Erysiphaceae
family of fungi
Erysiphaceae (commonly known as powdery mildews) is a family of ascomycete fungi in the order Helotiales. The members of this family are obligate parasites with a superficial mycelium that forms a characteristic white, powdery coating on their host plants.
The family contains seventeen genera and around a thousand species. Combined they infect over 10,000 species of plants, many of which are commercially valuable.
Description
Powdery mildews exist in two states, the asexual anamorph state reproducing by means of conidia, and the sexual teleomorph state reproducing by means of ascospores produced in asci developing in more or less spherical chasmothecia. The ripe spores become detached and are readily dispersed by the wind, causing fresh infection. The usually conspicuous whitish mycelium and conidiophores on leaves, and sometimes on stems, fruits or even petals, are what is generally seen first. The chasmothecia are usually visible to the naked eye and turn from translucent or yellow-orange to purple or black. They are produced on the mycelium later in the season, though may be absent. Upon reaching maturity the chasmothecia may develop hair‐like appendages that may branch in characteristic ways.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Erysiphaceae” as family of fungi. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as family of fungi. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 24, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1755354. The Library of Congress control number is sh85044738. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Erysiphaceae”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Erysiphaceae primary sources, Erysiphaceae archive and Erysiphaceae research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Erysiphaceae”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Erysiphaceae” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.