IMA FUNGUS · VOLUME 3 · NO 1: 25–38 16/RR7Q3./6./G/6/2 Afrocantharellus gen. stat. nov. is part of a rich diversity of African ARTICLE Cantharellaceae NN&6.­JJ#4.+&.FKK#1 1N?M#NJ([<GR6W7NJ&( X=1 Z .NJ"[MM#0#6QNWR.GVMJ Abstract: A new genus in the Cantharellaceae, Afrocantharellus Key words: N0F+JM+JM3RQ="&J.3F&(V"# Africa # [ ' ' # F F&(V CantharellusAfrocantharellus is Cantharellus ### "&J In contrast to most of Cantharellus, Afrocantharellus(Cantharellus LSU and Afrocantharellus based on LSU and a concatenated data set are provided, along with descriptions of and a Molecular phylogeny key to the four species and one form of Afrocantharellus J< & Article info: J1.R!./6.XF16V?./6.X(1.6>./6. INTRODUCTION Cantharellus and the closely related Craterellus, has recently been investigated using molecular data, and reviewed by Cantharellaceae Moncalvo et al. .//V " which in most cases have a vase-shaped or funnel-shaped relationships as reconstructed from different genes, particularly basidiome and a spore-bearing smooth, wrinkled, veined with respect to the placement of Tulasnella Cantharellus Cantharellus, as presently delineated, and Craterellus consistently were monophyletic and sister- .G0F#J groups in analyses based on LSU, SSU, mtSSU, and RPB. F # F % 0 '+N0F+JM T 2V F 67 F % .//G "&J'# &et al.//Q9P./66et al of or in Cantharellales # ! et al ./66%et al.//7Jet al./66Cantharellus 6772!et al.677WPet al677W(et al includes several well-known and highly esteemed edible 6777+et al6777Net al.///Pet al./// "FCantharellus species are widely collected 9 P .//. ?# et al .//V [ et F#FCantharellus al.//7"Cantharellaceae!et al E # P 67RQ 6772"&J# P 67VV from N Katanga, describing C. platyphyllus and C. symoensii as et al.//GF[#"&J "# 0FCantharellus cibarius-like 6772C. splendens, was described, and chanterelles has been demonstrated, suggesting a species others are mentioned in a list of Cantharellus species from the < ! et 90677R! al 6772 N et al .//G ( et al. .//G ?# Cantharellus from Africa, including detailed investigations of et al .//V = %9 genes such as RPB.# 677QFCantharellus species known from & # &#et al..///0 primarily had a background in incongruent placement of notes and descriptions of new subgenera and sections in Tulasnella with different datasets, whereas LSU still seems to Cantharellus%9.//6 [#Botryobasidium and Tulasnella ( +JM = Molecular studies of the ‘cantharelloid clade’ branch attraction in some types of analyses, particularly in & Q R = ?# et al. © 2012 International Mycological Association You are free to share - to copy, distribute and transmit the work, under the following conditions: Attribution: [ Non-commercial: No derivative works: 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. Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights. VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 25 "#$%4"*% .//VF < Cantharellus cibarius, considered to &# Q#R?#et family level, but are manageable and cause much less data al.//VCantharellus and this complicates ?#et al.//V the circumscription of Cantharellus s. str. Additionally, Buyck Although LSU- and mtSSU-based analyses previously 9P./66 ARTICLE # [ # [ < C. relationships in Cantharellaceae ?# et al. .//V cibarius F&(V P# F&(=V # phylogenetic inference in Cantharellaceae K 9 species are hidden under traditional phenotype-based species 6777# Eet al.//QP# in Boletales = ; of recent studies of basidiomycetes based on molecular data < # " for the protein coding gene tef-1, leading to the recognition < 0 F Cantharellus et @et al.//V!=#et al ./66 al.//W0et al./6.& in the Cantharellus cibarius < on molecular data should be adopted when a morphological MJF 9 P ./66 9 P .//Q species concept is inapplicable in the sense that it is not presented preliminary results of a four gene phylogeny for 0 Cantharellus, employing mtSSU, LSU, and two protein- =QR coding loci, tef-1 and RPB.ca.2R P.//V# continents were sampled suggesting the recognition of at least between molecular phylogenies and morphological features < P# evaluated a posteriori< stated that more studies on a larger data set were needed & <F# understanding and reassessment of the phylogeny of ##Q Cantharellus based on the inclusion of molecular data derived RPet al.677W.///(et al.6777P9 from the rich diversity of African Cantharellus species based N.//69P.//.+et al..//2 +JMRQ="&J.F&(V' Binder et al.//R?.//R?#et al..//V Cantharellus ! et al. 677W N et al. ./// Dunham et al..//G&9P.//2Pet al. MATERIALS AND METHODS .//R'F #E# Taxon and sequence sampling of the genus in Africa, this might well have hampered our All Cantharellus [ understanding of the phylogeny of Cantharellus and the & QR !6FM>JMN & # #.//2M.//WJ the molecular analyses so far published of phylogenetic # relationships of Cantharellus s. lat.< E&F##V/ ' & # E? <#0P <&et al.//Q& rich diversity of Cantharellus& ## 2/ diversity of CantharellusF< #E&F and the inclusion of data on African Cantharellus may thus #6/]' <# E& in comprehensiveness and phylogenetic relationships in 1=JNMAVM <=JN<5# the measured <5#AV5 JN #X 3 Current species recognition in Cantharellus %et al..//6&et al.//QJ In Cantharellus, as currently circumscribed, the distinction 67V7 < ! RQJM"&J. F&(V given the few and variable morphological characters ' .6 ./ Cantharellus #9P./66 respectively, +JM GV !<C. cibariusQCcibarius’ Craterellus " WW ' refers to any yellowish chanterelle, and C. cibarius is no @ # '&6 When the status of nominal species and morphological '@& variability within the species was not clear, sometimes these the phylogenetic position of African Cantharellus species as Q R & 26 IMA FUNGUS Afrocantharellus gen. nov. ARTICLE X X Fig. 1. Map showing the distribution ?= & F< Q\R 16+JMX. [ F&(V +JM3RQ="&J.3F&(V F" 9' [ & +JM 7. set for Clavulina ' @ < Cantharellus and related genera selected for this +JM RQ="&J. Cl. cinerea with Clavulina J' @ F&(VXDacrymyces chrysospermus# ' & " # ! .MG # &FJ% QR 13333333&.1J6.W/7 by the results presented by Moncalvo et al..//V" LSU sampling, representatives of Craterellus, Hydnum, and Molecular study Multiclavula were included representing more remote relatives of CantharellusMulticlavula mucida [ 9' A concatenated data set included &N0F< +JM3RQ="&J.3F&(V .Q ' preferentially from the hymenium to avoid contamination, 6W L (@N0F< # X # K B"[@%0 N 6/-1M6/=G N0F < (E;&RR+JMRQ= 'RQ="&J.F&(V&F&(V "&J. F&(V [ ( 1 " F&(V RR+JM1+;G+;RB9P677/ however, no Craterellus ' # +;[; 1333 0PCantharellus species only two, vizC. 33µ+ ;0F .R=.QJ cibarius, and C. cinnabarinus were included. Considering that '+E61 C. cibarius' RRM@&EE@F@&&@&F@F&@F@MGRX [ '#@ RQJ="&J."&J&.XF&(V1 & F&(V=.F&(V=GK96777 ?#F&(V' !(E;[+JMRQ="&J. #0PCantharellus species and F&(VF(®(E;(?< two Craterellus [ N K G 3+ N0F " 6R3+6/3?# VOLUME 3 · NO. 1 27 "#$%4"*% Table 1. J'##@ 'X##[@"N ' No Species Voucher Locality Collection no. (UPS) LSU-GB 5.8-ITS2 GB ATP6-GB 1 <' NN&G6 &F0TF0"F1K &G6.//V JQ976959 —— ARTICLE 2 < NN&2G &F0TF0"F1K &2G.//W JQ976965 —— 3 A. platyphyllus NN&VG &F0TF0"F1? &6/VG.//W JQ976970 —— cyanescens 4 A. platyphyllus NN&WQ &F0TF0"F1" &6/WQ.//W JQ976978 JQ976947 JQ976926 platyphyllus 5 A. platyphyllus NN&/G &F0TF0"F1? &6//G.//2 JQ976950 JQ976929 — platyphyllus 6 A. platyphyllus NN&26 &F0TF0"F1K &6/26.//V JQ976964 —— platyphyllus 7 A. splendens NN&RW &F0TF0"F1? &6/RW.//W JQ976967 JQ976937 JQ976916 8 A. splendens NN&6W &F0TF0"F1@ &6/6W.//R JQ976956 JQ976932 JQ976911 9 A. symoensii NN&GV &F0TF0"F1K &6/GV.//R JQ976961 JQ976934 JQ976914 10 A. symoensii NN&/2 &F0TF0"F1? &6//2.//R JQ976951 —— 11 A. symoensii NN&VV &F0TF0"F1" &6/VV.//W JQ976971 JQ976940 JQ976919 12 A. symoensii NN&66 &F0TF0"F1? &6/66.//R JQ976953 —— 13 A. symoensii NN&VW &F0TF0"F1" &6/VW.//W JQ976972 JQ976941 JQ976920 14 A. symoensii NN&62 &F0TF0"F1@ &6/62.//2 JQ976955 —— 15 Botryobasidium isabellinum F!G7G/2W — NRG2R7W6 16 C. appalachiensis NQ7QV7/ — — 17 C. appalachiensis P?WR/76V — — 18 C. cascadensis F/266R7 — — 19 C. cascadensis F/266RQ — — 20 C. cascadensis F/266V6 — — 21 C. cascadensis F/266V/ — — 22 C. cibarius # cibarius F/266RV — — 23 C. cibarius # cibarius F/266RR — — 24 C. cibarius # cibarius F/266RW — — 25 C. cibarius #roseocanus F/266R. — — 26 C. cibarius #roseocanus F/266RG — — 27 C. cibarius #roseocanus F/266R2 — — 28 C. cibarius #roseocanus F/266R6 — — 29 C. cibarius #multiramis P?WR/7./ — — 30 C. cibarius JJRW2 JL%N%01M [9! JQ976981 —— .//R3R/GWR. 31 C. cibarius %MR..Q.R — — 32 C. cibarius F>2/V2.Q — — 33 C. cibarius P?WR/7.W — — 34 C. cibarius FW2RW/Q 35 C. cibarius NQ7QV7G — — 36 C. cibarius # longipes P?WR/7.2 — — 37 C. cinnabarinus F/266VQ — — 38 C. cinnabarinus NQ7QV7. — — — — N6./722 — NQ7QV27 — 39 C. congolensis NN&WW &F0TF0"F1? &6/WW.//W JQ976977 JQ976946 JQ976925 40 C. congolensis NN&WV &F0TF0"F1" &6/WV.//W JQ976976 JQ976945 JQ976924 28 IMA FUNGUS Afrocantharellus gen. nov. Table 1. E ARTICLE No Species Voucher Locality Collection no. (UPS) LSU-GB 5.8-ITS2 GB ATP6-GB 41 C. densifolius NN&2/ &F0TF0"F1K &6/2/.//V JQ976963 JQ976935 JQ976915 42 C. densifolius NN&RQ &F0TF0"F1? &6/RQ.//V JQ976968 JQ976938 JQ976917 43 @\ NN&GG &F0TF0"F1? &6/GG.//V JQ976960 — JQ976913 44 @\ NN&GQ &F0TF0"F1? &6/GQ.//R JQ976962 —— 45 C. formosus F/266VV — — 46 C. formosus F/266V2 — — 47 C. formosus F/266VR — — 48 C. garnierii FG7.WVW — — 49 C. garnierii FG7.WVQ — — 50 C. isabellinus P?WR/7G6 — — 51 C. isabellinus NN&G/ &F0TF0"F1? &6/G/.//V JQ976958 —— 52 C.