Ліхенологія / Лихенология / Lichenology

Таким чином, ліхенофлора лісостепової зони верхів'я р. Інгулець представлена незначною кількістю видів, що пов'язано із одноманітністю деревних субстратів, відсутністю старих насаджень лісового масиву в долині річки та природних кам'янистих відслонень або вільних від судинних рослин ділянок ґрунту, де могли б існувати лишайники.

ЛІТЕРАТУРА

1.Котов М.І. Ботаніко-географічний нарис долини р. Інгульця // Труди с/г ботаніки. – 1927. – 1, вип. 3. – С. 17-61.

2.Окснер А.М. Флора лишайників України. – К.: Вид-во АН УРСР, 1993. – Т. 2, вип. 2.

–500 с.

A contribution to the taxonomy of the genus Rinodina (Physciaceae, lichenized Ascomycotina) based on molecular data

1NADYEINA O., 2GRUBE M., 2MAYRHOFER H.

1M.G. Kholodny Institute of Botany of NAS of Ukraine, Department of Lichenology and Bryology Tereshenkivska Str., 2, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine

2Institute of Plant Sciences, Karl-Franzens-University Graz Holteigasse 6, 8010, Graz, Austria

The genus Rinodina, one of the biggest in the family Physciaceae, is heterogenous because of the different types of ascospores (Hafellner et al., 1979; Mayrhofer, 1982; Kaschik, 2006) and asci (Rambold et al., 1994). It is still poorly investigated by means of molecular methods. Phylogenetic analysis with Rinodina species based on nr ITS rDNA gene region was carried out by Grube & Arup (2001), Helms et al. (2003) and Kaschik (2006). In accordance with those studies, Rinodina is a paraphylethic and heterogenous genus that forms close relationships with foliose and fruticose genera of the Physciaceae, which reflect to a slow morphological evolution in lichens. Improved phylogenetic resolution is expected from analyzing of multiple genes (Stenroos & DePriest, 1998). Variation among non-coding nr ITS regions is useful for the delimitation on species and population level (Myllys et al., 2001; Kaschik, 2006) while mt SSU rDNA sequences allows investigating natural relationships between genera (Crespo et al., 2001; Wedin et al., 2002). Aimed to clarify the phylogenetic position of some Rinodina and Buellia species with doubtful taxonomic status we have used sequences of the nr ITS and mt SSU rDNA genes.

The consensus analysis of the nr ITS and mt SSU rDNA sequences was used for the clarification of the relationships between the families Physciaceae and Caliciaceae (Wedin et al, 2002). The performed consensus phylogenetic nr ITS and mt SSU rDNA analyses as well as separate analyses of nr ITS and mt SSU data confirm the previously assigned heterogeny in the genus Rinodina (Grube & Arup, 2001; Helms et al., 2003; Kaschik, 2006). The genus Rinodina

59

Ліхенологія / Лихенология / Lichenology

splits into a number of species' groups. One clade contains mainly corticolous species whereas another clade consists of mainly saxicolous (calcareous) taxa. The next clade encompasses just Rinodina luridescens and species with doubtful taxonomic status as "Buellia" parvula and "Buellia" lindingeri. Another strange species is "Rinodina" insularis which comes separate within the bulk of Buellias. There has been a strong support for the monophyly of the genera Tetramelas, Diplotomma, Dirinaria and Pyxine, which group among Buellia species.

Based on molecular and morphological characters the following taxonomic changes are proposed. We reinstate the original name Rinodina parvula for "Buellia" parvula and propose the new combination Rinodina lindingeri. "Rinodina" insularis has to be separated from Rinodina and treated within the genus Buellia or one of the segregates of the heterogenous genus Buellia.

We would like to thank Sergey Kondratyuk for this collaboration within INTAS Young Scientists grant (№ 05-109-4864) and INTAS foundation for financial support of ON in her travel to the Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Graz.

REFERENCES

1.Crespo A., Blanco O., Hawksworth D.L. The potential of mitochondrial DNA for establishing phylogeny and stabilising generic concepts in the parmelioid lichens // Taxon. – 2001.

–50. – P. 807-819.

2.Grube M., Arup U. Molecular and morphological evolution in the Physciaceae (Lecanorales, lichenized Ascomycotina), with special emphasis on the genus Rinodina // Lichenologist. – 2001. – 33. – P. 63-72.

3.Hafellner J., Mayrhofer H., Poelt J. Die Gattungen der Flechtenfamilien Physciaceae // Herzogia. – 1979. – 5. – P. 39-790.

4.Helms G., Friedl T., Rambold G., Mayrhofer H. Identification of photobionts from the lichen family Physciaceae using algal-specific ITS rDNA sequencing // Lichenologist. – 2001. – 33. – P. 73–86.

5.Kaschik M. Taxonomic studies on saxicolous species of the genus Rinodina (lichenized Ascomycetes, Physciaceae) in the Southern Hemisphere with emphasis in Australia and New Zealand // Bibliotheca Lichenologica. – 2006. – 93. – 162 p.

6.Mayrhofer H. Ascosporen und Evolution der Flechtenfamilie Physciaceae // Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory. – 1982. – 52. – P. 313-321.

7.Myllys L., Lohtander K., Tehler A. Beta-tubulin, ITS and group I intron sequences challenge the species pair concept in Physcia aipolia and P. caesia // Mycologia. – 2001. – 93 (2). – P. 335-343.

8.Rambold G., Mayrhofer H., Matzer M. On the ascus types in the Physciaceae

(Lecanorales) // Plant Systematics and Evolution – 1994. – 192. – P. 31-40.

9.Stenroos S.K., DePriest P.T. SSU rDNA phylogeny of cladoniiform lichens // Am. J. Bot.

–1998. – 85. – P. 1548-1559.

10.Wedin M., Baloch E., Grube M. Parsimony analyses of mtSSU and nITS rDNA sequences reveal the natural relationships of the lichen families Physciaceae and Caliciaceae // Taxon. – 2002. – 51. – P. 655-660.

60