David L. Hawksworth

Global species numbers of fungi: are tropical studies and molecular approaches contributing to a more robust estimate?

Recent estimates of the global species numbers of fungi suggest that the much-used figure of 1.5 million is low, and figures up to 5.1 million have been proposed in the last few years. Data emerging from tropical studies, and from large-scale sequencing of environmental samples, have the potential to contribute towards a more robust figure. Additional evidence of species richness is coming from long-term studies of particular non-tropical sites, and also from molecular phylogenetic studies revealing extensive cryptic speciation. However, uncertainties remain over fungus:plant species ratios and how they should be extrapolated to the global scale, and also as to the geographical distribution of fungi known only as sequences. Also unclear is the extent to which figures should be modified to allow for insect-associated fungi. The need for comprehensive studies, especially in the tropics, to address the uncertainties used in past extrapolations, is stressed. For the present, it is recommended that the phrase “at least 1.5, but probably as many as 3 million” be adopted for general use until some of the current uncertainties are resolved.

The Genera of Fungi: fixing the application of type species of generic names.

To ensure a stable platform for fungal taxonomy, it is of paramount importance that the genetic application of generic names be based on their DNA sequence data, and wherever possible, not morphology or ecology alone. To facilitate this process, a new database, accessible at www.GeneraofFungi.org (GoF) was established, which will allow deposition of metadata linked to holo-, lecto-, neo- or epitype specimens, cultures and DNA sequence data of the type species of genera. Although there are presently more than 18 000 fungal genera described, we aim to initially focus on the subset of names that have been placed on the “Without-prejudice List of Protected Generic Names of Fungi” (see IMA Fungus 4(2): 381–443, 2013). To enable the global mycological community to keep track of typification events and avoid duplication, special MycoBank Typification identfiers (MBT) will be issued upon deposit of metadata in MycoBank. MycoBank is linked to GoF, thus deposited metadata of generic type species will be displayed in GoF (and vice versa), but will also be linked to Index Fungorum (IF) and the curated RefSeq Targeted Loci (RTL) database in GenBank at the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). This initial paper focuses on eight genera of appendaged coelomycetes, the type species of which are neo- or epitypified here: Bartalinia (Bartalinia robillardoides; Amphisphaeriaceae, Xylariales), Chaetospermum (Chaetospermum chaetosporum, incertae sedis, Sebacinales), Coniella (Coniella fragariae, Schizoparmaceae, Diaporthales), Crinitospora (Crinitospora pulchra, Melanconidaceae, Diaporthales), Eleutheromyces (Eleutheromyces subulatus, Helotiales), Kellermania (Kellermania yuccigena, Planistromataceae, Botryosphaeriales), Mastigosporium (Mastigosporium album, Helotiales), and Mycotribulus (Mycotribulus mirabilis, Agaricales). Authors interested in contributing accounts of individual genera to larger multi-authored papers to be published in IMA Fungus, should contact the associate editors listed below for the major groups of fungi on the List of Protected Generic Names for Fungi.

Phacidium and Ceuthospora (Phacidiaceae) are congeneric: taxonomic and nomenclatural implications

The morphologically diverse genus Ceuthospora has traditionally been linked to Phacidium sexual morphs via association, though molecular or cultural data to confirm this relationship have been lacking. The aim of this study was thus to resolve the relationship of these two genera by generating nucleotide sequence data for three loci, ITS, LSU and RPB2. Based on these results, Ceuthospora is reduced to synonymy under the older generic name Phacidium. Phacidiaceae (currently Helotiales) is suggested to constitute a separate order, Phacidiales (Leotiomycetes), as sister to Helotiales, which is clearly paraphyletic. Phacidiaceae includes Bulgaria, and consequently the family Bulgariaceae becomes a synonym of Phacidiaceae. Several new combinations are introduced in Phacidium, along with two new species, P. pseudophacidioides, which occurs on Ilex and Chamaespartium in Europe, and Phacidium trichophori, which occurs on Trichophorum cespitosum subsp. germanicum in The Netherlands. The generic name Allantophomopsiella is introduced to accommodate A. pseudotsugae, a pathogen of conifers, while Gremmenia is resurrected to accommodate the snow-blight pathogens of conifers, G. abietis, G. infestans, and G. pini-cembrae.

The application of the name Xylaria hypoxylon, based on Clavaria hypoxylon of Linnaeus *

Although Xylaria hypoxylon is one of the most familiar fungi of temperate regions, the basionym of the name, Clavaria hypoxylon of Linnaeus, has remained untypified. Here we assess the original five elements included in the 1753 protologue; no candidate specimen was located but two illustrations Linnaeus cited were considered, one a mixture of species and the other fanciful. As the name is sanctioned, following clarifications in the Melbourne Code, elements cited by Fries when the name was sanctioned in 1823 are also candidates for lectotypification. In addition to various illustrations, Fries cites two exsiccatae, and one from his own Scleromycetes Suecicae distributed in 1821 is designated as lectotype for Linnaeus’ name here. In view of the complexity of the group as revealed by molecular systematic work, and the poor state of the Fries material, we also designate a sequenced epitype from Sweden. We stress the importance of examining fungi in the complex in the sexual state, as those that are asexual can be difficult to identify conclusively. Figures of the original protologues and the most pertinent illustrations and specimens are provided, along with a detailed description and illustrations based on recent collections.

2. The Amsterdam Declaration on fungal nomenclature

The Amsterdam Declaration on Fungal Nomenclature was agreed at an international symposium convened in Amsterdam on 19-20 April 2011 under the auspices of the International Commission on the Taxonomy of Fungi (ICTF). The purpose of the symposium was to address the issue of whether or how the current system of naming pleomorphic fungi should be maintained or changed now that molecular data are routinely available. The issue is urgent as mycologists currently follow different practices, and no consensus was achieved by a Special Committee appointed in 2005 by the International Botanical Congress to advise on the problem. The Declaration recognizes the need for an orderly transition to a single-name nomenclatural system for all fungi, and to provide mechanisms to protect names that otherwise then become endangered. That is, meaning that priority should be given to the first described name, except where there is a younger name in general use when the first author to select a name of a pleomorphic monophyletic genus is to be followed, and suggests controversial cases are referred to a body, such as the ICTF, which will report to the Committee for Fungi. If appropriate, the ICTF could be mandated to promote the implementation of the Declaration.

Fungal Nomenclature at IMC10: Report of the Nomenclature Sessions.

Three Nomenclature Sessions were convened during the 10th International Mycological Congress (IMC10) in Bangkok on 3–8 August 2014. In addition a Questionnaire was given to all delegates. This Report reviews and summarizes the views expressed in the Sessions and in the responses to the Questionnaire. The issues covered related to aspects of: registration, protected names, forgotten names, pleomorphic fungi, lichenized fungi, typification, diagnoses, and governance. In addition, reports were received from working groups preparing lists of names to be proposed for protection, and controversial cases of competing names were discussed. The Congress was mandated to ratify decisions of the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi (NCF) on the appointment of repositories for the registration of new fungal names. After discussion in the Sessions on the decision of the NCF to appoint three such bodies, a Resolution to that effect was approved by the Congress. The Congress also adopted a Resolution asking that the opinions of mycologists on future directions for the nomenclature of fungi be taken into account in formulating changes in the rules for consideration at the International Botanical Congress in 2017.

Biodiversity and conservation of insects and other invertebrates

The thematic issue of Biodiversity and Conservation devoted to the biodiversity and conservation of insects and other invertebrates is introduced. The issue comprises 23 original research papers covering diverse habitats from forests to grasslands, ponds and rivers to coasts, and the tropics to boreal regions. Amongst the organisms discussed are ants, bees, beetles, butterflies, crabs, microgastropods, millipedes, spiders, and weevils. Some of the difficulties of conserving the most species-rich groups of eukaryotes, in the face of ignorance as to their identities and positions in ecological processes, are noted and the precautionary principle is seen as a pragmatic and responsible approach.

Fungal nomenclature evolving: changes adopted by the 19th International Botanical Congress in Shenzhen 2017, and procedures for the Fungal Nomenclature Session at the 11th International Mycological Congress in Puerto Rico 2018

This article summarizes the key changes in the rules relating to the nomenclature of fungi made at the XIX International Botanical Congress in Shenzhen, China, in July 2017. Most significant was the decision to transfer decision-making on matters related only to the naming of fungi from International Botanical to International Mycological Congresses (IMCs). The rules relating to fungi are to be grouped together in a separate section of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN). The way in which the Fungal Nomenclature Session will operate at the upcoming IMC in Puerto Rico in 2018 is summarized and the timetable for new proposals is presented. In addition, approval for names included on lists of protected names to be protected against unlisted as well as known competing names were passed, as were some simplifications relating to the naming of pleomorphic fungi. From 1 January 2019, it will also be necessary to deposit details of lecto-, neo-, and epitypifications in one of the recognized repositories of fungal names in order for them to be validly published and to establish their priority. Various aspects relating to typifications were referred to a new Special Committee, with a separate Special Subcommittee charged with addressing the issue of using DNA sequences as types for all groups covered by the ICN. It is anticipated that the Shenzhen Code will be published in the first half of 2018.

Sequence-based nomenclature: a reply to Thines et al. and Zamora et al. and provisions for an amended proposal "from the floor" to allow DNA sequences as types of names

We reply to two recently published, multi-authored opinion papers by opponents of sequence-based nomenclature, namely Zamora et al. (IMA Fungus 9: 167–175,2018) and Thines et al. (IMA Fungus 9: 177–183, 2018). While we agree with some of the principal arguments brought forward by these authors, we address misconceptions and demonstrate that some of the presumed evidence presented in these papers has been wrongly interpreted. We disagree that allowing sequences as types would fundamentally alter the nature of types, since a similar nature of abstracted features as type is already allowed in the Code (Art. 40.5), namely an illustration. We also disagree that there is a high risk of introducing artifactual taxa, as this risk can be quantified at well below 5 %, considering the various types of high-throughput sequencing errors. Contrary to apparently widespread misconceptions, sequence-based nomenclature cannot be based on similarity-derived OTUs and their consensus sequences, but must be derived from rigorous, multiple alignment-based phylogenetic methods and quantitative, single-marker species recognition algorithms, using original sequence reads; it is therefore identical in its approach to single-marker studies based on physical types, an approach allowed by the Code. We recognize the limitations of the ITS as a single fungal barcoding marker, but point out that these result in a conservative approach, with “false negatives” surpassing “false positives”; a desirable feature of sequence-based nomenclature. Sequence-based nomenclature does not aim at accurately resolving species, but at naming sequences that represent unknown fungal lineages so that these can serve as a means of communication, so ending the untenable situation of an exponentially growing number of unlabeled fungal sequences that fill online repositories. The risks are outweighed by the gains obtained by a reference library of named sequences spanning the full array of fungal diversity. Finally, we elaborate provisions in addition to our original proposal to amend the Code that would take care of the issues brought forward by opponents to this approach. In particular, taking up the idea of the Candidatus status of invalid, provisional names in prokaryote nomenclature, we propose a compromise that would allow valid publication of voucherless, sequence-based names in a consistent manner, but with the obligate designation as “nom. seq.” (nomen sequentiae). Such names would not have priority over specimen- or culture-based names unless either epitypified with a physical type or adopted for protection on the recommendation of a committee of the International Commission on the Taxonomy of Fungi following evaluation based on strict quality control of the underlying studies based on established rules or recommendations.

Books on Insect Biodiversity and Conservation

Reviews are provided for four books relevant to the studies on the biodiversity conservation of insects: Insect diversity conservation (Samways 2005), Insect conservation biology (Stewart et al. 2007), Ecology of insects: concepts and applications (Speight et al. 2008, 2nd edn), and Insect conservation: a handbook of approaches and methods (Samways et al. 2009).