthus acidus | Thailand | KM006433 | KM006464 | ------ |
| L. thailandica | B0421 | Mangifera indica | Thailand | KJ193637 | KJ193681 | ------ |
| L. theobromae | CBS111530 | Unknown | Unknown | EF622074 | EF622054 | KU887531 |
| L. theobromae | CBS164.96 | Unknown | New Guinea | AY640255 | AY640258 | KU887532 |
| L. viticola | UCD2553AR | Vitis vinifera | USA | HQ288227 | HQ288269 | HQ288306 |
| L. viticola | USD2604MO | Vitis vinifera | USA | HQ288228 | HQ288270 | HQ288307 |
| L. vitis | CBS 124060 | Vitis vinifera | Italy | KX464148 | KX464642 | KX464917 |
MFLUCC: Mae Fah Luang University Culture Collection, Chiang Rai, Thailand; IRAN: Culture Collection of the Iranian Research Institute of Plant Protection, Tehran, Iran; CBS: Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, Utrecht, Netherlands; GZCC: Guizhou Culture Collection, Guiyang, China; CMW: Forestry and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute, University of Pretoria, South Africa; CMM: Culture Collection of Phytopathogenic Fungi ‘Professora Maria Menezes’, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil; CGMCC: China General Microbiological Culture Collection, Beijing, China; BL: Personal number of B.T. Linaldeddu; USD: Phaff Yeast Culture Collection, Department of Food Science and Technology, University of California, Davis, USA.
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. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Tovar-Pedraza, J.M.; Estrada-Arroyo, G.; Macedo-Arzate, R.; Michereff, S.J.; Correia, K.C.; Leyva-Mir, S.G.; Mora-Aguilera, J.A.; Camacho-Tapia, M.; Márquez-Licona, G.; Solano-Báez, A.R. Multilocus Phylogenetic Identification and Fruit Pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia Isolates Obtained from Mango Branches with Dieback and Fruits with Stem-End Rot in Mexico. J. Fungi 2026, 12, 370. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof12050370
AMA Style
Tovar-Pedraza JM, Estrada-Arroyo G, Macedo-Arzate R, Michereff SJ, Correia KC, Leyva-Mir SG, Mora-Aguilera JA, Camacho-Tapia M, Márquez-Licona G, Solano-Báez AR. Multilocus Phylogenetic Identification and Fruit Pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia Isolates Obtained from Mango Branches with Dieback and Fruits with Stem-End Rot in Mexico. Journal of Fungi. 2026; 12(5):370. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof12050370
Chicago/Turabian StyleTovar-Pedraza, Juan Manuel, Guillermo Estrada-Arroyo, Rafael Macedo-Arzate, Sami J. Michereff, Kamila C. Correia, Santos Gerardo Leyva-Mir, José Antonio Mora-Aguilera, Moisés Camacho-Tapia, Guillermo Márquez-Licona, and Alma Rosa Solano-Báez. 2026. "Multilocus Phylogenetic Identification and Fruit Pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia Isolates Obtained from Mango Branches with Dieback and Fruits with Stem-End Rot in Mexico" Journal of Fungi 12, no. 5: 370. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof12050370
APA StyleTovar-Pedraza, J. M., Estrada-Arroyo, G., Macedo-Arzate, R., Michereff, S. J., Correia, K. C., Leyva-Mir, S. G., Mora-Aguilera, J. A., Camacho-Tapia, M., Márquez-Licona, G., & Solano-Báez, A. R. (2026). Multilocus Phylogenetic Identification and Fruit Pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia Isolates Obtained from Mango Branches with Dieback and Fruits with Stem-End Rot in Mexico. Journal of Fungi, 12(5), 370. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof12050370
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
