Besides a diffuse research activity on drug discovery and biodiversity carried out in natural contexts, more recently, investigations concerning endophytic fungi have started considering their occurrence in crops based on the major role that these microorganisms have been recognized to play in plant protection and growth promotion. Fruit growing is particularly involved in this new wave, by reason that the pluriannual crop cycle likely implies a higher impact of these symbiotic interactions. Aspects concerning occurrence and effects of endophytic fungi associated with citrus species are revised in the present paper.Agriculture 2019, 9, 247 2 of 13 similar but fast-growing, and producing conidia embedded within a thicker mucoid sheath [4][5][6][7][8]. The latter, characterized as a different species (Phyllosticta capitalensis), are known to be ubiquitous as endophytes in woody plants, having been reported from at least 70 botanical families [6,9,10]. Guignardia endophyllicola, treated as a separate species in a work also emphasizing its widespread endophytic occurrence [11], is at present recognized as a synonym. Differences between the two sister species also concern their metagenetic cycle. In fact, it has been ascertained that P. citricarpa is heterothallic, while P. capitalensis is homothallic [8]. This consolidated taxonomic distinction supports the exclusion from quarantine measures of plant material harbouring P. capitalensis. To this purpose, several rapid PCR assays have been developed [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. The applicative use of these assays has enabled to exclude the presence of the pathogen in New Zealand, unlike what was previously assumed [21], and has supported the hypothesis of the possible endophytic occurrence of P. citricarpa in asymptomatic Citrus spp., as pointed out by several investigations (Table 1). Moreover, the two species have been clearly differentiated on account of their enzymatic profiles, with a higher expression of amylases, endoglucanases, and pectinases in P. citricarpa, suggesting a likely involvement of these enzymes in the pathogenic aptitude of the CBS agent [22]. Differences in terms of pathogenesis-related proteins have been confirmed after the genome sequencing of the two species, disclosing a higher number of coding sequences in P. citricarpa (15,206 versus 14,797). Such a difference has been interpreted considering the presence of growth and developmental genes involved in the expression of pathogenicity [23].The issue of detection of contaminated material imported from areas where the pathogen is endemic has also prompted investigations concerning the assortment of Phyllosticta spp. able to colonize citrus plants in either symptomatic or latent courses. Several revisions have been published [17,24], and novel species characterized, which consistently enlarge the citrus-associated consortium within this widespread genus. Particularly, the pathogenic P. citriasiana from south-east Asia [25], P. citrichinaensis from China [26], P. citrimaxima from Thailand...