Hyalopsora tibetica Y.M. Liang & S.T. Liu, 2021

Wang, Lei, Liu, Shi-Tong, Liu, Yun & Liang, Ying-Mei, 2021, Two new species and one new record of Hyalopsora (Pucciniastraceae) on ferns in China, Phytotaxa 527 (1), pp. 41-50 : 45-46

publication ID	https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.527.1.4
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5728798
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03849207-E45D-FFD5-FF29-D45EFEA1FDE1
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Hyalopsora tibetica Y.M. Liang & S.T. Liu
status	sp. nov.

Treatment

Hyalopsora tibetica Y.M. Liang & S.T. Liu View in CoL , sp. nov. ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 )

MycoBank no.: MB830424.

Holotype:— China, Tibet Prov., 29˚39’05”N, 94˚42’50”E, 3918 m asl, on Athyrium spinulosum (Athyriaceae) , 24 July 2016, Y. M. Liang, BJFC-R02435 .

Etymology:— Tibetica , referring to the place of collection.

Distribution:— China ( Tibet Prov.).

Uredinia amphigenous, mostly on the abaxial surface of fronds, cauline, along the veins densely covering the whole frond, scattered or in groups, round or elliptical, yellow to golden-yellow, without paraphyses, 0.5–1 mm; fresh urediniospores and amphispores with yellow contents that fade over time. Urediniospores rare, elongate, ovoid, or sub-pyriform, 28.0–33.5 × 14.0–17.0 μm ( x = 31.5 × 16.0 μm, n = 50), walls hyaline, 1.0–1.5 μm thick, finely echinulate, with 2–6 scattered germ pores. Amphispores abundant, near rectangular, rhombus, polygonal, sometimes very irregularly angular, 29.0–45.5 × 19.5–30.5 μm ( x = 37.0 × 24.5 μm, n = 50), walls hyaline, 1.0–8.0 μm thick, 8 μm at the corners of the walls, not significantly thickened or only 1.0–2.0 μm thick in the remaining margins, nearly smooth, with 4–6(–7) scattered pores.

Additional specimen examined:— China, Tibet Prov., 29˚39’05” N, 94˚42’50” E, 3912 m asl, on Athyrium spinulosum (Athyriaceae) , 24 July 2016, Y. M. Liang, BJFC-R 02437.

Notes:— Hyalopsora tibetica resembles H. japonica and H. nodispora superficially in having amphispores that are larger than 35.0 μm. H. japonica and H. nodispora only have amphispores ( Chen 1982, Saba et al. 2012), while H. tibetica has urediniospores and amphispores in the same uredinia. H. tibetica is parasitic on Athyrium similar to H. pseudocystopteridis , H. hakodatensis and H. polypodii . However, H. pseudocystopteridis only possesses amphispores ( Wang et al. 1980).Although H. hakodatensis and H. polypodii have amphispores and urediniospores, their amphispores are smaller than those of H. tibetica . Those of H. hakodatensis are 15.0–30.0 × 12.5–20.0 μm, and those of H. polypodii 24.0–37.5 × 15.0–27.5 μm ( Kuprevich & Transhel 1957, Hiratsuka et al. 1992). In addition, H. tibetica can have up to 6 germ pores on urediniospores, whereas H. hakodatensis and H. polypodii have 4 or fewer germ pores. ( Sydow & Sydow 1914).