Dear Gabriel ,

RNA Sequencing Will Be The Best Way To Identify .

27F Primer Can Be Used .

Regards

Aamir 

Hi: you can use sequencing for ITS reign . 

Yes DNA squensing I think is best method for  fungus identification. You can also  inducing sporulation then making slide culture and identify  it. 

Dear Gabriel,

Based on the pictures, it is quite difficult. You need to carry out some molecular and morphological work.

Perform PCR that amplify ITS1-2 region, especially if it is for publication. Use PCR primers ITS1 and ITS4 and send the PCR product for DNA sequencing. Once you receive the sequence make on-line BLAST searches towards the data bases NCBI and UNITE (it focus on the identification of various fungi, including Ascomycetes such as Acremonium spp.). Based on what you BLAST searches gives, lets say it shows similarity to Acremonium spp., then find other typical primers (e.g. elongation factor alpha a primers) that are used for correct identification (often required these days) at the species level. You can find the additional primers by looking at similar publication records of your similar search findings. In case this work it is for publication, you definitely would need multi-locus sequencing for best possible identification and it can also be used for further phylogenetic relationship and evolutionary work.

Again, based on the similarity searches you can see what other articles perform of experiments to make morphological characteristic of the giving fungus. In this way you can induce sporulation, macrocondia, sexual stage formation and etc. in best possible manner.

Good luck,

Daniel

microscopy and culture characteristics are no longer adequate for identification of conidial fungi. Seek molecular identification.

Identification of this organism should be based on both, morphological and PCR-based techniques. Based on morphological characteristics you should be able to identify this fungus at least at genus level, that would help to select the apropriate PCR-based techique (i.e., DNA region, primers, etc) for a reliable identification at species level

I do not agree with Osemwegie saying that microscopy and culture characteristics are not adequate for identification of conidial fungi. There are many identification failures in GeneBank, som much as 20% of the imputs. There are too many unnamed sequences whose source could have been identified by traditional fungal taxonomists.

But one has to take good microscopical pictures. I agreee that Acremonium is a good candidate for most of the pictures shown here. But the last picture could show sympodial conidiogenesis, and not a phialide. Is this right? Then Sporothrix could also be a candidate.

I always combine both micro and macroscopic characterization with molecular biology for more confident results. Usually I use ITS4 and ITS5 primers.