Published March 4, 2026 | Version v1
Taxonomic treatment Open

Metacapnodium stanhughesii Berbee & Aliabadi 2026, sp. nov.

  • 1. Department of Botany, University of British Columbia, 6270 University Blvd, Vancouver, BC V 6 T 1 Z 4, Canada

Description

Metacapnodium stanhughesii Berbee & Aliabadi sp. nov.

Fig. 15

Typification.

Canada • British Columbia Province, Vancouver, The University of British Columbia, 2075–2099 Main Mall, 49.26504°N, 123.25290°W, on bark of Taxus sp., 2 July 2021, F. Aliabadi & L. Le Renard (holotype: UBC F 35817).

Etymology.

Named in honor of mycologist Stanley J. Hughes.

GenBank accession numbers.

ITS, OR 532926; LSU, PP 140681; ef 1 - α, OR 820949.

Description.

Subicula dark brown to black, velutinous, thin, up to 2–4 mm thick, covering the bark of a trunk of Taxus sp. and intermingled with other sooty molds. Mycelium of moniliform hyphae, hyphae brown to dark brown, constricted at septa, surfaces finely verrucose throughout, cell wall thickness of 0.5–1 μm. Hyphae curved, straight, occasionally anastomosing, narrowing towards their tips. Cells usually broader than long, subglobose to doliiform, 13–21 × 10–16 μm, narrowing to 5–7 μm at hyphal tips.

Sexual form unknown.

Asexual forms. Capnobotrys – Differentiated conidiophores not observed. Conidiogenous cells in botryose clusters laterally or terminally on hyphal tips or at ends of short, 1–2 celled lateral branches, spherical, subspherical, ellipsoid, 3–10 × 3–9 μm, light brown to dark brown, bearing denticulate scars where successive conidia budded out, then seceded. Conidia brown to dark brown, smooth walled, initially subglobose, then ellipsoid or ovoid, occasionally cornute or allantoid, with a single median or supramedial septum, not or only slightly constricted at septa. Conidia (10) – 12.7 – (15) + / – 1.3 × (6) – 7.7 – (9) + / – 0.9 µm, N = 30, Q = 1.7. Proximal cells longer and wider than distal cells; proximal cell 7.0 + / - 0.9 × 7.7 + / - 0.8 µm; distal cell 5.7 + / - 0.9 × 7.0 + / - 0.7 µm. Proximal cell: distal cell length ratio, 1.3, width ratio 1.2. Proximal cells sometimes with inconspicuous oblique scar resulting from secession from diagonal attachment to a conidiogenous cell; apex of distal cells shows wall thinning, light in color, which sometimes protrudes slightly.

Capnophialophora – Phialides scanty, occasionally at hyphal tips, with a verruculose, brown, subspherical venter, 4–5 × 5 μm, bearing a funnel-shaped, pale brown collarette 2–3 μm long, with a narrow constriction at its base, 2.5–3 μm wide at its opening. No phialidic conidia observed.

Capnosporium – Branched, erect hyphae bear individual conidia at or near their tip cells. Capnosporium conidia ellipsoid, obclavate, mainly straight, occasionally curved, 2–6 septate, sessile, 19–21 × 8–10 μm (2 – septate), 27–34 × 8–12 μm (3 – septate), 33–42 (– 47) × 11–12 μm (4 – septate) μm.

Host and distribution.

Known only from a single collection on Taxus sp. in shaded, landscaped area next to Chemistry Building on University of British Columbia campus. The subiculum, first noticed by Ludovic Le Renard, changed little over five years.

Notes.

Among the described Metacapnodium species, M. moniliforme is similar to M. stanhughesii in morphology. Phylogenetically, M. stanhughesii cannot be included in M. moniliforme because the ITS tree and the concatenated region tree show M. stanhughesii as branching outside of a clade consisting of M. neesii and M. moniliforme. Metacapnodium guava is also similar to M. stanhughesii in that it shares capnophialophora, capnobotrys, and capnosporium forms (Hughes, 1981). While the dimensions of conidia in M. stanhughesii fall between those of M. moniliforme and M. guava, M. stanhughesii (Fig. 15 E) and M. moniliforme (Fig. 10 I) exhibit cornute conidia with a slight point at one end, which were not seen in M. guava (Hughes, 1981). Cornute and allantoid conidial morphology arise in Capnobotrys lechlerianus (Hughes and Seifert 2012), but the hyphal walls of Capnobotrys lechlerianus are smooth rather than verrucose as in M. stanhughesii and M. moniliforme. Hughes and Seifert (2012) used the absence of capnophialophora and capnosporium forms, and the smaller dimensions of conidia to distinguish Capnobotrys lechlerianus from the capnobotrys form of M. moniliforme (Hughes and Seifert 2012).

Notes

Published as part of Aliabadi, Faezeh, Le Renard, Ludovic & Berbee, Mary L., 2026, Taxonomy and phylogeny of the epiphytic sooty molds in family Metacapnodiaceae (class Eurotiomycetes, subclass Chaetothyriomycetidae), pp. 163-212 in MycoKeys 129 on pages 163-212, DOI: 10.3897/mycokeys.129.178067

Files

Files (5.0 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:d0d476b6df7c6fc1d92b0ff7d96f0755
5.0 kB Download

System files (24.6 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:1f98e060d4e781e187f45fc163828dcd
24.6 kB Download

Linked records

Additional details

Biodiversity

Collection code
UBC
Material sample ID
UBC F 35817
Event date
2021-07-02
Verbatim event date
2021-07-02
Scientific name authorship
Berbee & Aliabadi
Kingdom
Fungi
Phylum
Ascomycota
Order
Capnodiales
Family
Metacapnodiaceae
Genus
Metacapnodium
Species
stanhughesii
Taxon rank
species
Taxonomic status
sp. nov.
Type status
holotype
Taxonomic concept label
Metacapnodium stanhughesii Aliabadi & Berbee, 2026

References

  • Hughes SJ, Seifert KA (2012) Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on sooty mould names based on species mixtures: Hormiscium handelii and Torula lechleriana. Mycoscience 53: 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10267-011-0133-4