<i>Oxydothis ailaoshanensis</i> sp. nov. (Oxydothidaceae, Xylariales) from dead bamboo culms in Yunnan Province, China

Lakmali S. Dissanayake; Rungtiwa Phookamsak; Jianchu Xu; Dhanushka N. Wanasinghe; Lakmali S. Dissanayake; Rungtiwa Phookamsak; Jianchu Xu; Dhanushka N. Wanasinghe

doi:10.48130/sif-0024-0016

2024 Volume 9

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Next Previous

ARTICLE Open Access

Oxydothis ailaoshanensis sp. nov. (Oxydothidaceae, Xylariales) from dead bamboo culms in Yunnan Province, China

1.
Honghe Center for Mountain Futures, Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Honghe 654400, Yunnan, China
2.
Department of Economic Plants and Biotechnology, Yunnan Key Laboratory for Wild Plant Resources, Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming 650201, Yunnan, China
3.
Department of Soil Science, College of Food and Agriculture Sciences, King Saud University, PO Box 145111, Riyadh 11362, Saudi Arabia

More Information

Corresponding authors: jxu@mail.kib.ac.cn; dnadeeshan@gmail.com

Received: 12 November 2024
Revised: 05 December 2024
Accepted: 05 December 2024
Published online: 20 December 2024
Studies in Fungi 9, Article number: e016 (2024) | Cite this article

Abstract

During the investigation of ascomycetes on Poaceae in Yunnan Province, China, a fungus was collected from dead bamboo culms in a terrestrial habitat in the Ailaoshan subtropical evergreen broad-leaved forest. Based on morphological characterization and phylogenetic analyses, this fungus was introduced as Oxydothis ailaoshanensis sp. nov. Maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference analyses of a concatenated dataset of internal transcribed spacer (ITS), large subunits (LSU) of the nuclear ribosomal RNA gene, small subunit (SSU) of the nuclear ribosomal RNA gene, and translation elongation factor 1-alpha (tef1-α) sequences were performed to clarify the phylogenetic affinities of the new species. Phylogenetically, Oxydothis ailaoshanensis forms an independent lineage, basal to O. metroxylonis. Oxydothis ailaoshanensis differs from O. metroxylonis in having smaller, immersed ascomata that become raised and superficial with the long axis horizontal to the host surface, shorter asci that are mostly straight, and longer ascospores that are elongated and fusiform. The new species was justified based on morphological traits and multigene phylogenetic analyses in comparison with closely related species. A detailed description, micrograph, and a phylogenetic tree of the new species are provided.
- 1 new species,
- Ailaoshan forest,
- Bambusicolous fungi,
- Molecular phylogeny,
- Sordariomycetes,
- Taxonomy

Introduction

Starting in the early 2000s, China has experienced rapid growth as an emerging wine market. It has now established itself as the world's second-largest grape-growing country in terms of vineyard surface area. Furthermore, China has also secured its position as the sixth-biggest wine producer globally and the fifth-most significant wine consumer in terms of volume^[1]. The Ningxia Hui autonomous region, known for its reputation as the highest quality wine-producing area in China, is considered one of the country's most promising wine regions. The region's arid or semiarid climate, combined with ample sunlight and warmth, thanks to the Yellow River, provides ideal conditions for grape cultivation. Wineries in the Ningxia Hui autonomous region are renowned as the foremost representatives of elite Chinese wineries. All wines produced in this region originate from grapes grown in their vineyards, adhering to strict quality requirements, and have gained a well-deserved international reputation for excellence. Notably, in 2011, Helan Mountain's East Foothill in the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region received protected geographic indication status in China. Subsequently, in 2012, it became the first provincial wine region in China to be accepted as an official observer by the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV)^[2]. The wine produced in the Helan Mountain East Region of Ningxia, China, is one of the first Agricultural and Food Geographical Indications. Starting in 2020, this wine will be protected in the European Union^[3].

Marselan, a hybrid variety of Cabernet Sauvignon and Grenache was introduced to China in 2001 by the French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA). Over the last 15 years, Marselan has spread widely across China, in contrast to its lesser cultivation in France. The wines produced from Marselan grapes possess a strong and elegant structure, making them highly suitable for the preferences of Chinese consumers. As a result, many wineries in the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region have made Marselan wines their main product^[4]. Wine is a complex beverage that is influenced by various natural and anthropogenic factors throughout the wine-making process. These factors include soil, climate, agrochemicals, and human intervention. While there is an abundance of research available on wine production, limited research has been conducted specifically on local wines in the Eastern Foot of Helan Mountain. This research gap is of significant importance for the management and quality improvement of Chinese local wines.

Ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) is a rapid analytical technique used to detect trace gases and characterize chemical ionic substances. It achieves this through the gas-phase separation of ionized molecules under an electric field at ambient pressure. In recent years, IMS has gained increasing popularity in the field of food-omics due to its numerous advantages. These advantages include ultra-high analytical speed, simplicity, easy operation, time efficiency, relatively low cost, and the absence of sample preparation steps. As a result, IMS is now being applied more frequently in various areas of food analysis, such as food composition and nutrition, food authentication, detection of food adulteration, food process control, and chemical food safety^[5,6]. The orthogonal hyphenation of gas chromatography (GC) and IMS has greatly improved the resolution of complex food matrices when using GC-IMS, particularly in the analysis of wines^[7].

The objective of this study was to investigate the changes in the physicochemical properties of Marselan wine during the winemaking process, with a focus on the total phenolic and flavonoids content, antioxidant activity, and volatile profile using the GC-IMS method. The findings of this research are anticipated to make a valuable contribution to the theoretical framework for evaluating the authenticity and characterizing Ningxia Marselan wine. Moreover, it is expected that these results will aid in the formulation of regulations and legislation pertaining to Ningxia Marselan wine in China.

Materials and methods

Plant materials

All the grapes used to produce Marselan wines, grow in the Xiban vineyard (106.31463° E and 38.509541° N) situated in Helan Mountain's East Foothill of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region in China.

Chemicals and reagents

Folin-Ciocalteau reagent, (±)-6-Hydroxy-2,5,7,8-tetramethylchroman-2-carboxylic acid (Trolox), 2,20-azino-bis-(3-ethylbenzthiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS), 2,4,6-tris (2-pyridyl)-s-triazine (TPTZ), anhydrous methanol, sodium nitrite, and sodium carbonate anhydrous were purchased from Shanghai Aladdin Biochemical Technology Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China). Reference standards of (+)-catechin, gallic acid, and the internal standard (IS) 4-methyl-2-pentanol were supplied by Shanghai Yuanye Bio-Technology Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China). The purity of the above references was higher than 98%. Ultrapure water (18.2 MΩ cm) was prepared by a Milli-Q system (Millipore, Bedford, MA, USA).

Preparation of Marselan juices and wines

Stage 1−Juice processing: Grapes at the fully mature stage are harvested and crushed, and potassium metabisulfite (5 mg/L of SO₂) was evenly spread during the crushing process. The obtained must is transferred into stainless steel tanks. Stage 2−Alcoholic fermentation: Propagated Saccharomyces cerevisiae ES488 (Enartis, Italy) are added to the fresh must, and alcoholic fermentation takes place, after the process is finished, it is kept in the tanks for 7 d for traditional maceration to improve color properties and phenolics content. Stage 3−Malolactic fermentation: When the pomace is fully concentrated at the bottom of the tanks, the wine is transferred to another tank for separation from these residues. Oenococcus oeni VP41 (Lallemand Inc., France) is inoculated and malic acid begins to convert into lactic acid. Stage 4−Wine stabilization: After malolactic fermentation, potassium metabisulfite is re-added (35 mg/L of SO₂), and then transferred to oak barrels for stabilization, this process usually takes 6-24 months. A total of four batches of samples during the production process of Marselan wine were collected in this study.

Total polyphenols and flavonoid content determination

Total polyphenols were determined on 0.5 mL diluted wine sample using the Folin-Ciocalteu method^[8], using gallic acid as a reference compound, and expressed as milligrams of gallic acid equivalents per liter of wine. The total flavonoid content was measured on 0.05 mL of wine sample by a colorimetric method previously described^[9]. Results are calculated from the calibration curve obtained with catechin, as milligrams of catechin equivalents per liter of wine.

ABTS free-radical scavenging assay

The antioxidative activity was determined using the ABTS^·+ assay^[10]. Briefly, the ABTS^·+ radical was prepared from a mixture of 88 μL of potassium persulfate (140 mmol/L) with 5 mL of the ABTS^·+ solution (7 mmol/L). The reaction was kept at room temperature under the absence of light for 16 h. Sixty μL samples were mixed with 3 mL of ABTS^·+ solution with measured absorption of 0.700 ± 0.200 at 734 nm. After 6 min reaction, the absorbance of samples were measured with a spectrophotometer at 734 nm. Each sample was tested in triplicate. The data were expressed as mmol Trolox equivalent of antioxidative capacity per liter of the wine sample (mmol TE/L). Calibration curves, in the range 64.16−1,020.20 μmol TE/L, showed good linearity (R² ≥ 0.99).

FRAP free-radical scavenging assay

The FRAP assay was conducted according to a previous study^[11]. The FRAP reagent was freshly prepared and mixed with 10 mM/L TPTZ solution prepared in 20 mM/L FeCl₃·6H₂O solution, 40 mM/L HCl, and 300 mM/L acetate buffer (pH 3.6) (1:1:10; v:v:v). Ten ml of diluted sample was mixed with 1.8 ml of FRAP reagent and incubated at 37 °C for 30 min. The absorbance was determined at 593 nm and the results were reported as mM Fe (II) equivalent per liter of the wine sample. The samples were analyzed and calculated by a calibration curve of ferrous sulphate (0.15−2.00 mM/mL) for quantification.

HS-GC-IMS analysis

The volatile compounds were analyzed on a GC-IMS instrument (FlavourSpec, GAS, Dortmund, Germany) equipped with an autosampler (Hanon Auto SPE 100, Shandong, China) for headspace analysis. One mL of each wine was sampled in 20 mL headspace vials (CNW Technologies, Germany) with 20 μL of 4-methyl-2-pentanol (20 mg/L) ppm as internal standard, incubated at 60 °C and continuously shaken at 500 rpm for 10 min. One hundred μL of headspace sample was automatically loaded into the injector in splitless mode through a syringe heated to 65 °C. The analytes were separated on a MxtWAX capillary column (30 m × 0.53 mm, 1.0 μm) from Restek (Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, USA) at a constant temperature of 60 °C and then ionized in the IMS instrument (FlavourSpec®, Gesellschaft für Analytische Sensorsysteme mbH, Dortmund, Germany) at 45 °C. High purity nitrogen gas (99.999%) was used as the carrier gas at 150 mL/min, and drift gas at 2 ml/min for 0−2.0 min, then increased to 100 mL/min from 2.0 to 20 min, and kept at 100 mL/min for 10 min. Ketones C₄−C₉ (Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) were used as an external standard to determine the retention index (RI) of volatile compounds. Analyte identification was performed using a Laboratory Analytical Viewer (LAV) 2.2.1 (GAS, Dortmund, Germany) by comparing RI and the drift time of the standard in the GC-IMS Library.

Statistical data analysis

All samples were prepared in duplicate and tested at least six times, and the results were expressed as mean ± standard error (n = 4) and the level of statistical significance (p < 0.05) was analyzed by using Tukey's range test using SPSS 18.0 software (SPSS Inc., IL, USA). The principal component analysis (PCA) was performed using the LAV software in-built 'Dynamic PCA' plug-in to model patterns of aroma volatiles. Orthogonal partial least-square discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) in SIMCA-P 14.1 software (Umetrics, Umeă, Sweden) was used to analyze the different volatile organic compounds in the different fermentation stages.

Results

Changes in total polyphenol and flavonoid contents and antioxidant activity during fermentation

The results of the changes in the antioxidant activity of Marselan wines during the entire brewing process are listed in Table 1. It can be seen that the contents of flavonoids and polyphenols showed an increasing trend during the brewing process of Marselan wine, which range from 315.71−1,498 mg CE/L and 1,083.93−3,370.92 mg GAE/L, respectively. It was observed that the content increased rapidly in the alcoholic fermentation stage, but slowly in the subsequent fermentation stage. This indicated that the formation of flavonoid and phenolic substances in wine mainly concentrated in the alcoholic fermentation stage, which is consistent with previous reports. This is mainly because during the alcoholic fermentation of grapes, impregnation occurred to extract these compounds^[12]. The antioxidant activities of Marselan wine samples at different fermentation stages were detected by FRAP and ABTS methods^[11]. The results showed that the ferric reduction capacity and ABST^·+ free radical scavenging capacity of the fermented Marselan wines were 2.4 and 1.5 times higher than the sample from the juice processing stage, respectively, indicating that the fermented Marselan wine had higher antioxidant activity. A large number of previous studies have suggested that there is a close correlation between antioxidant activity and the content of polyphenols and flavonoids^[13−15]. Previous studies have reported that Marselan wine has the highest total phenol and anthocyanin content compared to the wine of Tannat, Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Cabernet Franc, and Syrah^[13]. Polyphenols and flavonoids play an important role in improving human immunity. Therefore, Marselan wines are popular because of their high phenolic and flavonoid content and high antioxidant capacity.

Table 1. GC-IMS integration parameters of volatile compounds in Marselan wine at different fermentation stages.

No.	Compounds	Formula	RI^*	Rt [sec]^**	Dt [RIPrel]^***	Identification approach	Concentration (μg/mL) (n = 4)
No.	Compounds	Formula	RI^*	Rt [sec]^**	Dt [RIPrel]^***	Identification approach	Stage 1	Stage 2	Stage 3	Stage 4
Aldehydes
5	Furfural	C₅H₄O₂	1513.1	941.943	1.08702	RI, DT, IS	89.10 ± 4.05^c	69.98 ± 3.22^c	352.16 ± 39.06^b	706.30 ± 58.22^a
6	Furfural dimer	C₅H₄O₂	1516.6	948.77	1.33299	RI, DT, IS	22.08 ± 0.69^b	18.68 ± 2.59^c	23.73 ± 2.69^b	53.39 ± 9.42^a
12	(E)-2-hexenal	C₆H₁₀O	1223.1	426.758	1.18076	RI, DT, IS	158.17 ± 7.26^a	47.57 ± 2.51^b	39.00 ± 2.06^c	43.52 ± 4.63^bc
17	(E)-2-pentenal	C₅H₈O	1129.2	333.392	1.1074	RI, DT, IS	23.00 ± 4.56^a	16.42 ± 1.69^c	18.82 ± 0.27^b	18.81 ± 0.55^b
19	Heptanal	C₇H₁₄O	1194.2	390.299	1.33002	RI, DT, IS	17.28 ± 2.25^a	10.22 ± 0.59^c	14.50 ± 8.84^b	9.11 ± 1.06^c
22	Hexanal	C₆H₁₂O	1094.6	304.324	1.25538	RI, DT, IS	803.11 ± 7.47^c	1631.34 ± 19.63^a	1511.11 ± 26.91^b	1526.53 ± 8.12^b
23	Hexanal dimer	C₆H₁₂O	1093.9	303.915	1.56442	RI, DT, IS	588.85 ± 7.96^a	93.75 ± 4.67^b	92.93 ± 3.13^b	95.49 ± 2.50^b
29	3-Methylbutanal	C₅H₁₀O	914.1	226.776	1.40351	RI, DT, IS	227.86 ± 6.39^a	33.32 ± 2.59^b	22.36 ± 1.18^c	21.94 ± 1.73^c
33	Dimethyl sulfide	C₂H₆S	797.1	193.431	0.95905	RI, DT, IS	120.07 ± 4.40^c	87.a02 ± 3.82^d	246.81 ± 5.62^b	257.18 ± 3.04^a
49	2-Methylpropanal	C₄H₈O	828.3	202.324	1.28294	RI, DT, IS	150.49 ± 7.13^a	27.08 ± 1.48^b	19.36 ± 1.10^c	19.69 ± 0.92^c
Ketones
45	3-Hydroxy-2-butanone	C₄H₈O₂	1293.5	515.501	1.20934	RI, DT, IS	33.20 ± 3.83^c	97.93 ± 8.72^b	163.20 ± 21.62^a	143.51 ± 21.48^a
46	Acetone	C₃H₆O	836.4	204.638	1.11191	RI, DT, IS	185.75 ± 8.16^c	320.43 ± 12.32^b	430.74 ± 3.98^a	446.58 ± 10.41^a
Organic acid
3	Acetic acid	C₂H₄O₂	1527.2	969.252	1.05013	RI, DT, IS	674.66 ± 46.30^d	3602.39 ± 30.87^c	4536.02 ± 138.86^a	4092.30 ± 40.33^b
4	Acetic acid dimer	C₂H₄O₂	1527.2	969.252	1.15554	RI, DT, IS	45.25 ± 3.89^c	312.16 ± 19.39^b	625.79 ± 78.12^a	538.35 ± 56.38^a
Alcohols
8	1-Hexanol	C₆H₁₄O	1365.1	653.825	1.32772	RI, DT, IS	1647.65 ± 28.94^a	886.33 ± 32.96^b	740.73 ± 44.25^c	730.80 ± 21.58^c
9	1-Hexanol dimer	C₆H₁₄O	1365.8	655.191	1.64044	RI, DT, IS	378.42 ± 20.44^a	332.65 ± 25.76^a	215.78 ± 21.04^b	200.14 ± 28.34^b
13	3-Methyl-1-butanol	C₅H₁₂O	1213.3	414.364	1.24294	RI, DT, IS	691.86 ± 9.95^c	870.41 ± 22.63^b	912.80 ± 23.94^a	939.49 ± 12.44^a
14	3-Methyl-1-butanol dimer	C₅H₁₂O	1213.3	414.364	1.49166	RI, DT, IS	439.90 ± 29.40^c	8572.27 ± 60.56^b	9083.14 ± 193.19^a	9152.25 ± 137.80^a
15	1-Butanol	C₄H₁₀O	1147.2	348.949	1.18073	RI, DT, IS	157.33 ± 9.44^b	198.92 ± 3.92^a	152.78 ± 10.85^b	156.02 ± 9.80^b
16	1-Butanol dimer	C₄H₁₀O	1146.8	348.54	1.38109	RI, DT, IS	24.14 ± 2.15^c	274.75 ± 12.60^a	183.02 ± 17.72^b	176.80 ± 19.80^b
24	1-Propanol	C₃H₈O	1040.9	274.803	1.11042	RI, DT, IS	173.73 ± 4.75^a	55.84 ± 2.16^c	80.80 ± 4.99^b	83.57 ± 2.34^b
25	1-Propanol dimer	C₃H₈O	1040.4	274.554	1.24784	RI, DT, IS	58.20 ± 1.30^b	541.37 ± 11.94^a	541.33 ± 15.57^a	538.84 ± 9.74^a
28	Ethanol	C₂H₆O	930.6	231.504	1.11901	RI, DT, IS	5337.84 ± 84.16^c	11324.05 ± 66.18^a	9910.20 ± 100.76^b	9936.10 ± 101.24^b
34	Methanol	CH₄O	903.6	223.79	0.98374	RI, DT, IS	662.08 ± 13.87^a	76.94 ± 2.15^b	61.92 ± 1.96^c	62.89 ± 0.81^c
37	2-Methyl-1-propanol	C₄H₁₀O	1098.5	306.889	1.35839	RI, DT, IS	306.91 ± 4.09^c	3478.35 ± 25.95^a	3308.79 ± 61.75^b	3313.85 ± 60.88^b
48	1-Pentanol	C₅H₁₂O	1257.6	470.317	1.25222	RI, DT, IS	26.13 ± 2.52^c	116.50 ± 3.71^ab	112.37 ± 6.26^b	124.17 ± 7.04^a
Esters
1	Methyl salicylate	C₈H₈O₃	1859.6	1616.201	1.20489	RI, DT, IS	615.00 ± 66.68^a	485.08 ± 31.30^b	470.14 ± 23.02^b	429.12 ± 33.74^b
7	Butyl hexanoate	C₁₀H₂₀O₂	1403.0	727.561	1.47354	RI, DT, IS	95.83 ± 17.04^a	62.87 ± 3.62^a	92.59 ± 11.88^b	82.13 ± 3.61^c
10	Hexyl acetate	C₈H₁₆O₂	1298.6	524.366	1.40405	RI, DT, IS	44.72 ± 8.21^a	33.18 ± 2.17^d	41.50 ± 4.38^c	40.89 ± 4.33^b
11	Propyl hexanoate	C₉H₁₈O₂	1280.9	499.577	1.39274	RI, DT, IS	34.65 ± 3.90^d	70.43 ± 5.95^a	43.97 ± 4.39^b	40.12 ± 4.05^c
18	Ethyl hexanoate	C₈H₁₆O₂	1237.4	444.749	1.80014	RI, DT, IS	55.55 ± 5.62^c	1606.16 ± 25.63^a	787.24 ± 16.95^b	788.91 ± 28.50^b
20	Isoamyl acetate	C₇H₁₄O₂	1127.8	332.164	1.30514	RI, DT, IS	164.22 ± 1.00^d	243.69 ± 8.37^c	343.51 ± 13.98^b	365.46 ± 1.60^a
21	Isoamyl acetate dimer	C₇H₁₄O₂	1126.8	331.345	1.75038	RI, DT, IS	53.61 ± 4.79^d	4072.20 ± 11.94^a	2416.70 ± 49.84^b	2360.46 ± 43.29^c
26	Isobutyl acetate	C₆H₁₂O₂	1020.5	263.605	1.23281	RI, DT, IS	101.65 ± 1.81^a	15.52 ± 0.67^c	44.87 ± 3.21^b	45.96 ± 1.41^b
27	Isobutyl acetate dimer	C₆H₁₂O₂	1019.6	263.107	1.61607	RI, DT, IS	34.60 ± 1.05^d	540.84 ± 5.64^a	265.54 ± 8.31^c	287.06 ± 3.66^b
30	Ethyl acetate dimer	C₄H₈O₂	885.2	218.564	1.33587	RI, DT, IS	1020.75 ± 6.86^d	5432.71 ± 6.55^a	5052.99 ± 9.65^b	5084.47 ± 7.30^c
31	Ethyl acetate	C₄H₈O₂	878.3	216.574	1.09754	RI, DT, IS	215.65 ± 3.58^a	38.29 ± 2.37^c	71.59 ± 2.99^b	69.32 ± 2.85^b
32	Ethyl formate	C₃H₆O₂	838.1	205.127	1.19738	RI, DT, IS	175.48 ± 3.79^d	1603.20 ± 13.72^a	1472.10 ± 5.95^c	1509.08 ± 13.26^b
35	Ethyl octanoate	C₁₀H₂₀O₂	1467.0	852.127	1.47312	RI, DT, IS	198.86 ± 36.71^b	1853.06 ± 17.60^a	1555.51 ± 24.21^a	1478.05 ± 33.63^a
36	Ethyl octanoate dimer	C₁₀H₂₀O₂	1467.0	852.127	2.03169	RI, DT, IS	135.50 ± 13.02^d	503.63 ± 15.86^a	342.89 ± 11.62^b	297.28 ± 14.40^c
38	Ethyl butanoate	C₆H₁₂O₂	1042.1	275.479	1.5664	RI, DT, IS	21.29 ± 2.68^c	1384.67 ± 8.97^a	1236.52 ± 20.21^b	1228.09 ± 5.09^b
39	Ethyl 3-methylbutanoate	C₇H₁₄O₂	1066.3	288.754	1.26081	RI, DT, IS	9.70 ± 1.85^d	200.29 ± 4.21^a	146.87 ± 8.70^b	127.13 ± 12.54^c
40	Propyl acetate	C₅H₁₀O₂	984.7	246.908	1.48651	RI, DT, IS	4.57 ± 1.07c	128.63 ± 4.28a	87.75 ± 3.26b	88.49 ± 1.99b
41	Ethyl propanoate	C₅H₁₀O₂	962.1	240.47	1.46051	RI, DT, IS	10.11 ± 0.34^d	107.08 ± 3.50^a	149.60 ± 5.39^c	167.15 ± 12.90^b
42	Ethyl isobutyrate	C₆H₁₂O₂	971.7	243.229	1.56687	RI, DT, IS	18.29 ± 2.61^d	55.22 ± 1.07^c	98.81 ± 4.67^b	104.71 ± 4.73^a
43	Ethyl lactate	C₅H₁₀O₃	1352.2	628.782	1.14736	RI, DT, IS	31.81 ± 2.91^c	158.03 ± 2.80^b	548.14 ± 74.21^a	527.01 ± 39.06^a
44	Ethyl lactate dimer	C₅H₁₀O₃	1351.9	628.056	1.53618	RI, DT, IS	44.55 ± 2.03^c	47.56 ± 4.02^c	412.23 ± 50.96^a	185.87 ± 31.25^b
47	Ethyl heptanoate	C₉H₁₈O₂	1339.7	604.482	1.40822	RI, DT, IS	39.55 ± 6.37^a	38.52 ± 2.47^a	28.44 ± 1.52^c	30.77 ± 2.79^b
Unknown
1						RI, DT, IS	15.53 ± 0.18	35.69 ± 0.80	12.70 ± 0.80	10.57 ± 0.86
2						RI, DT, IS	36.71 ± 1.51	120.41 ± 3.44	198.12 ± 6.01	201.19 ± 3.70
3						RI, DT, IS	44.35 ± 0.88	514.12 ± 4.28	224.78 ± 6.56	228.32 ± 4.62
4						RI, DT, IS	857.64 ± 8.63	33.22 ± 1.99	35.05 ± 5.99	35.17 ± 3.97
* Represents the retention index calculated using n-ketones C4−C9 as external standard on MAX-WAX column. Represents the retention time in the capillary GC column. * Represents the migration time in the drift tube.

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Analysis of the change in volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during fermentation by GS-IMS

This study adopted the GC-IMS method to test the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the samples from the different fermentation stages of Marselan wine. Figure 1 shows the gas phase ion migration spectrum obtained, in which the ordinate represents the retention time of the gas chromatographic peaks and the abscissa represents the ion migration time (normalized)^[16]. The entire spectrum represents the aroma fingerprints of Marselan wine at different fermentation stages, with each signal point on the right of the relative reactant ion peak (RIP) representing a volatile organic compound detected from the sample^[17]. Here, the sample in stage 1 (juice processing) was used as a reference and the characteristic peaks in the spectrum of samples in other fermentation stages were compared and analyzed after deducting the reference. The colors of the same component with the same concentration cancel each other to form a white background. In the topographic map of other fermentation stages, darker indicates higher concentration compared to the white background. In the 2D spectra of different fermentation stages, the position and number of peaks indicated that peak intensities are basically the same, and there is no obvious difference. However, it is known that fermentation is an extremely complex chemical process, and the content and types of volatile organic compounds change with the extension of fermentation time, so other detection and characterization methods are needed to make the distinction.

Figure 1. 2D-topographic plots of volatile organic compounds in Marselan wine at different fermentation stages.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Fingerprint analysis of VOCs at different fermentation stages of Marselan wine

To visually display the dynamic changes of various substances in the fermentation process of Marselan wine, peaks with obvious differences were extracted to form the characteristic fingerprints for comparison (Fig. 2). Each row represents all signal peaks selected from samples at the same stage, and each column means the signal peaks of the same volatile compound in samples from different fermentation stages. Figure 2 shows the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) information for each sample and the differences between samples, where the numbers represent the undetermined substances in the migration spectrum library. The changes of volatile substances in the process of Marselan winemaking is observed by the fingerprint. As shown in Fig. 2 and Table 2, a total of 40 volatile chemical components were detected by qualitative analysis according to their retention time and ion migration time in the HS-GC-IMS spectrum, including 17 esters, eight alcohols, eight aldehydes, two ketones, one organic acid, and four unanalyzed flavor substances. The 12 volatile organic compounds presented dimer due to ionization of the protonated neutral components before entering the drift tube^[18]. As can be seen from Table 2, the VOCs in the winemaking process of Marselan wine are mainly composed of esters, alcohols, and aldehydes, which play an important role in the construction of aroma characteristics.

Figure 2. Fingerprints of volatile organic compounds in Marselan wine at different fermentation stages.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Table 2. Antioxidant activity, total polyphenols, and flavonoids content of Marselan wine at different fermentation stages.

Winemaking stage	TFC (mg CE/L)	TPC (mg GAE/L)	FRAP (mM FeSO₄/mL)	ABTs (mM Trolox/L)
Stage 1	315.71 ± 0.00^d	1,083.93 ± 7.79^d	34.82^c	38.92 ± 2.12^c
Stage 2	1,490.00 ± 7.51^c	3,225.51 ± 53.27^c	77.32^b	52.17 ± 0.95^b
Stage 3	1,510.00 ± 8.88^a	3,307.143 ± 41.76^b	77.56^b	53.04 ± 0.76^b
Stage 4	1,498.57 ± 6.34^b	3,370.92 ± 38.29^a	85.07^a	57.46 ± 2.55^a
Means in the same column with different letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Esters are produced by the reaction of acids and alcohols in wine, mainly due to the activity of yeast during fermentation^[19], and are the main components of fruit juices and wines that produce fruit flavors^[20,21]. In this study, it was found that they were the largest detected volatile compound group in Marselan wine samples, which is consistent with previous reports^[22]. It can be observed from Table 2 that the contents of most esters increased gradually with the extension of fermentation time, and they mainly began to accumulate in large quantities during the stage of alcohol fermentation. The contents of ethyl hexanoate (fruity), isoamyl acetate (banana, pear), ethyl octanoate (fruity, pineapple, apple, brandy), ethyl acetate (fruity), ethyl formate (spicy, pineapple), and ethyl butanoate (sweet, pineapple, banana, apple) significantly increased at the stage of alcoholic fermentation and maintained a high level in the subsequent fermentation stage (accounting for 86% of the total detected esters). These esters can endow a typical fruity aroma of Marselan wine, and played a positive role in the aroma profiles of Marselan wine. Among them, the content of ethyl acetate is the highest, which is 5,153.79 μg/mL in the final fermentation stage, accounting for 33.6% of the total ester. However, the content of ethyl acetate was relatively high before fermentation, which may be from the metabolic activity of autochthonous microorganisms present in the raw materials. Isobutyl acetate, ethyl 3-methyl butanoate, propyl acetate, ethyl propanoate, ethyl isobutyrate, and ethyl lactate were identified and quantified in all fermentation samples. The total contents of these esters in stage 1 and 4 were 255.28 and 1,533.38 μg/mL, respectively, indicating that they may also have a potential effect on the aroma quality of Marselan wine. The results indicate that esters are an important factor in the formation of flavor during the brewing process of Marselan wine.

Alcohols were the second important aromatic compound in Marselan wine, which were mainly synthesized by glucose and amino acid decomposition during alcoholic fermentation^[23,24]. According to Table 2, eight alcohols including methanol, ethanol, propanol, butanol, hexanol, amyl alcohol, 3-methyl-1-butanol, and 2-methyl-1-propanol were detected in the four brewing stages of Marselan wine. The contents of ethanol (slightly sweet), 3-methyl-1-butanol (apple, brandy, spicy), and 2-methyl-1-propanol (whiskey) increased gradually during the fermentation process. The sum of these alcohols account for 91%−92% of the total alcohol content, which is the highest content of three alcohols in Marselan wine, and may be contributing to the aromatic and clean-tasting wines. On the contrary, the contents of 1-hexanol and methanol decreased gradually in the process of fermentation. Notably, the content of these rapidly decreased at the stage of alcoholic fermentation, from 2,026.07 to 1,218.98 μg/mL and 662.08 to 76.94 μg/mL, respectively, which may be ascribed to volatiles changed from alcohols to esters throughout fermentation. The reduction of the concentration of some alcohols also alleviates the strong odor during wine fermentation, which plays an important role in the improvement of aroma characteristics.

Acids are mainly produced by yeast and lactic acid bacteria metabolism at the fermentation stage and are considered to be an important part of the aroma of wine^[22]. Only one type of acid (acetic acid) was detected in this experiment, which was less than previously reported, which may be related to different brewing processes. Acetic acid content is an important factor in the balance of aroma and taste of wine. Low contents of volatile acids can provide a mild acidic smell in wine, which is widely considered to be ideal for producing high-quality wines. However, levels above 700 μg/mL can produce a pungent odor and weaken the wine's distinctive flavor^[25]. The content of acetic acid increased first and then decreased during the whole fermentation process. The content of acetic acid increased rapidly in the second stage, from 719.91 to 3,914.55 μg/mL reached a peak in the third stage (5,161.81 μg/mL), and decreased to 4,630.65 μg/mL in the last stage of fermentation. Excessive acetic acid in Marselan wine may have a negative impact on its aroma quality.

It was also found that the composition and content of aldehydes produced mainly through the catabolism of amino acids or decarboxylation of ketoacid were constantly changing during the fermentation of Marselan wines. Eight aldehydes, including furfural, hexanal, heptanal, 2-methylpropanal, 3-methylbutanal, dimethyl sulfide, (E)-2-hexenal, and (E)-2-pentenal were identified in all stage samples. Among them, furfural (caramel bread flavor) and hexanal (grass flavor) are the main aldehydes in Marselan wine, and the content increases slightly with the winemaking process. While other aldehydes such as (E)-2-hexenal (green and fruity), 3-methylbutanol (fresh and malt), and 2-methylpropanal (fresh and malt) were decomposed during brewing, reducing the total content from 536.52 to 85.15 μg/mL, which might potently affect the final flavor of the wine. Only two ketones, acetone, and 3-hydroxy-2-butanone, were detected in the wine samples, and their contents had no significant difference in the fermentation process, which might not affect the flavor of the wine.

Multivariate statistical analysis

To more intuitively analyze the differences of volatile organic compounds in different brewing stages of Marselan wine samples, principal component analysis was performed^[26−28]. As presented in Fig. 3, the points corresponding to one sample group were clustered closely on the score plot, while samples at different fermentation stages were well separated in the plot. PC1 (79%) and PC2 (18%) together explain 97% of the total variance between Marselan wine samples, indicating significant changes in volatile compounds during the brewing process. As can be seen from the results in Fig. 3, samples of stages 1, 2, and 3 can be distinguished directly by PCA, suggesting that there are significant differences in aroma components in these three fermentation stages. Nevertheless, the separation of stage 3 and stage 4 samples is not very obvious and both presented in the same quadrant, which means that their volatile characteristics were highly similar, indicating that the volatile components of Marselan wine are formed in stage 3 during fermentation (Fig. S1). The above results prove that the unique aroma fingerprints of the samples from the distinct brewing stages of Marselan wine were successfully constructed using the HS-GC-IMS method.

Figure 3. PCA based on the signal intensity obtained with different fermentation stages of Marselan wine.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Based on the results of the PCA, OPLS-DA was used to eliminate the influence of uncontrollable variables on the data through permutation test, and to quantify the differences between samples caused by characteristic flavors^[28]. Figure 4 revealed that the point of flavor substances were colored according to their density and the samples obtained at different fermentation stages of wine have obvious regional characteristics and good spatial distribution. In addition, the reliability of the OPLS-DA model was verified by the permutation method of 'Y-scrambling'' validation. In this method, the values of the Y variable were randomly arranged 200 times to re-establish and analyze the OPLS-DA model. In general, the values of R² (y) and Q² were analyzed to assess the predictability and applicability of the model. The results of the reconstructed model illustrate that the slopes of R² and Q² regression lines were both greater than 0, and the intercept of the Q² regression line was −0.535 which is less than 0 (Fig. 5). These results indicate that the OPLS-DA model is reliable and there is no fitting phenomenon, and this model can be used to distinguish the four brewing stages of Marselan wine.

Figure 4. Scores plot of OPLS-DA model of volatile components in Marselan wine at different fermentation stages.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 5. Permutation test of OPLS-DA model of volatile components in Marselan wine at different fermentation stages (n = 200).

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

VIP is the weight value of OPLS-DA model variables, which was used to measure the influence intensity and explanatory ability of accumulation difference of each component on classification and discrimination of each group of samples. In previous studies, VIP > 1 is usually used as a screening criterion for differential volatile substances^[28−30]. In this study, a total of 22 volatile substances had VIP values above 1, indicating that these volatiles could function as indicators of Marselan wine maturity during fermentation (see Fig. 6). These volatile compounds included furfural, ethyl lactate, heptanal, dimethyl sulfide, 1-propanol, ethyl isobutyrate, propyl acetate, isobutyl acetate, ethanol, ethyl hexanoate, acetic acid, methanol, ethyl formate, ethyl 3-methylbutanoate, ethyl acetate, hexanal, isoamyl acetate, 2-methylpropanal, 2-methyl-1-propanol, and three unknown compounds.

Figure 6. VIP plot of OPLS-DA model of volatile components in Marselan wine at different fermentation stages.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Conclusions

This study focuses on the change of volatile flavor compounds and antioxidant activity in Marselan wine during different brewing stages. A total of 40 volatile aroma compounds were identified and collected at different stages of Marselan winemaking. The contents of volatile aroma substances varied greatly at different stages, among which alcohols and esters were the main odors in the fermentation stage. The proportion of furfural was small, but it has a big influence on the wine flavor, which can be used as one of the standards to measure wine flavor. Flavonoids and phenols were not only factors of flavor formation, but also important factors to improve the antioxidant capacity of Marselan wine. In this study, the aroma of Marselan wines in different fermentation stages was analyzed, and its unique aroma fingerprint was established, which can provide accurate and scientific judgment for the control of the fermentation process endpoint, and has certain guiding significance for improving the quality of Marselan wines (Table S1). In addition, this work will provide a new approach for the production management of Ningxia's special wine as well as the development of the native Chinese wine industry.

Author contributions

The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study conception and design: Gong X, Fang L; data collection: Fang L, Li Y; analysis and interpretation of results: Qi N, Chen T; draft manuscript preparation: Fang L. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

This work were supported by the project of Hainan Province Science and Technology Special Fund (ZDYF2023XDNY031) and the Central Public-interest Scientific Institution Basal Research Fund for Chinese Academy of Tropical Agricultural Sciences in China (Grant No. 1630122022003).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions
Copyright: © 2024 by the author(s). Published by Maximum Academic Press, Fayetteville, GA. This article is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

References

[1]	Jiang K, Chen J, Wang S, Li Y, Zhang D, et al. 2024. Diversity and distribution of bamboo feeding true bugs in China. Ecology and Evolution 14:e11563 doi: 10.1002/ece3.11563 CrossRef Google Scholar
[2]	Jiang H, Phookamsak R, Hongsanan S, Bhat DJ, Mortimer PE, et al. 2022. A review of bambusicolous Ascomycota in China with an emphasis on species richness in Southwest China. Studies in Fungi 7:20 doi: 10.48130/SIF-2022-0020 CrossRef Google Scholar
[3]	Qian LS, Chen JH, Deng T, Sun H. 2020. Plant diversity in Yunnan: Current status of future directions. Plant Diversity 42:281−91 doi: 10.1016/j.pld.2020.07.006 CrossRef Google Scholar
[4]	Dai DQ, Phookamsak R, Wijayawardene NN, Li WJ, Bhat DJ, et al. 2017. Bambusicolous fungi. Fungal Diversity 82:1−105 doi: 10.1007/s13225-016-0367-8 CrossRef Google Scholar
[5]	Dai DQ, Wijayawardene NN, Tang LZ, Liu C, Han LH, et al. 2019. Rubroshiraia gen. nov., a second hypocrellin-producing genus in Shiraiaceae (Pleosporales). MycoKeys 58:1−26 doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.58.36723 CrossRef Google Scholar
[6]	Dai D, Han L, Jin X. 2022. Species identification and diversity investigation of bambusicolous ascomycetes in Yunnan. Journal of Qujing Normal University 41:16−28 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-8879.2022.03.004 CrossRef Google Scholar
[7]	Jiang HB, Phookamsak R, Hyde KD, Mortimer PE, Xu JC, et al. 2021. A taxonomic appraisal of bambusicolous fungi in Occultibambusaceae (Pleosporales, Dothideomycetes) with new collections from Yunnan province, China. Life 11(9):932 doi: 10.3390/life11090932 CrossRef Google Scholar
[8]	Monkai J, Phookamsak R, Xu S, Xu JC, Mortimer PE, et al. 2022. Pseudophaeocytostroma bambusicola gen. et sp. nov. (Diaporthaceae) from bamboo in Yunnan, P.R. China. Phytotaxa 571:39−51 doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.571.1.3 CrossRef Google Scholar
[9]	Phookamsak R, Jiang H, Suwannarach N, Lumyong S, Xu J, et al. 2022. Bambusicolous fungi in Pleosporales: Introducing four novel taxa and a new habitat record for Anastomitrabeculia didymospora. Journal of Fungi 8:630 doi: 10.3390/jof8060630 CrossRef Google Scholar
[10]	Han LS, Wijayawardene NN, Liu C, Han LH, Promputtha I, et al. 2024. Paramphibambusa bambusicola gen. et. sp. nov. , Arecophila xishuangbannaensis and A. zhaotongensis spp. nov. in Cainiaceae from Yunnan, China. MycoKeys 104:113−32 doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.104.117872 CrossRef Google Scholar
[11]	Zhou X, Habib K, Zeng W, Ren Y, Shen X, et al. 2024. Addition of three new species of Xylariomycetidae fungi on bamboo from Southern China. MycoKeys 109:109−29 doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.109.128020 CrossRef Google Scholar
[12]	Penzig O, Saccardo PA. 1897. Diagnoses fungorum novorum in Insula Java collectorum. Malpighia 11:491−530 doi: 10.5962/bhl.title.4921 CrossRef Google Scholar
[13]	Barr ME. 1990. Prodromus to nonlichenized, Pyrenomycetous members of Class Hymenoascomycetes. Mycotaxon 39:43−104 Google Scholar
[14]	Hawksworth DL, Kirk PM, Sutton BC, Pegler DN. 1995. Ainsworth and Bisby's Dictionary of the Fungi. UK: CAB International.
[15]	Wang YZ, Hyde KD. 1999. Hyponectria buxi with notes on the Hyponectriaceae. Fungal Diversity 3:159−72 Google Scholar
[16]	Kang JC, Kong RYC, Hyde KD. 1998. Studies on the Amphisphaeriales 1. Amphisphaeriaceae (sensu stricto) and its phylogenetic relationships inferred from 5.8S rDNA and ITS2 sequences. Fungal Diversity 1:147−57 Google Scholar
[17]	Kang JC, Hyde KD, Kong RYC. 1999. Studies on Amphisphaeriales: the Amphisphaeriaceae (sensu stricto). Mycological Research 103:53−64 doi: 10.1017/S0953756298006650 CrossRef Google Scholar
[18]	Shenoy BD, Jeewon R, Hyde KD. 2005. Oxydothis bambusicola, a new ascomycete with a huge subapical ascal ring found on bamboo in Hong Kong. Nova Hedwigia 80:511−18 doi: 10.1127/0029-5035/2005/0080-0511 CrossRef Google Scholar
[19]	Hidayat I, Jeewon R, To-Anon C, Hyde KD. 2006. The genus Oxydothis: new palmicolous taxa and phylogenetic relationships within the Xylariales. Fungal Diversity 23:159−79 Google Scholar
[20]	Konta S, Hongsanan S, Tibpromma S, Thongbai B, Maharachchikumbura SSN, et al. 2016. An advance in the endophyte story: Oxydothidaceae fam. nov. with six new species of Oxydothis. Mycosphere 7(9):1425−46 doi: 10.5943/mycosphere/7/9/15 CrossRef Google Scholar
[21]	Maharachchikumbura SSN, Hyde KD, Gareth Jones EB, McKenzie EHC, Bhat JD, et al. 2016. Families of Sordariomycetes. Fungal Diversity 79:1−317 doi: 10.1007/s13225-016-0369-6 CrossRef Google Scholar
[22]	Hyde KD, Norphanphoun C, Maharachchikumbura SSN, Bhat DJ, Jones EBG, et al. 2020. Refined families of Sordariomycetes. Mycosphere 11:305−1059 doi: 10.5943/mycosphere/11/1/7 CrossRef Google Scholar
[23]	Samuels GJ, Rossman AY. 1987. Studies in the Amphisphaeriaceae (sensu lato). II. Leiosphaerella cocoës and two new species of Oxydothis on palms. Mycotaxon 28:461−71 Google Scholar
[24]	Konta S, Hyde KD, Phookamsak R, Xu JC, Maharachchikumbura SSN, et al. 2020. Polyphyletic genera in Xylariaceae (Xylariales): Neoxylaria gen. nov. and Stilbohypoxylon. Mycosphere 11:2629−51 doi: 10.5943/mycosphere/11/1/17 CrossRef Google Scholar
[25]	Tibpromma S, Hyde KD, McKenzie EHC, Bhat DJ, Phillips AJL, et al. 2018. Fungal diversity notes 840–928: micro-fungi associated with Pandanaceae. Fungal Diversity 93(1):1−160 doi: 10.1007/s13225-018-0408-6 CrossRef Google Scholar
[26]	Hu HM, Liu LL, Zhang X, Lin Y, Shen XC, et al. 2022. New species and records of Neomassaria, Oxydothis and Roussoella (Pezizomycotina, Ascomycota) associated with palm and bamboo from China. MycoKeys 93:165−91 doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.93.89888 CrossRef Google Scholar
[27]	Senanayake IC, Rossi W, Leonardi M, Weir A, McHugh M, et al. 2023. Fungal diversity notes 1611–1716: taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions on fungal genera and species emphasis in south China. Fungal Diversity 122:161−403 doi: 10.1007/s13225-023-00523-6 CrossRef Google Scholar
[28]	Crous PW, Jurjević Ž, Balashov S, De la Peña-Lastra S, Mateos A, et al. 2024. Fungal Planet description sheets: 1614–1696. Fungal Systematics and Evolution 13:183−440 doi: 10.3114/fuse.2024.13.11 CrossRef Google Scholar
[29]	Zhang SN, Hyde KD, Jones EBG, Yu XD, Cheewangkoon R, et al. 2024. Current insights into palm fungi with emphasis on taxonomy and phylogeny. Fungal diversity 127:55−301 doi: 10.1007/s13225-024-00536-9 CrossRef Google Scholar
[30]	Fröhlich J, Hyde KD. 1994. New Oxydothis species associated with palm leaf spots in north Queensland, Australia. Mycological Research 98:213−18 doi: 10.1016/S0953-7562(09)80188-3 CrossRef Google Scholar
[31]	Hyde KD. 1994. Fungi from palms. XIII. The genus Oxydothis, a revision. Sydowia 46:265−314 Google Scholar
[32]	Chethana KWT, Jayawardena RS, Chen YJ, Konta S, Tibpromma S, et al. 2021. Diversity and function of Appressoria. Pathogens 10:746 doi: 10.3390/pathogens10060746 CrossRef Google Scholar
[33]	Dissanayake LS, Samarakoon MC, Mortimer PE, Lu YZ, Li QR, et al. 2020. Morpho-molecular characterization of two novel amphisphaeriaceous species from Yunnan, China. Phytotaxa 446:144−158 doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.446.3.1 CrossRef Google Scholar
[34]	Dissanayake LS, Maharachchikumbura SSN, Mortimer PE, Hyde KD, Kang JC. 2021. Acrocordiella yunnanensis sp. nov. (Requienellaceae, Xylariales) from Yunnan, China. Phytotaxa 487:103−13 doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.487.2.1 CrossRef Google Scholar
[35]	Dissanayake LS, Marasinghe DS, Samarakoon MC, Maharachchikumbura SSN, Mortimer PE, et al. 2022. Three new species of Iodosphaeria (Xylariomycetidae): I. chiayiensis, I. jinghongensis and I. thailandica. MycoKeys 86:1−17 doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.86.75801 CrossRef Google Scholar
[36]	Dissanayake LS, Kang JC, Maharachchikumbura SSN. 2023. Microdochium sichuanense sp. nov. (Microdochiaceae, Xylariales), from a Poaceae host in Sichuan, China. Phytotaxa 600:206−16 doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.600.3.7 CrossRef Google Scholar
[37]	Dissanayake LS, Samarakoon MC, Maharachchikumbura SSN, Hyde KD, Tang X, et al. 2024. Exploring the taxonomy and phylogeny of Sordariomycetes taxa emphasizing Xylariomycetidae in Southwestern China. Mycosphere 15(1):1675−793 doi: 10.5943/mycosphere/15/1/15 CrossRef Google Scholar
[38]	Senanayake IC, Rathnayaka AR, Marasinghe DS, Calabon MS, Gentekaki E, et al. 2020. Morphological approaches in studying fungi: collection, examination, isolation, sporulation and preservation. Mycosphere 11:2678−754 doi: 10.5943/mycosphere/11/1/20 CrossRef Google Scholar
[39]	Jayasiri SC, Hyde KD, Ariyawansa HA, Bhat J, Buyck B, et al. 2015. The Faces of Fungi database: fungal names linked with morphology, phylogeny and human impacts. Fungal Diversity 74:3−18 doi: 10.1007/s13225-015-0351-8 CrossRef Google Scholar
[40]	Wanasinghe DN, Phukhamsakda C, Hyde KD, Jeewon R, Lee HB, et al. 2018. Fungal diversity notes 709–839: taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions to fungal taxa with an emphasis on fungi on Rosaceae. Fungal Diversity 89:1−236 doi: 10.1007/s13225-018-0395-7 CrossRef Google Scholar
[41]	Vilgalys R. Hester M. 1990. Rapid genetic identification and mapping of enzymatically amplified ribosomal DNA from several Cryptococcus species. Journal of Bacteriology 172:4238−46 doi: 10.1128/JB.172.8.4238-4246.1990 CrossRef Google Scholar
[42]	White TJ, Bruns T, Lee J, Taylor SB. 1990. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications, eds. Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ. San Diego, California, USA: Academic Press. pp. 315–22. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-372180-8.50042-1
[43]	Rehner SA, Buckley E. 2005. A Beauveria phylogeny inferred from nuclear ITS and EF1-α sequences: evidence for cryptic diversification and links to Cordyceps teleomorphs. Mycologia 97:84−98 doi: 10.1080/15572536.2006.11832842 CrossRef Google Scholar
[44]	Katoh K, Rozewicki J, Yamada KD. 2019. MAFFT online service: multiple sequence alignment, interactive sequence choice and visualization. Briefngs in Bioinformatics 20:1160−66 doi: 10.1093/bib/bbx108 CrossRef Google Scholar
[45]	Hall TA. 1999. BioEdit: A user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symposium Series 41:95−98 Google Scholar
[46]	Nylander JAA. 2004. MrModeltest v2. Program distributed by the author. Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University.
[47]	Swofford DL. 2003. PAUP. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (* and other methods)*. Version 4. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates.
[48]	Miller MA, Pfeiffer W, Schwartz T. 2010. Creating the CIPRES Science Gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. 2010 Gateway Computing Environments Workshop (GCE), New Orleans, LA, USA, 2010. USA: IEEE. doi: 10.1109/GCE.2010.5676129
[49]	Stamatakis A, Hoover P, Rougemont JA. 2008. A rapid bootstrap algorithm for the RAxML web servers. Systematic Biology 57:758−71 doi: 10.1080/10635150802429642 CrossRef Google Scholar
[50]	Stamatakis A. 2014. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30:1312−13 doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033 CrossRef Google Scholar
[51]	Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist F. 2001. MrBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17:754−55 doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/17.8.754 CrossRef Google Scholar
[52]	Zhaxybayeva O, Gogarten JP. 2002. Bootstrap, Bayesian probability and maximum likelihood mapping exploring new tools for comparative genome analyses. BMC Genomics 3:4 doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-3-4 CrossRef Google Scholar
[53]	Ronquist F, Teslenko M, Van Der Mark P, Ayres DL, Darling A, et al. 2012. MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Systematic Biology 61(3):539−42 doi: 10.1093/sysbio/sys029 CrossRef Google Scholar
[54]	Rambaut A, Drummond AJ. 2012. FigTree: Tree Figure Drawing Tool. Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh: Edinburgh, Scotland. http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/
[55]	Wong MKM, Hyde KD. 2001. Fungi on grasses: new species of Ascotaiwania, Diaporthe and Oxydothis (Ascomycetes). Cryptogamie Mycologie 22:19−28 doi: 10.1016/s0181-1584(01)01055-7 CrossRef Google Scholar
[56]	Karimi O, Afshari N, Asghari R, Li Q, Chethana KWT, et al. 2024. Novel discoveries of Xylariomycetidae (Ascomycota) taxa from peat swamp forests and other terrestrial habitats in Thailand. MycoKeys 107:219−47 doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.107.127749 CrossRef Google Scholar
[57]	Fröhlich, Hyde KD. 2000. Palm Microfungi. Fungal Diversity Research Series. 393 pp.
[58]	Taylor JE, Hyde KD. 2003. Microfungi of Tropical and Temperate Palms. Fungal Diversity Research Series. 459 pp.
[59]	Pinruan U, Hyde KD, Lumyong S, McKenzie EHC, Jones EBG. 2007. Occurrence of fungi on tissues of the peat swamp palm Licuala longicalycata. Fungal Diversity 25:157−73 Google Scholar
[60]	Lu B, Hyde KD, Ho WH, Tsui KM, Taylor JE et al. 2000. Checklist of Hong Kong Fungi. Hong Kong: Fungal Diversity Press. 207 pp.
[61]	Zhuang WY. 2001. Higher fungi of tropical China. Ithaca, NY: Mycotaxon. 485 pp.
[62]	Liu JK, Hyde KD, Jones EBG, Ariyawansa HA, Bhat DJ, et al. 2015. Fungal diversity notes 1–110: taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions to fungal species. Fungal Diversity 72:1−197 doi: 10.1007/s13225-015-0324-y CrossRef Google Scholar
[63]	Thaung MM. 2008. Pathologic and taxonomic analysis of leaf spot and tar spot diseases in a tropical dry to wet monsoon ecosystem of lowland Burma. Australasian Plant Pathology 37:180−97 doi: 10.1071/AP08007 CrossRef Google Scholar
[64]	Turner PD. 1971. Microorganisms associated with oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.). Phytopathology 14:1−58 Google Scholar
[65]	Pirozynski KA. 1972. Microfungi of Tanzania. I. Miscellaneous fungi on oil palm. Mycology 129:1−39 Google Scholar
[66]	Sivanesan A, Hsieh WH. 1989. New species and new records of ascomycetes from Taiwan. Mycological Research 93:340−51 doi: 10.1016/S0953-7562(89)80161-3 CrossRef Google Scholar
[67]	Mendes MAS, da Silva VL, Dianese JC, 1998. Fungos em Plants no Brasil. Embrapa-SPI/Embrapa-Cenargen, Brasilia
[68]	Dennis RWG. 1970. Kew Bulletin Additional Series III. Fungus Flora of Venezuela and Adjacent Countries. Verlag von J. Cramer. Kew Bulletin Additional series. 531 pp.
[69]	Teodoro NG. 1937. An Enumeration of Philippine Fungi. Manila: Bureau of printing 4:1−585 Google Scholar
[70]	Hyde KD. 1993. Fungi from palms. VII. The genus Oxydothis from rachides of palms in north Queensland, including five new species. Sydowia 45:226−40 Google Scholar
[71]	Petrak F. 1953. Ein Beitrag zur Pilzflora Floridas. Sydowia 6:399−406 Google Scholar
[72]	McKenzie EHC, O'Sullivan PJ, Wilkie JP. 1992. A list of type specimens of New Zealand fungi held in DSIR Plant Protection Herbarium (PDD). Mycotaxon 43:77−156 Google Scholar
[73]	McKenzie EHC, Buchanan PK, Johnston PR. 2004. Checklist of fungi on nikau palm (Rhopalostylis sapida and R. baueri var. chessemanii) in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany 42:335−55 doi: 10.1080/0028825x.2004.9512908 CrossRef Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Dissanayake LS, Phookamsak R, Xu J, Wanasinghe DN. 2024. Oxydothis ailaoshanensis sp. nov. (Oxydothidaceae, Xylariales) from dead bamboo culms in Yunnan Province, China. Studies in Fungi 9: e016 doi: 10.48130/sif-0024-0016

Dissanayake LS, Phookamsak R, Xu J, Wanasinghe DN. 2024. Oxydothis ailaoshanensis sp. nov. (Oxydothidaceae, Xylariales) from dead bamboo culms in Yunnan Province, China. Studies in Fungi 9: e016 doi: 10.48130/sif-0024-0016

Figures(2) / Tables(2)

Download PDF

Article Metrics

Article views(2075) PDF downloads(431)

Species name	Strain no.	GenBank accession no.
Species name	Strain no.	ITS	LSU	SSU	tef1-α
Oxydothis ailaoshanensis	HKAS 130464^T	PQ635200	PQ587528	PQ587530	PQ584438
O. ailaoshanensis	HKAS 130465^IST	PQ635201	PQ587529	PQ587531	PQ584439
O. calamicola	MFLUCC 14-1165^T	NA	KY206761	KY206767	NA
O. caryotae	HKAS 115712^T	PP592449	PP621075	PP639207	PP761002
O. chinensis	ZHKUCC 22-0134^T	OR164912	OR164957	NA	NA
O. coperniciae	CMUB 40043^T	PP278359	PP278849	PP278850	NA
O. cyrtostachicola	MRC0007^T	DQ660334	DQ660337	NA	NA
O. daemonoropsicola	MRC 0005	DQ660335	DQ660338	NA	NA
O. dehongensis	ZHKU 23-0986^T	PP580831	PP002130	PP002127	PP001172
O. dehongensis	ZHKU 23-0987	PP580832	PP002131	PP002128	PP001173
O. dehongensis	ZHKU 23-0988	NA	PP002132	PP002129	PP001174
O. foliata	MFLU 24-0165^T	PP592450	PP621076	PP639208	PP761003
O. fortunei	GMBC0315^T	NR_187011	NG_228961	NA	NA
O. fortunei	GMBC0389	ON510944	ON510945	NA	NA
O. frondicola	HKUCC 3173/Mt14	AF009803	AY083835	AY083818	NA
O. garethjonesii	MFLUCC 15-0287^T	KY206773	KY206762	KY206768	KY206777
O. hohnelli	HKUCC 3854	NA	DQ810227	DQ810259	NA
O. inaequalis	MRC0004^T	DQ660336	DQ660339	NA	NA
O. metroxylonicola	MFLUCC 15-0281^T	KY206774	KY206763	KY206769	NA
O. metroxylonis	MFLUCC 15-0283^T	KY206775	KY206764	KY206770	KY206779
O. narathiwatensis	MFLUCC 24-0085^T	PP824654	PP824658	PP824659	NA
O. palmae	HKAS 115711^T	PP592451	PP621077	PP639209	PP761004
O. palmicola	MFLUCC 15-0806^T	KY206776	KY206765	KY206771	NA
O. phoenicis	MFLUCC 18-0269^T	MK088065	MK088061	MK088063	MK087667
O. phoenicis	MFLUCC 18-0270^IS	MK088066	MK088062	MK088064	MK087668
O. pyriforme	HKAS 115710^T	PP592452	PP621078	PP639210	PP761005
O. rhapidicola	MFLUCC 14-0616^T	NA	KY206766	KY206772	NA
O. sinensis	GZCC21-0240^T	PP592453	PP621079	PP639211	PP761006
Oxydothis sp.	JHGB17 3A	MH268015	NA	NA	NA
Oxydothis sp.	IFO 32218	NA	DQ810225	DQ810261	NA
Oxydothis sp.	E04B-2	PP592454	PP621080	PP639212	NA
O. yunnanensis	GZUCC 0127^T	ON176681	ON176684	NA	NA
Vialaea mangiferae	MFLUCC 12-0808^T	KF724974	KF724975	NA	NA
V. minutella	BRIP 56959	KC181926	KC181924	NA	NA
Superscripts 'T' and 'IST' represent the type and isotype strains. Newly generated sequences are indicated in bold. 'NA' sequences are unavailable.

Species name	Host	Family	Country	Ref.
Oxydothis acutata	Orania spp.	Arecaceae	Philippines	[31]
O. aequalis	Bamboo, Calamus sp.	Arecaceae, Poaceae	Australia, Brunei, Malaysia, Philippines	[31,57]
O. alexandrarum	Archontophoenix alexandrae	Arecaceae	Australia	[31,58]
O. angustispora	Licuala ramsayi	Arecaceae	Australia, Brunei, Thailand	[57−59]
O. asiatica	Calamus flabellatus, Daemonorops sparsiflorus, Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Australia, Brunei, China (Hong Kong)	[57,60,61]
O. asymmetrica	Calamus conirostris	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. atypica	Licuala longicalycata	Arecaceae	Thailand	[62]
O. atypica	Licuala longicalycata	Arecaceae	Thailand	[59]
O. australiensis	Archontophoenix sp.	Arecaceae	Australia	[31]
O. bambusicola	Indocalamus sp.	Poaceae	China (Hong Kong)	[18]
O. batuapoiensis	Daemonorops oxycarpa	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. belalongensis	Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. bruneiensis	Calamus sp., Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. calami	Calamus sp., Salacca wallichiana	Arecaceae	Australia, Burma, China (Hong Kong), Indonesia, Myanmar, Philippines	[31,57,60,61,63]
O. calamicola	Calamus sp.	Arecaceae	Thailand	[20]
O. caryotae	Caryota sp.	Arecaceae	China (Guangdong Province)	[29]
O. chinensis	Pandanus sp.	Arecaceae	China (Guangdong Province)	[27]
O. circularis	Myrsine sp.	Primulaceae	Brazil	[31]
O. coperniciae	Copernicia alba	Arecaceae	Thailand	[28]
O. cyrtospora	Licuala ramsayi	Arecaceae	Australia	[57]
O. cyrtostachicola	Cyrtostachys renda	Arecaceae	Thailand	[19]
O. daemonoropis	Daemonorops sp.	Arecaceae	Philippines	[31]
O. daemonoropsicola	Daemonorops margaritae	Arecaceae	Australia, China (Hong Kong), Malaysia, Thailand	[57,58,60,61]
O. dispariapicis	Daemonorops oxycarpa	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. elaeicola	Calamus sp., Elaeis sp., Livistona sp., Pandanus sp.	Arecaceae	Brazil, China (Hong Kong, Taiwan), Democratic Republic of the Congo, Honduras, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Tanzania	[31,60,64−67]
O. elaeidis	Elaeis sp.	Arecaceae	China (Taiwan), Democratic Republic of the Congo, Tanzania, Zaire	[31,60,65,66]
O. extensa	Licuala ramsayi	Arecaceae	Australia	[57]
O. foliata	Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Thailand	[29]
O. fortunei	Trachycarpus fortunei	Arecaceae	China (Guizhou Province)	[26]
O. froehlichii	Calamus radicalis	Arecaceae	Australia	[31]
O. froehlichiae	Calamus sp., Linospadix sp.	Arecaceae	Australia	[31]
O. frondicola	Licuala sp., Archontophoenix sp.	Arecaceae	Australia, Malaysia, Thailand	[31,58,59]
O. garethjonesii	Eleais sp.	Arecaceae	Thailand	[20]
O. gigantea	Palm	Arecaceae	Australia, Indonesia	[31,58]
O. grisea	Arenga sp., Calamus sp., Heliconia sp., Licuala sp., Ptychosperma sp.	Arecaceae	China (Taiwan), Malaysia, Indonesia, Venezuela	[31,59,66,68]
O. hoehnelii	Arenga sp., Calamus sp., Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Philippines	[31,59−61]
O. hongkongensis	Daemonorops sp., Calamus sp.	Arecaceae	Australia, China (Hong Kong)	[57,60,61]
O. ianei	Trachycarpus sp.	Arecaceae	China (Hubei Province), UK	[58]
O. inaequalis	Wallichia siamensis	Arecaceae	Thailand	[19]
O. insignis	Eugenia sp.	Myrtaceae	Brazil	[31]
O. licualae	Archontophoenix sp., Calamus sp., Jessenia sp., Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Australia, China (Hong Kong), Ecuador, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand	[31,57−60]
O. licualicola	Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei, Myanmar	[57,63]
O. linospadicis	Linospadix microcarya	Arecaceae	Australia	[30,31]
O. livistonae	Licuala sp., Livistona sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei, Philippines, Thailand	[31,57,59,69]
O. livistonica	Calamus sp., Licuala sp., Livistona sp.	Arecaceae	China (Hong Kong), Japan, Thailand	[31,57,59−61]
O. livistonicola	Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Australia	[57]
O. luteaspora	Calamus sp.	Arecaceae	Australia	[31]
O. maculosa	Palm	Arecaceae	Indonesia	[31,70]
O. magnicolla	Calamus sp., Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei	[56]
O. manokwariensis	Calamus sp., Daemonorops sp.	Arecaceae	China (Hong Kong), Indonesia	[31,57,60]
O. maquilingiana	Daemonorops sp.	Arecaceae	Philippines	[31]
O. mauritiae	Mauritia flexuosa	Arecaceae	Ecuador	[57]
O. megalospora	Calamus sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. metroxylonis	Metroxylon sagu	Arecaceae	Thailand	[20]
O. miscanthicola	Miscanthus floridulus	Poaceae	China (Hong Kong)	[54]
O. narathiwatensis	Eleiodoxa conferta	Arecaceae	Thailand	[56]
O. nigra	Archontophoenix sp., Licuala sp., Livistona sp.	Arecaceae	Australia, China (Hong Kong), Malaysia	[31,58,60,61]
O. nigricans	Ptychosperma sp.	Arecaceae	Indonesia	[12]
O. nonamyloidea	Livistona sp.	Arecaceae	Indonesia	[31]
O. nonspecifica	Calamus sp., Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Australia, Brunei	[57]
O. nontincta	Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. nypae	Nypa fruticans	Arecaceae	Brunei	[31]
O. nypicola	Nypa fruticans	Arecaceae	Brunei	[31]
O. obducens	Calamus sp., Linospadix microcarya	Arecaceae	Australia, China (Hong Kong)	[31,57,60,61]
O. oedema	Mauritia flexuosa	Arecaceae	Brunei, China (Hong Kong), Guiana, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Seychelles	[31,57,58,60,61]
O. opaca	Rhopalostylis sp., Ripogonum sp.	Arecaceae	New Zealand	[31,73]
O. oraniopsidis	Calamus sp., Laccospadix sp., Licuala sp., Oraniopsis sp.	Arecaceae	Australia, India, Thailand	[31,57,59]
O. palmae	Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	China (Guangdong Province)	[29]
O. palmicola	Eleais guineensis	Arecaceae	Thailand	[20]
O. pandani	Pandanus sp.	Arecaceae	China (Hong Kong), French Polynesia, Tubuai, United States	[31,60,61]
O. pandanicola	Livistona chinensis, Pandanus sp., Pritchardia sp.	Arecaceae	Indonesia, Philippines, United States	[31,57,60,61]
O. parasitica	Licuala ramsayi	Arecaceae	Australia	[30,31,57]
O. parvula	Calamus sp., Orania sp., Phoenix sp.	Arecaceae	China (Hong Kong), Philippines	[31,57,60,61]
O. perangusta	Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. phoenicis	Phoenix paludosa	Arecaceae	Thailand	[22]
O. poliothea	Palm	Arecaceae	Venezuela	[31]
O. pusillispora	Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. pyriforme	Licuala sp.	Arecaceae	China (Guangdong Province)	[29]
O. ragae	Palm	Arecaceae	Indonesia	[31]
O. ragae	Arenga sp.	Arecaceae	China (Hong Kong), Irian Jaya	[31,60,61]
O. rattanica	Calamus sp., Daemonorops sp., Eleiodoxa sp.	Arecaceae	Brunei, China (Hong Kong), Thailand	[57,60]
O. rattanicola	Calamus sp., Daemonorops sp.	Arecaceae	Australia, China (Hong Kong)	[57]
O. rhapidicola	Rhapis excelsa	Arecaceae	Thailand	[20]
O. rhopalostylidis	Rhopalostylis sapida	Arecaceae	New Zealand	[23]
O. rimicolla	Calamus pogonacanthus	Arecaceae	Brunei	[57]
O. rubella	Calamus sp.	Arecaceae	Australia	[31,57,70]
O. sabalensis	Sabal sp., Serenoa sp.	Arecaceae	USA	[71,31]
O. saltuensis	Archontophoenix sp., Cocos nucifera, Licuala sp., Livistona sp.	Arecaceae	Australia, Brunei, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Seychelles, Sri Lanka	[31,57,58]
O. selenosporellae	Rhopalostylis sapida	Arecaceae	New Zealand	[23,31,72,73]
O. sinensis	Livistona chinensis	Arecaceae	China (Guangdong Province)	[29]
O. tayabensis	Calamus sp.	Arecaceae	Philippines	[31]
O. uniseriata	Calamus radicalis	Arecaceae	Australia	[57]
O. wallichianensis	Wallichia siamensis	Arecaceae	Thailand	[19]

Contents

Policies

Services

Partnerships

Oxydothis ailaoshanensis sp. nov. (Oxydothidaceae, Xylariales) from dead bamboo culms in Yunnan Province, China

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Plant materials

Chemicals and reagents

Preparation of Marselan juices and wines

Total polyphenols and flavonoid content determination

ABTS free-radical scavenging assay

FRAP free-radical scavenging assay

HS-GC-IMS analysis

Statistical data analysis

Results

Changes in total polyphenol and flavonoid contents and antioxidant activity during fermentation

Analysis of the change in volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during fermentation by GS-IMS

Fingerprint analysis of VOCs at different fermentation stages of Marselan wine

Multivariate statistical analysis

Conclusions

Author contributions

Data availability

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

Rights and permissions

References

About this article

Cite this article

Article Metrics

Access History

Other Articles By Authors

Oxydothis ailaoshanensis sp. nov. (Oxydothidaceae, Xylariales) from dead bamboo culms in Yunnan Province, China

HTML

Sample collection and morphological examination

DNA extraction, PCR amplification, and sequencing

Phylogenetic analysis

Phylogenetic analysis

Taxonomy

Catalog

HTML

Sample collection and morphological examination

DNA extraction, PCR amplification, and sequencing

Phylogenetic analysis

Phylogenetic analysis

Taxonomy

Contents

Policies

Services

Partnerships

Export File

Citation

Format

Content