Search
2026 Volume 17
Article Contents
ARTICLE   Open Access    

Uncovering the hidden diversity of oomycetes (Straminipila) in freshwater environments

More Information
  • Received: 11 November 2025
    Revised: 22 December 2025
    Accepted: 17 March 2026
    Published online: 12 May 2026
    Mycosphere  17 Article number: e006 (2026)  |  Cite this article
  • Oomycetes play a key role in decomposing and recycling organic materials in freshwater ecosystems. However, their diversity and ecological study gained less attention compared with other organisms. Based on extensive, long-term surveys for freshwater oomycetes, the present study undertakes a comprehensive examination of oomycete diversity and ecology in the Korean freshwater environments. We successfully identified a total of 78 taxa of oomycetes (568 isolates), which are classified into the orders Peronosporales (4%), Pythiales (77%), and Saprolegniales (19%), based on their cultural, morphological, and molecular characteristics. These taxa consist of 57 previously described species, including 22 species new to Korea, and 21 previously unknown lineages. Eight of these taxa were described as new species under the Pythiales, with detailed taxonomic descriptions in this study. Our findings revealed that the distributions of freshwater oomycetes varied depending on substrates and that oomycetes were primarily found in plant-derived sources, such as decaying leaves, stems, and twigs. Across all seasons and freshwater ecosystem types, Pythiales were more frequently isolated than Peronosporales and Saprolegniales. However, isolation frequencies among taxa varied across seasons and habitat types. This study provides extensive strain resources and establishes a fundamental reference for future taxonomic and ecological research on freshwater oomycetes, expanding knowledge of their diversity and functional roles in freshwater ecosystems.
  • 加载中
  • Supplementary Table S1 Strain information and collection details.
    Supplementary Fig. S1 Phylogenetic tree of Peronosporales and Pythiales species from the minimum evolution analysis based on cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (cox1) mtDNA sequences.
    Supplementary Fig. S2 Phylogenetic tree of Saprolegniales species from the minimum evolution analysis based on internal transcribed spacer (ITS) rDNA sequences.
    Supplementary Taxonomy S1 Descriptions of Oomycota species previously unrecorded in Korea Freshwater samples, including algae, animal debris, plant litter, soil sediment, and water, were collected from various freshwater environments in Korea. B. Nam and Y.J. Choi collected samples, from which B. Nam isolated pure oomycete cultures.
  • [1] Beakes GW, Thines M, Honda D. 2015. Straminipile "Fungi" – Taxonomy. In Encyclopedia of Life Sciences. US: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. pp. 9 doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0001984
    [2] Thines M. 2014. Phylogeny and evolution of plant pathogenic oomycetes—a global overview. European Journal of Plant Pathology 138:431−447 doi: 10.1007/s10658-013-0366-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [3] Beakes GW, Honda D, Thines M. 2014. Systematics of the Straminipila: Labyrinthulomycota, Hyphochytriomycota, and Oomycota. In Systematics and Evolution, eds. McLaughlin DJ, Spatafora JW. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 39–97 doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-55318-9_3
    [4] Beakes GW, Thines M. 2016. Hyphochytriomycota and Oomycota. In Handbook of the Protists, eds Archibald JM, Simpson AGB, Slamovits CH, Margulis L, Melkonian M, et al. Cham: Springer. pp. 1−71 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-32669-6_26-1
    [5] Dick MW. 2001. Straminipilous fungi: systematics of the peronosporomycetes including accounts of the marine straminipilous protists, the plasmodiophorids and similar organisms. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 670 pp
    [6] Thines M, Choi YJ. 2016. Evolution, diversity, and taxonomy of the Peronosporaceae, with focus on the genus Peronospora. Phytopathology 106:6−18 doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-05-15-0127-RVW

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [7] Thines M, Kamoun S. 2010. Oomycete – plant coevolution: recent advances and future prospects. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 13:427−433 doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2010.04.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [8] Erwin D, Ribeiro O. 1996. Phytophthora diseases worldwide. St. Paul, Minnesota, USA: APS Press
    [9] Lamour K. 2013. Phytophthora a global perspective. Wallingford, UK: CABI Digital Library
    [10] Jung T, Pérez-Sierra A, Durán A, Jung MH, Balci Y, et al. 2018. Canker and decline diseases caused by soil- and airborne Phytophthora species in forests and woodlands. Persoonia 40:182−220 doi: 10.3767/persoonia.2018.40.08

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [11] Chen Q, Bakhshi M, Balci Y, Broders KD, Cheewangkoon R, et al. 2022. Genera of phytopathogenic fungi: GOPHY 4. Studies in Mycology 101:417−564 doi: 10.3114/sim.2022.101.06

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [12] Reeser PW, Sutton W, Hansen EM, Remigi P, Adams GC. 2011. Phytophthora species in forest streams in Oregon and Alaska. Mycologia 103:22−35 doi: 10.3852/10-013

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [13] Hüberli D, Hardy GESJ, White D, Williams N, Burgess TI. 2013. Fishing for Phytophthora from Western Australia's waterways: a distribution and diversity survey. Australasian Plant Pathology 42:251−260 doi: 10.1007/s13313-012-0195-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [14] Oh E, Gryzenhout M, Wingfield BD, Wingfield MJ, Burgess TI. 2013. Surveys of soil and water reveal a goldmine of Phytophthora diversity in South African natural ecosystems. IMA Fungus 4:123−131 doi: 10.5598/imafungus.2013.04.01.12

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [15] Shrestha SK, Zhou Y, Lamour K. 2013. Oomycetes baited from streams in Tennessee 2010–2012. Mycologia 105:1516−1523 doi: 10.3852/13-010

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [16] Jung T, Scanu B, Brasier C, Webber J, Milenković I, et al. 2020. A survey in natural forest ecosystems of vietnam reveals high diversity of both new and described Phytophthora taxa including P. ramorum. Forests 11:93 doi: 10.3390/f11010093

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [17] Jung T, La Spada F, Pane A, Aloi F, Evoli M, et al. 2019. Diversity and distribution of Phytophthora species in protected natural areas in sicily. Forests 10:259 doi: 10.3390/f10030259

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [18] Jung T, Durán A, Sanfuentes von Stowasser E, Schena L, Mosca S, et al. 2018. Diversity of Phytophthora species in Valdivian rainforests and association with severe dieback symptoms. Forest Pathology 48:e12443 doi: 10.1111/efp.12443

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [19] Jung T, Chang TT, Bakonyi J, Seress D, Pérez-Sierra A, et al. 2017. Diversity of Phytophthora species in natural ecosystems of Taiwan and association with disease symptoms. Plant Pathology 66:194−211 doi: 10.1111/ppa.12564

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [20] Corcobado T, Cech TL, Daxer A, Ďatková H, Janoušek J, et al. 2023. Phytophthora, Nothophytophthora and Halophytophthora diversity in rivers, streams and riparian alder ecosystems of Central Europe. Mycological Progress 22:50 doi: 10.1007/s11557-023-01898-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [21] Caballol M, Redondo MÁ, Catalán N, Corcobado T, Jung T, et al. 2024. Climate acts as an environmental filter to plant pathogens. The ISME Journal 18:wrae010 doi: 10.1093/ismejo/wrae010

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [22] Fell JW, Master IM. 1975. Phycomycetes (Phytophthora spp. nov. and Pythium sp. nov.) associated with degrading mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) leaves. Canadian Journal of Botany 53:2908−2922 doi: 10.1139/b75-320

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [23] Pegg KG, Gillespie NC, Forsberg LI. 1980. Phytophthora sp. associated with mangrove death in Central Coastal Queensland. Australasian Plant Pathology 9:6−7 doi: 10.1071/APP98030006

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [24] Pegg KG, Alcorn JL. 1982. Phytophthora operculata sp. nov., a new marine fungus. Mycotaxon 16:99−102 doi: 10.5962/p.417437

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [25] Gerrettson-Cornell L, Simpson J. 1984. Three new marine Phytophthora species from New South Wales. Mycotaxon 19:453−470 doi: 10.5962/p.418718

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [26] Nakagiri A. 2000. Ecology and biodiversity of Halophytophthora species. Fungal Diversity 5:153−164

    Google Scholar

    [27] Nakagiri A, Newell SY, Ito T. 1994. Two new Halophytophthora species, H. tartarea and H. masteri, from intertidal decomposing leaves in saltmarsh and mangrove regions. Mycoscience 35:223−232 doi: 10.1007/BF02268442

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [28] Nakagiri A, Ito T, Manoch L, Tanticharoen M. 2001. A new Halophytophthora species, H. porrigovesica, from subtropical and tropical mangroves. Mycoscience 42:33−41 doi: 10.1007/BF02463973

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [29] Newell SY, Fell JW. 1992. Distribution and experimental responses to substrate of marine oomycetes (Halophytophthora spp.) in mangrove ecosystems. Mycological Research 96:851−856 doi: 10.1016/S0953-7562(09)81030-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [30] Hulvey J, Telle S, Nigrelli L, Lamour K, Thines M. 2010. Salisapiliaceae - a new family of oomycetes from marsh grass litter of southeastern North America. Persoonia 25:109−116 doi: 10.3767/003158510x551763

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [31] Man in 't Veld WA, Rosendahl KCHM, Brouwer H, de Cock AWAM. 2011. Phytophthora gemini sp. nov., a new species isolated from the halophilic plant Zostera marina in the Netherlands. Fungal Biology 115:724−732 doi: 10.1016/j.funbio.2011.05.006

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [32] Man in 't Veld WA, Rosendahl KCHM, van Rijswick PCJ, Meffert JP, Boer E, et al. 2019. Multiple Halophytophthora spp. and Phytophthora spp. including P. gemini, P. inundata and P. chesapeakensis sp. nov. isolated from the seagrass Zostera marina in the Northern hemisphere. European Journal of Plant Pathology 153:341−357 doi: 10.1007/s10658-018-1561-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [33] Govers LL, Man in 't Veld WA, Meffert JP, Bouma TJ, van Rijswick PCJ, et al. 2016. Marine Phytophthora species can hamper conservation and restoration of vegetated coastal ecosystems. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 283:20160812 doi: 10.1098/rspb.2016.0812

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [34] Marano AV, Jesus AL, de Souza JI, Jerônimo GH, Gonçalves DR, et al. 2016. Ecological roles of saprotrophic Peronosporales (Oomycetes, Straminipila) in natural environments. Fungal Ecology 19:77−88 doi: 10.1016/j.funeco.2015.06.003

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [35] Maia C, Jung MH, Carella G, Milenković I, Janoušek J, et al. 2022. Eight new Halophytophthora species from marine and brackish-water ecosystems in Portugal and an updated phylogeny for the genus. Persoonia 48:54−90 doi: 10.3767/persoonia.2022.48.02

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [36] Sandoval-Sierra JV, Latif-Eugenin F, Martín MP, Zaror L, Diéguez-Uribeondo J. 2014. Saprolegnia species affecting the salmonid aquaculture in Chile and their associations with fish developmental stage. Aquaculture 434:462−469 doi: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2014.09.005

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [37] Rezinciuc S, Sandoval-Sierra JV, Diéguez-Uribeondo J. 2014. Molecular identification of a bronopol tolerant strain of Saprolegnia australis causing egg and fry mortality in farmed brown trout, Salmo trutta. Fungal Biology 118:591−600 doi: 10.1016/j.funbio.2013.11.011

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [38] Hussein MMA, Hatai K, Nomura T. 2001. Saprolegniosis in salmonids and their eggs in Japan. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 37:204−207 doi: 10.7589/0090-3558-37.1.204

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [39] Fernández-Benéitez MJ, Ortiz-Santaliestra ME, Lizana M, Diéguez-Uribeondo J. 2008. Saprolegnia diclina: another species responsible for the emergent disease 'Saprolegnia infections' in amphibians. FEMS Microbiology Letters 279:23−29 doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2007.01002.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [40] Perotti MG, Basanta MD, Steciow MM, Sandoval-Sierra JV, Diéguez-Uribeondo J. 2013. Early breeding protects anuran eggs from Saprolegnia infection. Austral Ecology 38:672−679 doi: 10.1111/aec.12014

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [41] Romansic JM, Diez KA, Higashi EM, Johnson JE, Blaustein AR. 2009. Effects of the pathogenic water mold Saprolegnia ferax on survival of amphibian larvae. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 83:187−193 doi: 10.3354/dao02007

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [42] Sekimoto S, Yokoo K, Kawamura Y, Honda D. 2008. Taxonomy, molecular phylogeny, and ultrastructural morphology of Olpidiopsis porphyrae sp. nov. (Oomycetes, Straminipiles), a unicellular obligate endoparasite of Bangia and Porphyra spp. (Bangiales, Rhodophyta). Mycological Research 112:361−374 doi: 10.1016/j.mycres.2007.11.002

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [43] Kawamura Y, Yokoo K, Tojo M, Hishiike M. 2005. Distribution of Pythium porphyrae, the causal agent of red rot disease of Porphyrae spp., in the Ariake Sea, Japan. Plant Disease 89:1041−1047 doi: 10.1094/PD-89-1041

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [44] Grossart HP, Van den Wyngaert S, Kagami M, Wurzbacher C, Cunliffe M, et al. 2019. Fungi in aquatic ecosystems. Nature Reviews Microbiology 17:339−354 doi: 10.1038/s41579-019-0175-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [45] Krauss GJ, Solé M, Krauss G, Schlosser D, Wesenberg D, et al. 2011. Fungi in freshwaters: ecology, physiology and biochemical potential. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 35:620−651 doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6976.2011.00266.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [46] Calabon MS, Hyde KD, Jones EBG, Luo ZL, Dong W, et al. 2022. Freshwater fungal numbers. Fungal Diversity 114:3−235 doi: 10.1007/s13225-022-00503-2

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [47] Czeczuga B, Kozłowska M, Godlewska A. 2002. Zoosporic aquatic fungi growing on dead specimens of 29 freshwater crustacean species. Limnologica 32:180−193 doi: 10.1016/S0075-9511(02)80007-X

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [48] Yang X, Hong C. 2014. Halophytophthora fluviatilis sp. nov. from freshwater in Virginia. FEMS Microbiology Letters 352:230−237 doi: 10.1111/1574-6968.12391

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [49] Jung T, Blaschke M. 2004. Phytophthora root and collar rot of alders in Bavaria: distribution, modes of spread and possible management strategies. Plant Pathology 53:197−208 doi: 10.1111/j.0032-0862.2004.00957.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [50] Bjelke U, Boberg J, Oliva J, Tattersdill K, McKie BG. 2016. Dieback of riparian alder caused by the Phytophthora alni complex: projected consequences for stream ecosystems. Freshwater Biology 61:565−579 doi: 10.1111/fwb.12729

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [51] Hong C, Richardson PA, Hao W, Ghimire SR, Kong P, et al. 2012. Phytophthora aquimorbida sp. nov. and Phytophthora taxon 'aquatilis' recovered from irrigation reservoirs and a stream in Virginia, USA. Mycologia 104:1097−1108 doi: 10.3852/11-055

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [52] Christova PK. 2024. Fishing for estuarine oomycetes. Diversity 16:530 doi: 10.3390/d16090530

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [53] Jung T, Blaschke H, Neumann P. 1996. Isolation, identification and pathogenicity of Phytophthora species from declining oak stands. European Journal of Forest Pathology 26:253−272 doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0329.1996.tb00846.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [54] Hwang J, Oak SW, Jeffers SN. 2009. Monitoring occurrence and distribution of Phytophthora species in forest streams in North Carolina using bait and filtration methods. General Technical Report. PSW-GTR-221. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Albany, CA, US
    [55] Remigi P, Sutton W, Reeser P, Hansen E. 2009. Characterizing the community of Phytophthora species in an Oregon forest stream. General Technical Report. PSW-GTR-221. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Albany, CA, US
    [56] Mullett MS, Van Poucke K, Haegeman A, Focquet F, Cauldron NC, et al. 2023. Phylogeography and population structure of the global, wide host-range hybrid pathogen Phytophthora × cambivora. IMA Fungus 14:4 doi: 10.1186/s43008-023-00109-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [57] Bezuidenhout CM, Denman S, Kirk SA, Botha WJ, Mostert L, et al. 2010. Phytophthora taxa associated with cultivated Agathosma, with emphasis on the P. citricola complex and P. capensis sp. nov. Persoonia 25:32−49 doi: 10.3767/003158510x538371

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [58] Bose T, Hulbert JM, Burgess TI, Paap T, Roets F, et al. 2021. Two novel Phytophthora species from the southern tip of Africa. Mycological Progress 20:755−767 doi: 10.1007/s11557-021-01702-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [59] Jung T, Stukely MJC, Hardy GETJ, White D, Paap T, et al. 2011. Multiple new Phytophthora species from ITS Clade 6 associated with natural ecosystems in Australia: evolutionary and ecological implications. Persoonia 26:13−39 doi: 10.3767/003158511x557577

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [60] Hansen E, Reeser P, Sutton W, Brasier C. 2015. Redesignation of Phytophthora taxon Pgchlamydo as Phytophthora chlamydospora sp. nov. North American Fungi 10:1−14

    Google Scholar

    [61] Nam B, Lee DJ, Choi YJ. 2021. High-temperature-tolerant fungus and oomycetes in Korea, including Saksenaea longicolla sp. nov. Mycobiology 49:476−490 doi: 10.1080/12298093.2021.1985698

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [62] Jung T, Colquhoun IJ, Hardy GESJ. 2013. New insights into the survival strategy of the invasive soilborne pathogen Phytophthora cinnamomi in different natural ecosystems in Western Australia. Forest Pathology 43:266−288 doi: 10.1111/efp.12025

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [63] Stamler RA, Sanogo S, Goldberg NP, Randall JJ. 2016. Phytophthora species in rivers and streams of the Southwestern United States. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 82:4696−4704 doi: 10.1128/AEM.01162-16

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [64] Hulvey J, Gobena D, Finley L, Lamour K. 2010. Co-occurrence and genotypic distribution of Phytophthora species recovered from watersheds and plant nurseries of eastern Tennessee. Mycologia 102:1127−1133 doi: 10.3852/09-221

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [65] Jung T, Orlikowski L, Henricot B, Abad-Campos P, Aday AG, et al. 2016. Widespread Phytophthora infestations in European nurseries put forest, semi-natural and horticultural ecosystems at high risk of Phytophthora diseases. Forest Pathology 46:134−163 doi: 10.1111/efp.12239

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [66] Jung T, Milenković I, Balci Y, Janoušek J, Kudláček T, et al. 2024. Worldwide forest surveys reveal forty-three new species in Phytophthora major Clade 2 with fundamental implications for the evolution and biogeography of the genus and global plant biosecurity. Studies in Mycology 107:251−389 doi: 10.3114/sim.2024.107.04

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [67] Jung T, Hansen EM, Winton L, Oswald W, Delatour C. 2002. Three new species of Phytophthora from European oak forests. Mycological Research 106:397−411 doi: 10.1017/S0953756202005622

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [68] Jung T. 2009. Beech decline in Central Europe driven by the interaction between Phytophthora infections and climatic extremes. Forest Pathology 39:73−94 doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0329.2008.00566.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [69] Belisario A, Luongo L, Vitale S, Galli M, Haegi A. 2016. Phytophthora gonapodyides causes decline and death of English (Persian) walnut (Juglans regia) in Italy. Plant Disease 100:2537 doi: 10.1094/pdis-03-16-0394-pdn

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [70] Hong CX, Gallegly ME, Richardson PA, Kong P, Moorman GW, et al. 2010. Phytophthora hydropathica, a new pathogen identified from irrigation water, Rhododendron catawbiense and Kalmia latifolia. Plant Pathology 59:913−921 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3059.2010.02323.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [71] Brasier CM, Sanchez-Hernandez E, Kirk SA. 2003. Phytophthora inundata sp. nov., a part heterothallic pathogen of trees and shrubs in wet or flooded soils. Mycological Research 107:477−484 doi: 10.1017/s0953756203007548

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [72] Hong C, Gallegly ME, Richardson PA, Kong P, Moorman GW. 2008. Phytophthora irrigata, a new species isolated from irrigation reservoirs and rivers in Eastern United States of America. FEMS Microbiology Letters 285:203−211 doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2008.01226.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [73] Wallace SF. 2015. Diversity of Phytophthora species in Costa Rica's Tropical Forest. Master Thesis. University of Maryland, US
    [74] Milenković I, Keča N, Karadžić D, Radulović Z, Nowakowska JA, et al. 2018. Isolation and pathogenicity of Phytophthora species from poplar plantations in Serbia. Forests 9:330 doi: 10.3390/f9060330

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [75] Jung T, Burgess TI. 2009. Re-evaluation of Phytophthora citricola isolates from multiple woody hosts in Europe and North America reveals a new species, Phytophthora plurivora sp. nov. Persoonia 22:95−110 doi: 10.3767/003158509x442612

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [76] Werres S, Wagner S, Brand T, Kaminski K, Seipp D. 2007. Survival of Phytophthora ramorum in recirculating irrigation water and subsequent infection of Rhododendron and Viburnum. Plant Disease 91:1034−1044 doi: 10.1094/pdis-91-8-1034

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [77] Eyre CA, Kozanitas M, Garbelotto M. 2013. Population dynamics of aerial and terrestrial populations of Phytophthora ramorum in a California forest under different climatic conditions. Phytopathology 103:1141−1152 doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-11-12-0290-R

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [78] Reeser PW, Hansen EM, Sutton W. 2007. Phytophthora siskiyouensis, a new species from soil, water, myrtlewood (Umbellularia californica) and tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus) in southwestern Oregon. Mycologia 99:639−643 doi: 10.1080/15572536.2007.11832528

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [79] Khulbe RD. 1983. Pathogenicity of some species of Pythium Pringsheim on certain fresh water temperate fishes. Mycoses 26:273−275 doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0507.1983.tb03209.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [80] Abdelzaher HMA, Ichitani T, Elnaghy MA, Hassan SKM, FadI-Alla EM. 1995. Materials for Pythium flora of Japan. X. Occurrence, identification and seasonality of Pythium spp. in three pond waters and mud soils in Osaka. Mycoscience 36:71−85 doi: 10.1007/BF02268576

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [81] Czeczuga B, Snarska A. 2001. Pythium species in 13 various types of water bodies of N-E Poland. Acta Societatis Botanicorum Poloniae 70:61−69 doi: 10.5586/asbp.2001.009

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [82] Rahman MZ, Abdelzaher HMA, Li M, Motohashi K, Suga H, et al. 2015. Pythium rishiriense sp. nov. from water and P. alternatum sp. nov. from soil, two new species from Japan. FEMS Microbiology Letters 362:fnv086 doi: 10.1093/femsle/fnv086

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [83] Nelson EB, Karp MA. 2013. Soil pathogen communities associated with native and non-native Phragmites australis populations in freshwater wetlands. Ecology and Evolution 3:5254−5267 doi: 10.1002/ece3.900

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [84] Poitras AW. 1949. A new aquatic species of Pythium. Mycologia 41:171−176 doi: 10.2307/3755163

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [85] Robertson GI. 1975. A paper disc technique for the recovery of Pythium spp. from soil or water. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 18:409−410 doi: 10.1080/00288233.1975.10421069

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [86] Czeczuga B. 1996. Species of Pythium isolated from eggs of fresh-water fish. Acta Mycologica 31:151−161 doi: 10.5586/am.1996.014

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [87] Nam B, Choi YJ. 2019. Phytopythium and Pythium species (oomycota) isolated from freshwater environments of Korea. Mycobiology 47:261−272 doi: 10.1080/12298093.2019.1625174

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [88] El-Hissy FT, Moubasher AH, El-Nagdy MA. 1982. Seasonal fluctuations of freshwater fungi in River Nile (Egypt). Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Mikrobiologie 22:521−527 doi: 10.1002/jobm.19820220803

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [89] Czeczuga B, Muszynska E. 2004. Aquatic zoosporic fungi from baited spores of cryptogams. Fungal Diversity 16:11−22

    Google Scholar

    [90] Matsiakh I, Oszako T, Kramarets V, Nowakowska JA. 2016. Phytophthora and Pythium species detected in rivers of the Polish-Ukrainian border areas. Baltic Forestry 22:230−238

    Google Scholar

    [91] Karling JS. 1968. Some zoosporic fungi of New Zealand. XIII. Traustochytriaceae, Saprolegniaceae and Puthiaceae. Sydowia 20:226−234

    Google Scholar

    [92] Vetukuri RR, Masini L, McDougal R, Panda P, de Zinger L, et al. 2020. The presence of Phytophthora infestans in the rhizosphere of a wild Solanum species may contribute to off-season survival and pathogenicity. Applied Soil Ecology 148:103475 doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.103475

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [93] Baten MA, Li M, Motohashi K, Ishiguro Y, Rahman MZ, et al. 2015. Two new species, Phytopythium iriomotense sp. nov. and P. aichiense sp. nov., isolated from river water and water purification sludge in Japan. Mycological Progress 14:2 doi: 10.1007/s11557-015-1027-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [94] Sparrow FK, Jr. 1931. Two new species of Pythium parasitic in green algae. Annals of Botany 45:257−277

    Google Scholar

    [95] Abdelzaher HMA, Kageyama K. 2020. Diversity of aquatic Pythium and Phytopythium spp. from rivers and a pond of Gifu city Japan. Novel Research in Microbiology Journal 4:1029−1044 doi: 10.21608/nrmj.2020.130851

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [96] Kikuchi H, Hieno A, Suga H, Masuya H, Uematsu S, et al. 2024. New species Pythium amaminum sp. nov. isolated from river water on Amami Island in Japan. Mycoscience 65:133−137 doi: 10.47371/mycosci.2024.02.004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [97] Al-Sheikh H, Abdelzaher HM. 2012. Occurrence, identification and pathogenicity of Pythium aphanidermatum, P. diclinum, P. dissotocum and Pythium "Group P" isolated from Dawmat Al-Jandal Lake, Saudi Arabia. Research Journal of Environmental Sciences 6:196−209 doi: 10.3923/rjes.2012.196.209

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [98] Lodhi AM, Khanzada MA, Shahzad S, Ghaffar A. 2013. Prevalence of Pythium aphanidermatum in agro-ecosystem of Sindh province of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany 45:635−642

    Google Scholar

    [99] Uzuhashi S, Okada G, Ohkuma M. 2015. Four new Pythium species from aquatic environments in Japan. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 107:375−391 doi: 10.1007/s10482-014-0336-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [100] Rahman KM, Sarowar MN. 2016. Molecular characterisation of oomycetes from fish farm located in Mymensingh sadar during summer. Asian Journal of Medical and Biological Research 2:236−246 doi: 10.3329/ajmbr.v2i2.29066

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [101] Presser JW, Goss EM. 2015. Environmental sampling reveals that Pythium insidiosum is ubiquitous and genetically diverse in North Central Florida. Medical Mycology 53:674−683 doi: 10.1093/mmy/myv054

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [102] Salmaninezhad F, Mostowfizadeh-Ghalamfarsa R. 2019. Three new Pythium species from rice paddy fields. Mycologia 111:274−290 doi: 10.1080/00275514.2018.1543486

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [103] Czeczuga B, Godlewska A, Mazalska B, Muszyńska E. 2010. Diversity of aquatic fungi and fungus-like organisms on fruits. Nova Hedwigia 90:123−151 doi: 10.1127/0029-5035/2010/0090-0123

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [104] Nechwatal J, Wielgoss A, Mendgen K. 2005. Pythium phragmitis sp. nov., a new species close to P. arrhenomanes as a pathogen of common reed (Phragmites australis). Mycological Research 109:1337−1346 doi: 10.1017/s0953756205003990

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [105] Chen JJ, Zheng XB. 2019. Pythium subutonaiense, a new aquatic oomycete from Southern China based on morphological and molecular characters. Mycobiology 47:273−279 doi: 10.1080/12298093.2019.1642700

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [106] Robideau GP, De Cock AWAM, Coffey MD, Voglmayr H, Brouwer H, et al. 2011. DNA barcoding of oomycetes with cytochrome c oxidase subunit I and internal transcribed spacer. Molecular Ecology Resources 11:1002−1011 doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2011.03041.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [107] Hunjavanit C, Rakmanee C, Kitancharoen N, Hatai K. 2012. Freshwater oomycete isolated from African catfish Clarias gariepinus eggs in Thailand. Aquaculture Science 60:269−276 doi: 10.11233/aquaculturesci.60.269

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [108] Vega-Ramírez MT, Moreno-Lafont MC, Valenzuela R, Cervantes-Olivares R, Miguel Aller-Gancedo J, et al. 2013. New records of Saprolegniaceae isolated from rainbow trout, from their eggs, and water in a fish farm from the State of México. Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 84:637−649 doi: 10.7550/rmb.28627

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [109] Ogbonna CIC, Alabi RO. 1991. Studies on species of fungi associated with mycotic infections of fish in a Nigerian freshwater fish pond. Hydrobiologia 220:131−135 doi: 10.1007/BF00006545

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [110] Godlewska A, Kiziewicz B, Muszyńska E, Milewski R. 2013. Aquatic fungi and straminipilous organisms in lakes of the Augustowska Primeval Forest, Poland. Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies 42:451−459 doi: 10.2478/s13545-013-0101-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [111] Choi YJ, Lee SH, Nguyen TTT, Nam B, Lee HB. 2019. Characterization of Achlya americana and A. bisexualis (Saprolegniales, Oomycota) isolated from freshwater environments in Korea. Mycobiology 47:135−142 doi: 10.1080/12298093.2018.1551855

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [112] Leclerc MC, Guillot J, Deville M. 2000. Taxonomic and phylogenetic analysis of Saprolegniaceae (Oomycetes) inferred from LSU rDNA and ITS sequence comparisons. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 77:369−377 doi: 10.1023/A:1002601211295

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [113] Srivastava RC, Srivastava GC. 1978. Fungi associated with the diseases of freshwater fishes. Mycopathologia 63:121−126 doi: 10.1007/BF00441258

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [114] Shanor L, Saslow HB. 1944. Aphanomyces as a fish parasite. Mycologia 36:413−415 doi: 10.2307/3754756

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [115] Hoshina T, Sano T, Sunayama H. 1960. Studies on the saprolegniasis of eel. Journal of the Tokyo University of Fisheries 47:59−79

    Google Scholar

    [116] Shah KL, Jha BC, Jhingran AG. 1977. Observations on some aquatic phycomycetes pathogenic to eggs and fry of freshwater fish and prawn. Aquaculture 12:141−147 doi: 10.1016/0044-8486(77)90181-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [117] Paul B, Steciow MM. 2008. Achlya spiralis, a new aquatic oomycete with bent oogonial stalks, isolated from the Burgundian region of France. FEMS Microbiology Letters 284:120−125 doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2008.01183.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [118] Unestam T, Nylund JE. 1972. Blood reactions in vitro in crayfish against a fungal parasite, Aphanomyces astaci. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 19:94−106 doi: 10.1016/0022-2011(72)90194-2

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [119] Hsieh CY, Huang CW, Pan YC. 2016. Crayfish plague Aphanomyces astaci detected in redclaw crayfish, Cherax quadricarinatus in Taiwan. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 136:117−123 doi: 10.1016/j.jip.2016.03.015

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [120] Ballesteros I, Martín MP, Diéguez-Uribeondo J. 2006. First isolation of Aphanomyces frigidophilus (Saprolegniales) in Europe. Mycotaxon 95:335−340 doi: 10.5962/p.418188

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [121] Iberahim NA, Trusch F, van West P. 2018. Aphanomyces invadans, the causal agent of Epizootic Ulcerative Syndrome, is a global threat to wild and farmed fish. Fungal Biology Reviews 32:118−130 doi: 10.1016/j.fbr.2018.05.002

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [122] Steciow MM, Lara E, Pillonel A, Pelizza SA, Lestani EA, et al. 2013. Incipient loss of flagella in the genus Geolegnia: the emergence of a new clade within Leptolegnia? IMA Fungus 4:169−175 doi: 10.5598/imafungus.2013.04.02.02

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [123] Nam B, Nguyen TTT, Lee HB, Park SK, Choi YJ. 2022. Uncharted diversity and ecology of Saprolegniaceae (Oomycota) in freshwater environments. Mycobiology 50:326−344 doi: 10.1080/12298093.2022.2121496

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [124] Czeczuga B, Kiziewicz B, Godlewska A, Orłowska M. 2002. Further studies on aquatic fungi in the River Narew within the Narew National Park. Roczniki Akademii Medycznej w Bialymstoku 47:58−79

    Google Scholar

    [125] Masigol H, Khodaparast SA, Mostowfizadeh-Ghalamfarsa R, Rojas-Jimenez K, Woodhouse JN, et al. 2020. Taxonomical and functional diversity of Saprolegniales in Anzali lagoon, Iran. Aquatic Ecology 54:323−336 doi: 10.1007/s10452-019-09745-w

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [126] Pavić D, Miljanović A, Grbin D, Šver L, Vladušić T, et al. 2021. Identification and molecular characterization of oomycete isolates from trout farms in Croatia, and their upstream and downstream water environments. Aquaculture 540:736652 doi: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.736652

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [127] Martín-Torrijos L, Sandoval-Sierra JV, Muñoz J, Diéguez-Uribeondo J, Bosch J, et al. 2016. Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) threaten Andean amphibians. Neotropical Biodiversity 2:26−36 doi: 10.1080/23766808.2016.1151133

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [128] Sadinski W, Gallant AL, Cleaver JE. 2020. Climate's cascading effects on disease, predation, and hatching success in Anaxyrus canorus, the threatened Yosemite toad. Global Ecology and Conservation 23:e01173 doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01173

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [129] Blaustein AR, Grant Hokit D, O'Hara RK, Holt RA. 1994. Pathogenic fungus contributes to amphibian losses in the Pacific northwest. Biological Conservation 67:251−254 doi: 10.1016/0006-3207(94)90616-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [130] Prada-Salcedo LD, Franco-Correa M, Acosta-Galvis AR. 2011. First record of Saprolegnia sp. in an amphibian population in Colombia. Universitas Scientiarum 16:234−242

    Google Scholar

    [131] Groffen J, Oh SY, Kwon S, Jang Y, Borzée A. 2019. High mortality in Bufo gargarizans eggs associated with an undescribed Saprolegnia ferax strain in the Republic of Korea. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 137:89−99 doi: 10.3354/dao03434

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [132] Nolan RA. 1975. Physiological studies with the fungus Saprolegnia megasperma isolated from the freshwater nematode Neomesomermis flumenalis. Canadian Journal of Botany 53:3032−3040 doi: 10.1139/b75-332

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [133] Shin S, Kulatunga DCM, Dananjaya SHS, Nikapitiya C, Lee J, et al. 2017. Saprolegnia parasitica isolated from rainbow trout in Korea: characterization, anti-Saprolegnia activity and host pathogen interaction in zebrafish disease model. Mycobiology 45:297−311 doi: 10.5941/myco.2017.45.4.297

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [134] Jeffers S. 2015. PROTOCOL 07-11.1: V8 agar (V8A) or broth. In Laboratory Protocols for Phytophthora Species, ed. Steve J. USA: The American Phytopathological Society. pp. 1−2 doi: 10.1094/9780890544969.07.11.1
    [135] Martin FN. 1992. Pythium. In Methods for Research on Soilborne Phytopathogenic Fungi, eds Singleton LL, Rush CM. St. Paul, MN, USA: APS Press. pp. 33−49
    [136] White TJ, Bruns T, Lee S, Taylor J. 1990. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In PCR Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications, eds Innis MA, Sninsky JJ, White TJ. Amsterdam: Elsevier. pp. 315−322 doi: 10.1016/b978-0-12-372180-8.50042-1
    [137] Hudspeth DSS, Nadler SA, Hudspeth MES. 2000. cox2 molecular phylogeny of the Peronosporomycetes. Mycologia 92(4):674−684 doi: 10.2307/3761425

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [138] Choi YJ, Beakes G, Glockling S, Kruse J, Nam B, et al. 2015. Towards a universal barcode of oomycetes – a comparison of the cox1 and cox2 loci. Molecular Ecology Resources 15:1275−1288 doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12398

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [139] Katoh K, Toh H. 2008. Improved accuracy of multiple ncRNA alignment by incorporating structural information into a MAFFT-based framework. BMC Bioinformatics 9:212 doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-9-212

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [140] Katoh K, Rozewicki J, Yamada KD. 2019. MAFFT online service: multiple sequence alignment, interactive sequence choice and visualization. Briefings in Bioinformatics 20:1160−1166 doi: 10.1093/bib/bbx108

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [141] Kumar S, Stecher G, Li M, Knyaz C, Tamura K. 2018. MEGA X: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Molecular Biology and Evolution 35:1547−1549 doi: 10.1093/molbev/msy096

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [142] Vaidya G, Lohman DJ, Meier R. 2011. SequenceMatrix: concatenation software for the fast assembly of multi-gene datasets with character set and codon information. Cladistics 27:171−180 doi: 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2010.00329.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [143] LéVesque CA, de Cock AWAM. 2004. Molecular phylogeny and taxonomy of the genus Pythium. Mycological Research 108:1363−1383 doi: 10.1017/S0953756204001431

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [144] Sideris CP. 1932. Pythium chamaihyphon Sideris. Mycologia 24:33

    Google Scholar

    [145] Drechsler CE. 1930. Pythium helicoides Drechsler. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 20:413−414

    Google Scholar

    [146] Nechwatal J, Mendgen K. 2006. Pythium litorale sp. nov., a new species from the littoral of Lake Constance, Germany. FEMS Microbiology Letters 255:91−101 doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2005.00058.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [147] de Bary HA. 1896. Pythium vexans de Bary. Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England 2:255

    Google Scholar

    [148] Uzuhashi S, Tojo M, Kakishima M. 2010. Phylogeny of the genus Pythium and description of new genera. Mycoscience 51:337−365 doi: 10.1007/S10267-010-0046-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [149] Nguyen HDT, Dodge A, Dadej K, Rintoul TL, Ponomareva E, et al. 2022. Whole genome sequencing and phylogenomic analysis show support for the splitting of genus Pythium. Mycologia 114:501−515 doi: 10.1080/00275514.2022.2045116

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [150] Van der Plaats-Niterink AJ. 1981. Monograph of the genus Pythium. Studies in Mycology 21:1−244

    Google Scholar

    [151] Paul B. 2004. A new species of Pythium isolated from Burgundian vineyards and its antagonism towards Botrytis cinerea, the causative agent of the grey mould disease. FEMS Microbiology Letters 234:269−274 doi: 10.1016/j.femsle.2004.03.039

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [152] Broders KD, Lipps PE, Ellis ML, Dorrance AE. 2009. Pythium delawarii—a new species isolated from soybean in Ohio. Mycologia 101:232−238 doi: 10.3852/08-133

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [153] Belbahri L, McLeod A, Paul B, Calmin G, Moralejo E, et al. 2008. Intraspecific and within-isolate sequence variation in the ITS rRNA gene region of Pythium mercuriale sp. nov. (Pythiaceae). FEMS Microbiology Letters 284:17−27 doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2008.01168.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [154] Duan RL. 1985. A new species and two new records of Pythium in China. Acta Mycologica Sinica 4:1−4

    Google Scholar

    [155] Van der Plaats-Niterink AJ. 1972. The occurrence of Pythium in the Netherlands: III. Pythium flevoense sp. nov. Acta Botanica Neerlandica 21:633−639 doi: 10.1111/j.1438-8677.1972.tb00223.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [156] Vaartaja O. 1965. New Pythium species from South Australia. Mycologia 57:417−430 doi: 10.1080/00275514.1965.12018224

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [157] Bala KG, Gautam N, Paul B. 2006. Pythium rhizo-oryzae sp. nov. isolated from paddy fields: taxonomy, ITS region of rDNA, and comparison with related species. Current Microbiology 52:102−107 doi: 10.1007/s00284-005-0116-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [158] Höhnk JWG. 1953. Studien zur Brack- und Seewassermykologie. 3. Oomycetes. Veröffentlichungen des Institutes für Meeresforschung in Bremerhaven 2:52−108

    Google Scholar

    [159] Ito S, Tokunaga Y. 1935. Notae mycologicae Asiae orientalis. l. Transactions of the Sapporo Natural History Society 14:11−33

    Google Scholar

    [160] Bala K, Robideau GP, Désaulniers N, de Cock AWAM, Lévesque CA. 2010. Taxonomy, DNA barcoding and phylogeny of three new species of Pythium from Canada. Persoonia 25:22−31 doi: 10.3767/003158510X524754

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [161] McGehee C, Raudales RE, Elmer WH. 2018. First report of Pythium dissotocum causing Pythium root rot on hydroponically grown lettuce in connecticut. Plant Disease 102:2043 doi: 10.1094/PDIS-02-18-0365-PDN

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [162] Moorman GW, Kang S, Geiser DM, Kim SH. 2002. Identification and characterization of Pythium species associated with greenhouse floral crops in Pennsylvania. Plant Disease 86:1227−1231 doi: 10.1094/PDIS.2002.86.11.1227

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [163] Subila KP, Bhai RS. 2020. Pythium deliense, a pathogen causing yellowing and wilt of black pepper in India. New Disease Reports 42:6 doi: 10.5197/j.2044-0588.2020.042.006

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [164] Lee SJ, Jee BY, Son MH, Lee SR. 2017. Infection and cox2 sequence of Pythium chondricola (Oomycetes) causing red rot disease in Pyropia yezoensis (Rhodophyta) in Korea. Algae 32:155−160 doi: 10.4490/algae.2017.32.5.16

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [165] Gaastra W, Lipman LJA, De Cock AWAM, Exel TK, Pegge RBG, et al. 2010. Pythium insidiosum: an overview. Veterinary Microbiology 146:1−16 doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2010.07.019

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [166] Kachour L, Gacemi Kirane D, Loucif L, Alayat H. 2016. First survey of aquatic microbial fungi-like pythiaceae predominantly colonizing the South-Mediterranean Freshwater Wetlands. Research Journal of Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences 7:3067−3078

    Google Scholar

    [167] Masigol H, Khodaparast SA, Woodhouse JN, Rojas-Jimenez K, Fonvielle J, et al. 2019. The contrasting roles of aquatic fungi and oomycetes in the degradation and transformation of polymeric organic matter. Limnology and Oceanography 64:2662−2678 doi: 10.1002/lno.11242

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [168] Choudhary CE, Burgos-Garay ML, Moorman GW, Hong C. 2016. Pythium and Phytopythium species in two Pennsylvania greenhouse irrigation water tanks. Plant Disease 100:926−932 doi: 10.1094/PDIS-07-15-0836-RE

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [169] Bala K, Robideau GP, Lévesque A, de Cock AWAM, Abad ZG, et al. 2010. Phytopythium Abad, de Cock, Bala, Robideau & Levesque, gen. nov. and Phytopythium sindhum Lodhi, Shahzad & Levesque, sp. nov. Persoonia 24:136−137 doi: 10.3767/003158510X512748

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [170] de Cock AWAM, Lodhi AM, Rintoul TL, Bala K, Robideau GP, et al. 2015. Phytopythium: molecular phylogeny and systematics. Persoonia 34:25−39 doi: 10.3767/003158515x685382

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [171] Baten MA, Asano T, Motohashi K, Ishiguro Y, Rahman MZ, et al. 2014. Phylogenetic relationships among Phytopythium species, and re-evaluation of Phytopythium fagopyri comb. nov., recovered from damped-off buckwheat seedlings in Japan. Mycological Progress 13:1003 doi: 10.1007/s11557-014-1003-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [172] Mazurkiewicz-Zapałowicz K, Golianek A, Łopusiewicz Ł. 2016. Microscopic fungi on Nymphaeaceae plants of the Lake Płociczno in Drawa National Park (NW Poland). Acta Mycologica 51:1079 doi: 10.5586/am.1079

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [173] Liu Y, Vaghefi N, Ades PK, Idnurm A, Ahmed A, et al. 2023. Globisporangium and Pythium species associated with yield decline of Pyrethrum (Tanacetum cinerariifolium) in Australia. Plants 12:1361 doi: 10.3390/plants12061361

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [174] Costa S, Lopes I. 2022. Saprolegniosis in amphibians: an integrated overview of a fluffy killer disease. Journal of Fungi 8:537 doi: 10.3390/jof8050537

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [175] Van den Berg AH, McLaggan D, Diéguez-Uribeondo J, van West P. 2013. The impact of the water moulds Saprolegnia diclina and Saprolegnia parasitica on natural ecosystems and the aquaculture industry. Fungal Biology Reviews 27:33−42 doi: 10.1016/j.fbr.2013.05.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [176] Pérez-Sierra A, Jung MH, Jung T. 2022. Survey and monitoring of Phytophthora species in natural ecosystems: methods for sampling, isolation, purification, storage, and pathogenicity tests. In Plant Pathology, ed. Luchi N. New York, NY: Humana. pp. 13–49 doi: 10.1007/978-1-0716-2517-0_2
    [177] Català S, Pérez-Sierra A, Abad-Campos P. 2015. The use of genus-specific amplicon pyrosequencing to assess Phytophthora species diversity using eDNA from soil and water in Northern Spain. PLoS One 10:e0119311 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0119311

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Nam B, Bennett RM, Tojo M, Na DH, Lee JS, et al. 2026. Uncovering the hidden diversity of oomycetes (Straminipila) in freshwater environments. Mycosphere 17: e006 doi: 10.48130/mycosphere-0026-0006
    Nam B, Bennett RM, Tojo M, Na DH, Lee JS, et al. 2026. Uncovering the hidden diversity of oomycetes (Straminipila) in freshwater environments. Mycosphere 17: e006 doi: 10.48130/mycosphere-0026-0006

Figures(14)  /  Tables(7)

Article Metrics

Article views(75) PDF downloads(30)

ARTICLE   Open Access    

Uncovering the hidden diversity of oomycetes (Straminipila) in freshwater environments

Mycosphere  17 Article number: e006  (2026)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Oomycetes play a key role in decomposing and recycling organic materials in freshwater ecosystems. However, their diversity and ecological study gained less attention compared with other organisms. Based on extensive, long-term surveys for freshwater oomycetes, the present study undertakes a comprehensive examination of oomycete diversity and ecology in the Korean freshwater environments. We successfully identified a total of 78 taxa of oomycetes (568 isolates), which are classified into the orders Peronosporales (4%), Pythiales (77%), and Saprolegniales (19%), based on their cultural, morphological, and molecular characteristics. These taxa consist of 57 previously described species, including 22 species new to Korea, and 21 previously unknown lineages. Eight of these taxa were described as new species under the Pythiales, with detailed taxonomic descriptions in this study. Our findings revealed that the distributions of freshwater oomycetes varied depending on substrates and that oomycetes were primarily found in plant-derived sources, such as decaying leaves, stems, and twigs. Across all seasons and freshwater ecosystem types, Pythiales were more frequently isolated than Peronosporales and Saprolegniales. However, isolation frequencies among taxa varied across seasons and habitat types. This study provides extensive strain resources and establishes a fundamental reference for future taxonomic and ecological research on freshwater oomycetes, expanding knowledge of their diversity and functional roles in freshwater ecosystems.

    • Oomycetes from the kingdom Straminipila[1] have adapted to a range of environmental conditions by evolving as either saprotrophs or pathogens. Members of this group are widely distributed in terrestrial and aquatic environments[25]. Oomycetes, often referred to as pseudo-fungi or water molds[1,5], exhibit several traits with similar characteristics as true fungi, such as mycelial growth, strategies of infection, and an osmotrophic mode of nutrition. Most studies on oomycetes are biased towards terrestrial plant pathogens[2,611]; however, there have been several studies reporting the occurrence and ecological roles of oomycetes in other biomes, such as freshwater[1221], marine, and brackish environments[2235]. This highlights the worth of exploration into this diverse group.

      The freshwater biome serves as one of the most important habitats for oomycetes. Common aquatic species are congeners within the Peronosporales, Pythiales, and Saprolegniales (Table 1). They were isolated from diverse substrates, including algae, animals, plants, soil, and water of mountain streams, reservoirs, and rivers. Although some members of these groups are pathogens of fish[3638], amphibians[3941], and algae[42,43], the potential ecological roles of oomycetes in the freshwater biomes are not to be neglected (e.g., litter decomposition and recycling of organic materials)[44,45]. Saprotrophic microorganisms play an important role in biogeochemical cycles and food webs, and this functioning maintains the ecological processes[4446].

      Table 1.  Oomycetes inhabiting freshwater ecosystems.

      Taxon Substrate Distribution Ref.
      Order Species Algae Amphibian Crustaceans Fish Mosquito Nematoda Plant Soil Water Stream Reservoir River
      Myzocytiopsidales Resticularia marchaliana o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Leptomitales Apodachlya brachynema o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Peronosporales Halophytophthora fluviatilis o o o o Yang & Hong[48]
      Phytophthora ×alni o o o o o Jung & Blaschke[49], Bjelke et al.[50]
      Phytophthora taxon aquatilis o o Hong et al.[51]
      Phytophthora bilorbang o o Corcobado et al.[20], Christova[52]
      Phytophthora cactorum o o o o Jung et al.[53], Jung et al.[19], Reeser et al.[12]
      Phytophthora ×cambivora o o o o o o Hwang et al.[54], Remigi et al.[55], Reeser et al.[12], Jung et al.[17], Mullett et al.[56]
      Phytophthora capensis o o o o o Bezuidenhout et al.[57], Jung et al.[16], Bose et al.[58]
      Phytophthora chlamydospora* o o o o o o Remigi et al.[55], Reeser et al.[12], Jung et al.[59], Hong et al.[51], Jung et al.[10], Jung et al.[17], Hansen et al.[60], Jung et al.[16], Nam et al.[61], Corcobado et al.[20]
      Phytophthora cinnamomi o o o o o Hwang et al.[54], Hong et al.[51], Jung et al.[62], Stamler et al.[63], Jung et al.[16]
      Phytophthora citricola o o o o o Hwang et al.[54], Remigi et al.[55], Hulvey et al.[64]
      Phytophthora citrophthora o o o o o o Hwang et al.[54], Hulvey et al.[64], Hong et al.[51], Jung et al.[65], Jung et al.[66]
      Phytophthora cryptogea o o Hong et al.[51]
      Phytophthora drechsleri o o o o o Jung et al.[65], Jung et al.[16]
      Phytophthora europaea o o o o o Jung et al.[67], Remigi et al.[55], Hwang et al.[54], Reeser et al.[12]
      Phytophthora gallica o o Corcobado et al.[20]
      Phytophthora gibbosa o Jung et al.[59]
      Phytophthora gonapodyides o o o o o o Hwang et al.[54], Jung[68], Remigi et al.[55], Jung et al.[59], Belisario et al.[69], Corcobado et al.[20]
      Phytophthora gregata o o o o Jung et al.[59]
      Phytophthora heveae o o o o Erwin & Ribeiro[8], Hwang et al.[54], Jung et al.[19], Jung et al.[16]
      Phytophthora honggalleglyana o o Christova[52]
      Phytophthora hydropathica o o o o o Hulvey et al.[64], Hong et al.[70], Corcobado et al.[20]
      Phytophthora inundata* o o o o o o Brasier et al.[71], Jung et al.[59], Hüberli et al.[13], Christova[52]
      Phytophthora irrigata o o o o o Hong et al.[72], Hulvey et al.[64]
      Phytophthora lacustris o o Corcobado et al.[20], Christova[52]
      Phytophthora sp. 'lagoariana'* o o o Wallace[73], Nam et al.[61]
      Phytophthora litoralis o o o o o Hulvey et al.[64], Jung et al.[59]
      Phytophthora macrochlamydospora o o o o Jung et al.[16]
      Phytophthora megasperma o o o o o o Erwin & Ribeiro[8], Remigi et al.[55], Jung et al.[59], Reeser et al.[12], Jung et al.[65], Jung et al.[17]
      Phytophthora mississippiae o o o Hong et al.[51]
      Phytophthora nemorosa o o o o Reeser et al.[12]
      Phytophthora nicotianae o o o o Hulvey et al.[64]
      Phytophthora pini o o o o Reeser et al.[12], Jung et al.[65], Jung et al.[66], Milenković et al.[74]
      Phytophthora plurivora o o o o o Jung & Burgess[75], Reeser et al.[12], Jung et al.[10], Jung et al.[17], Jung et al.[18], Jung et al.[19], Jung et al.[65], Jung et al.[66]
      Phytophthora pseudosyringae o o o o o Hwang et al.[54], Jung[68], Reeser et al.[12], Jung et al.[10], Jung et al.[65]
      Phytophthora ramorum o o o o Werres et al.[76], Reeser et al.[12], Hong et al.[51], Eyre et al.[77], Jung et al.[16]
      Phytophthora riparia o o o Hong et al.[51], Corcobado et al.[20]
      Phytophthora siskiyouensis o o o o Reeser er al.[12], Reeser et al.[78]
      Phytophthora syringae o o o o o o Erwin & Ribeiro[8], Remigi et al.[55], Hulvey et al.[64], Reeser et al.[12], Hong et al.[51], Jung et al.[65], Corcobado et al.[20]
      Phytophthora thermophila o o o o o Jung et al.[17], Jung et al.[59]
      Phytophthora vesicula o o Nakagiri[26]
      Pythiales Elongisporangium anandrum o o Christova[52]
      Elongisporangium helicandrum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Elongisporangium undulatum* o o o o o o Khulbe[79], Abdelzaher et al.[80], Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Globisporangium alternatum* o o Rahman et al.[82]
      Globisporangium attrantheridium* o o o o Nelson & Karp[83]
      Globisporangium carolinianum o o o Abdelzaher et al.[80], Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Globisporangium debaryanum o Poitras[84]
      Globisporangium echinulatum o o o o o o Robertson[85], Khulbe[79], Czeczuga[86], Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Globisporangium heterothallicum* o o Nam & Choi[87]
      Globisporangium intermedium* o o o o o o El-Hissy et al.[88], Czeczuga[86], Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89], Nam & Choi[87]
      Globisporangium irregulare* o o o o Poitras[84], Abdelzaher et al.[80], Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Globisporangium lucens o o Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Globisporangium macrosporum* o o In the present study
      Globisporangium marsipium* o o o o Czeczuga[86], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89], Matsiakh et al.[90]
      Globisporangium megalacanthum o o o o Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89]
      Globisporangium middletonii o o o o Karling[91], Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Globisporangium multisporum o o Poitras[84]
      Globisporangium nagaii* o o Vetukuri et al.[92]
      Globisporangium paddicum* o o In the present study
      Globisporangium pleroticum o o Abdelzaher et al.[80], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89]
      Globisporangium pulchrum o o o Poitras[84], Khulbe[79]
      Globisporangium rostratifingens* o o o o In the present study
      Globisporangium rostratum o o o o o Czeczuga[86], Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89]
      Globisporangium selbyi* o o In the present study
      Globisporangium spinosum* o o o o o o Khulbe[79], Abdelzaher et al.[80], Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Globisporangium splendens o o Poitras[84]
      Globisporangium sylvaticum* o o o o o o o Abdelzaher et al.[80], Czeczuga[86], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89], Matsiakh et al.[90]
      Globisporangium terrestre * o o Matsiakh et al.[90]
      Globisporangium ultimum* o o o o o Poitras[84], El-Hissy et al.[88], Czeczuga[86], Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89], Nam & Choi[87]
      Lagenidium giganteum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Lagenidium microsporum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Lagenidium oophilum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Myzocytium megastomum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Myzocytium rabenhorstii o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Myzocytium zoophthorum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Phytopythium chamaehyphon* o o Nam & Choi[87]
      Phytopythium citrinum o o Christova[52]
      Phytopythium indigoferae o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Phytopythium iriomotense o o Baten et al.[93]
      Phytopythium litorale* o o o o o Nam & Choi[87], Vetukuri et al.[92], Christova[52]
      Phytopythium palingenes o o El-Hissy et al.[88], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Phytopythium vexans* o o o o Poitras[84], Khulbe[79], Nam & Choi[87]
      Pythium acanthicum* o o o o Robertson[85], Czeczuga & Snarska[81]
      Pythium adhaerens o o o Sparrow[94], Abdelzaher & Kageyama[95]
      Pythium afertile o o o o Robertson[85], Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Pythium amaminum o o o Kikuchi et al.[96]
      Pythium angustatum o o o Matsiakh et al.[90], Christova[52]
      Pythium aphanidermatum* o o o o o o Poitras[84], Khulbe[79], Al-Sheikh & Abdelzaher[97], Lodhi et al.[98]
      Pythium apleroticum* o o In the present study
      Pythium aquatile* o o o o Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89], Matsiakh et al.[90], Abdelzaher & Kageyama[95]
      Pythium aristosporum o o o o o Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Czeczuga[86], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89]
      Pythium arrhenomanes o o Czeczuga & Muszynska[89]
      Pythium biforme* o o o Uzuhashi et al.[99]
      Pythium brachiatum* o o Uzuhashi et al.[99]
      Pythium cactacearum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium catenulatum* o o o o Poitras[84], Abdelzaher et al.[80], Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Rahman & Sarowar[100]
      Pythium cedri* o o In the present study
      Pythium coloratum o o Robertson[85]
      Pythium debaryanum o o o o o o Robertson[85], Khulbe[79], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium deliense o o Abdelzaher et al.[80]
      Pythium diclinum* o o o o o Abdelzaher et al.[80], Al-Sheikh & Abdelzaher[97], Nam & Choi[87], Abdelzaher & Kageyama[95]
      Pythium dissimile o o Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Pythium dissotocum* o o o o o Poitras[84], Abdelzaher et al.[80], Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Al-Sheikh & Abdelzaher[97]
      Pythium elongatum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium gibbosum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium globosum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium gracile o o o Poitras[84], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium graminicola o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium hydnosporum o o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Czeczuga & Muszynska[89]
      Pythium imperfectum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium inflatum o o o o o o o Poitras[84], Robertson[85], Czeczuga[86], Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Nam & Choi[87]
      Pythium insidiosum* o o Presser & Goss[101]
      Pythium jirovecii o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium junctum o o Uzuhashi et al.[99]
      Pythium monospermum* o o o o o Poitras[84], Abdelzaher et al.[80], Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Matsiakh et al.[90]
      Pythium myriotylum o o o Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Pythium oligandrum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium oopapillum* o o o Matsiakh et al.[90], Nam & Choi[87]
      Pythium oryzicollum* o o o o Salmaninezhad & Mostowfizadeh-Ghalamfarsa[102]
      Pythium pachycaule* o o o o Czeczuga et al.[103], Abdelzaher & Kageyama[95]
      Pythium papillatum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium periilum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium periplocum* o o Czeczuga & Muszynska[89]
      Pythium phragmitis o o Nechwatal et al.[104]
      Pythium podbielkowskii o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium polysporum o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium pyrilobum o o Czeczuga & Snarka[81]
      Pythium rhizo-oryzae* o o o Uzuhashi et al.[99]
      Pythium rishiriense o o Rahman et al.[82]
      Pythium subutonaiense* o o Chen & Zheng[105]
      Pythium sukuiense o o Matsiakh et al.[90]
      Pythium tardicrescens o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium tenue o o o Poitras[84], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythium thalassium o o El-Hissy et al.[88]
      Pythium torulosum* o o o o Poitras[84], Czeczuga & Snarka[81], Czeczuga[86], Abdelzaher & Kageyama[95]
      Pythium utonaiense* o o Uzuhashi et al.[99]
      Pythium vanterpoolii o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Saprolegniales Achlya ambisexualis o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Robideau et al.[106], Hunjavanit et al.[107],
      Vega-Ramírez et al.[108]
      Achlya americana o o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47], Robideau et al.[106], Godlewska et al.[110], Choi et al.[111]
      Achlya apiculata o o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Achlya bisexualis* o o o o Leclerc et al.[112], Robideau et al.[106], Choi et al.[111]
      Achlya caroliniana o o o o o Srivastava & Srivastava[113], Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya colorata o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya crenulata o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya debaryana o o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya diffusa o o Srivastava & Srivastava[113], Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya dubia o o o Shanor & Saslow[114], Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya flagellata o o Hoshina et al.[115], Shah et al.[116], El-Hissy et al.[88], Ogbonna & Alabi[109]
      Achlya heterosexualis o o Vega-Ramírez et al.[108]
      Achlya klebsiana o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Achlya megasperma o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109]
      Achlya oblongata o o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Achlya oligocantha o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya orion o o o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya polyandra o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Achlya prolifera o o o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Achlya proliferoides o o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Achlya racemosa o o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya rodrigueziana o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Achlya spiralis o o Paul & Steciow[117]
      Aphanomyces acinetophagu o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Aphanomyces amphigynus o o o El-Hissy et al.[88], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Aphanomyces astaci o o Unestam & Nylund[118], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110], Hsieh et al.[119]
      Aphanomyces bosminae o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Aphanomyces daphniae o o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Aphanomyces frigidophilus o o o o Ballesteros et al.[120]
      Aphanomyces helicoides o o o o Srivastava & Srivastava[113], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Aphanomyces invadans o o o Iberahim et al.[121]
      Aphanomyces irregularis o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Aphanomyces laevis* o o o o Shanor & Saslow[114], Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Aphanomyces ovidestruens o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Aphanomyces patersonii o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Aphanomyces stellatus o o o o Hoshina et al.[115], Shah et al.[116], Ogbonna & Alabi[109]
      Dictyuchus carpophorus o o El-Hissy et al.[88]
      Dictyuchus magnusii o o El-Hissy et al.[88]
      Dictyuchus monosporus o o El-Hissy et al.[88]
      Dictyuchus sterilis o o El-Hissy et al.[88], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Geolegnia helicoides* o o o o Steciow et al.[122], Nam et al.[123]
      Leptolegnia caudata* o o o o o o o o o El-Hissy et al.[88], Czeczuga et al.[47], Nam et al.[123]
      Newbya androgyna o o o El-Hissy et al.[88], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Protoachlya papillata o o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Pythiopsis cymosa o o El-Hissy et al.[88], Czeczuga et al.[124]
      Saprolegnia aenigmatica* o o o Sandoval-Sierra et al.[36], Nam et al.[123]
      Saprolegnia anisospora o o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Masigol et al.[125]
      Saprolegnia asterophora* o o o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110], Nam et al.[123]
      Saprolegnia australis* o o o Vega-Ramírez et al.[108], Rezinciuc et al.[37], Pavić et al.[126], Nam et al.[123]
      Saprolegnia crustosa o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Saprolegnia delica* o o o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110], Pavić et al.[126], Nam et al.[123]
      Saprolegnia diclina o o o o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Fernández-Benéitez et al.[39], Hunjavanit et al.[107], Godlewska et al.[110], Vega-Ramírez et al.[108], Martín-Torrijos et al.[127], Sadinski et al.[128], Nam et al.[123]
      Saprolegnia eccentrica o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Saprolegnia ferax* o o o o o o Blaustein et al.[129], Czeczuga et al.[47], Romansic et al.[41], Prada-Salcedo et al.[130], Godlewska et al.[110], Vega-Ramírez et al.[108], Groffen et al.[131], Nam et al.[123]
      Saprolegnia glomerata o o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110], Vega-Ramírez et al.[108]
      Saprolegnia hypogna o o Godlewska et al.[110]
      Saprolegnia latvica o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Saprolegnia litoralis o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Saprolegnia megasperma o o o Nolan[132]
      Saprolegnia monilifera o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Saprolegnia monoica o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Saprolegnia parasitica* o o o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110], Vega-Ramírez et al.[108],
      Shin et al.[133], Pavić et al.[126], Nam et al.[123]
      Saprolegnia pseudocrustosa o o Czeczuga et al.[47]
      Saprolegnia salmonis* o o Hussein et al.[38], Nam et al.[123]
      Saprolegnia terrestris o o o Vega-Ramírez et al.[108]
      Saprolegnia torulosa* o o o o o o Godlewska et al.[110], Czeczuga et al.[47], Nam et al.[123]
      Saprolegnia turfosa o o Godlewska et al.[110]
      Saprolegnia uliginosa o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Vega-Ramírez et al.[108]
      Saprolegnia unispora o o o o o Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110], Vega-Ramírez et al.[108]
      Thraustotheca clavata o o o Ogbonna & Alabi[109], Czeczuga et al.[47], Godlewska et al.[110]
      Species reported in Korea are shown in bold. Asterisk means oomycetes species isolated in the present study.

      Of the known members of freshwater oomycetes, saprotrophic oomycetes have been poorly studied in Korea and, therefore, underestimated. The exploration of their diversity and ecology is pivotal for a more profound comprehension of their function in aquatic ecosystems. To bridge this gap, an initial survey using a cultivation approach was deployed from 2016 to 2021. In this study, congeners of the Peronosporales (Phytophthora), Pythiales (Elongisporangium, Globisporangium, Phytopythium and Pythium), and Saprolegniales (Achlya, Aphanomyces, Geolegnia, Leptolegnia and Saprolegnia) are reported. Furthermore, this study identified and included eight novel species of Pythiales (Phytopythium and Pythium). This study contributes to our knowledge of the diversity and ecology of oomycetes in freshwater environments. Moreover, this study attempts to understand the substrate preference and spatial and temporal distribution of these oomycetes in Korea.

    • Between 2016 and 2021, samples of algae, animal debris, plant litter, soil sediment, and water were collected from different freshwater environments, including mountain streams, reservoirs, and lowland rivers in Korea (Fig. 1). The data on monthly mean water temperatures and average monthly air temperatures from each survey area were compiled utilizing two primary sources; the water environment information system of the National Institute of Environmental Research (https://water.nier.go.kr) and the weather data portal of the Korean Meteorological Administration (https://data.kma.go.kr). Oomycete strains from soil sediment and water samples were isolated using a simple plating method on 5% V8 agar (V8A; 50 mL clarified V8 juice, 10 g CaCO3, 15 g agar, 950 mL deionized water). For substrates involving algal, animal, and plant debris, samples were rinsed with distilled water three times, cut into 2 mm2 sections, and then plated onto 5% V8A plates. To suppress bacterial and fungal growth, 15 ppm of rifampicin and 20 ppm of nystatin were added to the media. After the mycelia were formed, a hyphal tip was isolated and transferred onto a new 20% V8A plate, containing 200 mL clarified V8 juice, 10 g CaCO3, 15 g agar, and 800 mL deionized water. Representative strains were deposited in the Nakdonggang National Institute of Biological Resources (NNIBR, Sangju, Korea) or the Korean Agricultural Culture Collection (KACC).

      Figure 1. 

      Location of the 121 sampling sites (red dots) in South Korea. The map was created using QGIS v.3.24.

    • The strains were inoculated onto different agar media, including 20% V8A, potato dextrose agar (PDA; Difco, Detroit, MI, USA), and corn meal agar (CMA; Difco, Detroit, MI, USA). After the incubation for 2–3 d at 25 °C in the darkness, colony patterns were recorded. After 7–14 d, sporangia, gametangia, and chlamydospores on V8A[134] were observed using an Axio Imager A2 microscope (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany) and Axiocam 512 color camera (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany). The sterile distilled water was added to the surface of the colony on V8A, and the isolates were placed at 5 °C for 24 h[87], to induce the formation of sporangia or oospores. Alternatively, the morphology of zoosporangia, oogonia, oospores, and antheridia was investigated in a grass-leaf water culture[135] with Korean lawngrass (Zoysia sp.). Fifty measurements were conducted for each observed structure. The minimum, optimum, and maximum growth temperatures of the novel species were determined by conducting growth trials at various temperatures: 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, and 45 °C, on V8A with five replicates.

    • Genomic DNA was extracted from 7-day-old cultures using the MagListo 5M plant Genomic DNA Extraction Kit (Bioneer, Daejeon, Korea) following the manufacturer's instructions. The regions of internal transcribed spacer (ITS) rDNA and cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (cox1) were amplified with polymerase chain reaction (PCR), along with cytochrome c oxidase subunit II (cox2) mtDNA, for the isolates of the new species. The primer pairs used in PCR were ITS1/ITS4[136], OomCox1-levup/OomCox1-levlo[106], and cox2-F[137]/cox2-RC4[138], respectively. The amplicons were purified with the AccuPrep PCR Purification Kit (Bioneer, Daejeon, Korea) and sequenced by the Sanger method in Macrogen Inc. (Seoul, Korea). The sequences were edited using the DNAStar software package 5.05 (DNAStar, Inc., Madison, WI, USA) and subjected to an NCBI BLAST search to reveal the closest related sequences in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) GenBank database. For phylogenetic analysis, previously published sequences of authentic oomycete strains were retrieved from GenBank. These reference sequences were included in the datasets created by aligning the sequences from the present study, using the G-INS-I algorithm[139] of MAFFT version 7 (https://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server/)[140]. Phylogenetic trees were reconstructed using maximum likelihood (ML) and minimum evolution (ME) inferences in MEGA version 10.2[141]. The ML and ME analyses were carried out using the Tamura-Nei model at 1,000 bootstrap replicates (BS). Multilocus phylogenetic analysis for new species used a combined ITS, cox1, and cox2 dataset, which was produced by concatenating the sequences of the individual markers in SequenceMatrix v1.7.8[142]. The phylogenetic tree was reconstructed using the multi-locus sequence in MEGA as mentioned above.

    • A total of 568 isolates were obtained from lowland rivers (ca. 25%), mountain streams (ca. 35%), and reservoirs (ca. 40%). These isolates were recovered during two distinct seasons: the cold to cool (CC) season (January–April), which accounted for ca. 46% of the total, and the warm to hot (WH) season (May–September), which comprised ca. 54%. During the CC season, the monthly mean air and water temperatures at the sampling sites were below 15 °C, while during the WH season, they crossed above 15 °C. These isolates originated from diverse freshwater substrates, including algae, animal debris, plant litter, soil sediment, and the water itself. Over half the strains (ca. 55%) were isolated from plant-derived materials like decaying leaves, stems, and twigs, suggesting that they served as the dominant isolation sources of the oomycete strains. The remaining strains were found in the soil (ca. 20%), water (ca. 12%), algae (ca. 5%), and animal sources (ca. 8%), such as fish, snail, or frog spawn. The strain information and collection details are outlined in Supplementary Table S1. The strains were identified based on cultural and morphological features, along with phylogenetic analyses. This process resulted in the recognition of 78 taxa, comprising 57 published species and 21 undescribed taxa of oomycetes in the orders Peronosporales (4%), Pythiales (77%), and Saprolegniales (19%).

    • In the phylogenetic tree based on cox1 gene sequences (Supplementary Fig. S1), the Korean strains formed a well-supported group with Phytophthora chlamydospora, Ph. inundata, and Ph. sp. 'lagoariana' with maximum support value in the ME and ML analyses. Based on a BLASTn search, the ITS and cox1 sequences of the Korean strains of Ph. chlamydospora were identical to those of the authentic isolate CPHST BL156 (MG865471 in ITS, MH136867 in cox1). Colony growth pattern and morphological characteristics of Ph. chlamydospora strains were identical to those in the original description by Hansen et al.[60]. Strains W655 and W675 were identified as Ph. sp. 'lagoariana', following the description provided by Wallace[73]. The cox1 sequences were identical to those of the isolate P8223 (HQ261441) and P11904 (GU594812) of Ph. sp. 'lagoariana', while ITS had 10–12 bp sequence differences (P8223; EF590256, P11904; FJ801644). Strain W1757 matched the strain CPHST BL 20 (MG865516 in ITS, MH136910 in cox1) of Ph. inundata with sequence similarities of 100% (847/847 bp) in ITS and 99.87% (747/748 bp) in cox1. This species has been previously unrecorded in Korea. The cultural and morphological characteristics of this strain were described in Supplementary Taxonomy S1, in comparison with the description by Brasier et al.[71]. Images of the colonies and taxonomically significant structures are shown in Figs 2 and 3.

      Figure 2. 

      Cultural characteristics of the isolates of Elongisporangium, Globisporangium, and Phytophthora species, which have previously been unrecorded in Korea, obtained from this study. (a) Elongisporangium undulatum W923, (b) Globisporangium alternatum W1167, (c) G. attrantheridium W786, (d) G. macrosporum W716, (e) G. marsipium W1296, (f) G. nagaii W1534, (g) G. paddicum W1603, (h) G. rostratifingens W1608, (i) G. selbyi W743, (j) G. sylvaticum W769, (k) G. terrestre W2010, and (l) Phytophthora inundata W1757 on (1) PDA, (2) V8A, (3) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (left: observed view and right: reverse view).

      Figure 3. 

      Morphological characteristics of Elongisporangium, Globisporangium, and Phytophthora species, which have previously been unrecorded in Korea, obtained from this study. Microscopic structures observed under a microscope: (a1), (a2) Chlamydospores of Elongisporangium undulatum W923, (b1) sporangium, (b2) oogonium and oospore of Globisporangium alternatum W1167, (c1), (c3), (c4) hyphal swellings, and (c2) sporangium of (d1)–(d4) G. attrantheridium W786, sporangia of G. macrosporum W716, (e1) sporangium, (e2) hyphal swelling of G. marsipium W1296, (f1), (f2) oogonia and oospores of G. nagaii W1534, (g1) oogonia with ornamentation of G. paddicum W1603, (h1), (h2) sporangia, oogonium and (h3) oospore of G. rostratifingens W1608, (i1) sporangia and (i2)–(i4) oogonia of G. selbyi W743, (j1)–(j4) hyphal swellings of G. sylvaticum W769, (k1), (k2) sporangium, and (k3) oogonium of G. terrestre W2010 (scale bars: a1, a2, d1–k3 = 20 μm, b1–c4 = 10 μm).

    • In the present study, 82 of the Korean strains were classified under the genus Globisporangium, which consists of clades E–G, I, and J of Pythium Pringsheim (nom. cons.) sensu lato (s.l.) sensu Lévesque & de Cock[143]. The strains identified within this genus were Globisporangium alternatum, G. attrantheridium, G. heterothallicum, G. intermedium, G. irregulare, G. macrosporum, G. marsipium, G. nagaii, G. paddicum, G. rostratifingens, G. selbyi, G. spinosum, G. sylvaticum, G. terrestre, and G. ultimum sensu stricto (s.s.), all of which develop globose sporangia. In contrast, from the genus Elongisporangium, only E. undulatum was isolated. This strain, characterized by its elongated sporangia, was previously classified as clade H of Pythium s.l. sensu Lévesque & de Cock[143]. In the phylogenetic analyses, the groupings of Korean strains with the reference isolates for each species were supported by high bootstrap values ranging from 99% to 100% (Supplementary Fig. S1). Moreover, the BLASTn search results for the ITS and cox1 sequences of each Korean strain revealed high similarities of 99%–100% with the published sequences of authentic isolates. Cultural and morphological features of these species, which have previously not been recorded in Korea, were described in Supplementary Taxonomy S1. For selected known species, colonies and taxonomically important structures such as sporangia, oogonia, or oospores are shown in Figs 2 and 3.

      Phytopythium (syn. Ovatisporangium) species were also found in the present study (64 strains). The Korean strains formed four well-supported groups, matching four distinct species, Phytopythium chamaehyphon, Pp. helicoides, Pp. litorale, and Pp. vexans, in the phylogenetic tree (Supplementary Fig. S1). The groupings of the Korean strains with each reference isolate were supported by high bootstrap values (99%–100%). Based on a BLASTn search of the ITS and cox1 sequences, 19 strains (e.g., W1307, W1308, W1322, W1389, and W1393) were identical to Pp. chamaehyphon CBS259.30 (HQ643374 in ITS, HQ708421 in cox1), 11 strains (e.g. W671, W682, W687, W688, and W1291) to Pp. helicoides CBS286.31 (HQ643383 in ITS, EF408875 in cox1), 14 strains (e.g. W595, W628, W629, W630, and W1193) to Pp. litorale CBS118360 (HQ643386 in ITS, HQ708433 in cox1), and ten strains (W707, W708, W714, W943, and W1000) to Pp. vexans CBS455.62 (HQ643386 in ITS, HQ708448 in cox1). Each group was morphologically identified, referencing the original descriptions of Pp. chamaehyphon (CBS259.30)[144], Pp. helicoides (CBS286.31)[145], Pp. litorale (CBS118360)[146], and Pp. vexans (CBS119.80)[147].

      Two new species of Phytopythium were discovered in the present study. The strains W676, W1152, W1998, and W1999 formed a well-supported group in the multi-gene phylogenetic tree (Fig. 4), and this group is close to Pp. citrinum CBS119171, Pp. delawarense 382B, Pp. aichiense CBS137195 and Pp. litorale CBS118360. The cox1 sequences of the new strains were closest to those of Pp. citrinum CBS119171 (HQ708422), with a sequence similarity of 98.91% (635/642 bp) in the BLASTn search. The ITS and cox2 sequences were a 97% match to the strain CBS119171 (HQ643375.2 in ITS, AB690679 in cox2). The ITS and cox2 sequences were identical to those of an undescribed isolate UZ230 (AB468792 in ITS and AB468917 in cox2); however, the cox1 sequence of UZ230 is not available in the GenBank database. The strain W1435 occupied a unique branch in the phylogenetic trees, although it showed a close phylogenetic relation to Pp. iriomotense GUCC0025 with sequence similarities of 97% (625/642 bp) in cox1 (AB690652) and 97% (507/521 bp) in cox2 (AB690682). The cultural, morphological, and physiological characteristics of these novel species will be described in the following Taxonomy section.

      Figure 4. 

      Multigene phylogenetic tree of Phytopythium and Pythium species from the minimum evolution analysis based on internal transcribed spacer (ITS), cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (cox1), and II (cox2) mtDNA sequences. Bootstrapping values (minimum evolution BP/maximum likelihood BP) higher than 70% were given above or below the branches (1,000 replicates). The strains of new species obtained from this study are shown in bold (ex-type culture with asterisk). Phytophthora ramorum was used as an outgroup. The scale bar equals the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.

      This study identified 21 species of Pythium sensu stricto (s.s.) sensu Uzuhashi et al.[148] and Nguyen et al.[149] (308 strains), namely, Py. acanthicum, Py. aphanidermatum, Py. apleroticum, Py. aquatile, Py. biforme, Py. brachiatum, Py. catenulatum, Py. cedri, Py. diclinum, Py. dissotocum, Py. insidiosum, Py. lutarium, Py. monospermum, Py. oopapillum, Py. oryzicollum, Py. pachycaule, Py. periplocum, Py. rhizo-oryzae, Py. subutonaiense, Py. torulosum, and Py. utonaiense. These species belonged to clades A–D of Pythium s.l. as classified in the phylogenetic studies by Lévesque & de Cock[143] and Uzuhashi et al.[148] and are characterized by their filamentous sporangia. In the cox1 tree (Supplementary Fig. S1), the Korean strains formed well-supported groups with each reference of Pythium s.s., which is supported with high bootstrap support. A BLASTn search revealed that the sequences of each Korean strain matched the published sequences of authentic isolates with high similarities of 99%–100%. The taxonomic characters of the previously unrecorded species in Korea were investigated in the present study. The cultural and morphological characteristics of these species were described in the supplementary data (Supplementary Taxonomy S1), with Figs 5 and 6 illustrating the colonies and taxonomically significant structures of representative strains. Morphological characteristics of Korean isolates were consistent with the descriptions of van der Plaats-Niterink[150].

      Figure 5. 

      Cultural characteristics of the isolates of Pythium species, which have previously been unrecorded in Korea, obtained from this study. (a) Pythium acanthicum W927, (b) Py. apleroticum W2032, (c) Py. biforme W813, (d) Py. brachiatum W1541, (e) Py. cedri W754, (f) Py. insidiosum W1285, (g) Py. oryzicollum W1211, (h) Py. pachycaule W1650, (i) Py. subutonaiense W929, and (j) Py. utonaiense W1684 on (1) PDA, (2) V8A, (3) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (left: observed view and right: reverse view).

      Figure 6. 

      Morphological characteristics of Pythium species, which have previously been unrecorded in Korea, obtained from this study. Microscopic structures observed under a microscope: (a1) oogonium and (a2) sporangium of Pythium acanthicum W927, (b1), (b3) oogonium and (b2) hyphal swellings of Py. apleroticum W2032, (c1), (c2) hyphal bodies of Py. biforme W813, (d1) oogonia in a chain of Py. brachiatum W1541, (e1)–(e3) sporangia of Py. cedri W754, (f1) Py. insidiosum W1285, (g1) Py. oryzicollum W1211, (g2) oogonium and oospore of Py. oryzicollum W1211, (h1) Py. pachycaule W1650, (i1) Py. subutonaiense W929, and (j1), ( j2) Py. utonaiense W1684 (scale bars: a1, a2, c1–e3, g2, i1–j2 = 20 μm, b1–b3, f1, g1, h1 = 10 μm).

      We also identified six new species within Pythium s.s. The strains W1856 and W1859 formed a well-supported group in the phylogenetic tree (Fig. 4). The cox1 sequences of these strains were most closely related to P. flevoense isolate CBS23372 (HQ708583, 587/621 bp) with 94.5% similarity in the BLASTn search. Their ITS and cox2 sequences were identical to those of an undescribed isolate ZSF0011 (AB468820 in ITS and AB468939 in cox2), but the cox1 sequence of ZSF0011 is not available at GenBank.

      Strains W604, W693, W695, W1522, W1523, W1524, W1951, W1952, W2004, and W2005 were related to an undescribed isolate P8201 with 96% similarity in the BLASTn search of the cox1 (HQ261483) and cox2 (GU222160) sequences (619/645 bp in cox1 and 489/508 in cox2). The ITS sequence was also a 96% match to isolate P8201 (GU258928, 748/777 bp). In the BLASTn search of ITS, the Korean strains were a 99.9% match to various strains of Pythium sp. 'group B' DP-2020[126], e.g., DG26 (MT555835) and UPG14 (MT555842); however, these isolates have not yet been formally described. Their cox1 and cox2 sequences are not available at GenBank.

      Another new taxon included strains W1470, W1991, and W2002, which formed a well-supported cluster in the phylogenetic tree. ITS and cox1 sequences of these strains were identical with an undescribed strain CLE-2015d (KT247392 in ITS and KT247393 in cox1). The cox2 sequence CLE-2015d is not available at GenBank. The Korean strains had identical cox2 sequences as an undescribed strain W18-138 (PX437885). The ITS and cox1 sequences of Korean strains matched those of the strain W18-138 with 99% similarity (PX430644 in ITS and PX437881 in cox1).

      The strains W1298, W1300, W2006, W2007, W2008, and W2011 constituted another novel lineage. Their ITS, cox1, and cox2 sequences exhibited a sequence similarity of 97% with Py. aquatile CBS21580 (HQ643445 in ITS, HQ708492 in cox1, and KJ595355 in cox2), Py. apleroticum CBS77281 (HQ643444 in ITS and HQ708491 in cox1), and Py. brachiatum UZ00746 (KJ995583 in ITS and KJ995594 in cox1).

      The strains W664, W2020, W2021, W2026, and W2029 formed a well-supported cluster in the phylogenetic tree. These strains had identical ITS, cox1, and cox2 sequences as an undescribed isolate W22-20 (PX430645 in ITS, PX437883 in cox1, and PX437886 in cox2). The ITS of another undescribed isolate, P8207 (HQ261734), was identical to this new taxon, while cox1 (HQ261481) and cox2 (GU222161) sequences displayed similarities of 99% (634/637 bp in cox1 and 521/523 in cox2).

      The next new group, strains W1962, W1966, W1968, W1972, and W1995, is close to a cluster containing the new taxa group mentioned above (W664, W2020, W2021, W2026, and W2029); however, their ITS and cox1 sequence similarities were 96.5%, and cox2 was 98.5%. The ITS sequences of the last new group displayed similarities of 99% to species such as Py. catenulatum CBS842.68 (AY598675.2) and Py. rhizo-oryzae CBS119169 (HQ643757.2). The cox1 and cox2 sequences showed the similarities of 96%–97% to Py. catenulatum CBS842.68 (HQ708540 in cox1 and KJ595404 in cox2) and Py. rhizo-oryzae CBS119169 (HQ708798 in cox1 and KJ595420 in cox2).

      The cultural, morphological, and physiological characteristics of six novel taxa were described in the Taxonomy section.

    • In the ITS tree of the Saprolegniales (Supplementary Fig. S2), 98 Korean strains grouped with multiple known species such as Achlya bisexualis, Aphanomyces laevis, Geolegnia helicoides, Leptolegnia caudata, Saprolegnia aenigmatica, S. asterophora, S. australis, S. diclina, S. ferax, S. parasitica, and S. torulosa. A BLASTn search revealed that the Korean strains shared high sequence similarities with previously published sequences of authentic isolates. Prior studies have documented both morphological and phylogenetic descriptions of the Korean strains of A. bisexualis[111] and Saprolegniaceae species[123].

    • Identification of oomycete strains isolated from various sources revealed their preference for plant-derived sources, including decaying leaves, stems, and twigs. Of the 78 identified taxa, 60 were isolated from plant-derived substrates. These taxa were assigned to the Aphanomyces, Elongisporangium, Geolegnia, Globisporangium, Leptolegnia, Phytophthora, Phytopythium, Pythium s.s., or Saprolegnia. In contrast, other taxa were isolated from soil sediments and/or water but not found in the plant sources in the present study; A. laevis, E. undulatum, G. macrosporum, G. selbyi, G. sylvaticum, G. ultimum, Py. acanthicum, Py. apleroticum, Py. monospermum, Py. oryzicollum, Py. torulosum, and S. parasitica. Two Saprolegniales species (Achlya bisexualis and Saprolegnia australis) were isolated only from animal sources, such as fish and marsh snails. Pythiales was isolated mainly from the plant sources (ca. 56%); however, Phytopythium vexans, Pythium catenulatum, Py. diclinum, Py. oopapillum, Py. rhizo-oryzae, Py. subutonaiense, and Py. torulosum were also isolated from marsh snails or frog eggs (ca. 5%). Phytopythium litorale, Pythium apleroticum, Py. diclinum, and Py. oopapillum were also isolated from the algae (4%). From water, Elongisporangium undulatum, Globisporangium attrantheridium, G. spinosum, Phytopythium chamaehyphon, Pythium apleroticum, Py. diclinum, Py. lutarium, Py. oopapillum, Py. oryzicollum, Py. pachycaule, Py. periplocum, Py. subutonaiense were found (ca. 10%). The genus Globisporangium was mainly isolated from soil (ca. 54%), and diverse species were identified: Globisporangium attrantheridium, G. heterothallicum, G. macrosporum. G. marsipium, G. rostratifingens, G. selbyi, G. spinosum, G. sylvaticum, G. terrestre, G. ultimum, and two unknown new taxa. Elongisporangium, Phytopythium, and Pythium s.s. were also isolated from soil; Elongisporangium undulatum, Phytopythium chamaehyphon, Pp. helicoides, Pp. vexans, Pythium acanthicum, Py. aphanidermatum, Py. aquatile, Py. biforme, Py. catenulatum, Py. diclinum, Py. dissotocum, Py. lutarium, Py. monospermum, Py. oopapillum, Py. rhizo-oryzae, Py. subutonaiense, and Py. torulosum. 24% of the total strains of Pythiales were found in soil sediments.

      Across both seasons, the Pythiales were frequently isolated, accounting for ca. 86.4% of the isolates obtained in WH and ca. 73.4% of those obtained in the CC season. Among congeners of Pythium s.s., 12 taxa were observed in both WH and CC seasons; Py. aquatile, Py. catenulatum, Py. diclinum, Py. dissotocum, Py. lutarium, Py. oopapillum, Py. pachycaule, Py. subutonaiense, and four undescribed taxa. However, 12 taxa, Py. acanthicum, Py. aphanidermatum, Py. apleroticum, Py. insidiosum, Py. monospermum, Py. oryzicollum, Py. periplocum, Py. rhizo-oryzae, Py. torulosum and three undescribed taxa were exclusively discovered in the WH season, while ten taxa, Py. biforme, Py. brachiatum, Py. cedri, Py. utonaiense and six undescribed taxa were unique to the CC season. In the case of Globisporangium, more taxa were found in the CC season (14 taxa) than in the WH season (ten taxa). Several species, including G. alternatum, G. irregulare, G. nagai, G. paddicum, G. rostratifingens, G. selbyi, and G. sylvaticum, were isolated only in the CC season, while G. marsupium and G. ultimum were exclusive to the WH season. In Phytopythium, which was increased sharply in the WH season, a total of seven taxa were found in the present study. In the CC season, only Pp. vexans and an unknown taxon were found, while diverse species were isolated in the WH season; Pp. chamaehyphon, Pp. helicoides, Pp. litorale, Pp. vexans, and three unknown taxa.

      In the case of Saprolegniales, the proportion among isolates was ca. 12.6% in WH and ca. 22.8% in the CC season. Species richness was eight taxa in the WH and nine taxa in the CC seasons. However, the proportions of individual taxa were different between the two seasons; Geolegnia helicoides, Saprolegnia parasitica, S. salmonis, S. torulosa, and two undescribed taxa were exclusively found in the CC season. Conversely, Achlya bisexualis, Aphanomyces laevis, Leptolegnia caudata, S. aenigmatica, S. asterophora, and S. australis were found only in the WH season. S. diclina and S. ferax were found in both seasons, but accounting for ca. 81% of the isolates in the CC and ca. 28% in the WH season. Finally, order Peronosporales represented a small proportion; ca. 1% in WH and ca. 4% CC season.

      The Pythiales was frequently isolated across the different types of freshwater ecosystems (ca. 89% in reservoir, 74% in lowland river, and 76% in mountain stream). At the genus level, Pythium s.s. was the most isolated genus in all types (ca. 59% in reservoir, 60% in lowland river, and 45% in mountain stream). The proportion of Globisporangium among isolates was ca. 17% in reservoir, 6% in lowland river, and 17% in mountain stream. Similarly, Phytopythium accounted for ca. 13%, 7%, and 13% of the isolates in these habitats, respectively. Saprolegniales was isolated at a proportion of ca. 10% in reservoir, 22% in lowland river, and 22% in mountain stream. The species richness of Saprolegnia was higher in mountain stream (seven taxa) and lowland river (eight taxa), whereas its presence was relatively limited in reservoirs with only four taxa. Lastly, Peronosporales was detected at proportions of a few percent across all freshwater ecosystem types (ca. 1% in reservoir, 4% in lowland river, and 2% in mountain stream).

    • Phytopythium minutum B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, sp. nov. Fig. 7

      Figure 7. 

      Colony patterns and morphology of Phytopythium minutum W1152. Cultural characteristics of (a) PDA, (b) V8A, (c) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (1: observed view and 2: reverse view). (d)–(p) Microscopic structures observed under a microscope: (d)–(i) (sub-)globose to (ob-)pyriform sporangia with or without discharge tube, (j)–(p) globose oogonia with one or multiple antheridia per oogonium, sometimes encircling the oogonium (scale bars: 20 μm).

      MycoBank number: MB861107; Facesoffungi number: FoF18859

      Etymology – Name refers to the small size of sporangia and oogonia (minutus Latin = very small).

      Main hyphae up to 5 µm wide. Sporangia were globose to sub-globose, with an average size of 18 ± 3 μm in diameter, with a total range of 13–23 μm, rarely pyriform to obpyriform or ovoid, 16–20 × 24–27 μm (average 18 ± 2 × 26 ± 1 μm). Sporangia were terminal or intercalary. Hyphal swellings and chlamydospores were not observed. Oogonia were globose to sub-globose or limoniform and had smooth walls. Oogonial diameter averaged 21.5 ± 4 µm with an overall range of 15.5–29.3 µm. Oospores were aplerotic or plerotic, globose, ranging in size from 13–26 µm (av. 18.5 ± 3 µm) in diameter with a wall 0.5–3 (av. 1.8) µm thick. Antheridia were monoclinous or diclinous, paragynous, and showing undefined shapes or encircled the oogonium.

      Culture characteristics – Colonies showed a chrysanthemum pattern on PDA, a faint chrysanthemum on V8A, and faintly striate on CMA. Radial growth rates on PDA, V8A, and CMA at 25 °C were 8, 12, and 9.5 mm/d, respectively. On V8A, minimum, optimum, and maximum growth temperatures were 4, 30, and 35 °C, respectively.

      Material examined – Korea, Gyeongsangbuk-do, Sangju, isolated from leaf litter in a mountain stream, Apr. 2020, B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, W1152 (holotype NNIBRFG31634, ex-type culture NNIBRF31694); Jeollabuk-do, Namwon, isolated from leaf litter in a river, Sept. 2018, ditto, W676. Jeollanam-do, Muan, isolated from leaf litter in a river, June 2021, ditto, W1998, W1999.

      GenBank numbers – W1152: ITS = PP812166, cox1 = PP798551, cox2 = PP834383; W676: ITS = PP812163, cox1 = PP798444, cox2 = PP834380; W1998: ITS = PP812183, cox1 = PP798888, cox2 = PP834397; W1999: ITS = PP812184, cox1 = PP798889, cox2 = PP834398.

      Notes – Morphological and physiological characters of Phytopythium minutum are listed in Table 2, for comparison, with those of already known and phylogenetically close species, Pp. aichiense, Pp. citrinum, Pp. delawarense, and Pp. litorale. Sporangia and oogonia of Pp. minutum are on average smaller than those of the related species. Optimum growth temperature is higher (30 °C) than in other species (2528 °C), like Pp. litorale.

      Table 2.  Comparison of Phytopythium minutum with morphologically and phylogenetically related species (n.a. = not available).

      Character Phytopythium minutum Phytopythium citrinum Phytopythium delawarense Phytopythium aichiense Phytopythium litorale
      Colony Chrysanthemum pattern on PDA, faintly chrysanthemum on V8A, and faintly striate on CMA Submerged and mixed chrysanthemum-rosette pattern on PCA Radiate pattern on PCA Stellate pattern on V8A Radiate to chrysanthemum pattern on PCA and V8A
      Growth rate 8 mm per day at 25 °C
      on PDA
      12 mm per day at 25 °C
      on V8A
      9.5 mm per day at 25 °C
      on CMA
      9 mm per day at 25 °C on CMA
      11 mm per day at 25 °C
      on PCA
      10 mm per day at
      25 °C on CMA
      11.6 mm per day at
      25 °C on CMA
      13.3 mm per day at 25 °C on CMA
      12.6 mm per day at 25 °C on PCA
      Proliferation Internal extended Internal extended Internal nested and internal extended Internal nested and internal extended Internal nested and internal extended
      Hyphal swellings Absent Absent Present Absent Present
      Sporangia (Sub-)globose, 13–23 (av. 18 ± 3) μm diameter, or ovoid to (ob-)pyriform, 16–20 × 24–27 (av. 18 ± 2 × 26 ± 1) μm, terminal or intercalary (Sub-)globose or pyriform to lemoniform, terminal
      or intercalary, 15–35 (av. 24.2) μm diameter
      Globose to slightly elongate, limonform or (ob-)void, terminal or intercalary, 25–40 (av. 32.5) μm diameter Sub-globose, ovoid or limonoform, 25–39 × 19–27 (31.4 × 24.9) μm (av. 31.4 μm) diameter (Sub-)globose, broad ovoid or obpyriform, terminal or intercalary, 22.8–32.2 × 20.8–29.1 (av. 28.5 × 26.7) μm
      Oogonia Smooth, globose to sub-globose or limoniform, 15.5–29.3 (av. 21.5 ± 4) μm diameter Smooth, globose, 20–36 (av. 27.6) μm diameter Smooth, globose, 21–34 (av. 27.2) μm diameter Smooth, globose, 29–40 (av. 34.3) μm diameter Absent
      Antheridia Monoclinous or diclinous, showing undefined shapes or encircling the oogonium Strictly hypogynous 1–2 per oogonium, diclinous, broad lengthwise contact 1–2 per oogonium, mostly diclinous, and rarely monoclinous, crook-necked or filamentous inflated Absent
      Oospores Aplerotic or plerotic, globose, 13–26 (av. 18.5 ± 3) μm diameter Plerotic, 18–34 (av. 24.9) μm diameter Aplerotic, 21–26 (av. 24.2) μm diameter Aplerotic, av. 24.2 μm diameter Absent
      Cardinal growth temperature (minimum/optimum/
      maximum temperature)
      4/30/35 °C n.a. 10/28/34 °C 4/28/34 °C 4/30/35 °C
      Ref. This study Paul[151] Broders et al.[152] Baten et al.[93] Nechwatal & Mendgen[146]

      Phytopythium lacustre B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, sp. nov. Fig. 8

      Figure 8. 

      Colony patterns and morphology of Phytopythium lacustre W1435. Cultural characteristics of (a) PDA, (b) V8A, and (c) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (1: observed view and 2: reverse view). (d)–(u) Microscopic structures observed under a microscope: (d)–(i) (sub-)globose sporangia with (h) growing release tube, and (i) empty sporangium, (j)–(u) (sub-)globose oogonia with one to two club-shaped or filamentous inflated antheridia per oogonium (scale bars: 20 μm).

      MycoBank number: MB861116; Facesoffungi number: FoF18860

      Etymology – Name refers to the isolation of the type strain from a lake (lacustis Latin = lake).

      Main hyphae up to 6 µm wide. Sporangia were globose to sub-globose. The size of the sporangia averaged 31 ± 4 μm in diameter with a total range of 24–38 μm. Sporangia were terminal. Hyphal swellings and chlamydospores were not observed. Oogonia were globose to subglobose and had smooth walls. Oogonial diameter averaged 32.5 ± 2 µm with an overall range of 29–36 µm. Oospores were aplerotic or plerotic, globose, ranging in size from 23–35 µm (av. 29.5 ± 4 µm) in diameter with a wall 1–3 (av. 1.7) µm thick. Antheridia were monoclinous or diclinous, paragynous, and produced one to two per oogonium. Antheridial cells were club-shaped or inflated clavate.

      Culture characteristics – Colonies showed radiate to faint chrysanthemum patterns on PDA, V8A, and CMA. Radial growth rates on PDA, V8A, and CMA at 25 °C were 12, 14, and 10 mm/d, respectively. On V8A, minimum, optimum, and maximum growth temperatures were 10, 30, and 35 °C, respectively.

      Material examined – Korea, Chungcheongnam-do, Boryeong, isolated from leaf litter in an artificial reservoir, Sept. 2020, B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, W1435 (holotype NNIBRFG31641, ex-type culture NNIBRF31701).

      GenBank numbers – W1435: ITS = PP812169, cox1 = PP798688, cox2 = PP834405

      Notes – Morphological and physiological characters of Phytopythium lacustre are compared with those of already known and phylogenetically close species, Pp. boreale, Pp. iriomotense, Pp. mercuriale, and Pp. oedochilum (Table 3). The growth rate at 25 °C on the CMA of Pp. lacustre and Pp. mercuriale is lower (9–10 mm) than in other closely related species (20–28.5 mm). Pp. lacustre was obtained during the warm season, which may be related to its minimum (10 °C), optimum (30 °C), and maximum (35 °C) growth temperatures. Interestingly, the related species Pp. iriomotense and Pp. oedochilum exhibit the same cardinal temperatures. This species is currently represented by a single isolate, which limits assessment of intraspecific variation. However, the species is clearly distinguished from its closest relatives based on diagnostic morphological characters and robust multilocus phylogenetic evidence. Additional isolates may further refine the characterization of this species in future studies.

      Table 3.  Comparison of Phytopythium lacustre with morphologically and phylogenetically related species (n.a. = not available).

      Character Phytopythium lacustre Phytopythium iriomotense Phytopythium mercuriale Phytopythium oedochilum Phytopythium boreale
      Colony Radiate to faint chrysanthemum patterns on PDA, V8A and CMA Chrysanthemum pattern on V8A Tightly chrysanthemum on PDA, rosaceous on MEA, slightly stellate on CMA Submerged with some aerial mycelium on CMA, without a special pattern on PCA n.a.
      Growth rate 12 mm per day at 25 °C
      on PDA
      14 mm per day at 25 °C
      on V8A
      10 mm per day at 25 °C
      on CMA
      24.3 mm per day at 25 °C on CMA 9 mm per day at
      25 °C on CMA
      20 mm per day at 25 °C on CMA 20 mm per day at
      25 °C on CMA
      Proliferation Internal extended Internal or internal nested Internal or internal nested External, internal and internal nested Internal
      Hyphal swellings Absent Present Present Absent Present
      Sporangia Globose to sub-globose, terminal, 24–38
      (av. 31 ± 4) μm
      diameter
      Globose to sub-globose, papillated and terminal
      av. 32.7 μm
      Sub-globose to obovoid, papillated and terminal
      av. 22 μm
      Sub-globose, lemoniform, obovoid
      or ovoid, papillated
      av. 32.8 μm
      Absent
      Oogonia Smooth, (sub-)globose, terminal or intercalary, 29–36 (av. 32.5 ± 2) μm diameter Smooth, globose av.
      27.3 μm diameter, oogonia with double oospores present
      Smooth, globose, av. 29.8 μm diameter Smooth and globose av. 32.8 μm diameter Smooth, globose, av. 32.8 μm diameter
      Antheridia Monoclinous or diclinous, 1−2 per oogonium, club-shaped or inflated clavate Diclinous, 1−2 per oogonium, crook-necked or occasionally amphigynous antheridial cells are present Mostly diclinous, multiple knotted around the oogonia Diclinous, occasionally monoclinous, 1−2(4) per oogonium, cells were large, curved, and broadly laterally attached to the oogonium Monoclinous, rarely diclinous, 1−2 per oogonium, antheridial cells are amphigynous
      or sessil
      Oospores Aplerotic or plerotic, globose, 23–35(av. 29.5 ± 4) μm diameter Aplerotic or plerotic av. 24.4 μm diameter Absent Aplerotic av. 30.3 μm diameter Plerotic av. 22.2 μm diameter
      Cardinal growth temperature (minimum/optimum/
      maximum temperature)
      10/30/35 °C 10/30/35 °C 5/25–30/43 °C 10/30/35 °C 4/25–30/43 °C
      Ref. This study Baten et al.[93] Belbahri et al.[153] Van der Plaats-Niterink[150] Duan[154]

      Pythium aculeatum B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, sp. nov. Fig. 9

      Figure 9. 

      Colony patterns and morphology of Pythium aculeatum W1856. Cultural characteristics of (a) PDA, (b) V8A, (c) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (1: observed view and 2: reverse view). (d)–(q) Microscopic structures observed under a microscope, (d)–(f) inflated filamentous sporangia, (g), (h) hyphal swellings, (i)–(q) globose oogonia with ornamented wall and globose or clavate antheridia (scale bars: d–h = 10 μm, i–q = 20 μm).

      MycoBank number: MB861117; Facesoffungi number: FoF18892

      Etymology – Name refers to the ornamented walls of the oogonia (aculeatus Latin = spiny).

      Main hyphae up to 6 µm wide. Sporangia were filamentous and inflated. Hyphal swellings were globose to subglobose, limoniform or catenulate, terminal or intercalary. Oogonia were globose and had ornamented walls with blunt projections. Oogonial diameter averaged 21 ± 2 µm with an overall range of 19–27 µm. Oospores were mostly aplerotic or plerotic, globose, often yellowish, ranging in size from 16–24 µm (av. 20 ± 2 µm) in diameter with a wall 0.3–2.5 (av. 1.5) µm thick. Antheridia were produced one or two per oogonium, monoclinous or diclinous, paragynous. Antheridial cells were globose or clavate.

      Culture characteristics – Colonies showed faint chrysanthemum patterns on PDA and V8A, and a radiate pattern on CMA. Radial growth rates on PDA, V8A, and CMA at 25 °C were 13.5, 15.5, and 13.5 mm/d, respectively. On V8A, minimum, optimum, and maximum growth temperatures were 5, 20, and 30 °C, respectively.

      Material examined – Korea, Jeju-do, Jeju, isolated from water in a mountain stream, Apr. 2021, B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, W1856 (holotype NNIBRFG35173, ex-type culture NNIBRF35147); Jeju-do, Jeju, isolated from water in a mountain stream, Apr. 2021, ditto, W1859.

      GenBank numbers – W1856: ITS = PP812174, cox1 = PP798833, cox2 = PP834389; W1859: ITS = PP812175, cox1 = PP798835, cox2 = PP834390.

      Notes – Morphological and physiological characters of Pythium aculeatum are listed in Table 4 for comparison with those of the phylogenetically close new taxon Py. intricatum and already known species, namely Py. flevoense, Py. inflatun, Py. pyrilobum, and Py. rishiriense. Oogonial walls of Py. aculeatum are ornamented with blunt projections, while those of related species are smooth. The optimum growth temperature of the related species is between 25 and 35 °C, but Py. aculeatum grows optimally at 20 °C, and the maximum temperature is 30 °C. ITS and cox2 sequences of Py. aculeatum were identical to those of isolate ZSF0011 reported by Uzuhashi et al.[148], but its taxonomic characteristics are still undescribed.

      Table 4.  Comparison of Pythium aculeatum with morphologically and phylogenetically related species (n.a. = not available).

      Character Pythium aculeatum Pythium flevoense Pythium rishiriense Pythium pyrilobum Pythium inflatum
      Colony Faint chrysanthemum pattern on PDA and V8, radiate pattern on CMA Chrysanthemum pattern on PDA and CMA Rosette petaloid on PDA, vaguely petaloid on V8A Radiate pattern without a special pattern on PCA Radiate pattern on PCA, slightly radiate pattern on CMA
      Growth rate 13.5 mm per day at 25 °C on PDA
      15.5 mm per day at 25 °C on V8A
      13.5 mm per day at 25 °C on CMA
      10 mm per day at 25 °C
      on CMA
      16 mm per day at
      25 °C on PCA
      22 mm per day at
      25 °C on PCA
      20 mm per day at 25 °C on CMA
      Hyphal swellings Present. Hyphal bodies, terminal or intercalary, (sub-)globose, limoniform or catenulate Absent Absent n.a. n.a.
      Sporangia Filamentous, inflated, irregularly swollen Filamentous, not-inflated Filamentous, inflated Filamentous, inflated, irregularly swollen Filamentous, inflated, forming irregular or globose outgrowths
      Oogonia Ornamented with blunt projections, globose, terminal, 19–27 (av. 21 ± 2) μm diameter Smooth, mostly terminal on short side branches of feather-like hyphae, 17–30 (av. 19) µm diameter Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, sometimes in a chain, av. 24.3 μm diameter Smooth, globose or pyriform, terminal or intercalary, 23–33 (av. 27) μm diameter Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, 19–27 (av. 22.5) μm diameter
      Antheridia Monoclinous or diclinous, 1−2 per oogonium, antheridial cells globose or clavate Diclinous, one to several per oogonium, antheridial stalks mostly bifurcate or differently branched near the oogonium 1−2(–5) per oogonium, monoclinous or diclinous, terminal on branched stalk, rarely intercalary, clavate or
      crook-necked, hypogynous
      Monoclinous or diclinous, mostly two or three cells on one long stalk which encircles the oogonium, mostly crook-necked 1−2 per oogonium, diclinous
      Oospores Aplerotic or plerotic, globose, often yellowish, 16–24 (av. 20 ± 2) µm diameter Aplerotic, occasionally nearly plerotic, 14–24
      (av. 17.7) µm diameter
      Mostly plerotic, av. 21.8 μm diameter Aplerotic or plerotic, globose, yellowish, 20–32 (av. 23.5) µm diameter Plerotic, 18–25 (av. 21.5) µm diameter
      Cardinal growth temperature (minimum/optimum/
      maximum temperature)
      5/20/30 °C 5/25/35 °C 5/35/42 °C 4/25/37 °C 5/30/37 °C
      Ref. This study Van der Plaats-Niterink[155] Rahman et al.[82] Vaartaja[156] Van der Plaats-Niterink[150]

      Pythium aquaticum B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, sp. nov. Fig. 10

      Figure 10. 

      Colony patterns and morphology of Pythium aquaticum W2020. Cultural characteristics on (a) PDA, (b) V8A, (c) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (1: observed view and 2: reverse view). (d)–(s) Microscopic structures observed under a microscope, (d), (r), (s) lipid globules inside the hyphae, (e) filamentous, inflated sporangia, (f)–(q) cylindrical, clavate, (sub-)globose, ovoid or peanut-shaped hyphal swellings (scale bars: 10 μm).

      MycoBank number: MB861131; Facesoffungi number: FoF18861

      Etymology – Name refers to the wide distribution in freshwater ecosystems (aquaticus Latin = living in water).

      Main hyphae up to 7 µm wide. Sporangia were filamentous and slightly inflated. Cylindrical, clavate, (sub-)globose, ovoid, or peanut-shaped hyphal swellings were produced terminally or intercalary. Chlamydospores and sexual structures were not observed.

      Culture characteristics – Colonies showed a rosaceous pattern on PDA and radiate patterns on V8A and CMA. Radial growth rates on PDA, V8A, and CMA at 25 °C were 12.5, 9.5, and 10.5 mm/d, respectively. On V8A, minimum, optimum, and maximum growth temperatures were 5, 30, and 40 °C, respectively.

      Material examined – Korea, Gyeongsangbuk-do, Mungyeong, isolated from water in a river, June 2021, B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, W2020 (holotype NNIBRFG48680, ex-type culture NNIBRF48682); Chungcheongbuk-do, Cheongwon, isolated from soil sediments in a river, June 2018, ditto, W664; Gyeongsangbuk-do, Mungyeong, isolated from water in a river, June 2021, ditto, W2021. Gyeongsangbuk-do, Mungyeong, isolated from soil sediments in a river, June 2021, ditto, W2026; Gyeongsangbuk-do, Mungyeong, isolated from marsh snail in a river, June 2021; ditto, W2029.

      GenBank numbers – W2020: ITS = PP812192, cox1 = PP798909, cox2 = PP842635; W664: ITS = PP812162, cox1 = PP798442, cox2 = PP842631; W2021: ITS = PP812193, cox1 = PP798910, cox2 = PP842636; W2026: ITS = PP812194, cox1 = PP798915, cox2 = PP842637; W2029: ITS = PP812195, cox1 = PP798918, cox2 = PP842638.

      Notes – Py. aquaticum has higher optimum (30 °C) and maximum (40 °C) growth temperatures, like related species, including the new taxon Py. fluminis (Table 5). Py. aquaticum produces diverse shapes of hyphal swellings: (sub-)globose, ovoid, and peanut-shaped. The ITS sequence of Py. aquaticum is identical to unclassified Pythium sp. AL-2010 (NCBI taxonomy ID 907948; specimen-voucher P8207), but the cox1 and cox2 sequences displayed similarities of 99%.

      Table 5.  Comparison of Pythium aquaticum and Py. fluminis with morphologically and phylogenetically related species (n.a. = not available).

      Character Pythium aquaticum Pythium fluminis Pythium catenulatum Pythium torulosum Pythium rhizo-oryzae Pythium rishiriense
      Colony Rosaceous pattern on PDA, radiate pattern on V8 and CMA Rosaceous pattern on PDA, chrysanthemum pattern on V8A, irregular pattern on CMA Narrow chrysanthemum pattern on PCA, rosette pattern on CMA Rosette pattern on PCA Narrow chrysanthemum pattern on PCA, rosette pattern on CMA Rosette petaloid on PDA, vaguely petaloid on V8A
      Growth rate 12.5 mm per day at 25 °C on PDA
      9.5 mm per day at
      25 °C on V8A
      10.5 mm per day at 25 °C on CMA
      12.5 mm per day at
      25 °C on PDA
      14.5 mm per day at
      25 °C on V8A
      10.5 mm per day at
      25 °C on CMA
      14 mm per day at
      25 °C on PCA
      15 mm per day at
      25 °C on PCA
      12 mm per day at 25 °C on PCA 16 mm per day at
      25 °C on PCA
      Hyphal swellings Present. Hyphal bodies, terminal or intercalary, cylindrical, clavate, (sub-)globose, ovoid or peanut-shaped Present. Hyphal bodies, terminal or intercalary, clavate, (sub-)globose, catenulate, ovoid or peanut-shaped Present Absent Present. Hyphal bodies, catenulate and terminal Absent
      Sporangia Filamentous, slightly inflated Filamentous, inflated Filamentous, inflated, irregularly swollen, branched parts of the mycelium Filamentous, inflated Not observed Filamentous, inflated
      Oogonia Not observed Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, 11–22 (av. 15 ± 3) μm diameter Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, mostly heterothallic,
      av. 22.8 μm diameter
      Smooth, terminal or intercalary, 11–22
      (av. 15) μm diameter
      Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, av.
      19.7 μm diameter
      Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, sometimes in a chain, av. 24.3 μm diameter
      Antheridia Not observed Monoclinous, antheridial cells clavate, bell-shaped,
      or with wide contact with oogonium
      5–(–12) per oogonium, diclinous, occasionally monoclinous in homothallic isolates, clavate or crook-necked, stalk branched 1–2(–3) per oogonium, monoclinous or occasionally diclinous, borne on rarely branched antheridial stalks Wrapping around, making a knot 1–2(–5) per oogonium, monoclinous or diclinous, terminal on branched stalk, rarely intercalary, clavate or
      crook-necked, hypogynous
      Oospores Not observed Aplerotic or plerotic, globose, 9.5–20 (av.
      14 ± 3) μm diameter
      Mostly plerotic, occasionally aplerotic Plerotic, 10–21 μm diameter Plerotic and aplerotic, 14–
      20 μm diameter
      Mostly plerotic, av. 21.8 μm diameter
      Cardinal growth temperature (minimum/
      optimum/
      maximum temperature)
      5/30/40 °C 5/30/40 °C 10/30–35/40 °C 5/25–30/35 °C n.a. 5/35/42 °C
      Ref. This study This study Van der Plaats-Niterink[150] Van der Plaats-Niterink[150] Bala[157] Rahman et al.[82]

      Pythium chlamydosporum B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, sp. nov. Fig. 11

      Figure 11. 

      Colony patterns and morphology of Pythium chlamydosporum W2002. Cultural characteristics of (a) PDA, (b) V8A, (c) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (1: observed view and 2: reverse view). (d)–(q) Microscopic structures observed under a microscope: (d), (e) filamentous slightly inflated structures, (f)–(i) cylindrical, clavate, (sub-)globose, ovoid or peanut-shaped hyphal swellings, (j), (k) chlamydospores, (l) empty and mature chlamydospore, (m)–(q) globose oogonia with antheridia (scale bars: 10 μm).

      MycoBank number: MB861143; Facesoffungi number: FoF18862

      Etymology – Name refers to the frequent formation of chlamydospores.

      Main hyphae up to 7 µm wide. Sporangia and zoospores not observed. Hyphal inflated structures filamentous slightly inflated. Hyphal swellings and chlamydospores were observed. Hyphal swellings were globose, rarely ovoid or peanut-shaped, and produced terminally or intercalary. Chlamydospores formed in V8A agar media, abundant at 25 °C. Chlamydospores were globose, terminal, and intercalary, with an average diameter of 15 ± 2 µm. Oogonia had smooth walls, were globose, and produced terminal or intercalary. Oogonial diameter averaged 18 ± 4 µm with an overall range of 10–24 µm. Oospores were plerotic, globose, ranging in size from 9–22 µm (av. 16 ± 3 µm) in diameter with a wall 0.5–2.5 (av. 1.6) µm thick. Antheridia were produced one or two per oogonium, monoclinous or diclinous, paragynous, globose, or encircling an oogonium.

      Culture characteristics – Colonies showed a radial pattern on PDA, V8A, and CMA. Radial growth rates on PDA, V8A, and CMA at 25 °C were 16, 18, and 16 mm/d, respectively. On V8A, minimum, optimum, and maximum growth temperatures were 5, 25, and 30 °C, respectively.

      Material examined – Korea, Jeollanam-do, Jindo, isolated from soil sediments in a reservoir, June 2021, B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, W2002 (holotype NNIBRFG35175, ex-type culture NNIBRFG35149); Jeollabuk-do, Jeonju, isolated from leaf litter in a reservoir, Sept. 2020, ditto, W1470; Jeollanam-do, Muan, isolated from soil sediments in a river, June 2021, ditto, W1991.

      GenBank numbers – W2002: ITS = PP812185, cox1 = PP798892, cox2 = PP842634; W1470: ITS = PP812170, cox1 = PP798704, cox2 = PP842632; W1991: ITS = PP812181, cox1 = PP798883, cox2 = PP842633.

      Notes – Morphological and physiological characters of Pythium chlamydosporum are listed in Table 6 for comparison with those of phylogenetically related species, i.e., Py. apleroticum, Py. aquatile, Py. brachiatum, Py. diclinum and the new species Py. vigens. Py. chlamydosporum produces chlamydospores abundantly at 25 °C. Hyphal swellings were formed in diverse shapes. The ITS and cox1 sequences of Py. chlamydosporum are identical to an undescribed Pythium species, CLE-2015d (NCBI taxonomy ID 1695211). Another undescribed Pythium strain, W18-138 (NCBI taxonomy ID 1862977), formed a cluster with Py. chlamydosporum in the phylogenetic tree. This strain was also isolated from freshwater ecosystems of Cocalico Creek in Pennsylvania, USA, according to Professor Blair (pers. comm.).

      Table 6.  Comparison of Pythium chlamydosporum and Py. vigens with morphologically and phylogenetically related species (n.a. = not available)

      Character Pythium chlamydosporum Pythium vigens Pythium aquatile Pythium apleroticum Pythium brachiatum Pythium oopapillum Pythium diclinum
      Colony Radiate pattern on PDA, V8A, and CMA Faint striate to radiate pattern on PDA, V8A, and CMA Rosette pattern on PCA and CMA n.a. Radiate pattern Vague chrysanthemum pattern on PCA Radiate pattern on CMA and PCA
      Growth rate 16 mm per day at 25 °C on PDA
      18 mm per day at 25 °C on V8A
      16 mm per day at 25 °C on CMA
      22 mm per day at 25 °C
      on PDA
      28.5 mm per day at 25 °C on V8A
      20 mm per day at 25 °C
      on CMA
      17 mm per day at
      25 °C on PCA
      19 mm per day at
      25 °C on PCA
      14 mm per day at 25 °C on PCA 17 mm per day at
      25 °C on PCA
      19 mm per day at
      25 °C on PCA
      Hyphal swellings Present. Hyphal bodies, terminal or intercalary, (sub-)globose, rarely ovoid or peanut shaped Present. Hyphal bodies, terminal or intercalary, (sub-)globose, ovoid or peanut-shaped, rarely catenulate Absent Absent Filamentous slightly inflated n.a. n.a.
      Sporangia Not observed Not observed Filamentous or slightly inflated, forming rectangular, dendroid structures Filamentous, not-inflated Not observed Filamentous, inflated, lobate elements Filamentous, not-inflated
      Oogonia Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, 10–24 (av. 18 ± 4) μm diameter Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, 21–26 (av. 23 ± 1) μm diameter Oogonia globose, smooth, terminal or less often intercalary, but frequently clustering in small groups, 19–23 (av. 21 µm) diameter Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, 11–20 μm Intercalary or terminal, sometimes in chain; smooth- walled or occasionally with a projection, 13.3–34.4 (av. 22.7) Globose, sub-terminal or intercalary, av.
      21.5 μm
      Smooth, spherical or ovoid, mostly terminal or subterminal, occasionally intercalary, 18–23 μm (av. 20.5)
      Antheridia Monoclinous or diclinous, 1–2 per oogonium, antheridial cells globose or encircling an oogonium Lacking One, rarely two per oogonium, monoclinous, originating from the oogonial stalk at 2–10 µm or more below the oogonium, or from the parent hypha Diclinous, 1–2 per oogonium. Diclinous and monoclinous; arm-like shaped on unbranched stalks; 1–2 per oogonium Rarely hypogynous, antheridial stalks branched Diclinous, 1–2 per oogonium
      Oospores Aplerotic or plerotic, globose, 9–22 (av. 16 ± 3) µm diameter Aplerotic, globose, 13–16 (av. 15) µm diameter Aplerotic, 16–19 (av. 17.9) µm diameter Aplerotic, 9–17 µm diameter Plerotic, occasionally aplerotic, 9.4–27.2
      (av. 16.4) diameter
      av. 16.4 μm diameter av. 17.5 μm diameter
      Cardinal growth temperature (minimum/optimum/
      maximum temperature)
      5/25/30 °C 5/25/35 °C 5/25/35 °C 5/30/40 °C 4/25/30 °C n.a./30/30 °C 5/30/40 °C
      Ref. This study This study Höhnk[158] Ito & Tokunaga[159] Uzuhashi et al.[99] Bala et al.[160] Ito & Tokunaga[159]

      Pythium intricatum B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, sp. nov. Fig. 12

      Figure 12. 

      Colony patterns and morphology of Pythium intricatum W2004. Cultural characteristics of (a) PDA, (b) V8A, (c) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (1: observed view and 2: reverse view). (d)–(r) Microscopic structures observed under a microscope: (d) filamentous inflated sporangia, (e)–(h) lobulated sporangia forming toruloid complexes or dendroid structures, (i)–(k) filamentous sporangia and swelling, (l), (m) chlamydospores, (n)–(r) globose oogonia with antheridial cells (scale bars: d–k = 10 μm, l–r = 20 μm).

      MycoBank number: MB861145; Facesoffungi number: FoF18863

      Etymology – Name refers to the shape of sporangia; strongly inflated, irregular toruloid complexes or dendroid structures (intricatus Latin = complex).

      Main hyphae up to 7 µm wide. Sporangia were filamentous, strongly inflated, and formed toruloid complexes or dendroid structures. Terminal hyphal swellings were abundantly formed. Globose chlamydospores were rarely observed. Oogonia had smooth walls, were globose with oogonial diameter averaging 22 ± 3 µm and an overall range of 17–27 µm. Oospores were aplerotic or plerotic, globose, ranging in size from 15–26 µm (av. 20.5 ± 3 µm) in diameter with a wall 1–3 (av. 2.2) µm thick. Antheridia were produced one or two per oogonium, monoclinous or diclinous, paragynous. Antheridia were globose, clavate, or encircling an oogonium.

      Culture characteristics – Colonies showed chrysanthemum patterns on PDA and V8A, and a very faint striate pattern on CMA. Radial growth rates on PDA, V8A, and CMA at 25 °C were 10.5, 10.5, and 8.5 mm/d, respectively. On V8A, minimum, optimum, and maximum growth temperatures were 5, 25 and 30 °C, respectively.

      Material examined – Korea, Jeollanam-do, Jindo, isolated from soil sediments in a reservoir, June 2021, B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, W2004 (holotype NNIBRFG35176, ex-type culture NNIBRFG35150); Jeollabuk-do, Wanju, isolated from leaf litter in a stream, May 2018, ditto, W604; Jeollabuk-do, Imsil, isolated from water in a stream, Sept. 2018, ditto, W693 & W695; Jeollanam-do, Damyang, isolated from the algae in a stream, Jan. 2021, ditto, W1522, W1523 and W1524; Gyeongsangbuk-do, Yeongju, isolated from leaf litter in a stream, May 2021, ditto, W1952; Jeollanam-do, Jindo, isolated from leaf litter in a reservoir, June 2021, ditto, W2005.

      GenBank numbers – W2004: ITS = PP812186, cox1 = PP798894, cox2 = PP834399; W604: ITS = PP812161, cox1 = PP798437, cox2 = PP834379; W693: ITS = PP812164, cox1 = PP798451, cox2 = PP834381; W695: ITS = PP812165, cox1 = PP798452, cox2 = PP834382; W1522: ITS = PP812171, cox1 = PP798741, cox2 = PP834386; W1523: ITS = PP812172, cox1 = PP798742, cox2 = PP834387; W1524: ITS = PP812173, cox1 = PP798743, cox2 = PP834388; W1952: ITS = PP812176, cox1 = PP798858, cox2 = PP834391; W2005: ITS = PP812187, cox1 = PP798895, cox2 = PP834400.

      Notes – Morphological and physiological characters of Pythium intricatum are listed in Table 7 for comparison with those of phylogenetically related species. Filamentous sporangia of Py. intricatum are strongly inflated or lobulated. They often produce toruloid complexes or dendroid structures. The hyphal swellings of Py. intricatum were formed only on the terminal portion of hyphae. The ITS, cox1, and cox2 sequences of W2004 are close to the sequences of unclassified Pythium sp. AL-2010 (NCBI taxonomy ID 907948; specimen-voucher P8201, P8204) and MNS-2013 (NCBI taxonomy ID 1383453; strain ABDN_66 and isolate VN851a) with 96%–98% similarity in the BLASTn search.

      Table 7.  Comparison of Py. intricatum with morphologically and phylogenetically related species (n.a. = not available).

      Character Pythium intricatum Pythium flevoense Pythium rishiriense Pythium inflatum Pythium aquatile
      Colony Chrysanthemum patterns on PDA and V8A, very faint striate pattern on CMA Chrysanthemum pattern on PDA and CMA Rosette petaloid on PDA, vaguely petaloid on V8A Radiate pattern on PCA, slightly radiate pattern on CMA Rosette pattern on PCA and CMA
      Growth rate 10.5 mm per day at 25 °C on PDA
      10.5 mm per day at 25 °C on V8A
      8.5 mm per day at 25 °C
      on CMA
      10 mm per day at 25 °C
      on CMA
      16 mm per day at 25 °C on PCA 20 mm per day at 25 °C on CMA 17 mm per day at 25 °C on PCA
      Hyphal swellings Present. Hyphal bodies, terminal, (sub-)globose Absent Absent n.a. Absent
      Sporangia Filamentous, strongly inflated, lobulated, forming toruloid complexes or dendroid structures. Filamentous, not-inflated Filamentous, inflated Filamentous, inflated, forming irregular or globose outgrowths Filamentous or slightly inflated, forming rectangular, dendroid structures
      Oogonia Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, 17–27 (av. 22 ± 3) μm diameter Smooth, mostly terminal on short side branches of feather-like hyphae, 17–30 (av. 19) µm diameter Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, sometimes in a chain, av. 24.3 μm diameter Smooth, globose, terminal or intercalary, 19–27 (av. 22.5) μm diameter Oogonia globose, smooth, terminal or less often intercalary, but frequently clustering in small groups, 19–23 (av. 21 µm) diameter
      Antheridia Monoclinous or diclinous, 1–2 per oogonium, antheridial cells globose, clavate or encircling an oogonium Diclinous, one to several per oogonium, antheridial stalks mostly bifurcate or differently branched near the oogonium 1–2(–5) per oogonium, monoclinous or diclinous, terminal on branched stalk, rarely intercalary, clavate or
      crook-necked, hypogynous
      1–2 per oogonium, diclinous One, rarely two per oogonium, monoclinous, originating from the oogonial stalk at 2–10 µm or more below the oogonium, or from the parent hypha
      Oospores Aplerotic or plerotic, globose, 15–26 (av. 20.5 ± 3) µm diameter Aplerotic, occasionally nearly plerotic, 14–24
      (av. 17.7) µm diameter
      Mostly plerotic, av. 21.8 μm diameter Plerotic, 18–25 (av. 21.5) µm diameter Aplerotic, 16–19 (av. 17.9) µm diameter
      Cardinal growth temperature (minimum/optimum/
      maximum temperature)
      5/25/30 °C 5/25/35 °C 5/35/42 °C 5/30/37 °C 5/25/35 °C
      Ref. This study Van der Plaats-Niterink[155] Rahman et al.[82] Van der Plaats-Niterink[150] Höhnk[158]

      Pythium fluminis B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, sp. nov. Fig. 13

      Figure 13. 

      Colony patterns and morphology of Pythium fluminis W1962. Cultural characteristics of (a) PDA, (b) V8A, (c) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (1: observed view and 2: reverse view). (d)–(v) Microscopic structures observed under a microscope: (d) filamentous, inflated sporangium, (e)–(r) clavate, (sub-)globose, ovoid or peanut-shaped, sometimes catenulate hyphal swellings, (s), (t) globose oogonia (u), (v) with antheridia (scale bars: d–p = 10 μm, q–v = 20 μm).

      MycoBank number: MB861146; Facesoffungi number: FoF18864

      Etymology – Name refers to the isolation of the type strain from a lowland river (flumen Latin = river).

      Main hyphae up to 7 µm wide. Sporangia were filamentous and inflated. The hyphal swellings were observed to be irregularly swollen. Hyphal swellings were clavate, (sub-)globose, rarely ovoid or peanut-shaped, and produced terminally or intercalary. Chlamydospores were not observed. Oogonia were globose and had a smooth wall. Oogonial diameter averaged 15 ± 3 µm with an overall range of 11–22 µm. Oospores were aplerotic or plerotic, and globose, ranging in size from 9.5–20 µm (av. 14 ± 3 µm) in diameter with a wall 0.5–2.5 (av. 1.7) µm thick. Antheridia were monoclinous and paragynous. Antheridial cells were clavate, bell-shaped, or with a wide contact with the oogonium.

      Culture characteristics – Colonies showed a rosaceous pattern on PDA, a chrysanthemum pattern on V8A, and an irregular pattern on CMA. Radial growth rates on PDA, V8A, and CMA at 25 °C were 12.5, 14.5, and 10.5 mm/d, respectively. On V8A, minimum, optimum, and maximum growth temperatures were 5, 30, and 40 °C, respectively.

      Material examined – Korea, Jeollanam-do, Haenam, isolated from soil sediments in a river, June 2021, B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, W1962 (holotype NNIBRFG35174, ex-type culture NNIBRFG35148); Jeollanam-do, Haenam, isolated from soil sediments in a river, June 2021, ditto, W1966; Jeollanam-do, Haenam, isolated from marsh snail in a river, June 2021, ditto, W1968 & W1972; Jeollanam-do, Muan, isolated from leaf litter in a river, June 2021, ditto, W1995.

      GenBank numbers – W1962: ITS = PP812177, cox1 = PP798860, cox2 = PP834392; W1966: ITS = PP812178, cox1 = PP798863, cox2 = PP834393; W1968: ITS = PP812179, cox1 = PP798865, cox2 = PP834394; W1972: ITS = PP812180, cox1 = PP798869, cox2 = PP834395; W1995: ITS = PP812182, cox1 = PP798886, cox2 = PP834396.

      Notes – Morphological and physiological characters of Pythium fluminis are compared with those of a phylogenetically close new taxon, Py. aquaticum, but also related to Py. catenulatum, Py. rhizo-oryzae, Py. rishiriense, and Py. torulosum (Table 5). Optimum and maximum growth temperatures of these species, including Py. fluminis and Py. aquaticum are 30 and 40 °C, respectively. Py. fluminis produces diverse shapes of hyphal bodies: (sub-)globose, ovoid, peanut-shaped, and catenulate. In cox1 Py. rishiriense is closest to Py. fluminis with a 97% similarity in the BLASTn search; however, it does not produce hyphal swellings. The ITS sequences of Py. fluminis displayed similarities of 98%–99% to phylogenetically related species, but cox1 sequences exhibited a 4%–5% genetic distance.

      Pythium vigens B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, sp. nov. Fig. 14

      Figure 14. 

      Colony patterns and morphology of Pythium vigens W2006. Cultural characteristics of (a) PDA, (b) V8A, (c) CMA, after 72 h at 25 °C (1: observed view and 2: reverse view). (d)–(v) Microscopic structures observed under a microscope: (d), (e) filamentous slightly inflated structures, (f)–(q) intercalary, cylindrical, (sub-)globose, ovoid or peanut-shaped hyphal swellings, (n) rarely catenulate, (r)–(v) globose oogonia (scale bars: d–q = 10 μm, r–v = 20 μm).

      MycoBank number: MB861147; Facesoffungi number: FoF18865

      Etymology – Name refers to the rapid growth of the colonies (vigens Latin = being strong, vital).

      Main hyphae up to 6 µm wide. Hyphal filamentous inflated structures. (Sub-)globose, ovoid, or peanut-shaped, rarely, catenulate hyphal swellings were produced terminally or intercalary. Sporangia and chlamydospores were not observed. Oogonia had smooth walls, were globose, and produced terminally or intercalary. Oogonial diameter averaged 23 ± 1 µm with an overall range of 21–26 µm. Oospores were aplerotic and globose, ranging in size from 13–16 µm (av. 15 ± 1 µm) in diameter with a wall 0.5–1.2 (av. 1) µm thick. Antheridia were absent or encircling an oogonium, showing undefined shapes.

      Culture characteristics – Colonies showed a faint striate to radiate patterns on PDA, V8A, and CMA. Radial growth rates on PDA, V8A, and CMA at 25 °C were 22, 28.5, and 20 mm/d, respectively. On V8A, minimum, optimum, and maximum growth temperatures were 5, 25, and 35 °C, respectively.

      Material examined – Korea, Jeollanam-do, Jindo, isolated from leaf litter in a reservoir, June 2021, B. Nam & Y.J. Choi, W2006 (holotype NNIBRFG35177 ex-type culture NNIBRFG 35151); Jeollabuk-do, Iksan, isolated from the weed in a reservoir, June 2020, ditto, W1298 & W1300; Jeollanam-do, Jindo, isolated from the leaf litter in a reservoir, June 2021, ditto, W2007, W2008, and W2011.

      GenBank numbers – W2006: ITS = PP812188, cox1 = PP798896, cox2 = PP834401; W1298: ITS = PP812167, cox1 = PP798625, cox2 = PP834384; W1300: ITS = PP812168, cox1 = PP798626, cox2 = PP834385; W2007: ITS = PP812189, cox1 = PP798897, cox2 = PP834402; W2008: ITS = PP812190, cox1 = PP798898, cox2 = PP834403; W2011: ITS = PP812191, cox1 = PP798901, cox2 = PP834404.

      Notes – Morphological and physiological characters of Pythium vigens are listed in Table 6 for comparison with those of phylogenetically close species, including Py. chlamydosporum. Hyphal swellings with diverse shapes were abundantly observed. Growth rate of Py. vigens is higher than phylogenetically close species, and fastest on V8A at 25 °C (28.5 mm/d). The ITS, cox1, and cox2 sequences of Py. vigens differed from those of the closest related species with sequence similarities of 95%–97%.

    • A wide and diverse range of species from the genus Pythium Pringsheim (nom. cons.) sensu lato (s.l.) were found in the present study. Recently, a phylogenomic investigation conducted by Nguyen et al.[149] supported splitting up the genus of Pythium s.l. into five distinct genera, namely Elongisporangium, Globisporangium, Phytopythium (= Ovatisporangium), Pilasporangium, and Pythium sensu stricto (s.s.), proposed by Uzuhashi[148] based on an earlier phylogenetic analysis. The division of Pythium s.l. was validated by the cox1 tree of the present study (Supplementary Fig. S1), in which the phylogenetic relationship among the newly proposed genera was unraveled. Of Pythium s.l., Globisporangium, Phytopythium, and Pythium s.s. were widely distributed in freshwater habitats of Korea. These genera are probably ubiquitous in freshwater ecosystems; they are underrepresented so far. In particular, Pythium s.s. was the most frequently isolated genus from diverse substrates such as algae, animals, plants, soil, as well as water, and was found in all seasons in the present study. Some species in this genus have been well-known due to their pathogenicity, e.g., Py. aphanidermatum, Py. catenulatum, Py. deliense, and Py. dissotocum to crops[161163], Py. chondricola and Py. porphyrae to algae[43,164], and Py. insidiosum to mammals[165]. However, most strains of Pythium s.s. obtained in the present study inhabited plant litter, and their pathogenicity remains unknown. Previous research also reported that a diverse range of Pythium s.s. spp. inhabits plants, soil, and water in freshwater ecosystems[95,99,166]. In conclusion, it is likely that the species from this group perform a role as saprophytes in freshwater ecosystems. Masigol et al.[125,167] determined the enzymatic capacity of aquatic Saprolegniales as well as their involvement in humic substances mineralization and processing, but the role of other groups remain obscure. As shown in Table 1, pathogenic oomycetes of fishes, amphibians, and algae have been investigated primarily so far, leading to an underestimation of saprotrophic oomycetes. Various species were isolated and reported also from plants, soil, and water (Table 1), but their ecological features have not been studied. Further investigation is imperative for future research to determine the role of oomycete saprophytes in biogeochemical and ecological processes in freshwater ecosystems.

      Previously, clades A–D of Pythium s.l. have merged into Pythium s.s.[143,148,149], and the presence of filamentous sporangia is their common trait. This group appears to be associated with aquatic habitats. For instance, Py. adhaerens, Py. chondricola, and Py. porphyrae in clade A originate from marine algae, Py. biforme, Py. brachiatum, Py. junctum, Py. subutonaiense, and Py. utonaiense in clade B from freshwater environment[99,105], and Py. grandisporangium and Py. insidiosum in clade C from reed and seawater[143]. In the present study, Clade B showed the highest number of isolates and the largest number of taxa: ca. 95% of total strains of Pythium s.s. and 40 taxa. Moreover, we described six newly encountered species belonging to clade B of Pythium s.s., i.e., Py. aculeatum, Py. aquaticum, Py. chlamydosporum, Py. intricatum, Py. fluminis and Py. vigens. In addition, the other seven taxa are potential new species of Pythium s.s. also belonged to clade B. These taxa were isolated mainly from plant sources. Considering these factors, it is conceivable that freshwater plants or organic materials may harbor a greater diversity of clade B of Pythium s.s.

      Genus Phytopythium was also prominently identified in the current study. All eight Phytopythium species were detected in the sampled plant sources, which mainly consisted of plant litter. The findings validate freshwater environments as suitable habitats for these organisms, along with Pythium s.s.[87,168]. Two novel species of Phytopythium were also described in the present study: Pp. minutum and Pp. lacustre. Phytopythium was originally classified in clade K of Pythium s.l.[143], but introduced to separate it from other groups of Pythium s.l. by Bala et al.[169] and de Cock et al.[170], and by Uzuhashi et al.[148] under the synonymous name Ovatisporangium. The members of Phytopythium produce globose to ovoid papillate sporangia, unlike Pythium s.s.[169], and further subdivided into three phylogenetic clades[171]. Our novel species, Pp. minutum and Pp. lacustre, belongs to the clade 1 sensu Baten et al.[171] and de Cock[170]. Pp. minutum formed a monophyletic group with Pp. citrinum and Pp. delawarense. Pp. lacustre is close to Pp. iriomotense. Their sister species have also been previously reported from freshwater ecosystems[52,93].

      Various Globisporangium species were also found in this study; however, they were absent from the plant samples. For instance, G. macrosporum, G. sylvaticum, and G. ultimum (= Pythium ultimum var. ultimum), known for their aggressiveness to certain plant species[150,172,173], were exclusively recovered from soil and/or water samples in the present study. The greater part of the genus Globisporangium was found in soil sediments. The absence of Globisporangium species in the plant sources prompts further investigation. It is plausible that these oomycete species exhibit a preference for young or actively growing plants[150], in contrast to the plant litter used as the plant substrate in this study.

      Our study found congeners of Saprolegniales: Achlya, Aphanomyces, Geolegnia, Leptolegnia, and Saprolegnia. This group preferred to inhabit plant-derived sources, although they were found from diverse substrates, including algae, animals, plants, soil, and water. However, two species, namely Achlya bisexualis and Saprolegnia australis, were isolated only from animal sources, such as fishes and marsh snails. Overall, Saprolegniales is strongly associated with animal sources such as amphibians, crustaceans, fishes, and mosquitoes, which is in line with previous research. (Table 1). Previous studies have frequently reported that the Saprolegniales group, including, Achlya, Aphanomyces, as well as Saprolegnia, are commonly isolated from fish and crustaceans and are often considered potential pathogens[39,41,133,174,175]. Notorious pathogens belonging to Saprolegniales are responsible for high-profile declines in aquatic animals and cause economic damage to aquaculture. As our research primarily involved sampling from plants, soil, and water, where non-pathogenic strains are more likely to occur, Saprolegniales taxa frequently reported in host-associated studies were rarely detected in the present study. However, in our survey, which included amphibian and fish samples, the pathogenic species frequently reported in previous studies were indeed found to be more frequently isolated from these animal-associated samples: Achlya bisexualis, Saprolegnia australis, S. diclina, and S. ferax. Based on the findings of this study, future research should aim to include a greater diversity of host organisms, particularly animal-associated samples, to comprehensively compare oomycete communities across host types. This will contribute to a more complete understanding of host-oomycete interactions and ecology in freshwater ecosystems.

      In general, the saprotrophic oomycetes inhabiting freshwater have, until recently, received less attention. However, diverse plant pathogenic species of the genus Phytophthora have been reported from freshwater ecosystems[1219]. In the present study, only three Phytophthora taxa have been found, which is much lower than the diversity found in previous freshwater surveys. All three taxa are mainly aquatic saprophytes, and primarily plant pathogenic species were missing. Previous studies obtained various species of Phytophthora from the streams and rivers using leaf baiting approaches or selective agar with hymexazol, which restricts the quick-growing Pythiales group. The study of Perez-Sierra et al.[176] and Jung et al.[16,66] established the methods for sampling and isolation of Phytophthora. For Phytophthora isolations from sediment and water samples, a baiting approach along with selective agar with hymexazol would have been needed. Given the broad scope of this study, the methodology was designed to capture overall oomycete diversity rather than to maximize the detection of specific groups. Consequently, some taxa, especially those requiring specialized isolation or detection techniques, may have been underrepresented. Previous metagenomic studies have revealed an exceptionally high Phytophthora diversity in freshwater environments[21,177], suggesting that many Phytophthora taxa remain undiscovered in Korea. This reinforces the need for follow-up studies that employ more targeted and diverse isolation strategies, which are likely to uncover additional Phytophthora groups beyond those identified in the present study.

      Our extensive and long-term surveys have garnered noteworthy insights into an unexplored area of freshwater oomycetes that have gained less attention so far than terrestrial oomycete groups. This study contributes to our knowledge of the diversity of freshwater oomycetes and attempts to understand ecological features. In addition, we suggested that the saprotrophic oomycetes have been underestimated and poorly studied, despite their crucial role in decomposing and recycling organic materials in aquatic ecosystems. Our results highlight the need for targeted research into the specific ecological roles of oomycetes in freshwater environments. Employing selective isolation techniques and integrating culture-independent approaches such as metagenomics may help uncover functionally significant or currently unculturable oomycete taxa. These approaches could contribute to a more complete understanding of host-oomycete interactions and ecological roles in freshwater ecosystems.

      • This study was supported by the Nakdonggang National Institute of Biological Resources (NNIBR) (Grant No. NNIBR20261103). The authors thank Professor Jaime Blair (Department of Biology, Franklin & Marshall College) for providing oomycete strain data and related background information.

      • The authors confirm contributions to the paper as follows: study conception and design: Nam B, Choi YJ; data collection: Nam B, Na DH, Lee JS; analysis and interpretation of results: Nam B, Bennett RM, Tojo M; writing − original draft manuscript preparation: Nam B; writing − review and editing: Bennett RM, Tojo M, Choi YJ, Lee HB, Mun HY, Kang KH; supervision: Choi YJ, Lee HB; project administration, funding acquisition: Lee HB, Mun HY. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

      • All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

      • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

      • Supplementary Table S1 Strain information and collection details.
      • Supplementary Fig. S1 Phylogenetic tree of Peronosporales and Pythiales species from the minimum evolution analysis based on cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (cox1) mtDNA sequences.
      • Supplementary Fig. S2 Phylogenetic tree of Saprolegniales species from the minimum evolution analysis based on internal transcribed spacer (ITS) rDNA sequences.
      • Supplementary Taxonomy S1 Descriptions of Oomycota species previously unrecorded in Korea Freshwater samples, including algae, animal debris, plant litter, soil sediment, and water, were collected from various freshwater environments in Korea. B. Nam and Y.J. Choi collected samples, from which B. Nam isolated pure oomycete cultures.
      • Copyright: © 2026 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/.
    Figure (14)  Table (7) References (177)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Nam B, Bennett RM, Tojo M, Na DH, Lee JS, et al. 2026. Uncovering the hidden diversity of oomycetes (Straminipila) in freshwater environments. Mycosphere 17: e006 doi: 10.48130/mycosphere-0026-0006
    Nam B, Bennett RM, Tojo M, Na DH, Lee JS, et al. 2026. Uncovering the hidden diversity of oomycetes (Straminipila) in freshwater environments. Mycosphere 17: e006 doi: 10.48130/mycosphere-0026-0006

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return