As seen in, field-identified as Xerulina chrysopepla (fig. 2D).

Observation uploaded with permission. Awaiting info on a Kew accession number.

Ecoregion: Northwest Andean montane forest (NT0145)

Collectors: T.S. Jekinson & B. Dentinger

Collection #: RLC059

Species Lists


Copyright © 2008 Bryn Dentinger

Proposed Names

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
Sequence does not really BLAST to Bjerkandera
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2017-06-26 20:37:46 CDT (-0400)

The query coverage of all of the BLAST matches is around 30%, which means that just a small part of the sequence is matching. This small part matches equally with Bjerkandera, Thanatephorus and Rhizoctonia sequences (206/222(93%)). I think the part that is matching is a highly conserved region, so the matches should be almost completely ignored. The sequence very likely is from Callistodermatium, and since there are no Callistodermatium sequences in GenBank, the only part that BLAST can match up are parts that are not taxonomically informative. This sequence should be added to GenBank so when Callistodermatium species get BLASTed in the future, they have something to match with.

It’s not uncommon to see results like this when something completely novel is sequenced using a highly variable region like ITS. LSU sequences are more conserved and would probably paint a very different picture. In several years, this ITS sequence will be extremely useful, right now all it tells us is that nothing even remotely like this has had its ITS sequenced and added to GenBank.

Contamination between samples is relatively rare, when sequences get switched it is usually due to a human error like a sequence getting pasted into the wrong column of a spreadsheet or a file from the sequencer getting the name of an adjacent sequence. If that was the case here, we would see a query coverage of nearly 100%.