ARTICLE 81 Code IMA · VOLUME 3 · NO 1: 81–86 NO 1: 3 · · VOLUME FUNGUS IMA Key words: anamorph C"# fungi for algae International Code of Nomenclature fungi, and plants teleomorph

th al&!5.&!4. “International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and P . I .] .H[ electronic of effective besides Latin in future, the recognition H Q O H ( .4&!P et the separate naming of morphs of pleomorphic fungi, which Q\R C 7C ^ 7 &!HC ]. ..C"#0E5 E _ E 5. &!!" I.. International al &! th et et al.&!C

, molecular analyses, physiological and biochemical data, in vivo or in vitro, molecular analyses, physiological and biochemical <O>?@PC&M'C

$ Various proposals to emend the International Code Various H.I HH J0E5 morphology H H@ symposium “One fungus = One name” held in Amsterdam held in symposium “One fungus = One name” C &! pleomorphic fungi were discussed culminating in the . OC P 4 $ 2 E ( C . K &! C7C OQR of Botanical Nomenclature adopted by the Melbourne Congress caused worldwide surprise to most mycologists . < ))H Erysiphales 0H < . .. 02E(&!F © 2012 International Mycological Association © 2012 International Mycological conditions: distribute and transmit the work, under the following are free to share - to copy, You Attribution: O P5C@)E27 J O. E)Q INTRODUCTION However, all aspects of this declaration did not receive However, general acceptance, and opposing arguments were also 3 &!& ()*)+. 0  2 2 3 2 3 4 5 & !6!## 4 7 Uwe Braun The impacts of the discontinuation of dual nomenclature of pleomorphic of pleomorphic nomenclature of dual discontinuation of the The impacts and strategies problems, the trivial facts, fungi: 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. Article info: 7&(&!&8CK&!&8F&K&!& H H 7 < groups of organisms nomenclaturally like plants and all other fungi in future will be treated 0E55 7\H .\H4. Abstract: 38R);) VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 !""#$%&!&!'!!$ Braun

new rules for fungi I came to the conclusion that these drastic 0 changes are probably the best solution, since they provide we indeed have “one fungus” that deserves “one name”, \H decisions regarding synonymy can be made on the basis of and should prevent endless discussions and attempts to H. C"#4. of anamorphs and teleomorphs in culture or any other

ARTICLE <]CodeC C&!O>?>P the application of all fungal names is ruled by their types, it the Melbourne decisions, as well as various discussions is necessary to have convincing data for the type species C &!& O> ) ) ?@`P.H H . \ H 4.. _ ]. . indications that certain anamorph and teleomorph genera are most of the discussed problems and obvious reservations are probably congeneric merely based on data derived from non- H J .\ <] a widespread misunderstanding concerning the function of H the Code is allowed and is not under the jurisdiction of the Code< _I. Code only rules which name has to be adopted in this case of addressed by Gams et al &!& .C adds to the debate by addressing some further more minor 7. H mycological community for the enormous load of work caused by the new rules are also discussed using powdery mildews HCode Erysiphales H E H Other problems, also discussed during the Amsterdam Q 7 C given during the second Amsterdam symposium, discussions numerous phylogenetically unproven species previously I assigned to a certain anamorph genus whose name, based on C C HCode, and can be GENERAL NOTES, PROBLEMS, AND done on the basis of any method, ranging from morphology to STRATEGIES I0) ) Special problems at the generic level generic name, based on molecular data referring to their two At the generic level, the new rules provide obvious advantages type species, it would be theoretically possible, but not in all ) cases advisable, to re-allocate all species names previously I assigned to the anamorph genus to the teleomorph genus purposes, so that they may now be used as holomorph < . 5 species can be retained in the anamorph genus, which is )) . HO C C "# P 0 K&!'H oldest valid and legitimate name, and it is the most widely used morphs, are neither considered to be alternative names Aspergillus, Cladosporium, Penicillium C 'x& \ this name has priority over any younger meiosporic genus C"& and can be applied and used immediately as the name for 7.. .. < .< in the case of Cladosporium *$6 . Davidiella Crous & names may be retained and used for morphologically similar +2&!!'0) . C nevertheless preferred, proposals may be made in future to ) . 0 ) .) name is younger, it may also be proposed as the name for or younger names being given priority following a proposal to < 0 *C . x'C"6'.Code4 . .\H . < . However, problems in the application of genus names ] H H H.<. C to re-allocate such unproven species to another genus, if

82 IMA FUNGUS Impacts of the discontinuation of dual nomenclature

available, or even to introduce a new genus for them, which ..< ARTICLE one fungus is present cannot be upheld and the two morphs < I 0 . < such cases, the genera concerned remain paraphyletic or H even polyphyletic for a certain time until the phylogenetic Another possible scenario concerns two different morphs positions of all species assigned to these genera are known independently and validly described by different authors as < K &!' @ Monophyletic genera are the goal, but it will be a long time . . J name just becomes a heterotypic synonym of the older one .<Q . < H Q3et al&!&0 K&!'. . As already mentioned, concepts and circumscriptions Implication of nomenclature and H “One fungus = One name” is the premise of the changed Article jurisdiction of the CodeJ. "#(CodeI ..C criteria should be used to decide whether different morphs have to be named so that they are determinable for all H0 users, ranging from ecologists, phytopathologists, physicians H engaged in human pathogenic fungi to researchers in I. < <ICode, an appropriate, whenever possible monophyletic, genus is and it is not the role of the CodeO P < H . Facts and problems at the species level and < Code simply rules the below H Changes in the Code become immediately effective when IC] F 7 0 not sacrosanct; even molecular results are often debatable 2 E 0 < '!K&!& I. )) J I4. 0<7 I ` O &!& we need several markers? If so, which markers and how not to disrupt works in press which introduced new names for H .` @ <4 &! "$ OC K &!' classify them as a single species? Do connections between can only have one name, the system of permitting separate .. P< `[O. I misunderstandings and confusion since it only refers to new H K&!'C C\ .H H sensu lato or sensu stricto, K &!' the presence of different evaluations of certain characters, .\ .<H C"#(Code4 combination of objective facts and subjective interpretations names, including those of anamorphs, remain legitimate but 4. ) H < CI ]..H . < introduction of alternative names for different morphs is IO`P 0IQR H beholder! There is no general answer, but careful individual 0 H H HOH to uncertainty on the part of an author, it will still be possible always in competition with each other, and the best solutions .J prevail, following their eventual adoption by applicants and < @H. state that the merging of the two morphs in one fungus is times and will have it in future, but whether it is good or bad ] H H

VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 83 Braun

Table 1EErysiphales*) .bold

Erysiphe arcuata +27<€4, Schlechtendalia 16##&!! Synonym: carpini JQin Braun, Powdery Mildews Eur.&&&##" ARTICLE azaleae +2+2€7<Schlechtendalia 4"&!!! Basionym: Microsphaera azaleae+2Mycotaxon 14'!#$& Synonym: Oidium ericinum [Meddn Kungl. Landtbr.-Akad. Exper1x$$"

Erysiphe buhrii +25|[!|32$!#$ Synonyms: Erysiphe pisi .buhrii +20Mycotaxon 44&""##& Oidium dianthi KQKarm. Opred. Gribov 2 (Muchnisto-rosyanye gribyx6#&

Erysiphe caricae+2€2in Bolay, Cryptog. Helv20x6&!!" Synonyms: Oidium caricae J5Bol. Inst. Agron. Estado São Paulo 9$$#$ Acrosporum caricae J57Hyphomycetes$'"# Oidium papayae (7IGarcia de Orta, sér. Est. Agron18&x##&

Erysiphe catalpae77Mikol. Fitopatol18x6'#$x Synonym: Oidium bignoniaeKQEzhegodnik 5&x#!#

Erysiphe celosiae Tanda, Mycoscience 41"&!!! Synonym: Oidium amaranthi ^(et al., Indian Phytopath246x#

Erysiphe cruciferarum>QH*KSvensk. Bot. Tidskr61&#6 Synonyms: Erysiphe cruciferarum >QLotos 5x&$""nom. inval. C'& E. pisi .cruciferarum >QH*K0Mycotaxon 44&""##& Oidium matthiolae ^, Palestine J. BotJerusalem ser1'&"#x!‚O#'$M#'#Pƒ

Erysiphe oehrensii 4.+2€7<Schlechtendalia 4&!!! Basionym: Microsphaera oehrensii 4.Mycotaxon 49&"###' Synonym: Oidium robustum +2€>Mycotaxon 25&6$#$6

Erysiphe quercicola 7<€+2Mycol. Res111$#&!! Synonym: Oidium anacardii Noack, Bol. Inst. Estado São Paulo 9$#$

Golovinomyces biocellatus [4Ukr. bot. Zh45"6&#$$ Basionym: Erysiphe biocellata[Nova Acta Phys.-Med. Acad. Caes. Leop.-Carol. Nat. Cur10&$& Synonyms: Erysibe biocellata[*Sp. Plx6!#$&x‚QbiocellarisRƒ Oidium erysiphoides JSyst. mycol3x'&$'&

Golovinomyces magnicellulatus +24Ukr. bot. Zh45"6'#$$ Basionym: Erysiphe magnicellulata+2Feddes Repert886"6#$ Synonyms: E. cichoracearum.magnicellulata+2+2Nova Hedwigia 346#"#$. Oidium drummondii<Mycoth. Univ 12$$

Golovinomyces sonchicola +2€^<CEin Cook & Braun, Mycol. Res. 1136&#&!!# Synonym: Oidium sonchi-arvensis 7Bull. Dept. Agric. Gov. Res. Inst. Formosa 24'x#&

Golovinomyces verbasci KQ4Ukr. bot. Zh. 45"6'#$$ Basionym: Erysiphe cichoracearumverbasciKQKarm. Opred. Gribov 2 (Muchnisto-rosyanye griby&&x#& Synonyms: E. verbasciKQ72Beitr. Krypt.-Fl. Schweiz 7&$x#'' Oidium balsamii(Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist &13x6'$"x

Leveillula rutae KQ+2in Braun & Cook, CBS Biodiversity Series 11&!"&!& Basionym: Leveillula taurica rutaeKQKarm. Opred. Gribov 2 (Muchnisto-rosyanye gribyx#& Synonyms: L. rutae KQO€^Cryptog. Mycol5&##$"‚O#$xPƒ8comb inval. C''' Oidium haplophylli Magnus, Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien 50xxx#!! Ovulariopsis haplophylli(<.Atti Accad. Sci. Veneto-Trentino-Istriana 6#'

84 IMA FUNGUS Impacts of the discontinuation of dual nomenclature

Table 1E ARTICLE

Oidiopsis haplophylli (^Bull. Soc. Bot. Centre-Ouest 17##$6

Phyllactinia ampelopsidis5€ *Acta Microbiol. Sin19x## Synonym: Ovulariopsis ampelopsidis-heterophyllae7Bull. Dept. Agric. Gov. Res. Inst. Formosa 61$#''

Phyllactinia chubutiana 4.et alMycoscience 47&'$&!!6 Synonyms: Oidium insolitum +2et al., Sydowia 53'"&!! Ovulariopsis insolita +2et al.4.et al., Mycoscience 47&'$&!!6

Phyllactinia gmelinae +2€2Sydowia 51### Synonyms: Phyllactinia suffulta .gmelinae FCurr. Sci30"6#68nom. inval.C'6 P. gmelinae 4et al., Indian J. Trop. Biol1: '$##'8nom. inval. C'6 Ovulariopsis gmelinae-arboreae 4et al., Indian J. Trop. Biol1: '6##'

Phyllactinia populiKQ5in Yu & Lai, Acta Microbiol. Sin19$## Basionym: Phyllactinia suffulta f. populi KQKarm. Opred. Gribov 2 (Muchnisto-rosyanye gribyx'##& Synonym: Ovulariopsis salicis-warburgii7Bull. Dept. Agric. Gov. Res. Inst. Formosa 61$##''

based on molecular approaches is not per se superior over Euoidium.. H I C ) Opinions and proposals to restrict descriptions of new genera are younger than the corresponding teleomorph- H. H Oidium I. younger facultative synonyms in future, but nevertheless ( .C H.. H whenever possible, but its inclusion cannot and should not be \0 <O ..) PH. > of the world or would even force certain mycologists to give . HC particularly the conidial stages of species .8. are morphologically often poorly differentiated and of little HO5C .<. O5C H . 4 JH . ) from amateur mycologists, who study various important There is only a single generic problem in powdery Indeed, we need all available resources for the inventory of .QOidium *$&x . O type species Oidium monilioides, which is the anamorph of I Code as Blumeria graminis, the type species of the teleomorph genus being essential for valid publication would undoubtedly not Blumeria 3.H7#x4Oidium would be an 7I older name for Blumeria, and “Oidium graminis” would be the indirectly applied, outside the Code, by particular journals correct name for the powdery mildew of grasses and I in future; this is, of course, unacceptable, and Blumeria will 4. . H policies could ever be a way of preventing publication of new Most powdery mildew anamorphs are morphologically H[] . H to truly distinguish separate species in the absence of 4. 4 Concepts for names in powdery mildews in glass houses, and also in nature, usually connected with (Erysiphales) – an example [. CH I 2€E&!&@ due to a lack of data from other specimens for comparision group of obligate plant pathogens, clear connections between 4) Blumeria with Oidium H . s. str Erysiphe with Pseudoidium, Golovinomyces with descriptions are intended, they should only be based on

VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 85 Braun

striking morphological differences combined, if possible, with < H H will be put on a proposed List of accepted names according to used in future as they remain legitimate, valid, and available, the new provisions of the Melbourne CodeCx HO)

ARTICLE species in Erysiphe, Golovinomyces, Neoërysiphe and other ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ). and in accordance with the Code, but they should only be 0^<CE . H A recently found powdery mildew anamorph on Solanum betaceum 0 H < S. REFERENCES lycopersicum tomato is morphologically indistinguishable from Pseudoidium 2F2+E757_&!!#J neolycopersiciOidium neolycopersici2 an Oidium‚neolycopersiciƒSolanum betaceum0 et al&!!#5. Australasian Plant Disease Notes 4'&M'' only recorded as Oidium O. neolycopersici 2FE757_2+<74 because reviewers refused the latter denomination without (&!&(EQOidiumSolanum %< betaceum0The Plant Pathology Journal (Korea): inoculation tests were later carried out and the tree tomato 2 + E ^

86 IMA FUNGUS