Hyde,KD (reprint author),Chinese Acad Sci,Kunming Inst Bot,Key Lab Plant Divers & Biogeog East Asia,Kunming 650201,Yunnan,Peoples R China.
A review of phylogenetic studies carried out together with morphological ones shows that a major problem with most early studies is that they concentrated on techniques and used material or strains of fungi that in most cases were not carefully reference, and in a worrying number of cases wrongly named. Most classical species, particularly of microfungi, are not represented by adequate type material, or other authoritatively identified cultures or specimens, that can serve as DNA sources for phylogenetic study, or for developing robust identification systems. Natural classifications of fungi therefore suffer from the lack of reference strains in resultant phylogenetic trees. In some cases, epitypification and neotypification can solve this problem and these tools are increasingly used to resolve taxonomic confusion and stabilize the understanding of species, genera, families, or orders of fungi. This manuscript discusses epitypification and neotypification, describes how to epitypify or neotypify species and examines the importance of this process. A set of guidelines for epitypification is presented. Examples where taxa have been epitypified are presented and the benefits and problems of epitypification are discussed. As examples of epitypification, or to provide reference specimens, a new epitype is designated for Paraphaeosphaeria michotii and reference specimens are provided for Astrosphaeriella stellata, A. bakeriana, Phaeosphaeria elongata, Ophiobolus cirsii, and O. erythrosporus. In this way we demonstrate how to epitypify taxa and its importance, and also illustrate the value of proposing reference specimens if epitypification is not advisable. Although we provided guidelines for epitypification, the decision to epitypify or not lies with the author, who should have experience of the fungus concerned. This responsibility is to be taken seriously, as once a later typification is made, it may not be possible to undo that, particularly in the case of epitypes, without using the lengthy and tedious formal conservation and rejection processes.
1.Chinese Acad Sci, Kunming Inst Bot, Key Lab Plant Divers & Biogeog East Asia, Kunming 650201, Yunnan, Peoples R China 2.World Agroforestry Ctr, Kunming 650201, Yunnan, Peoples R China 3.Mae Fah Luang Univ, Inst Excellence Fungal Res, Sch Sci, Chiang Rai 57100, Thailand 4.Univ Complutense Madrid, Fac Farm, Dept Biol Vegetal 2, E-28040 Madrid, Spain 5.Nat Hist Museum, Dept Life Sci, London SW7 5BD, England 6.Royal Bot Gardens, Mycol Sect, Richmond TW9 3DS, Surrey, England 7.Manaaki Whenua Landcare Res, Auckland, New Zealand 8.AMB Grp Micol Forlivese Antonio Cicognani, Forli, Italy 9.King Saudi Univ, Dept Bot & Microbiol, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 10.Agri Sci Queensland, Plant Pathol Herbarium, Dutton Pk, Qld 4102, Australia
Ariyawansa,Hiran A.;Hawksworth,David L.;Hyde,Kevin D.;Jones,E. B. Gareth;Maharachchikumbura,Sajeewa S. N.;Manamgoda,Dimuthu S.;Thambugala,Kasun M.;Udayanga,Dhanushka;Camporesi,Erio;Daranagama,Anupama;Jayawardena,Ruvishika;Liu,Jian-Kui;McKenzie,Eric H. C.;Phookamsak,Rungtiwa;Senanayake,Indunil C.;Shivas,Roger G.;Tian,Qing;Xu,Jian-Chu.Epitypification and neotypification: guidelines with appropriate and inappropriate examples,FUNGAL DIVERSITY,2015,117():1035-1035