This Is the Published Version of a Paper

http://www.diva-portal.org

This is the published version of a paper published in IMA Fungus.

Citation for the original published paper (version of record):

Parra, L A., Zamora, J C. (2018) Proposals for consideration at IMC11 to modify provisions related solely to fungi in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants IMA Fungus, 9(1): I-III

Access to the published version may require subscription.

N.B. When citing this work, cite the original published paper.

Permanent link to this version: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-365266 MYCONAMES (i) : 8

(eds)

th et al. . IMA Fungus David L. Hawksworth David strikethrough International Mycological International th 2007). , provisions solely dealing with solely dealing with , provisions : 1234–1245. et al. 66

[Regnum Vegetabile no. 159.] Königstein: no. Vegetabile [Regnum International Botanical Congress in Shenzhen Shenzhen in BotanicalCongress International th (ICN) at the 11 (ICN) the at Ta xon (McNeill (McNeill Shenzhen Code Shenzhen adopted by the Nineteenth International Botanical Congress Congress Botanical International Nineteenth by the adopted

which is expected to be published in June (Turland (Turland which is expected be to published June in type, and any deleted text in in type, deleted text any and International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants and plants fungi, algae, for of Nomenclature Code International bold Vienna Code Vienna 2018). In the the 2018). In Art. 7.8 established that “typification of names adopted in adoptednames of “typification Art. 7.8 established that evolving: 19 the by changes 11 the at Session Nomenclature Fungal the for procedures 2017, and Rico 2018. Puerto in Mycological Congress International 211–218. on Botanical action Congress: of Congress report International proposals. nomenclature (2018) Code) (Shenzhen 2017. July China, Shenzhen, Botanical Books.Koeltz it is necessary necessary, proposals are these why understand To Note that in the series of proposals that follow, proposed new follow, of proposals that series the in that Note 2 of the 2 of the sanctioned specified(d),Art. works in 13.1 thus of the one and be effectedwith the associated light 15), may in anything (Art. of lectotype is “the that Art. 9.2 indicated work”. that in name the designated as a nomenclatural original material of the element an should be that elements 2 listed the Art. 9 Note Finally, type”. the including explicitly without original material considered they went to press. to they went Redhead nomenclature SA (2017) Fungal DL, TW, May Hawksworth L (2017) XIX Zhang AM, Y-F, Deng JH, Munro Wiersema NJ, Turland DL, Hawksworth FR, W, JH, Barrie Greuter Wiersema NJ, Turland Art. 9 Note 7.8, 9.2 and Arts in prescribed was what understand to and the proposals made here have been checked for confirmation been confirmation checked for have here proposals made the and new the in will appear that wording and precise numbering the with Code Shenzhen et al. as a new together in fungi brought are of organisms treated names onwards. F.1 numbered F” are which Articles in “Chapter is in text as here proposals presented the over looking for May W. gratefulI am Tom to

et al. International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants fungi, algae, for of Nomenclature Code International was advertised as advertised was 2017, Turland 2017, Turland et al. IMA Fungus by 30 April 2018, and a guiding 2018, and mail 30 April by International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants fungi, for algae, of Nomenclature Code International

(2017). The last date for the receiptthe of for date last (2017). The et al. IMA Fungus Accepted: Published: 2018. 1 March; 1 April Author citations, DNA types, ICN, Identifiers, Nomenclature, Sanctioned names, Typification. names, Sanctioned Nomenclature, types, DNA ICN, Identifiers, citations, Author Seven modify proposals to of the provisions the While the Shenzhen edition of the ICN edition of the is not expected Shenzhen While the be to The upcoming FNS will be able to consider any suggested any willupcoming FNS The to be ableconsider This means that proposals to change provisions solely related related solely provisions proposalsto change that This means VOLUME 9 · NO. 1 those that regulate what hierarchy must be followed a choosing in must hierarchy regulate what that those of neotypeslectotype designation the 9.13) or 9.12), the (Art. (Art. of lectotypessuperseding neotypes or 9.19). (Art. context of a sanctioning work (ECSW) work not. or of a sanctioning context original material are application thecorrect for importance is of crucial This clarification is material” “original expression which the in Articles of those as, example, use for of frequent some which are among mentioned, INTRODUCTION the from clarify to elements if the presented proposals are Two CONTEXT OF A SANCTIONING WORK ARE ORIGINAL MATERIAL ARE ORIGINAL WORK SANCTIONING A CONTEXT OF (F-001-002) PROPOSALS TO CLARIFY IF THE ELEMENTS FROM THE CLARIFY (F-001-002) PROPOSALS TO amendments to these sets of proposals during the Session, but no Session, but the of proposals during sets these to amendments forward. be new now put proposalscompletely can been now has finalized text IMC11, before the just published until vote will be made available to the Fungal Nomenclatural Session Nomenclatural Fungal the to available will be made vote July 2018. 19 IMC11 Thursday on be(FNS) to held during An annotated synopsis to guide discussions will then be prepared be guide synopsis to prepared will then annotated discussions An in inclusion for that guiding of results 2018. The 10 June until run ballot will then proposals by the Editor-in-Chief of Editor-in-Chief the proposalsby individual of proposals (seven sets four date, that 2018. By 1 March total)proposalsin been published received, had are here. these and 2018. The procedure and timetable to be followed for making to making be followed timetable for and procedure 2018. The IMC11 proposals to such explained was any dealingand with Hawksworth in 2017). Fungal decision the and fungi forward by to be debate for can put July Rico in (FNS) of IMC11 Session Puerto in Nomenclature Congresses (IMCs) and not International Botanical Congresses Botanical Congresses not International and (IMCs) Congresses in Botanical Congress International (IBCs) the by made was 2017 (Hawksworth July in Shenzhen The decision that all provisions related solely to fungi in the to solely related in fungi allprovisions that The decision and plants fungi algae, for of Nomenclature Code International Mycological International be at amended (ICN) future should in INTRODUCTION Key words: Key words: info: Article citations. A synopsis of the proposals will be provided during April, and the mycological community will be invited to provide a guiding vote up to 10 June 2018. Final 2018. Final a guiding 10 June to up provide to mycological vote will be the and invited community April, proposals will be during A synopsis of the provided citations. of IMC11. Session Nomenclature Fungal the at debate following be to made proposals are these decisions on Congress (IMC11) in July 2018 had been received by the proscribed date of 1 March 2018. These proposals are formally presented together here. The topics addressed The together here. presented formally proposalsare 2018. These of 1 March been date proscribed received 2018 had the by (IMC11) July in Congress of status nomenclatural the of indication the names, sanctioned of the to typification relation in material” “original of the meaning of clarification the to relate author to types,an as possibilityalternative the repository and sequences as of including of DNA identifiers nomenclatural use the citations, author in names sanctioned fungi in the fungi in Abstract: Proposals for consideration at IMC11 to modify provisions related solely to related provisions to modify IMC11 at for consideration Proposals (ii) MYCONAMES

formosa For cannot of rejected. be example, theneotypes neotype the name but was sanctioned, are ifthey material notoriginal such material, many if be previoussuperseded neotypifications should in Moreau done, for example, as selected be could materialoriginal aneotype but are ifthey not selected, notbe could material, aneotype elements lectotype. as included as designated obligately to be but are ifthey material, notoriginal wouldnotbe the ECSW in included thewould be hierarchy ofpriorities alectotype to select or neotypes). (supersession oflectotypes 9.13(conditions or 9.19 for thelectotypes), selection ofaneotype) the different elements of the original materialas be designated to (hierarchyArticles with dealing typification, 9.12 as of Art. such names) previously mentioned, appears in also other crucial 9.4 (definition of original and material), ofsanctioned F.3.9 (type mentioned in important the because concept of“original material”, being besides were,if they the addition “equivalent to” superfluous. wouldbe were material ECSW notoriginal or material; (b) original because, material”original taken be could toare mean that: (a)ECSW a source ofpotential nomenclatural instability. “Equivalent to wording ofNote 9were 4ofArt. constitutes which possible, that interpretations2014), revealed possible two ofthe current for were aname in ECSW available which (Moreauneotype of the An exchange with some members ofthe Editorial Committee BACKGROUND numbering ofprovisions in the new Noteas 2.For in clarity this paper we hereafter will adopt the Note 4retaining this same wording now under moved F.3.9 Art. 9.4ofthe Art. previous become 9.3will Art. work are considered equivalent as to material”. original The materialoriginal and those from the context ofthe sanctioning under 9.10,elements Art. from the context are ofthe protologue of the reference 7.7,7.8,and Art. 9.10)”at the see “(but end 9.3 ofArt. provisionsconsolidated fungal in Chapter F.3.9. Art. Fas withalthough the referenced 9.10having Art. to moved the been retained now in 9.3ofthe Art. the sanctioning treatment (Article 9.10)”. same This wordingbe will among elements with associated either and or both the protologue “For from may selected sanctioned names, be alectotype lectotypes: explicitly indicated in 9.2that Art. as may selected the be ECSW reason why subsequent typifications were with ECSW extremely rare. was likely the may according designated lectotypes, to be 9.2as Art. considered material be original should ECSW or not,and therefore without any explanation or additional remark. sentence, 7.7,second Art. also and see 7.8)” “(but the paragraph and made only abriefECSW citation in parentheses at the end of In 9.19,ifthere Art. are and are they available original ECSW In 9.13,ifthere Art. are and are they available original ECSW In are material, 9.12,ifthe original Art. ECSW these elements The implications of one interpretation or another are Likewise, to make more the explicit meaning ofthe cross Thereafter, in the in the lack of This specificity Melbourne Code Melbourne Code (Pers. :Fr.) (Petersen Quél. due to 1976),was superseded et al et Shenzhen Code . (2014). Melbourne Code , regarding the designation possible ofa “For, aNote names 4was included: falling Art. 9.3 (definition of lectotype), 9.3(definition Art. oflectotype), Shenzhen Code Vienna Code Shenzhen Code (McNeill as to whether as the Shenzhen Code (Turland et al et . 2012), it was . 2012),itwas . et al. et Ramaria Ramaria 2018), 2018), , with et al et . chosen (see Art. 9.4,Notes Art. chosen (see 2and F.3.9, 3,Art. and Note 2for details), set ofspecimens and illustrations may be from alectotype which expression “equivalent to material” original isused. that are material. original ECSW Here, the somewhat ambiguous treatment (Art. F.3.9)” by us]. added [bold withassociated either and the or both thesanctioning protologue states may that from designated be ECSW. alectotype Article 9.13 butamong 9.3 Art. the lectotype for material selection as eligible sentence,second 9.12 wouldnottherefore Art. as include ECSW change in F.3 Art. (Prop. Note necessary F-001below). 2 wouldbe renderedwould be ineffective 9.19).Therefore,(Art. only a minor are when available ECSW selected neotypes (Art. 9.13),and all material”. are available ifECSW designated notbe could Aneotype and uncitedcited illustrations that comprise the remaining original of“uncited in the specimens category wouldfall and 9.12), ECSW nomenclatural stability: are presented with alternatives, two in order to contribute to the Articles between and thediscrepancy Glossary, proposals two whether are material the original ECSW or not,and to avoid any 7.8 and 9.6”. application with ofthe term the current neotype wording ofArts. “It1191 ofthosereconcile isexplanatory: to proposals isdifficult Likewise, the designated. sentence notbe could on page neotype al. et considered material. original In the 8 Proposal Ex. works (Redhead Vienna Code according to 9.3. Art. lectotypes as designated nodoubtthatbe are material theoriginal ECSW may since they be itundermerging Therefore, the definition oflectotype. there should term “sanctiotype”, in proposed Redhead (222) ofPerry (2010),thus avoiding oferecting the necessity the new from the 9.1)”. Art. (see or the holotype definition This been had changed may be selected frommay selected be elements” by “original material”: “For sanctioned names, alectotype the material original for in example, the replacing second, “among are material original ECSW itwould have sufficient been to quote independentin two sentences, when ifitwere considered that the “original material”. association ofECSW, in aclear way, and direct with the expression solutions, grammatical circumlocutions are to prevent used the this instead isbecause, ofresorting to purely nomenclatural reluctance material. to original consider as the We ECSW think aforementioned Note F.3, 2ofArt. there seemsagreat to be stability, itisessential to know are ifthe“original ECSW material”. material.original latter (Franchi &Marchetti were ECSW considered 2016)because from was designated the the and alectotype existence ofECSW Art. 9.12mustArt. then to avoid changed aconflict be with 9.3 Art. Alternative 2inwhich the ECSW would not material. beoriginal In the hierarchical order (Art. ofdesignation ofalectotype However,as material original “the glossary isnow in defined the Note F.3 2ofArt. notindicate does clearly also and directly In 9.3the Art. material original are and the mentioned ECSW From an analysis ofthe wording 9.3and ofArt. the For ofthe above,in all order to contribute to nomenclatural Alternative 1inwhich the ECSW are material. original Taking into account interpret to unequivocally the need Likewise, the Proposals (223-232)to amend the Articles ofthe (2010) it is clear that if ECSW eligible as a type exist, a atype as (2010)itisclear that eligible ifECSW Vienna Code to regulate the to typification regulate of names in sanctioning et al. et to the the 2010) suggest that be should 2010)suggest the ECSW

original material Melbourne Code et al. et [ following the Proposal among elements (2010),and instead ter . of Redhead . ofRedhead IMA FUNGUS ]

(iii) MYCONAMES (ii) MYCONAMES VOLUME 9·NO. 1 works or not(Van Warmelo 1979,Demoulin any competing names, whether were they in included the sanctioning protect names in adopted the former starting-point works against to 1May 1753, the concept ofsanctioned names was introduced to in were 1981and reverted atof fungi abandoned the Sydney IBC When the later starting points for the nomenclature groups ofselected BACKGROUND NOMENCLATURAL STATUS OFSANCTIONED NAMES (F-003-004) PROPOSALSTO SIMPLIFY THEINDICATION OFTHE 9.12, except provided by over as 9.16,9.19(c), Art. precedence aneotype, always takes Alectotype may selected. be aneotype it ismissing, addition to 9.13:“If Art. material nooriginal isextant long or as as Editorial Committee ofthe in due course for theIf necessary be ifwill F-002isaccepted, alternative is an This to Prop F-001. been previously designated for the same name. when no original material is available, except has when aneotype the context of (F-002) Proposal to F.3. amend Art. Note 2asfollows: material.”original the context ofthe sanctioning work are the context ofthe protologue (F-001) Proposal to F.3 amend Art. Note 2asfollows: PROPOSALS sanctioned names that explored. has notyetbeen an interesting lectotypes, as ECSW formula for typification of the application with ofselecting ofthe term the possibility neotype alternative This type. using as aparticular ECSW would reconcile typification wants to doso,for example, if there is any advantage of ifthe authormay lectotype still as designated who be performs the previously one ofthe has designated, been ECSW if noneotype addition to the re-wording in Proposal F-002below. We note that in this alternative, in 9.12and Art. 9.13must Art. changed, be with was designated available ECSW. aneotype which Therefore, contribute to nomenclatural stability, we know as in cases several are available.and 9.19),even ifECSW This interpretation would (Arts. 9.12 superseded and notbe those could designated already (Art. designated 9.13), be could desirable thatbe neotypes new thatfrom ECSW isnotconsidered material. original It appears to ifasubsequent followed be author (9.13) designates alectotype typification 9.19), (Art. not could firstthis designates aneotype must With the followed. be present ifan authora neotype wording, 9.19(c),Art. but 9.19states Art. that the authors who first designate except provided by over as 9.16and Art. new precedence aneotype, a conflict with 9.13 9.19. statesArt. always thattakes alectotype ( must changed also be “ “ Note 2 Note 2 and F. 3.Note 2 . For under names falling F.3.9 Art. . For under names falling F.3.9, Art. asanctioning work may chosen be aslectotype

.” via across reference to 9.12)to Art. avoid Shenzhen Code are material original considered equivalent as to to make the following et al. et , anelement both 1981). This has 1981).This has ” and those from elements from from

Perry G(2010)(215-222)Proposals material. on original Moreau P-A, J-M, Bellanger Clowez P, Hansen Courtecuisse R, K McNeill V, Demoulin J, Buck WR, Barrie FR, Greuter W, McNeill J, Burdet V, Demoulin Barrie HM, FR, Hawksworth DL Franchi P, Marchetti M(2016)Novità nomenclaturali –Nomenclatural REFERENCES Shenzhen Code for adapting the to proposal the numbering new ofthe Articles and Notes ofthe comments useful for his Laboratory) and improvements to this manuscript and We thank John National Wiersema (USDA/ARS Germplasm Resources ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Turland NJ, Wiersema Greuter Barrie JH, W, FR, Hawksworth DL, Pennycook LL, Norvell (2010)(223-232)Proposals SR to amend SA, Redhead Petersen (1976)Contribution RH toward of amonograph mandated into to look later starting issues by the Nomenclatural utilizing the in colon this way had explored by acommittee been aRecommendationas rather than of an Article.possibility The sanctioned status ofnames, in was included the but Sydney Code, at astroke removed for numerous the need conservation proposals. proved amajor to be contribution names, and to theoffungal stability 1 1910. crassipes (2289) Proposal the name to conserve Koeltz ScientificBooks. Melbourne, Australia, July 2011. Code) adopted bythe Eighteenth International Botanical Congress International Code ofnomenclature for algae, fungi, andplants (Melbourne July 2005 adopted bythe Seventeenth International Botanical Congress Vienna, Austria, (2006 Koeltz Books. Botanical Shenzhen, China, July 2017. (Shenzhen Code) (2018) 59 Articles regulating the typification of names in sanctioning works. of Botany sanguinea novelties. The colon, “:”,use ofa in author citations to indicate the special Avenida Padre Claret 7,5ºG,09400Aranda deDuero, Burgos, : 1910 2 Museum ofEvolution, Uppsala University, Norbyvägen 16, ) International Code ofBotanical Nomenclature (Vienna Code) International Code ofNomenclature for algae, fungi, andplants , P. gigas –

. 63 , Rivista di Micologia . 1913. [Regnum Vegetabile no. 146.] Ruggell: A. R. G.Ganter Verlag. R. [Regnum Vegetabile A. no. 146.]Ruggell: R. formosa R. : 309 Corresponding author e-mail: and

– adopted bythe Nineteenth International Botanical Congress 316. P. undosus , and two new species from species Europe. new , and two [Regnum Vegetabile no. 159.]Königstein:

59 ( Luis Parra A. [Regnum Vegetabile no. 154.]Königstein: Ascomycota : 321–327. Morchella semilibera SE-752 36Uppsala, SwedenSE-752 ). axon Ta 1 and Juan C. Zamora [email protected]

63 axon Ta et al. et Ramaria : 677 American Journal

against against

(eds.) (2012) (eds.) 59 – et al. et 678. et al. et : 1909 III. III. et al. et

(2014) axon Ta (eds) (eds) Phallus R. R.

– Spain (eds) (eds)

(iii) MYCONAMES (iv) MYCONAMES

was then into looked by the International Commission on the Shenzhen Code Nicholas Turland (who the was for to the be Rapporteur général sanct.” in formal citations, an alternative that by was supported an alternative and as dropped, be should the proposed use of“nom. that congress, Tom May indicated that hewas convinced the colon In the course ofdiscussions in the Nomenclatural Sessions during names in the concept names ofprotected (Redhead Recommendation ifthis was linked to the inclusion ofsanctioned 2014, when 71.8%ofthose responding favoured deletion ofthe in aquestionnaire attending to mycologists in Bangkok IMC10 in ofauthorpart citations. the ofpublication place ofthe name –never routinely an integral as treatments where reference itisappended afterbibliographic a to restrictedbut generally to presentations offormal taxonomic etc. This way of indicating the status of names isestablished well abbreviations inval.”, “nom. “nom. illegit.”, “nom. cons.”, “nom. rej.”, whereonly and itisconsidered then useful by the use ofthe etc., the status rejected, invalid, isindicated illegitimate, conserved, ofan authora part citation. In other all where cases names are nomenclature where the nomenclatural status ofaname can form Fungorum or nomenclator databases for the names such as offungi Fungi, in adopted editions of been clumsy citations that can result.consequentlycolon The has not have chosen notto use the ofthe because colon confusions and and sosomething many followed, that notbe mycologists need Further,or ofsanctioning. place this isaRecommendation, as to the author original and name notto the sanctioning author date publication, ofvalid andtypification, oftenalso the relate publication and date ofthe names. is This unfortunateas the of the sanctioning work, and notwith the actual ofvalid place author, details, with only mycologists the bibliographic and date Korf (1996),sanctioned names are still by being some cited into the indicated in the current wording of Example 2( worded excessively can be clumsy when correctly as applied, and this has continued asource to be currently ofconfusion, and as recommendations were not,however, to found follow easy to be was quickly prepared how toas proceed by Korf (1982).His the sanctioned name from was moved genus to genus, and guidance practice when the sanctioned name was acombination, or when It appreciated was soon how complex to this apply wouldbe in debate at the Sydney Congress (Greuter &Voss 1982:49–50). but downgraded towas accepted, aRecommendation during the a wording by Holm (Petersen 1981);the ideaofthe notation resulted in to aproposal make the use of“:”mandatory adopting the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi and Lichens,and this not,however, decision was This membersall of by supported in the that proposals came from (Van IMC2 Warmelo 1979). foreseen inherent as in its’ use. It was nottherefore provided for any notation ofthe because complexities and misunderstandings Florida, in 1977,where was considered by the subsequent Congress, in Tampa, IMC2 Congress at (IMC1) Exeter in 1971.The of report thatcommittee Secretariat by the established first International Mycological The suggestion The thatsuggestion discontinuedbe the use of“:” included was notationThis is the only instance in biological the of whole Almost 35years after the introduction of conventionthe the published Code . , and despite provided by the further guidance ); see the report in Redhead the report); see in Redhead

catalogue of fungal names ( offungal catalogue

it was decided notto commendit was decided the use of Ainsworth &Bisby’s ofthe Dictionary et al. et see below (2014).Theissue Index ofFungi et al et . 2014). Index ). ), the nomenclatural status ofthe name of sanctioning in aformaladded citation, with together the citation ofthe place abbreviation “nom. sanct.” (nomen sanctionatum) Pers.” (to indicate the sanctioning author Fries or Persoon) or (F-003) Amend F.3A Rec. asfollows: PROPOSALS with that other for all used indications ofthe status ofaname. bring the expression ofthis form ofnomenclatural status into line by supported and the overwhelming IMC10 ICTF.also This would discontinue the alternative colon in linewith the expressed views at provides additional obfuscation, and are soproposals now made to the current 2017, Turland Hawksworth May TW, DL, (2017)Fungal SA nomenclature Redhead evolving: Hawksworth and enhance (2015)Proposals DL the to clarify naming offungi Greuter W, Voss nomenclature on botanical EG(1982)Report –Sydney 1981. V,Demoulin Hawksworth Korf RP, DL, Pouzar Z(1981)Asolution ofthe REFERENCES citing (Observ. Mycol. 1:51. 1815) when added citingis notto be its basionym sarcocephalus sarcocephalus status indicated can by be citing itas sanctioned when by adopted Fries (Syst. Mycol. 1:290.1821).That nomenclatural status ofthe name. or thereby sanctioned. It as cited can be in1790) was adopted Fries (Syst. Mycol. 1:388.1821)and was F.3A 1and Examples 2in Rec. (F-004) Revise asfollows: indicated by “:Fr.” or “:Pers.” parentheses after the author(s) of basionymthe 49.1). (Art. of asanctioned name, “:Fr.” or “:Pers.” within added the be should combination either on asanctioned based name or on the basionym use of“nom. sanct.” an alternative as to the “:”(Hawksworth were on the divided matter, but instead recommended they the thatfollow primarily suggestion, the because present mycologists (Hawksworth 2015),but the notto Shenzhen Congress decided A formal to proposal make this changewas therefore published supporting the deletion ofthe in colon favour of“nom. sanct.”. Taxonomy with ofFungi 95%ofthe 20 members (ICTF), voting : Fr : [footnote] B. piperatusB. .) Singer (in Lilloa 22:468.1949). Lilloa .) Singer (in F.3A.1. The situation of havingalternatives Recommendation in a changes adopted bychanges adopted the 19 FungusIMA under the Englera starting point problem in the nomenclature offungi. Ex. 2. Ex. 1. subsequent combinations such as

Agaricus compactus Boletus piperatus 1 2 In this Code After asanctioned name (Art. F.3.1), : 1–124. International Code ofNomenclature for algae, fungi, andplants. (Fr.) Fr., sanct. Thedesignation nom. “ (Fr. :Fr.) Fr. :Fr. or Bull., nom. sanct. nom. Bull., if et al et 6 : 199–205;

when it is (Turland Code . 2017) which has now been incorporated has. 2017)which now into been and its Appendices, sanctioning is Taxon th et al. et Bull. (Herb. Bull. 2. France: t.451,fig. considered International Congress Botanical in Shenzhen [unranked] [unranked] and nor to 2018). 64 when it is useful to indicate the A. compactus : 858–862. either either . desirable In aformal citation ofanew Psathyrella sarcocephala

, but it can be added when, but added itcan be sarcocephalus A. compactus B. piperatusB. A. sarcocephalus [unranked] [unranked] useful to indicate axon Ta either “:Fr.” or “: should : Fr : IMA FUNGUS

30 (Fr.) Fr. was nom. sanct.”nom. Bull. :Fr. Bull. [unranked] [unranked] : 52–63.

may may 1 Fr. Fr. et al. et the be be

(Fr.

(v) MYCONAMES (iv) MYCONAMES VOLUME 9·NO. 1 into Rio deJaneiro report to the next IBC in 2023. The rate of in Shenzhen (Hawksworth illustration meant that those names were invalid. Moncada or the an 2017),even though absence ofaphysical type Beer (De on alone sequences names based 2016). Nevertheless, have some mycologists introduced scientific was presented (Hawksworththis need to the Shenzhen IBC in thefungi absence ofany to address specimens aimed which forto names permit DNA of data sequence types as used to be of naming (Redhead such taxa 44 %ofCongress members responding the supported concept attendingmycologists in Bangkok IMC10 in 2014,found that (Hibbett (Hawksworth in the Amsterdam Declaration on Fungal Nomenclature reasons. when nophysical specimen or illustration isavailable for technical for fungi DNA data permissible sequence types be as should alone In addressed. to be needs order to remedy this, we propose that encountered with voucherless environmental data sequence that character diagnostic asole as are acceptable. It isthe situation taxonomy and notofnomenclature; thus DNA data sequence characters for the separation that being oftaxa, amatter of environmental samples. from obtained next-generationsequences sequencing of The problem ismostspecies. acute in of the voucherlesscase fromfungi and affects phylumthe of rank pressing, down to recoveredsequences from environmental samples isincreasingly of the numerous being discovered novel among fungi molecular for some provision The need with to deal in ICN the the naming BACKGROUND Turland NJ, Wiersema Greuter Barrie JH, W, FR, Hawksworth DL, V, Demoulin SA, Redhead Turland Hawksworth KA, Seifert DL, (2014) NJ Petersen ofthe Committee (1981)Report for RH Fungi and Lichens. Korf (1996)Simplified author RP citations fungi and someold for traps and Korf (1982) RP Sequences as Types as Sequences (Turland to setup aSpecial-purposedecided Committee on DNA potentially relevant to other groups the oforganisms, IBC TYPES OFNAMESFUNGI (F-005-006) PROPOSALSTOPERMITDNASEQUENCEDATA TOBEUSEDAS 30 complications.new ofnomenclatureCode enacted in 1981. 1753and 1832under between the changesin published the taxa fungal 211–218. International Congress Mycological in Puerto 2018. Rico 2017, and procedures for the Fungal Nomenclature Session at the 11 (2018) FungusIMA Fungal nomenclature at report ofthe IMC10: Nomenclature Sessions. The formal set of proposals generatedThe formalconsiderable setof proposals debate to takeThe need action on this matteralready emphasized was The : 472–473. Code et al et International Code ofNomenclature for algae, fungi, andplants . 2011,Taylor amongst conducted 2011).Apoll does not prohibit the of notprohibit does use ofany category Citation ofauthors’ names and the typification of names of et al. et

5 : 449–462. 2011), and also elsewhere 2011),and also at that time Mycologia

et al et

88 et al. et et al. et : 146–150. . 2017), and as the. 2017),and as issue was 2017);that Committee isdue 2014).Aseries ofproposals Mycologia et al. et

74 2016,Lücking & : 250–255. IMA FungusIMA et al. et axon Ta et al et th (eds) (eds)

. : Van Warmelo (1979)Proposals KT for the modification of of the Code Turland NJ, Wiersema Monro JH, Deng Y-F, AM, Zhang L(2017)XIX in 2022.Theissue of this “dark matter”,as it referredwas to by the issue, itrelates in as sofar left can be to fungi, untilIMC12 samples is,however, currently exponential and we donotconsider accumulation from ofnovel environmental offungi sequences used to create the phylogenetic tree deposited should be in a phylogenetic tree and the DNA sequence alignment that was with reference to a published phylogenetic both the analysis; sequence F.4.2), data (Art. the taxondescribed should new be (F-006) Add Recommendation anew F.4A as follows: deposited in apublic repository.” may composed ofDNA be 8.1–8.4),the sequence type data(Art. ofthe name asthebeen found ofthe type taxon to new serve taxon havea new beendetected, but no physical specimen has (F-005) Insert after paragraph anew Art. follows: F.4.1 as PROPOSALS community. ofthe mycological the to needs meet failing particular The current data. sequence corresponding to designateinability aphysical holotype to throughobtained voucherless sequencing techniques by the fromprecluded allocating names to environmental sequences characters, but are in including sequences, diagnoses, molecular and considered at the FNS.Authors are to free use already any We anticipate that some amendments to these suggested be will here astartingto the as Shenzhen IBC point for that discussion. a solution found, at we re-present IMC11, the made proposals shortly.under and expected review A further contribution by Lücking &Hawksworth iscurrently Hawksworthsee increasing urgency. Ryberg &Nilsson addressed (2018),has amatter now to be as of Comparative Plant Gardens, Botanical and Fungal Royal Biology, Botanical Nomenclature:Botanical proposals. IMC2 nomenclatural proposals. International report ofCongress Congress: action Botanical on Koeltz Books. Botanical Shenzhen, China, July 2017. (Shenzhen Code) “ “ In order to ensure that the matter and hopefully isdebated, For further background information relevant to this proposal F.4.2 F.4A.1 . In fungi, when DNA sequence data corresponding to Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3DS, UK; Kew, UK; Richmond, 3DS, Surrey TW9 . When the type is composed. Whenonly ofDNA the type Life Sciences, The Sciences, Life Natural History Museum, Cromwell Corresponding author [email protected] e-mail: Road, London SW7 5BD, UK; and SW75BD, London UK; Road, et al. et

adopted bythe Nineteenth International Botanical Congress (2016)and Hawksworth &Lücking (2017). University, Changchun, Jilin 130118,China axon Ta [Regnum Vegetabile no. 159.]Königstein:

66 : 1234–1245. Code axon Ta is, therefore, currently David L.Hawksworth

28 : 424–431.

Jilin Agricultural

Department of (v) MYCONAMES (vi) MYCONAMES

Hawksworth May TW, DL, (2017)Fungal SA nomenclature Redhead evolving: Hawksworth Lücking 2.2to R(2017)Fungal DL, revisited: diversity Hawksworth Hawksworth Crous Samson RA, DL, PW, DR, Reynolds SA, Redhead ZW, Beer De Marincowitz S.Duong TA, Wingfield A, Kim JJ, Rodrigues REFERENCES cross-reference see” “but in 8.1. Art. perhaps 40.5,to ensure consistency with them, adding a wellas as in 9.1and Art. 40,in Art. particular in Arts.40.2,40.3,40.4,and to consider making need will oftheedition ICN minor changes these theShould pass, proposals Editorial Committee for the next determined by the relevant taxonomic communities.” for delimiting on based prevailing species, practices best as drawnbe from the regions molecular that are appropriate independent ofwhich studies, one is designated asthe holotype.” data represented should be by multiple sequences obtained in publicly accessible repository.” because ofvariationsbecause in author name abbreviation and incomplete Fungi and Non-Lichenized Ascomycetes” ( names –ADatabase“LIAS with Names ofLichens,Lichenicolous demonstrated can which be last decades, by an analysis ofnames in of The length author name strings significantlyhas increasedin the BACKGROUND ALTERNATIVE TOTHECITATION OFTHEAUTHORSFUNGALNAMES (F-007) PROPOSALTORECOMMENDTHEUSEOFANIDENTIFIERAS persistent six digit identifying codes (i.e. taxon name (i.e. identifiers)persistent identifying codes sixdigit the registrationorganises names ofnew and provides stable and Index Fungorum, and MycoBank,consortium isin This place. names, comprisingfungal the three repositories Fungal Names, under Aconsortiumcompulsory the ICN. for the registration of repositories. Since 2012,registration names has been fungal ofnew by taxon name identifiersas issued by the designated registration names, whereof fungal considered replaced desirable,be should that in non-taxonomic scientific publications, author citations or incorrect citation ofauthors´ names. It istherefore suggested 211–218. International Congress Mycological in Puerto 2018. Rico bychanges adopted the 19 doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.FUNK-0052-2016. 2 In addition, ambiguity ofauthorIn name addition, citation ambiguity has increased 2017, and procedures for the Fungal Nomenclature Session at the 11 species. 3.8 million xon Ta Proposals ofnames to offungi. permit DNA types data sequence as to serve (2011) The AmsterdamDeclaration on Fungal Nomenclature. 1323 environmental nucleic (ENAS). acidsequences on how for adecision tothe name urgency known novel taxa from only (2016) MJ “ “ F4A.3 F.4A.2 : 105 – 65 – 1340 112. DL . DNA sequence data used for typification should :899–900. . A new taxon typified by DNAonly sequence taxon typified . Anew Hawksworthiomyces ,

Hibbett Microbiology Spectrum Microbiology DS , Kirk th International Congress Botanical in Shenzhen gen. nov. gen. ( PM, Lücking Ophiostomatales 5 (4):FUNK-0052-2016. (4):FUNK-0052-2016. R(2016)(308–310) www.liasnames Fungal Biology IMA FungusIMA ), illustrates

120 IMA FungusIMA .lias.net). .lias.net). : et al. et

Turland NJ, Wiersema Monro JH, Deng Y-F, AM, Zhang L(2017)XIX Taylor (2011)One Fungus JW =One nomenclature Name: DNA and fungal Ryberg Nilsson M, (2017)New on RH names light and naming ofdark taxa. V, Demoulin SA, Redhead Turland Hawksworth KA, Seifert DL, (2014) NJ MoncadaLücking M(2017)Dismantling R, Ohman GlotzerHibbett D, DS, Nuhn A, Kirk M, P, Nilsson (2011) RH combination found in LIAS, al Advantages ofsuch apractice are in by detail explained Rambold string and other key nomenclatural information on the taxon. database entries in the repositories that contain those author name replace author to name link adirect as strings, itcan because serve identifier. also function could to digits code ofsix Theidentifying and asp?RecordID=identifier http://www.mycobank.org/MB/ i.e. http://www.indexfungorum.org/Names/NamesRecord. partners ofthe consortium, Index Fungorum and MycoBank, Resource Identifiers(URIs) in the schemestwo provided by of part stableas consortium.are digits used The six Universal defined number and areranges therefore unique within the byused eachpartner in the consortium comefrom separate taxonthat names. Theidentifiers to published newly are assigned David L.Hawksworth . (2017). 1 Comparative Plant Botanic and Gardens, Fungal Royal Biology, nomenclatural proposals. International report ofCongress Congress: action Botanical on yearstwenty on. MycoKeys FungusIMA Fungal nomenclature at report ofthe IMC10: Nomenclature Sessions. sequences. on type based a precedent to the ofthousands formal recognition ofvoucherless fungi Agonimia Reviews options for formal classification of environmental sequences. in Fungi taxon discovery andProgress and morphological in molecular For example, one ofthe author longest name strings for a 3 5 Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, Jilin 130118,China State ofMycology, Institute Laboratory Key ofMicrobiology, 2 Department The Sciences, ofLife Natural History Museum,

( 30 Corresponding author [email protected] e-mail: : 6 Verrucariaceae

38–47. Chinese Academy Beijing ofSciences, 100101,China Botanischer Garten und Botanisches Museum Berlin,

: 31–39. 5 : 449–462. Königin-Luise-Straße 6–8,14195Berlin, Germany IMA Fungus IMA 950 Main Street, Worcester, 01610,USA MA 1-3 ) and Fungal Diversity axon Ta , David S.Hibbett Cromwell SW75BD, London UK Road, 4 Kew, UK Richmond, 3DS, Surrey TW9 Biology Department, Clark University, Biology 2 Massjukiella kaernefeltii Lawreymyces : 113–120.

66 : 1234–1245. Marchandiomphalina gen. nov. gen. ( Freie Universität Berlin, 4 , Paul M.Kirk Corticiaceae Robert Lücking Robert (S. Y. Kondr., IMA FUNGUS Fungal Biology into into ): setting 1,5 , and et et 6

(vii) MYCONAMES (vi) MYCONAMES VOLUME 9·NO. 1 out for the latter identifier be would registration repositories.” representation (Universal Resource Indicator) in one ofthe this identifierdirectlybe linked should out to its stable (#) and enclosed in square brackets. In electronic publications ).The identifier be bya should hash preceded the name itself in placeofthe author citation ofthe not to name replace (but 22.1andregistration 26.1)may used be Art. also (see repository identifierfor the name ofataxon issuedICN-recognized by an heading Citation of Authors ofFungal names asfollows: (F-007) Add Recommendation anew and examples under anew PROPOSAL names”.fungal underadded Article anew F.10 “Citation headed ofauthors of alternative, the following Recommendation we suggest new be in practice many authors persist in citing those involved. all Asan use of“ Groenew. &Boekhout ( P. Valente Yurkov, A.M. Rosa) &C.A. Xin F.Y. Zhan Liu, M. Bai, Santos, D.M. J.P. Pagani, A.R. Broetto, Ramos, T. Mott, Vainstein, vrieseae manyas 210letters spaces) as was found: (including letters spaces). In (including MycoBank an author name string with Kärnefelt, comprises Hurin 2012, Elix, published 108 Thell, &A. D. J. Galloway S.Y. &Goward) Kondr., Fedorenko, S.Stenroos, While we recognize that we theWhile recognize current 46recommends Art. the “ “ F.10A. Ex. 1 Ex. et al et (Landell, L.R. Brandão, S.V. L.R. (Landell, Safar, F.C. Félix, C.R. Gomes, . .” after the first author when there are more two, than Astrothelium meristosporoides

For names oforganisms treated asfungi, the

www.mycobank.org/MB/814757 www.mycobank.org/ [#816706]; the link Carlosrosaea ). MB/816706 Rambold G, Bensch K, Kirk Yao PM, G,Bensch K, Rambold Y-J, V, Robert REFERENCE mycobank.org/MB/389546 NamesRecord.asp?RecordID=389546 identifier be would Names/NamesRecord.asp?RecordID=816706 Corresponding author Konstanze e-mail: Bensch, bensch@bsm. instead oftaxon name author citation. taxon name identifier issues registration by ICN-recognized the repositories “ 4 Ex. 2 Ex. State of Mycology, Institute Laboratory Key of Microbiology, Gerhard Rambold 2 SNSB IT-Center, SNSB Botanische Staatssammlung München, . Lecanora varia or, alternatively, or, alternatively, Yi-Jian Yao Chinese Academy Beijing ofSciences, 100101,China 1 Uppsalalaan Utrecht, 8,3584CT The Netherlands Department ofMycology, University ofBayreuth, Menzinger Straße 67,80638München, Germany Universitätsstraße 3,95440Bayreuth, Germany http://www.indexfungorum.org/Names/ 3 Biodiversity Informatics Biodiversity &Spatial Analysis, 4 5 , Vincent Robert Westerdijk Fungal Institute, Biodiversity 1 [#389546]; the link out for the latter , Konstanze Bensch .” http://www.indexfungorum.org/ Richmond, Surrey TW9 3DS, UK Richmond, 3DS, Surrey TW9 T xon Ta Royal Botanic Gardens,Royal Kew, or, alternatively, or, alternatively,

66 5 et al. : 1200–1203. , and Dagmar Triebel 2,5 .” (2017) Citation ofa , Paul M.Kirk www. mwn.de 3,4 2 ,

(vii) MYCONAMES