Survey of macrofungi at the BFS Upper Research Site Kayla A. Dolce1 ABSTRACT Fungi present in an ecosystem are often overlooked, though they play vital roles in forest health and recovery. Analyzing and recording the fungal community of a forest can be a long and widespread effort, and surveys often require up to 10 years to thoroughly describe all species of macrofungi present in a forest community. This survey attempts to add to the data collected by Currie D. Marr between the summers of 1969 and 1971 (Marr 1970, 1971), as well as to add to the fungi collection in the Jewell and Arline Moss Settle Herbarium at SUNY Oneonta. INTRODUCTION Fungal communities are often overlooked in forest ecosystems, since they predominantly lie underground. Their presence is often only recognized by their aboveground fruiting body, the reproductive structure produced by the mycelium, or the vegetative body of the fungus, in the soil. Mycological efforts have been expanding greatly, as it is the least studied kingdom of the eukaryotes. It is estimated that there are up to 1.5 million fungal species in existence, however, only a fraction of these have been discovered and named (Blackwell 2011). Many of these species hold particular importance to humans, with multiple local species holding edible and/or medicinal value. Fungi play major roles in ecosystems in being the primary decomposers of dead and decaying matter and in cycling nutrients back into the ecosystem. They also hold important relationships with various animals as a source of food and shelter, including multiple vertebrates, arthropods, and gastropods. They are of significance to plant life as well, as they form positive mycorrhizal relationships with various tree species that aid in forest health, and provide nutrients to various parasitic plants. Even if a fungus is present in an ecosystem, it may be hard to detect. Various factors play into the production of a fruiting body, including substrate, host availability, and climate (Van Norman and Huff 2012). The time of year is another important factor. Temperature, humidity, and air composition make it so certain mushrooms reliably fruit at different times of the year. (Bellettini et al. 2016). For these reasons, it is important to carry out surveys over long periods of time each year, and for an estimated minimum of at least 10 years (Halme and Kotiaho 2012). 1 SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station Intern, summer 2017. Current affiliation: SUNY Oneonta. Funding provided by the Otsego County Conservation Association. Similar surveys were carried out by Marr during the summers of 1969, 1970, and 1971, (the resultant collections being curated in the Jewell and Arline Moss Settle Herbarium on the SUNY Oneonta campus) (Marr 1969, 1970, 1971). It is with a goal of establishing a permanent record of the species located at the BFS Upper Research Site that collections were made and surveys were carried out on the same property, 46 years later. It is also possible that new species of fungi were introduced to the property since that time. These data will provide information to support future studies on the property, including herbarium specimens, for future genetic and/or taxonomic research. METHODS Macrofungi were sampled weekly beginning on 13 June and ending on 10 August, excluding the week of July 16. In order to maximize collections of fruiting bodies, fungi were often collected after major rain/moisture events, in order to take into consideration the conditions in which fruiting bodies are most likely to be produced. A total of 8 surveys were carried out throughout the summer. Collection sites were defined using the map of the Upper Site property developed by C.D. Marr in 1970, pictured in Figure 1. The areas collected from represent a variety of different ecosystems, including bog habitats, grasslands, and a variety of different forest types (Table 1). An interactive map based on Marr’s map was generated using Google’s MyMaps to keep track of the subsection in which each fruiting body was located. This map was accessed via the MyMaps Android application. Greater detail regarding location was not recorded, since the vegetative body of a fungus spans over a much larger area than the area in which its fruiting body is found. Notes and photos were taken in the field and in the lab regarding numbered site in which the fruiting body was found, substrate, and a general description of important properties of the fruiting body. Since there are many factors taken into account in terms of identification of fungi, including taste, smell, color of spores, bruising, chemical tests, color of fruiting body, substrate, nearby trees, hymenium, cap/stipe appearance, and various microscopic elements, identification was often done in the lab and not in the field. Identification in the lab was achieved using Arora (1986), and Bessette (2010). Following identification, specimens were given collection numbers and dried using an industrial oven with the heat off overnight for storage in the Jewell and Arline Moss Settle Herbarium. They were also recorded on Mushroom Observer, a widely utilized online mushroom database. Figure 1. Map of Upper Site sampling areas, 2017. Key found in Table 1. Table 1. Site descriptions of sampling areas. Corresponding map can be found in Figure 1. Site number Description I Open Area, Herbaceous Flora II Bog, Swamp III West of Moe (Mixed Eastern Hemlock and Hardwoods) IV Red Pine V North of Moe (Mixed Eastern Hemlock and Hardwoods) VI European Larch VII East of Moe (Spruce) VIII East of Moe (Mixed Eastern Hemlock and Hardwoods) IX South of Moe (Spruce) X South of Moe (Mixed Eastern Hemlock and Hardwoods) RESULTS A complete list of fungi species found and collected is displayed in Table 2. A total of 94 different species were found, the majority of these being Basidiomycetes (93.617%). Only 6 different species of ascomycetes were recorded. A total of 32 different families were represented by the species found. The families found in greatest abundance include Amanitaceae and Polyporaceae. In total, 61 species found in this survey were recorded previously by Marr. This takes into account species whose names have been changed since the onset of Marr’s research. This indicates that 33 species found were either not found by Marr or introduced to the property, contributing data to the total comprehensive list of fungi present on the property. These numbers take into account the multiple species whose names have changed since Marr identified them. Over the course of the survey, numerous mushrooms were found that hold potential anthropogenic importance, whether as a source of food or those with medicinal antiviral/antibacterial properties. Mushrooms found on the property considered choice edibles include all members of the genus Cantharellus, Pluteus cervinus, and Laetiporus sulphureus. Mushrooms found on the property that are considered widely known and traditional medicinal mushrooms include Ganoderma tsugae and Inonotus obliquus. One fungus found on the property that is considered a harmful pathogenic facultative parasite that should be monitored is Kretzschmaria deusta, which acts as a wood decay fungus of living trees. Table 2. Complete list of fungi found at the BFS Upper Site, summer 2017. Collection Division Family Species number Date Location Ascomycota Geoglossaceae Trichoglossum sp. 8/3/2017 X Hypocreaceae Hypomyces chrysospermus 7/26/2017 X Leotiaceae Leotia lubrica KD00041 7/13/2017 X 7/26/2017 X Pyronemataceae Scutellinia scutellata KD00096 8/3/2017 III Xylariaceae Kretzschmaria deusta 6/13/2017 III 6/22/2017 IV Xylaria polymorpha KD00012 6/28/2017 IV KD00021 6/28/2017 VIII Basidiomycota Agaricaceae Agaricus sp. 8/3/2017 X Amanitaceae Amanita amerifulva 6/22/2017 IV Amanita bisporigera 8/3/2017 X Amanita rubescens KD00045 7/13/2017 X Collection Division Family Species number Date Location KD00087 8/3/2017 IV KD00086 8/3/2017 X Amanita brunnescens var. pallida KD00044 7/13/2017 III Amanita cokeri KD00060 7/26/2017 X Amanita flavoconia KD00031 7/6/2017 III KD00030 7/6/2017 IV 7/13/2017 X Amanita frostiana KD00058 7/13/2017 III Amanita muscaria var. guessowii KD00059 7/13/2017 III Amanita rubescens 7/6/2017 III 7/13/2017 X 8/3/2017 X 8/3/2017 IV Amanita sp. 7/6/2017 III Amanita sp. 7/26/2017 VIII Amanita vaginata KD00032 7/6/2017 V KD00049 7/13/2017 X KD00054 7/13/2017 III 7/26/2027 X KD00075 7/26/2017 VIII Auriscalpiaceae Artomyces pyxidatus 6/22/2017 III KD00017 6/28/2017 IV 7/6/2017 V Auriscalpium sp. KD00095 8/3/2017 III Bankeraceae Hydnellum caeruleum KD00061 7/26/2017 X Hydnellum concrescens KD00036 7/13/2017 X 8/3/2017 X Bolbitiaceae Conocybe sp. KD00039 7/13/2017 X Boletaceae Boletinellus merulioides KD00068 7/26/2017 VIII KD00088 8/3/2017 II Boletus atkinsonii 7/26/2017 X Boletus bicolor 7/6/2017 III Boletus sp. KD00028 7/6/2017 III Boletus sp. KD00054 7/13/2017 X Boletus sp. 7/26/2017 X Boletus sp. KD00089 8/3/2017 II Leccinum sp. 8/3/2017 IV Collection Division Family Species number Date Location Strobilomyces sp. 8/3/2017 X Tylopilus felleus KD00052 7/13/2017 III Cantharellaceae Cantharellus cibarius KD00035 7/13/2017 X KD00027 7/6/2017 III KD00033 7/6/2017 V Cantharellus deceptivus 7/13/2017 III Cantharellus latentius KD00022 6/28/2017 III Craterellus ignicolor KD00063 7/26/2017 X Cantharellus sp. KD00076 7/26/2017 VIII Cantharellus sp. KD00093 8/3/2017 III Clavariaceae Clavaria vermicularis KD00025 7/6/2017 III 7/6/2017 IV Clavaria zollingeri KD00091 8/3/2017 III Clavulinopsis fusiformis KD00067 7/26/2017 X Cortinariaceae Cortinarius iodes KD00070 7/26/2017 VIII Cortinarius sp.