ARTICLE 15 id, 3 . 1 62GM6RR ./6. Mycosphere Key words: Key words: anamorph Ascomycota Basidiomycota conidial fungi coelomycetes hyphomycetes International Code of Nomenclature nomenclature Sneath teleomorph IMA FUNGUS · VOLUME 3 · NO 1: 15–24 · NO 3 · VOLUME FUNGUS IMA & Dedicated to the memory of the numerical taxonomist and # M # + 67V2MV7 tried to convince me in the 1980s that the “approved lists” model was X 7 J ./66 permission of the publishers and with minor changes, especially in & 6 molecular methods were just becoming available, that some molecular methods were just becoming methods mycologists realized that molecular phylogenetic F position, regardless placed in its appropriate phylogenetic expressed – even of the kind of spore-producing structure & # 1 2 N[" 6/ R72G3 3G3.323 ( P F J 67.GM./66 “one name for one fungus” became increasingly recognized “one name for one fungus” became increasingly which that might be amongst mycologists, and the way in # At the same time some mycologists, impatient with a lack of common assent as to what should be done, started to adopt N et al. ./66 st
1, 2 International Code of of the recent changes in the International Code of An explanation is provided International Botanical Congress, meeting in International Botanical Congress, meeting th et al ./6. J # = " & = "The whole process is evolving, slower than some would like, and too fast for others (Scott A. Redhead, 26 January 2012)" A. Redhead, 26 January than some would like, and too fast for others (Scott "The whole process is evolving, slower the existing processes of sanctioning and conservation or rejection, and steps to be considered for the existing processes of sanctioning and conservation & in the current period of transition to a system of fungal by individuals, and responsible committees, .6 O+ P O P © 2012 International Mycological Association © 2012 International Mycological conditions: distribute and transmit the work, under the following are free to share - to copy, You Attribution: J X N + J 0 P ? E ; + JLW R N MKX = 1 Departamento de Biología Vegetal II, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Plaza Ramón y Cajal, E-28040 Madr Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Plaza II, Facultad de Farmacia, Vegetal Departamento de Biología N # + P Managing and coping with names of pleomorphic fungi in a period of in a period fungi of pleomorphic with names and coping Managing transition Article info: J 1 .W ? ./6.X F 1 R F ./6.X ( 1 6/ F ./6. Non-commercial: No derivative works: Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work, which can be found at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/legalcode. Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights. permission from the copyright holder. Abstract: of the separate naming of different fungi and plants relating to the ending Nomenclature for algae, Z VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 On 30 July 2011, the long-established practice of allowing the long-established On 30 July 2011, morphs of the separate names to be used for different [ INTRODUCTION 16/ RR7Q3 ./6. /G /6 /G Melbourne, Australia, adopted a resolution accepting the Australia, adopted a resolution Melbourne, of the Congress that decisions of the Nomenclature Section 6QM.. > ./66 ? 0 # ' " Congresses, the most dramatic being at the Sydney E 67Q6 P # 677/ Decisions became immediately effective from the date the Decisions became immediately effective resolution was adopted, unless a date on which particular was included in the decisions provisions become effective 0 J & # edited version of the new Code is expected in mid-2012 ? 0 the XVIII lichenized ascomycete and basidiomycete fungi has been especially since the a source of continuing controversy, 67R/ F ' # to mycologists have, however, been provided elsewhere to mycologists have, however, P ./66 + ./66 0 # ./66 and not the date of publication of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants "E0 X Hawksworth
" ? E J would cause, names in those two categories are ruled 2003, Norvell et al. ./6/ & as validly published and legitimate – provided they were # ; ./6/ 0 6 > ./6G F R7 6 by a special meeting, held under the auspices of the In some instances, generic names with type species " E & < ! "E&! ARTICLE F F ./66 P et al ./66 # < = ? E types, will have priority over currently used teleomorph- As a result of the Melbourne decision, the nomenclature & = of non-lichenized, pleomorphic fungi has entered a phase of names will have priority of publication, but be little used, so L # E ' ' # # F RW . = Furthermore, when made, the decisions on those names need names in cases where either name was “widely used for a to be promulgated throughout the mycological community, < = been considered by the General Committee and rejected” & # O[ 0 5 [ ! P & O[ ! 5 L 0 4P in instances where both names are not widely used, & mycologists are not constrained from immediately adopting P # " # = %# necessary to reassess around 2,000–3,000 names of genera, usage of dual nomenclature, where the anamorph name 6/ ///M6. /// " is much used, some mycologists are already adopting and probably most, the reassessments will not necessitate = < L = ; that may not be considered good practice under the Code, in need to minimize the potential disruption that could ensue, X the Congress made some special provisions to mitigate P # & # ' procedures will take some years to implement fully as, in @ E @E0 & some cases, deciding on which names to adopt is likely to = # ' & = 4 & # & 1 6 < " X . would be to propose either the less used teleomorph name 6 > ./6GX G # = # O+ PX O+ 2 P F # # @ E For submitted cases, the key guidance is to maintain THE NEW SITUATION “existing usage as far as possible”, pending the decision ; RVF 6 P # & = conservation or rejection has been announced by the = G/ > Committee, that should be followed – even though formal ./66 ; = E R ' < " E F & = 62 V RV 2 E ./6W & Some publications, introducing separate new names for ' 1 different states of the same fungus, may already have been in 6 & advanced stages of preparation, or in press, when the decision X F R7 6 the sexual stage represented by the name-bearing type protects those appearing before 1 January 2013 from either # # . & # # \ L nomenclature means that, where names had been application of the rules that apply to all other fungal names introduced for different morphs of a single taxon, those would mean that such names would not be available for use # # X # After 1 January 2013, different names proposed for morphs of \ a single species no longer have such protection but, until that < date, names introduced for different morphs will not be ruled " # #
16 IMA FUNGUS Managing and coping with names of pleomorphic fungi in a period of transition
" 1 6 J will give the largest number of “hits”, but these may contain ARTICLE ascomycetes and basidiomycetes published on or after Google Scholar is more restrictive in being 6 ? 6WRG = = ' general, but both these will not weed-out non-fungal usages X . 0 ! < proposed for different states, prior to 1 January 2013, a search of Coryne VW6 /// Google and which would otherwise be ruled as invalid or illegitimate by 6G W// Google Scholar due to the inclusion of coryneform the application of the general provisions for fungal names, bacteria and coryne-bacteria, whereas Ascocoryne yielded # 6GG /// 6 /W/ # X Sphaerellopsis, without the O P W/ R// Google but only 4,800 with “rust” due to problems of an orthographically DEFINING “WIDELY USED” X ' Polymorphum, 6.V /// Google and 3,380 in Google L < = Scholar, mainly from the use of “polymorphum” as a species = # & # for consideration through the mandated Committees, under in some cases, potentially misleading bibliometrics, but F RW . # O P they have merit in being broader in their coverage than & O P databases such as Web of Science or Scopus which catch < of what the Editorial Committee for the Melbourne Code to attract more attention as tools in the biblioinformatics considered to be good practice, are being incorporated into F 9 ? ./6. K ./6. " the body of the Code itself3: principle, a better guide for usage in fungal taxonomy would Ex. 2. & = Eupenicillium be the Bibliography of Systematic Mycology, but in that the ! + 6Q7. # = < 67QV %< = of numbers of hits obtained for 25 genera in three datasets Penicillium + 6Q/7 P 9 J J ? & 6 W/1 .2 ./66 Penicillium being the oldest and the most widely L # P # # # 1 6 and stabilize this nomenclature, it could be appropriate to propose to the advent of widespread computerization of bibliographic # = =67W/ 67Q/ @ E = # X . Ex. 3 & = Polychaeton ( the commonplace situation where both state names of + # 6Q2V E 9 ! N # R61 66V ./66 = accepted names for the different states, or where one is name Capnodium ? 6Q27 X G # < and the authors suggest that the teleomorphic name be considered the databases themselves, for example, if they are based on for inclusion in the planned lists of accepted names to be approved a search of the entire text, as words in an abstract, or only @ E F 62 6G It would be helpful if mycologists involved in making the L # # # two paragraphs might be overcome with the help of & < biblioinformatics specialists, others are unlikely to be and would need to be borne in mind when preparing draft %# & Biodiversity Heritage Library and CyberLiber were eventually 0 E ! 0E! # 6WRG " E "M J3"M?J there would be the so-pertinent usage in applied biological " E & < ! "E&! = Nevertheless, the numbers of mentions of generic names In reaching a decision as to whether each of a competing recovered by search engines or bibliographic databases may pair of state names is “widely used” or not, it will be important serve as a rough-and-ready indication as to what is “widely to consider the wider community of biologists who use fungal used”, but only with an awareness of the caveats noted < " above, and a familiarity with current practices in the group of = # A simple Google search on a word, such as a generic name, If in doubt whether one or both names of a pleomorphic fungus fall into the “widely used” category, it would be prudent 3& " before the new edition of the Code the prospect of embarrassment if the decision is reversed in
VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 17 Hawksworth 5 53 W7 41 VV 45 W. W. 21 GW BSM 8 898 145 155 QVQ 190 258 ARTICLE Scholar Search results 482 410 7 V2/ .V G// 1,340 V2 R// G 6V/ 121 .Q W// 95,200 14,300 31,300 Google Google 819,000 54,400 6 /VW .6V /// 1,010 189,000.V7 /// 2,330 W G// 142 .RV 6W. /// W /W/ 194 151,000 2,000 6RV 1,080,000 G. V// 505 6 VW/ /// 10,500 1,100,000 6/W /// 323 J? 67QV .6 ! ./6. N P 67QR K =E 67WV ! + 6Q7. ! & 9 E & 6QV/ P 67/7 ? N 9 F + + 67VQ Zukal 1885 ! 6Q.R GV. /// 2 V2/ .V. 0 6QW/ E 9 M .//G J 9 ( J 67.6 6/ W// 125 9 , and the Bibliography of Systematic Mycology Microascus Apiocrea Eupenicillium Ajellomyces Kirschsteiniothelia Teleomorph-typified Koordersiella Hypocrea Davidiella Diaporthe Filobasidiella v. Capnodium ? 6Q27 v. v. Puccinia ( 6W72 v. v. v. Erysiphe ; P < NE 6Q/R v. Niesslia F 6QV7 v. v. v. Monascus & 6QQ2 v. Asterophora Ditmar 1809 v. Eudarluca J 67/Q v. Hypomyces v. v. v. Neurospora J 9 [ N 67.W v. Cryphonectria J J 9 N J 67/R v. v. v. 1 4 22 , Google Scholar BSM Google 1 W/ 14 W2 21 GV 13 182 11 V76 15 184 12 549 VG 433139 24 6V .V/ V 6G/ 6.W 5,020 212 1,440 55 italic 5 5 X # 5 Scholar Search results 1 2 3,300 V /V/ 4,480 2 6W/ Q 2V/ 5,100 4820 40,200 12,100 13,200 89,200 RW /// Google Google 215,000 62V /// VQ. /// 210,000 940 RQV /// 30,900 555 1,910,000 28,200 ..V 1,500,000 129,000 2QV 4,950,000 W. Q// 815 5 bold N 67V/ J P 67RG 67/W + 6Q6V Cooke 1883 0 6Q6V @ & E 9 L K 67VQ + 6Q/7 J ( 9 > 0 K 67QV J 67/R 585,000 6V .// GWV ( + # 6Q2V + 6Q/7 J J 67RR Arx 1981 J 67/V Scopulariopsis Sphaerellopsis Uredo ( 6Q/6 Sepedonium Penicillium Pseudoidium Monocillium Histoplasma N 67/V Cladosporium # Anamorph-typified @ 1 ? ACCEPT PRIORITY (1) Basipetospora Ugola F 6WVG Hansfordiellopsis Polychaeton (2) ACCEPT LATER NAME ? ACCEPT LATER (2) Cladobotryum ( 6W72 Trichoderma Endothiella Dendryphiopsis Chrysonilia Table 1. Results of searches on 25 pairs potentially competing generic names in Table Phomopsis Cryptococcus B 67/6
18 IMA FUNGUS Managing and coping with names of pleomorphic fungi in a period of transition W 12 V/ one of the protected lists of accepted names, not to mention ARTICLE being responsible for additional confusion in the literature, < 93 233 AUTHOR CITATION CORRECTIONS Scholar BSM
& =? Code included a special # = < # = 89,40029,300 24,800 2,220 1,450 6GW 31,200 Google Google
6VQ /// 2 VG/ .WV = combination was to be treated as the name of a new species, and not as a new combination, if, and only if, a valid diagnosis # " " # teleomorph were provided, the binomial would remain as a # 4
# type of the basionym & # where it did, the combinations are now again to be treated F example of this situation is included in the Melbourne Code: Ex. 3 Mycosphaerella aleuritidis ? J P [ 672/ when published as a new combination, was accompanied by a + # to the anamorph on which the basionym Cercospora aleuritidis ? 676. M # Code, ¨ X Eudarluca E N 0 6QVW F ( 67V7 F ? 6Q2Q F 67WW ( ; < E 9 N 0 6QVG M. aleuritidis was considered to be the name of a new species with a teleomorph type, dating from 1940, and with authorship attributed v. v. v. v. v. [ M Code, the correct citation is as 3 M. aleuritidis ? J P [ Sphaerellopsis BSM In cases of this type, the correction can simply be made without any formal actions or even a publication though, 533842 10 53 549 when encountered, it would be helpful to inform the compilers 3,890 195 9,500 6WV of Index Fungorum that a correction should be made in the Scholar
PROOFS OF HOLOMORPHY 93,100 .V 7// 31,200 89,400 22 W// Google Google
K # 67.R One of the key drivers for the end of the dual nomenclatural system for pleomorphic fungi was the realization that, on the ' # <
Sphaerellopsis ; 9 & 677. & a fungal specimen or culture are irrelevant to its placement L < # regard, and have enabled even fungi known only in a non- sporing state to be incorporated into the sexual system, many
4In several editions of the Code prior to that adopted by the Sydney Congress in 1981, the epithet in a binomial placed in a teleomorph-
Due to confusion with the algal genus ! # © ¨ © Table 1. E Table Anamorph-typified Search results1 2 Teleomorph-typified Search results (3) REFER TO COMMITTEE ? (3) REFER TO Cylindrocladium Morgan 1892 P F < 9 @ F B 67WG P J 6QWQ J L 6QGG ( E # 6Q..
VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 19 Hawksworth
of the connections reported in the literature have, as yet, not situation, it is no different from numerous names already in < the literature under generic names such as Mycosphaerella, An enormous number of connections between anamorphs Phoma, Sphaeria, and Sporidesmium and teleomorphs were made in the pre-molecular era, and L K 67W7 X of a taxon under a particular generic name is no impediment ARTICLE ! =67th century, these connections were largely based on detailed observations of the fungi in nature and, most spectacularly, L " & 9 & 6QV6=VR + probably being wrong for a species, but not having enough culture, the development of sporocarps in or from one only evidence to make a transfer, or introduce a new generic # name, my personal practice is to place the generic name in 6QQW N ./th century, increased rigour was used, with ' OSporidesmium” lichenicola & the emphasis on establishing connections by examination of ? % # 67W/ # < Notwithstanding such careful approaches, a considerable a label with a good description so that it could be recognized number of the reported connections in the literature remain = L the new rules to provide the correct name for a species, TYPIFICATION particular care should be taken to ensure that the evidence & F # X co-occurrences, particularly as fungicolous fungi have < sometimes been misinterpreted as anamorphs of their a name where the name-bearing type lacks characters & Code itself provides no guidance as to proofs of ! < = holomorphy, and this remains a taxonomic decision parallel ' < J the application of names where DNA cannot be recovered a taxonomic decision whether to describe a conidial fungus = F X the ending of dual nomenclature, the Vienna Congress of in that case, the judgment has to be based on the similarity 2005 extended the original concept further, and authorized of that conidial fungus to ones already established as being the designation of teleomorph-types as “epitypes” for ? 0 et In discussion, I have heard it suggested that molecular al. .//V & < # ' " was introduced in order to avoid having to introduce a new ' # # O P # & P # # “teleotype” was proposed for this special category of epitypes # = L ; ./6/ " ' ? E ./66 0 # all in certain cases, for instance, when there was evidence with the changes effected at that Congress, there are likely to = be numerous instances where it will be desirable to designate = Vouauxiomyces epitypes exhibiting a state not evident on the name-bearing anamorphs of Abrothallus & % cases “beyond reasonable doubt” will remain that of authors X who have to satisfy their peer reviewers, editors, and X no different from that which already exists when taxonomic # NAMES OF FAMILIES AND ORDERS & particular species should be transferred to a particular Some mycologists have expressed concern that by = = " = = caution against wholesale uncritical transfers in such cases – ' especially as it is becoming clear that so many fungal genera some very familiar and long-established suprageneric & # P # taxonomic judgement, either by individuals or committees, while family names must be based on a legitimate generic but it is to be expected that there will be numerous F 6Q G # O P L For example, the treatment of Eurotium as a synonym of
20 IMA FUNGUS Managing and coping with names of pleomorphic fungi in a period of transition
Aspergillus does not in itself prevent the use of Eurotiaceae + # < O = ARTICLE and Eurotiales, nor would the adoption of Trichoderma as forming fungi and those fungi traditionally associated with the correct name for Hypocrea preclude the continued use < MycocaliciaceaeP ; of either Hypocreaceae or Hypocreales P # < " # the principle of priority does not apply to higher categories + ./66 & + E ' Cladosporiaceae J 0 67G2 < # " have priority over Davidiellacae E + J et al .//W + # in order to retain Hypocreaceae 0 6Q22 small groups, as well as formally constituted committees # # or subcommittees of international or national mycological Trichodermataceae ! 6Q.R P # + the Code ' @ E 0 @E0 & @E0 INFORMAL DESIGNATIONS 0 E ! 0E! turn will refer it to a subcommittee, which it has established Some mycologists have expressed concern over the loss in consultation with the GCN “and appropriate international of data that can be of practical importance, for example, in P " O referring to a particular state that is the causal agent of a bodies” will include the International Commission on the & J et al. & < ! "E&! ./// = = " E "E names, such as “acremonium-anamorph” and “trichoderma- L P " include users of names other than taxonomists for reasons being included in the titles of publications or associated with species names, either outside or inside brackets, where it is ! # + P # subcommittee tasked with this work, it is then to be submitted expressions, it might be simpler to use “morph” rather than 0E! F 0E! “anamorph” or “teleomorph” as the last two terms are not # X V/ ] 0E! = " " when considering individual name conservation and rejection a recommendation to encourage this practice included in proposals but, the NCF would have to consider whether it a future edition of the Code, even though such a proposal + L B E .//R P .//2 # 0E! + @E0 ! # @E0 + " E & ? Code ' LISTS OF ACCEPTED AND REJECTED NAMES consultation, but it is anticipated that a procedure, parallel to that already well established for the conservation and rejection & Code has various appendices dealing with lists of conserved and rejected names and suppressed publications, + and also accords special protection to names adopted in # 0E! & + # certain mycological works that are deemed to be “sanctioned” through a particular website, with a commenting facility, as ( ? E < # # no mechanism whereby additional lists of names might be It is imperative that the process is transparent, and open adopted for protection or rejection en bloc & to inputs from those working in applied and non-taxonomic all non-lichenized fungi on 30 July 2011 when procedures < & F 62 6G necessary in order to avoid the mycological community as a F RV G # " + # F + # which another is preferred would remain available for use in will be those who decide not to follow what they consider the < F 62 V # ' P # " # + ; + < # # F RV GX ! " 0 F + O that many mycologists will embrace the concept of Accepted + # ; + It is important to be aware that while the motivation of # P F 62 6G L # + to make even the earliest drafts as accurate as possible, this special rules relating to the names of pleomorphic fungi, the L Lists of Names in Current
VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 21 Hawksworth
Use for genera of all groups of organisms covered by the ( = # Code < O' P and advertised on an ordinal, familial, or generic basis for species names, depending on how mandated infrastructure would critically assess and correct entries for groups in which # 0E! " & # # ./6W ARTICLE @ et al. 677G E amount of checking has already been done for fungal & + " # & of other substantial data sets that also are available for use + ' # + & Outline of opportunity for larger scale protection of currently accepted Ascomycota + 9 P ./6/ Ainsworth & non-lichenized fungal names whether pleomorphism is Bisby’s Dictionary of the Fungi K et al .//Q Species + # Fungorum 30 3 < & 0 The Genera of Hyphomycetes J et issue for consideration by those involved in the preparation al. ./66 = # + K 67W7 O[ ! 5 L 0 4P WG7 = = "E&! P et al. ./66 F 6.M6G F ./6. F ' & # # + ' # [ = embraced by future generations of mycologists, this seems be achievable, at least for generic names, would be to: # " Approved 6 ; O' P ª Lists of Bacterial Names, which includes around 300 generic ./6. 6 Q// # . " # < # 67WV # + 67Q/ on or helping committees or subcommittees mandated was formally accepted at the 1982 International Congress 0E! + ./6. J 67QV & < G % + = # P # the end of June 2013, and have the NCF mandated in mycology, there are many more names to be handled, committees and subcommittees consider inputs although the precise numbers on which decisions will be # # + ! # 2 " # # + huge advantage of the internet and nomenclatural databases December 2013, after consideration by committees or # 67W/ subcommittees mandated by the NCF to perform that & + follow that used in the current Appendices of the Code which R N + # " open to all participants during the 10th International names, it will also be advantageous, wherever possible, to ? E "?E6/ F ./62 ' V P # 0E! # = X make further revisions and corrections by December ' + 2014, place the updated versions on the internet, and [ # @E0 ' 0E! # International Botanical Congress, the extent to which a W N # + 0E! + # < N ./6R @E0 the Melbourne Code " Q P # @E0 # + L O > ./6V # P F 62 6G O # 7 ( + " P F 62 62 E ./6W + # & 6/ " + F ./6Q matter will need to be considered by the NCF, but it would the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, # # + & and plants. enable them to be added to as detailed treatments of families L # 0E! # "E&! & # J which have specially protected status, is currently a matter Saccharomycetaceae, Trichocomaceae undergoing discussion in the zoological community, and it is much work has already been done, could well be integrated anticipated that proposals from the International Commission into this time-scale, but others would undoubtedly take much T 0 "ET0
22 IMA FUNGUS Managing and coping with names of pleomorphic fungi in a period of transition
" # + ARTICLE to monitor those discussions as they may be helpful in considerable time to prepare and be approved, use of these suggesting how best to develop and seek approval for fungal procedures may be the most expedient course of action to + remove uncertainties in a timely manner, especially for fungi
SANCTIONED NAMES NEXT STEPS & F + # = the specially protected status of the sanctioned names of P # F 6R & # now commencing regarding their implementation, I sanctioned names are mentioned as “competing synonyms” have endeavored to explain what is involved in the new + F 62 6G P # arrangements for the naming of pleomorphic fungi adopted status should be one issue for those preparing lists to take ? E ./66 " # into account when deciding which of two competing names possible timetable of actions as a basis for wider discussion – and without prejudice to the result of the decisions of the 0E! & # CONSERVATION AND REJECTION preparing their work for publication will need to make decisions on what names to use while the preparation of & # F ; + & of names of families, genera, and species is independent is already recognized in the Code through the examples + & # # F 62 6G # for avoiding the displacement of well-established names for ? E & purely nomenclatural reasons, such as priority of publication, make a decision now over competing names is not contrary to the Code, provided its general provisions for all names # @ are met M < = under these provisions is provided by McNeill et al. ./6. # = " + O # P P # F 62 6G O P F RV G formal nomenclatural changes that may prove controversial # & + # # " & distinction as conservation and rejection procedures grant a 1, I have indicated some examples of different situations and actions that might be taken in those cases as a basis deleted and, in the case of rejected names, are not to be F RV 6 0 # & # of conserved names, however, are still available for use in need to be addressed in mycology, and the appreciation a different taxonomy provided they do not compete with a that many would not be controversial, led to the inclusion # in the Amsterdam Declaration on Fungal Nomenclature Conservation and rejection over-ride inclusion in the P et al ./661 R ( ! + Reviser, a concept borrowed from the International Code compete are already conserved, for example Cryptococcus T 0 "ET0 67771 F .2 . & and Phomopsis & 6 L # F + generic names should be followed, and that those choices proposals for the conservation of the preferred name, over that which had been previously conserved, would have to be MycoBank, Index Fungorum " cases only needed referral to an internationally mandated L # # name or species name for a pleomorphic fungus would result & # # in the change of long-established and widely used names, the proposals presented to the Melbourne Congress, but the mechanisms for the conservation and rejection of names may merit consideration as a way of expediting decisions on # J & + O[ ! 5 L 0 4P # P # 0E! & by the Melbourne Congress, would wish to vote on them # = = + for-purpose for mycology in the 21st " " 0E! # mycologists will work constructively towards the realization P #
VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 23 Hawksworth
CAVEATS K !=& ./6. & European Science Editing 381 GMR & # + >E ./66 E " E and those involved in fungal nomenclature should consult 0 ? 1 # the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and Opuscula Philolichenum 101 VM6G ARTICLE plants ? 0 et al. ./6. # + P& P J? ./6/ [ Ascomycota M .//7 Information on the procedures to be used for the development Fieldiana, Life and Earth Sciences 11 6M2. + ? 0 > !; P? N B P N+ prepared by the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi, or the ? K 0 NP ( > J # (E J >% L " E & < ! >P & 0> .//V International Code of Botanical # & Nomenclature (Vienna Code) adopted by the Seventeenth made as to actions that might be considered appropriate in International Botanical Congress Vienna, Austria, July 2005 & 6 ; B 62V ; 1 ; @ @ B merely as a basis for discussion, and are without prejudice to ? 0 > & 0> ? F + > ./66 \B""" " Botanical Congress: preliminary mail vote and report of Congress Taxon 601 6R/WM6R./ ? 0 > !; L; N B @ L P ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS N+ P (J K J ? K ( > ( R # ; L! J @% L >P & 0> & # ./6. International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and K # N P " plants (Melbourne Code) adopted by the Eighteenth International E@+./66=.R//G ? Botanical Congress Melbourne, Australia, July 2011. [Regnum % E # ?%EE J " B ; 1 F ; @ @ B N ( % > P # < ? 0 > ; JF L >P ./6. @ = # Taxon 611 .2QM.R6 0 # ++ ./66 ! 6 ? # E Mycotaxon 1161 2Q6M27/ REFERENCES 0 # ++ P N+ ( ;P ; JF ./6/ "?E7 % 0 J Mycotaxon 1131 R/GMR66X F E ? J ./6. E 1 IMA Fungus 11 62GM62WX Taxon 591 6QVWM6QVQ Nature 4831 GV ; JF ./6/ ; J E F 6QQW Comparative Morphology and Biology of the Fungi, 0 ! ( + E Taxon 59: Mycetozoa and Bacteria. [< 1 E ( 6QVGM6QVV @ L ;K ! % K 0 K (? J # (E 677G ; JF ./6/ ( Q R NCU–3: names in current use for extant plant genera. [Regnum to rename Chapter VI, and to modify Article 59 to limit dual B 6.7 K 1 K J # \ < P N+ .//2 + Taxon 591 67.WM67.7 Taxon 531 R7VMR7Q ; N; & >L 677. F R71 P N+ ./66 F 1 # 4 Taxon 411 76M7Q of decisions made in Melbourne in July 2011 on the future J KF .//G P MycoKeys 11 WM./; 4 & F R7 Mycotaxon 881 27GMR/Q IMA Fungus 21 6RRM6V. J KF @ L E (L J @> ./// ? P N+ E (L ; JF ; N; J 1 = ;F J KF & >L L ?> 9 V7 ./66 Studies in Mycology 451 6M.G/ & F N ! 0 IMA J KF ? => @ @ L K ./66 The Genera Fungus 21 6/RM66.X Mycotaxon 1161 76MR// of Hyphomycetes E J # J . M 1 E J= P KN ? K %PE K K &L ./66 & K0FL ! # E M J (PF 67QV 0 " 1 Biological ./6/ Mycosphere 216MQQ Nomenclature Today LN+ ; & 1 GVM2Q "M J " E T 0 "ET0 6777 ? . % [< 1 ";+ ( International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. 4th + 1 & +; & E 6QV6MVR Selecta Fungorum Carpologia G " & T 0 # ( 1 " ( K 67W7 The Whole Fungus: the sexual-asexual system . # [ 1 0 ? E K (? E (! ? NL J >F .//Q Ainsworth & Bisby’s Dictionary of the Fungi. 10th L 1 EF "
24 IMA FUNGUS