title: Phylogeography and population structure of the grape powdery mildew fungus, Erysiphe necator, from diverse Vitis species.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The grape powdery mildew fungus, Erysiphe necator, was introduced into Europe more than 160 years ago and is now distributed everywhere that grapes are grown. To understand the invasion history of this pathogen we investigated the evolutionary relationships between introduced populations of Europe, Australia and the western United States (US) and populations in the eastern US, where E. necator is thought to be native. Additionally, we tested the hypothesis that populations of E. necator in the eastern US are structured based on geography and Vitis host species.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We sequenced three nuclear gene regions covering 1803 nucleotides from 146 isolates of E. necator collected from the eastern US, Europe, Australia, and the western US. Phylogeographic analyses show that the two genetic groups in Europe represent two separate introductions and that the genetic groups may be derived from eastern US ancestors. Populations from the western US and Europe share haplotypes, suggesting that the western US population was introduced from Europe. Populations in Australia are derived from European populations. Haplotype richness and nucleotide diversity were significantly greater in the eastern US populations than in the introduced populations. Populations within the eastern US are geographically differentiated; however, no structure was detected with respect to host habitat (i.e., wild or cultivated). Populations from muscadine grapes, V. rotundifolia, are genetically distinct from populations from other Vitis host species, yet no differentiation was detected among populations from other Vitis species.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Multilocus sequencing analysis of the grape powdery mildew fungus is consistent with the hypothesis that populations in Europe, Australia and the western US are derived from two separate introductions and their ancestors were likely from native populations in the eastern US. The invasion history of E. necator follows a pattern consistent with plant-mediated dispersal, however, more exhaustive sampling is required to make more precise conclusions as to origin. E. necator shows no genetic structure across Vitis host species, except with respect to V. rotundifolia.
authors.affiliation: Department of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
authors.forename: Marin Talbot
authors.initials: MT
authors.lastname: Brewer
authors.forename: Michael G
authors.initials: MG
authors.lastname: Milgroom
mesh_terms: D001203:Ascomycota / Q000145:classification* / Q000235:genetics*; D005656:Fungal Proteins / Q000235:genetics; D006239:Haplotypes; D058974:Phylogeography; D010935:Plant Diseases / Q000382:microbiology*; D027843:Vitis / Q000382:microbiology*
chemical_list: D005656:Fungal Proteins
references.citation: Theor Popul Biol. 1975 Apr;7(2):256-76
references.pmid: 1145509
references.citation: Biotechniques. 1991 Apr;10(4):506-13
references.pmid: 1867860
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2006 Apr;15(4):1021-31
references.pmid: 16599964
references.citation: Phytopathology. 1997 Jul;87(7):670-7
references.pmid: 18945087
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2002 Oct;11(10):2013-26
references.pmid: 12296945
references.citation: Trends Ecol Evol. 2001 Jan 1;16(1):37-45
references.pmid: 11146143
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2001 Feb;10(2):285-94
references.pmid: 11298945
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2005 Dec;14(14):4275-85
references.pmid: 16313592
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2000 Oct;9(10):1657-9
references.pmid: 11050560
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2009 Mar;18(5):817-33
references.pmid: 19207260
references.citation: Theor Appl Genet. 2005 Jul;111(2):370-7
references.pmid: 15902396
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2009 Jun 1;25(11):1451-2
references.pmid: 19346325
references.citation: Genetics. 1995 Jun;140(2):767-82
references.pmid: 7498753
references.citation: Fungal Genet Biol. 2007 Jun;44(6):474-83
references.pmid: 17412619
references.citation: Appl Environ Microbiol. 1999 Sep;65(9):3950-4
references.pmid: 10473400
references.citation: Evolution. 1975 Mar;29(1):1-10
references.pmid: 28563291
references.citation: Genetics. 2003 Aug;164(4):1635-44
references.pmid: 12930767
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2009 Jan;18(1):123-35
references.pmid: 19076279
references.citation: Genetics. 2000 Aug;155(4):2011-4
references.pmid: 10924493
references.citation: Genetics. 1992 Oct;132(2):619-33
references.pmid: 1385266
references.citation: Mol Phylogenet Evol. 1994 Jun;3(2):102-13
references.pmid: 8075830
references.citation: Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008 Oct;74(20):6327-32
references.pmid: 18723657
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2008 Jan;17(1):431-49
references.pmid: 17908213
references.citation: Phytopathology. 2010 Nov;100(11):1185-93
references.pmid: 20932167
references.citation: Genetics. 1992 Oct;132(2):583-9
references.pmid: 1427045
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Oct 11;102(41):14706-11
references.pmid: 16204000
references.citation: Mol Plant Pathol. 2003 May 1;4(3):187-98
references.pmid: 20569378
references.citation: Science. 2003 Jun 6;300(5625):1563-5
references.pmid: 12791991
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1994 Nov 22;91(24):11591-5
references.pmid: 7972108
references.citation: Science. 1975 Jan 31;187(4174):319-27
references.pmid: 17814259
references.citation: Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2007 Aug;44(2):741-51
references.pmid: 17346991
references.citation: Genetics. 2005 Jun;170(2):613-30
references.pmid: 15802503
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2008 Oct;17(20):4446-58
references.pmid: 18803594
references.citation: Mol Plant Pathol. 2006 Nov;7(6):519-31
references.pmid: 20507466
references.citation: Genetics. 1989 Nov;123(3):585-95
references.pmid: 2513255
references.citation: Phytopathology. 2003 Jun;93(6):738-46
references.pmid: 18943061