Chromosera cyanophylla was initially described from Europe and, when it was named type of the genus, was thought to be distributed throughout Europe and North America. Molecular phylogenies revealed that Chromosera “cyanophylla” from eastern and western North America represent two separate species and that neither is conspecific with European C. cyanophylla nor with the more recently described C. ambigua. Here we describe a new species from western North America as Chromosera loreleiae. We resurrect the species Peck described from eastern North America as Agaricus lilacifolius by recombining it in Chromosera and describe a new lilac variety lacking yellow pigments. The range of C. cyanophylla s.s. across eastern Eurasia including China is confirmed. Chromosera citrinopallida, described from Washington state, USA, comprised one clade in Washington that we infer is C. citrinopallida s.s. and a separate circumarctic clade distributed in Scandinavia, Iceland and Alaska.

The burgeoning accumulation of genomic data in recent years has revolutionized our understanding of fungal phylogenies and classifications. However, the genomic era also brings new challenges, as phylogenetic incongruences make the appearance of monophyly in some phylogenetic trees questionable. Existing criteria for constructing taxonomic systems, such as diagnostic characters and divergence time, become insufficient to address this challenge. Through order-level analyses of genomic data of the Subkingdom Dikarya within the Kingdom Fungi, we introduce the extended quadripartition internode certainty (EQP-IC) value as a novel criterion for constructing high-level fungal classifications, with a recommended threshold of 0.1 for each taxonomic rank. Suprageneric taxa with an EQP-IC value exceeding 0.1 exhibit reduced topological variation, suggesting a stronger correspondence with natural taxonomic category. This new criterion was also put into practice to investigate the derived suborders of mushroom-forming Agaricales, including three suborders, Agaricineae, Pluteineae, and Tricholomatineae (APT), that had been long-standing problems in phylogenetic analyses. In total, 142 genomes, including 64 newly generated ones, were utilized to reconstruct the phylogenetic relationships and delve into the phylogenetic incongruencies and evolutionary histories of APT. Our data suggested widespread and high-level incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) and introgression/hybridization (IH) present among suborders within the APT. Therefore, a dichotomous phylogenetic tree may not reflect the real relationships among the clades within the APT. Instead, their natural relationships may be reticulate. Three newly named suborders, Amanitineae, Macrocystidiineae, and Omphalinineae are added to the clade including APT. The new combination Baisuzhenia humphreyi, new genus Baisuzhenia, new family Baisuzheniaceae, and new suborder Baisuzheniineae are proposed to accommodate Stereopsis humphreyi, which shows an independent, but close relationship, with the clade formed by the six above-mentioned derived suborders of Agaricales.

Some species of Tilletia are responsible for diseases in economically important crops, such as wheat and rice. In this study, we sequenced, assembled, and annotated 22 new genomes for Tilletia, with a focus on species causing dwarf bunt (DB; T. controversa), common bunt (CB; T. caries and T. laevis), and rice kernel smut (RKS; T. horrida). We present the first genomes for four other species (T. bromi, T. fusca, T. goloskokovii, and T. rugispora), resulting in the largest and most diverse sample of Tilletia genomes studied to date. Depending on the species and strain, the assembly size ranged from 24.3 to 30.5 Mb and gene prediction resulted in 7138 to 8261 gene models per genome. Phylogenomic analyses with hundreds to thousands of genes revealed significant support for the relationships among certain Tilletia taxa and validated findings of previous molecular studies that employed a small number of genes. Further population-level analyses showed two distinct populations of DB and CB: T. controversa (DB) as a single population and another intermixed population of T. caries and T. laevis (CB). No evidence of geographic isolation was observed within these populations. Our phylogenomic analyses also supported previous multigene hypotheses that multiple lineages of Tilletia may cause RKS. Collectively, our results suggest that taxonomic revisions are needed for the RKS-causing pathogens and provide convincing evidence for formally recognizing the CB-causing taxa as one species, named T. caries (synonym T. laevis). Overall, our study significantly enhances genomic resources for Tilletia, offers insights into phylogenetic relationships and population structure, and provides whole genome sequences for future studies.

Helictotrichon sempervirens (blue oatgrass) is a perennial grass widely grown for ornamental use in Canada. Rusted blue oatgrass plants with diseased leaves covered with uredinia were collected from two locations at metropolitan Vancouver, British Columbia (BC), in summer 2022. The rust fungus was identified as Puccinia gibberosa (= P. coronata var. gibberosa) based on combined results of morphological characteristics and molecular analyses. The internal transcribed spacer two (ITS2) and partial large subunit ribosomal DNA were amplified and sequenced. The sequence obtained for the rust fungus showed 99.9% identity with the previously reported P. coronata var. gibberosa from USA. This is the first report of rust caused by P. gibberosa on blue oatgrass in Canada. Evidence from phylogenetic analyses supports the recognition of this rust at the species level. A revised description for P. gibberosa is provided, including synonyms, host range and distribution across the globe, and incorporating comprehensive molecular and morphological results for several North American and European specimens. In addition, a lectotype and an epitype are designated here for the rust species.

Basidiomycota is one of the major phyla in the fungal tree of life. The outline of Basidiomycota provides essential taxonomic information for researchers and workers in mycology. In this study, we present a time-framed phylogenomic tree with 487 species of Basidiomycota from 127 families, 47 orders, 14 classes and four subphyla; we update the outline of Basidiomycota based on the phylogenomic relationships and the taxonomic studies since 2019; and we provide notes for each order and discuss the history, defining characteristics, evolution, justification of orders, problems, significance, and plates. Our phylogenomic analysis suggests that the subphyla diverged in a time range of 443–490 Myr (million years), classes in a time range of 312–412 Myr, and orders in a time range of 102–361 Myr. Families diverged in a time range of 50–289 Myr, 76–224 Myr, and 62–156 Myr in Agaricomycotina, Pucciniomycotina, and Ustilaginomycotina, respectively. Based on the phylogenomic relationships and divergence times, we propose a new suborder Mycenineae in Agaricales to accommodate Mycenaceae. In the current outline of Basidiomycota, there are four subphyla, 20 classes, 77 orders, 297 families, and 2134 genera accepted. When building a robust taxonomy of Basidiomycota in the genomic era, the generation of molecular phylogenetic data has become relatively easier. Finding phenotypical characters, especially those that can be applied for identification and classification, however, has become increasingly challenging.

(2952) Coccidioides posadasii M.C. Fisher & al. in Mycologia 94: 78. 2002, nom. cons. prop. Lectotypus (hic designatus): [cryopreserved culture] “Pappagianis isolate ‘Silveira’” from “severe primary coccidioidal infection [human] with erythema nodosum”, U.S.A., California, San Joaquin Valley, 1951 (ATCC No. 28868). MBT 10011881 (=) Posadasia esferiformis Cantón ex Posadas, Ensayo Nueva Neoplasia Hombre: Psorospermiosis Infect. Generaliz. 2: [3, footnote]–94. 1898 (‘esferiforme’), nom. rej. prop. Lectotypus (hic designatus): preserved infected human male, left foot, Pieza No. 779 (Mus. Patol., Dept. Patol., Fac. Med. Univ. Buenos Aires). MBT 10011896 (=) Coccidium posadasi Cantón, Tratado Zooparásitos Cuerpo Humano: 108. 1898 (‘posadas’), nom. rej. prop. Lectotypus (hic designatus): [icon in] Cantón, Tratado Zooparásitos Cuerpo Humano: 119, fig. 6. 1898. MBT 10011898 (=) Pseudococcidioides mazzae Fonseca in Bol. Inst. Clín. Quir. Fac. Ci. Méd. Univ. Nac. 4: 495. Apr–Mai 1928, nom. rej. prop. Lectotypus (hic designatus): [icon in] Bol. Inst. Clín. Quir. Fac. Ci. Méd. Univ. Nac. 4: 499, fig. 19. Apr–Mai 1928. MBT 10011882 (=) Geotrichum louisianoideum Castell. in Med. Press Circ. 136: 439. 31 Mai 1933, nom. rej. prop. Neotypus (hic designatus): [cryopreserved culture] Castellani, No. C. 8 (CBS No. 145.34). MBT 10011899 (=) Glenospora meteuropea Castell. in Med. Press Circ. 136: 440. 31 Mai 1933, nom. rej. prop. Lectotypus (hic designatus): [icon in] Med. Press Circ. 136: 440, fig. 4. 31 Mai 1933. MBT 10011900. Epitypus (hic designatus): [cryopreserved culture] isolated by A. Castellani, deposited by R. Ciferri (CBS No. 146.34). MBT 10011885 (=) Glenospora metamericana Castell. in Med. Press Circ. 136: 440. 31 Mai 1933, nom. rej. prop. Lectotypus (hic designatus): [icon in] Med. Press Circ. 136: 440, fig. 5. 31 Mai 1933. MBT 10011901. Epitypus (hic designatus): [cryopreserved culture] isolated by A. Castellani, deposited by R. Ciferri (CBS No. 196.34). MBT 10011886 (=) Trichosporon proteolyticum Negroni & Villafañe in Mycopathologia 2: 57. 1939, nom. rej. prop. Lectotypus (hic designatus): [icon in] Mycopathologia 2(1): t. VIII, fig. 2. 1939. MBT 10011902 Coccidioides immitis Rixford & Gilchrist (in Johns Hopkins Hosp. Rep. 1: 243. 1896) was designated by Clements & Shear (Gen. Fung., ed. 2: 410. 1931) as type of the fungal generic name Coccidioides Stiles in Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.) (Ascomycota, Onygenales). This species name is occasionally incorrectly cited as “C. immitis C.W. Stiles in Rixford & Gilchrist”, due to a misreading of a statement by Rixford & Gilchrist in the original description “[…] we propose for it, in accordance with the suggestion of Dr. Stiles, the generic name Coccidioides, and we designate the species as Coccidioides immitis”. A quoted letter from Stiles republished by Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.: 244) supplies the generic diagnosis differentiating Coccidioides from other protozoan genera, Eimeria Schneider and Klossia Schneider, so that the generic name should be attributed to Stiles (Art. 46.2 of the ICN; Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018). Stiles agreed with the suggested specific epithet “immitis” that was made by Rixford & Gilchrist during a face-to-face meeting (see quoted letter) for the one species but disagreed with a second species epithet, “superficialis” for a second species that Rixford & Gilchrist subsequently formally named C. pyogenes Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.: 261). A sister species was molecularly recognized by M.C. Fisher, G.I. Koenig, T.J. White & J.W. Taylor (in Mycologia 94: 73–84. 2002), who described, identified, and separated it using an operational species concept, Genealogical Concordance Phylogenetic Species Recognition (GCPSR; Avise & Ball in Oxford Surv. Evol. Biol. 7: 45–67. 1990; Taylor & al. in Fungal Genet. Biol. 31: 21–32. 2000). The species was named Coccidioides posadasii M.C. Fisher & al. (l.c. 2002: 78). Sequences of the rDNA internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region provide diagnostic polymorphisms for the identification and differentiation of this species from C. immitis (Tintelnot & al. in Med. Mycol. 45: 385–393. 2007). Both species are etiologic agents of one of the classical systemic diseases, coccidioidomycosis, an infection known since the late 19th century (Posadas [as Posada] in Anales Circulo Méd. Argent. 15: 585–597, t. I–III. 1892; Wernicke in Centralbl. Bakteriol. Parasitenk. 12: 859–861. 1892). While both species exhibit a preference for arid desert regions of North, Central and South America, C. posadasii is found throughout these climatic zones, whereas C. immitis is primarily restricted in its distribution to the San Joaquin Valley area in California (Fisher & al., l.c. 2002: 73–98; Hamm & al. in J. Fungi 5(74): 1–11. 2019; Kollath & al. in Virulence 10: 222–233. 2019; Crum in Infect. Dis. Therapy 11: 713–742. 2022; Kirkland & al. in J. Fungi 8(859): 1–36. 2022). The purported “holotype” of Coccidioides posadasii is the frozen Californian strain RMSCC “Pappagianis isolate ‘Silveira’” (Fisher & al., l.c. 2002: 79), which, in the appendix to the publication (p. 82), is also listed as “Silveira4” from “D. Pappagianis”. Demosthenes Pappagianis is a well-known Coccidioides researcher who among other things was an author of a publication (Zimmermann & al. in J. Clin. Microbiol. 32: 3040–3042. 1994) that indicated that “Silveira” was isolated in 1951 from a human with severe primary coccidioidal infection with erythema nodosum and from the San Joaquin Valley, California. There were three other Silveira clones of the same isolate routed via the laboratory of Rebecca Cox, referred to as Silveira1, 2 and 3 by R. Cox used as controls (Fisher & al., l.c. 2002: 73–98). The history of these clonal isolates is further elucidated in a genome study of C. posadasii using the “Silveira” isolate in yet another lab (Teixeira & al. in G3 12(4): jkac031. 2022). RMSCC is an acronym for Roche Molecular Systems Culture Collection in Alameda, California. Article 40.7 of the ICN stipulates that beginning in 1990, “the single herbarium, collection, or institution in which the type is conserved must be specified” otherwise the name is not validly published. The type of C. posadasii is consequently interpreted as the RMSCC isolate stored in RMSCC because this was the only location and designation specified in the first sentence following “HOLOTYPE:”. The authors went on to say that it was a widely used isolate maintained in the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) # 28868. Additionally, they indicated that a “killed sample of RMSCC Silveira has been lodged in the Jepson Herbarium, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California 94720, USA” and that frozen samples were also in the “Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia”, thus listing three other locations ATCC (Manassas), JEPS (Berkeley) and CDC (Atlanta) later in the paragraph. Consequently, we interpret the holotype designation to be complete at the end of the first sentence, and the next three mentioned institutes to be indications of isotypes. Given the great importance of the organism involved, it is convenient to make this reasonable assumption of a single holotype with three isotypes. If it were not so interpreted, the name would not be validly published. Notably, the name Coccidioides posadasii was published in the first issue of Mycologia for 2002 and the paper had been in press when the 9/11 attacks occurred on September 11, 2001 in New York City, NY and the Pentagon, Arlington, VA. The species in the genus Coccidioides had become select agents in the U.S.A. (Dixon in J. Appl. Microbiol. 91: 602–605. 2001) and tightened rules followed (Federal Register 70: 13294–13325. 2005) for security reasons. Consequently the isolates, including the holotype, at Roche were destroyed (Matthew Fisher, pers. comm., 2 May 2012). The “killed” specimen was probably intended for UC (J. Taylor, pers. comm., 1 May 2012) rather than JEPS (both herbaria are in Berkeley but only UC held fungi), but the specimen never made it to either and was destroyed before deposit (J. Taylor, pers. comm., 1 May 2012). The number “94720” published by Fisher & al. (l.c. 2002: 79), is a U.S.A. postal code number for the herbaria rather than a specimen number. Given that the holotype was destroyed at RMSCC, and there are no illustrations, we hereby designated the frozen isotype at ATCC as lectotype in accordance with Art. 9.11–9.12; specifically ATCC No. 28868 (ex-RMSCC Silveira from San Joaquin, California, U.S.A.). We note that this isolate is also deposited elsewhere as CBS No. 113859. Ironically and confusingly, the name Coccidioides posadasii was proposed (Fisher & al., l.c. 2002) for the predominantly so called “non-California population” (Zimmermann & al., l.c.; Koufopanou & al. in Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 94: 5478–5482. 1997) but typified by an aberrant outlier, a Californian isolate. Should the Committee for Fungi and/or the General Committee decide that the name Coccidioides posadasii was not validly published in 2002 with regard to Art. 40.7 by not following our interpretation as explained above, then we request that the registered, validly published homonym (or isonym) Coccidioides posadasii M.C. Fisher & al. in de Hoog & al. (Index Fungorum No. 532. 2023) holotypified by the same lectotype (ATCC No. 28868) chosen here for the 2002 name, be substituted for conservation. Several older names long forgotten as supposed synonyms of Coccidioides immitis (see, e.g., Dodge, Med. Mycol.: 149. 1935) were not considered by Fisher & al. (l.c. 2002) and some of those names threaten the name C. posadasii: C. pyogenes Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.: 261) was described simultaneously with C. immitis but, because we conclude that it is referable to that species, not C. posadasii, it is discussed in the Appendix to this proposal (below). Other names older than C. posadasii that threaten or potentially threaten the name include Posadasia esferiformis (‘esferiforme’) Cantón ex Posadas (Ensayo Nueva Neoplasia Hombre: Psorospermiosis Infect. Generaliz. 2: [3]. 1898), type of the generic name Posadasia Cantón ex Posadas, which was named after the same person, Dr. Alejandro Posadas. Posadas's famous patient was 33-year-old Mr. Domingo Escurra from Argentina. Posadas studied Mr. Escurra's disease for 7 years, publishing photographs of him depicting his face, full head, torso, all limbs, front and back throughout the years and conducted an autopsy on him following his death. Posadas believed the causal agent was a protozoan and published numerous illustrations and photographs. Although the organism was unnamed in his thesis and some of his publications, Dr. Elios Cantón, a famous Argentinian medical doctor, proposed a generico-specifica name to honour Posadas, “Posadasia esferiforme”, in a footnote in volume 2 of Posadas's Ensayo … for the organism infecting Mr. Escurra. In 1948 the infected head of Mr. Escurra was discovered preserved in a jar in formalin by Dr. Flavio Niño (in Bol. Inst. Clin. Quir. 26: 3–14. 1950), recognizable because the patient had been photographed while living. This was preceded by the discovery of other autopsy specimens (feet, hand) by Dr. R. Sammartino, as documented by Deresinski & Mirels (in Med. Mycol. 57: S3–S15. 2019). Escurra's infected left foot (specimen No. 779) was re-examined by Canteros & al. (in Medicina (Buenos Aires) 69: 215–220. 2009) using microscopy and molecular techniques to identify the fungus specifically as Coccidioides posadasii. Given a choice of original materials including numerous illustrations or Mr. Escurra's head (Exhibit No. 1, Museo del Instituto de Parasitología de la Facultad de Ciencias Médicas de Buenos Aires), versus the molecularly analysed left foot fungus (No. 779, Museo de Patología, Departamento de Patología, Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad de Buenos Aires., Pieza) we opt to select No. 779 as lectotype specimen of Posadasia esferiformis. Photographs of the lectotype were published by Niño (l.c.), Canteros & al. (l.c.) and Deresinski & Mirels (l.c.). This confirms that this earlier species name applies to C. posadasii. Authentic materials of some species names introduced by Aldo Castellani and co-workers (in Med. Press Circ. 136: 439–440. 31 Mai 1933; all often incorrectly attributed to Castellani & Jacono in J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 36: 297–321. 16 Oct 1933) are still available as living isolates in the CBS culture collection. Geotrichum louisianoideum Castell. (CBS No. 145.34, from a well-travelled patient living in Louisiana, U.S.A.), Glenospora meteuropea Castell. (CBS No. 146.34, from an English patient reported to be infected in the Balkans) and Glenospora metamericana Castell. (CBS No. 196.34, origin unknown) all proved to be identical to Coccidioides posadasii on the basis of morphological characteristics and sequences of the rDNA ITS region (Tintelnot & al., l.c.). As these names fulfil the requirements for novel species descriptions under the Code, they are older synonyms of C. posadasii, having priority by more than 60 years (Tintelnot & al., l.c.). In his May 1933 publication, Castellani (l.c.) published two hanging drop illustrations of mostly nondistinctive mycelium, one each of Glenospora metamericana and G. meteuropea that are here selected as their respective lectotypes. No illustration was supplied for Geotrichum louisianoideum in May 1933 (Med. Press Circ. 136), but a nondescript illustration was published in October 1933 (Castellani & Jacono, l.c.) where the earlier publication in May is attributed to G. louisianoideum. The cryopreserved epitypes selected here for the Glenospora names are based upon authentic identified isolates deposited by R. Ciferri many years ago in CBS and their metadata has been lost. It is logical and reasonable to assume that Ciferri, a contemporary of the older Castellani who was a fellow Italian medical mycology investigator researching the same diseases (see obituary by Baldacci in Mycologia 57: 198–201. 1965), would have acquired Castellani's isolates directly. Castellani & Jacono (l.c.: 320) stated: “Cultures of the fungi described in this paper will be gladly supplied to workers interested in the subject.” Additional names for which there are neither types nor authentic cultures have been listed (Baker & al. in Farlowia 1: 220. 1943; Dodge, l.c.) as synonyms of Coccidioides immitis but because they are from outside of California they were probably the more widespread C. posadasii. These are: “Coccidium neoplasicum” Cantón (Tratado Zooparasítica Cuerpo Humano: 123. 1898) that Cantón replaced by Coccidium posadas before publication (see below); Pseudococcidioides mazzae Fonseca (in Bol. Inst. Clín. Quir. Fac. Ci. Méd. Univ. Nac. 4: 495. Apr/Mai 1928; in Prensa Méd. Argent. 12: 532. post Aug 1928) from laryngeal abscess of male patient, Chaco, Argentina, 1927; Oidium protozoides Ophüls (in J. Exp. Med. 6: 459. 1905) isolated from disseminated infection of 19-year-old male cattle farmer, originating from the Azores, presenting in San Francisco, 1900 but now considered to be synonymous with C. immitis (see Appendix); and Trichosporon proteolyticum Negroni & Villafañe (l.c.) isolated from a pulmonary and disseminated fatal infection of 41-year-old male originating from Córdoba, Argentina, 1938. This last species name was based upon a culture forming arthrospores rather than on the characteristic spherules in tissues normally linked to Coccidioides. Negroni later synonymized Trichosporon proteolyticum with Pseudococcidioides mazzae following experiments with cultures of T. proteolyticum injected into guinea pigs that induced production of endospores characteristic of Pseudococcidioides (Negroni & Radice in Rev. Arg. Dermatosifilografia 30(3/4): 219–223. 1946), but this was followed by Artagaveytia-Allende, who studied the isolate and concluded P. mazzae was conspecific with Coccidioides immitis (in Mycopathologia 4: 375–378. 1949). As these originated in South America, they are here considered to be C. posadasii. The name Pseudococcidioides mazzae was published at least twice in 1928, with internal evidence suggesting that the article in Bol. Inst. Clín. Quir. Fac. Ci. Méd. Univ. Nac. volume 4 was published in the spring (April or May) because of articles dated April 1928 bracketing Fonseca's publication on pages 265 and 522. Whereas the publication in Prensa Méd. Argent. volume 12 begins on page 513 with a footnote saying the article was presented at a meeting in May, 1928 and it ends on page 536 where reference is made to a meeting on August 8, 1928. In both 1928 articles there is the same figure 19, here selected as lectotype. The introduction of Coccidioides posadasii as a species distinct from C. immitis has stimulated much debate (Millar & al. in J. Clin. Microbiol. 41: 5778–5780. 2003), as this was the first time that a novel species had been described through the use of purely molecular methods. The name is now widely accepted by mycologists and physicians (Umeyama & al. in J. Clin. Microbiol. 44: 1859–1862. 2006; Ramani & al. in Mycopathologia 163: 315–319. 2007; Maxwell & al. in Evolution 73: 42–58. 2018; Crum, l.c.; Teixeira & al., l.c.). Furthermore, the species is the etiologic agent of one of the major fungal diseases in endemic areas in the Americas, with thousands of infections each year (Laniado-Laborin in Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 1111: 19–34. 2007). Under the names Coccidioides immitis and C. posadasii, the two species have been the focus of genome studies (Sharpton & al. in Genome Res. 19: 1722–1731. 2009; Neafsey & al. in Genome Res. 20: 938–946. 2010; Maxwell & al., l.c; Teixeira & al., l.c.) and many medical studies (>215 listed in PubMed as of Jan 2022; e.g., Tortorano & al. in Mycopathologia 180: 229–235. 2015; Loudin & al. in Case Rep. Infect. Dis. 2016: No. 8715405. 2016) including whole-genome studies (Maxwell & al., l.c.; Teixeira & al., l.c.). Therefore, to resurrect an earlier name would be counterproductive as it would contribute to nomenclatural instability and confusion. In contrast, the names Coccidium posadasi, Geotrichum louisianoideum, Glenospora meteuropea, G. metamericana, Posadasia esferiformis, Pseudococcidioides mazzae, and Trichosporon proteolyticum have been lost and forgotten except in lists of synonyms as has Coccidioides pyogenes, and Oidium protozoides, recognized as applicable to Coccidioides immitis. Given the wide usage of the name C. posadasii and the significance of this species as the infectious agent of a major clinical entity, it is judged inappropriate to replace the rapidly entrenched name for the species. We therefore propose to conserve the name Coccidioides posadasii against its earlier synonyms. Finally, we note that many of the early reports on pathogenic fungi of humans in medical literature over a century ago often confused fungi for protozoans, and were often reported by investigators in several languages nearly simultaneously, which makes tracing of literature nearly impossible. For example, C.W. Dodge (l.c.) lists “Megalocitosporides” Wernicke 1892 as a synonym of Coccidioides which would make it an earlier generic name, possibly with earlier specific epithets. But, the one citation given by Dodge and often subsequently referenced by many, the landmark publication by Wernicke (l.c.), does not mention “Megalocitosporides”. We saw that Posadas (Ensayo Nueva Neoplasia Hombre: Psorospermiosis Infect. Generaliz. 1: 97. 1897) noted that Dr. Wernicke thought that Posadas's term, “megalosporideo” was not sufficient and that he recommended the term “megalocitospordeo” be used for the morphological structure. Dodge's copied synonymy was repeated many times in the Dictionary of the Fungi up to edition 10 (Kirk & al., Dict. Fung., ed. 10: 412. 2008) and in other literature (e.g., Seifert & al., Gen. Hyphomycetes: 150 & 284. 2011). Another long-cited synonymous “name”, “Coccidium neoplasicum” attributed to Cantón was traced to his now exceedingly rare book (Cantón, l.c. 1898), where on page 123 he noted that following Posadas's thesis presentation, they tentatively were going to name Posadas's parasitic protozoan “Coccidium neoplasicum” [not validly published], but he settled on the name “Coccidium posadas” instead. Coccidium posadasi (as posadas) Cantón was based upon descriptions supplied by Posadas and quoted text and illustrations by Posadas. Cantón (l.c. 1898) redrew Posadas's illustrations, as is evident from Cantón's fig. 6, no. 5 (p. 119) which is identical to Posadas's second drawing on page 79 of his published thesis (Posadas, Contribuciónal Studio de la Etologia de los Tumores Psorospermiosi Infectante Generalizada [thesis]. 1894). Cantón's fig. 6, no. 5 (p. 119) is here selected as lectotype. Therefore, Coccidium posadasi is synonymous with Coccidioides posadasii. Coccidium Leuckart, typified by C. oviforme Leuckart (Parasiten Menschen Krankheiten, ed. 2, 1: 254–255. 1879) remains a protozoan genus. We therefore, do not “correct” the epithet further than adding “i”. The generic name Coccidium Leuckart should not be confused with Agardh's earlier use of “Coccidium” or “Coccidia”, with or without a capitalized first letter, for a suprageneric grouping among Floridean algae. Failure to conserve the exact binomial, Coccidioides posadasii, would require publication of a new combination destabilizing medical mycology and governments’ listings causing considerable harm to the reputation of mycological taxonomy among user communities. Appendix: Application and typification of the names of the related species, Coccidioides immitis and C. pyogenes. Differentiation of Coccidioides posadasii from C. immitis not only involves differentiating two taxa using molecular analyses of sequence data, but is also dependent upon fixing the concept and application of the name, C. immitis, via its type (Principle II). When C. posadasii was described in 2002 the authors assumed the name C. immitis was applied to a different commonly recognized fungus. A second species, C. pyogenes, was simultaneously described with C. immitis in 1896 and could have been either C. immitis itself or C. posadasii. Neither the name C. immitis nor C. pyogenes have extant types and therefore both require typification and discussion to fix their application and to decide if C. pyogenes should be rejected against C. posadasii or listed as a synonym of C. immitis or if indeed C. posadasii should be named C. immitis! Effective typifications are required (Art. 7.10, 29.1) as explained below. Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.: 209–268) introduced the name Coccidioides immitis, the type of Coccidioides, based upon observations of a specimen from a fatal case of disseminated coccidioidomycosis in a 40-year-old agricultural labourer who had been admitted to the municipal hospital of San Francisco in 1893. Authentic material of C. immitis is not known to be preserved at the Johns Hopkins Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland (E. Hornsby and W.G. Merz, pers. comm., 2008) and the type specimen(s) reportedly deposited by Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.: 243) at the “U.S. National Museum” (Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.), consisting presumably of microscope slides prepared via alcohol, celloidin, haematoxylin and eosin, oil of cloves, and Canada balsam from tissue of diseased Homo sapiens [Mr. Joas Fertado Silverra, U.S.A., California], has been lost (Rusty Russell, pers. comm. 2008). Additional specimens purportedly held by Rixford, Gilchrist, Welch, Stiles, and Councilman have apparently been lost too. Tintelnot & al. (l.c.) therefore designated a dried culture of strain RMSCC No. 2394 preserved in the Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures (CBS No. H-19784), matching the original approximate geographical location, as the neotype of C. immitis. CBS is now the Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute. The ex-“neotype” culture is preserved as CBS No. 120936. Designation of the neotype was not in accordance with Art. 9.8 because other original materials, as photographs, were published in the protologue. Therefore, we hereby designate a photograph, plate XXV, fig. 1 (Rixford & Gilchrist, l.c.) as lectotype of Coccidioides immitis (MBT 10011883). Additionally, we hereby designate CBS No. H-19784 as epitype to the lectotype (MBT 10011884), thus maintaining Tintelnot & al.'s (l.c.) application of the name, C. immitis, as a species distinct from C. posadasii. We further note that the lectotype was from “Case 1” as reported by Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.), a labourer in California who had worked in the interior, but which they suspected may or may not have been infected prior to emigrating from the Azores. Coccidioides pyogenes Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.: 261) described simultaneously with C. immitis was isolated from a cutaneous infection of a 33-year-old male originating from the Azores, having worked in San Joaquin Valley, California, presenting in San Francisco, 1938. As with C. immitis, the name's authors purportedly deposited what are presumed to be microscope slides in the U.S. National Museum that are presumed lost as were the other materials with other researchers. For both protologues, C. immitis and C. pyogenes, Rixford and Gilchrist (l.c.: 243, 261) cited “(Rixford and Gilchrist, 1895)” following the binomials which suggests earlier publication of the names. A footnote on page 209 indicates that references were listed following another article on varicella. No reference to Rixford and Gilchrist 1895 is included there, but there are references by L.A. Duhring (Cutan. Med. 1: 156–157. 1895) to Gilchrist and Rixford 1894, 1895 and again to 1895 in another publication. The two former citations to “Rixford and Gilchrist, 1895” were public readings by the authors on the disease before scientific societies, whilst in the book by Duhring, both authors’ study of the disease is discussed, but no generic name or binomials are included. Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.) differentiated the two species that they recognized based upon disease symptoms and morphological development but could not exclude the possibility that the same taxon was involved in both cases. We note that because the two species have a sympatric distribution and pathologically cannot be differentiated we still cannot exclude the possibility that the original material of C. pyogenes could have been C. immitis itself as both were described from California from labourers who had been in the San Joaquin Valley. However, to avoid continued ambiguity in name application in current literature, we hereby designate the illustration of Coccidioides pyogenes from “Case 2”, Plate XL Fig. 1 by Rixford & Gilchrist (l.c.) as lectotype of C. pyogenes (MBT 10011903). Additionally, we hereby designate as epitype the same specimen selected as epitype for C. immitis, viz. CBS No. H-19784 (MBT 10011887). This establishes that C. pyogenes is a synonym of C. immitis and not of C. posadasii. The epitype selected for both was molecularly characterized and differentiated from that for C. posadasii by Tintelnot & al. (l.c.) and maintains current usage. There was always a greater likelihood that C. pyogenes was C. immitis than C. posadasii because of the prevalence of C. immitis in California. Two other listed synonyms coined for Coccidioides pyogenes are superfluous and illegitimate. Ophüls (l.c.) considered that C. immitis Rixford & Gilchrist and C. pyogenes Rixford & Gilchrist represented a single species that should be included in Oidium and stated “[…] Its name then would be Oidium coccidioides, or, if there should be objections to the adoption of coccidioides, Oidium protozoides.” Being published prior to 1953 these are validly published alternative names (Art. 36.2), both are illegitimate as the epithets immitis or pyogenes were available for use in Oidium. It is also unclear which name is being replaced. Earlier C. pyogenes had been synonymized with C. immitis (Blanchard in Caus. Sci. Soc. Zool. France 1: 171. 1900), hence the alternative Oidium names should be considered as applying to C. immitis. SH, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5344-257x KT, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5788-1502 MCF, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1862-6402 JWT, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5794-7700 SAR, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9715-3705 We thank Dr. Liliana Semenas, Laboratorio de Parasitología, Universidad Nacional del Comahue-CONICET, San Carlos de Bariloche, Argentina for supplying references including the rare Cantón (l.c. 1898) from her personal library and also Emilie Montreuil (Canadian Agriculture Library, Ottawa) for intensive interlibrary loan searches along with Fernanda da Silva Santos (Coleção de Culturas de Fungos Filamentosos, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil). We also acknowledge that the late Drs. Walter Gams (1934–2017) and Ira F. Salkin (1941–2016) were collaborators and co-authors on early drafts.

After the Nomenclature Section of each International Botanical Congress (IBC) the Editorial Committee (elected at that Congress) is empowered to write the new version of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants arising from that Congress. The Shenzhen Code (Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018) introduced Div. III Prov. 8 that mandates the Fungal Nomenclature Session (FNS) of an International Mycological Congress (IMC) to approve alterations to Chapter F of the Code, the section that contains material solely related to names of organisms treated as fungi. An oversight in the new provision was a mechanism to formally establish the equivalent of the Editorial Committee, as far as having a committee to prepare the revised Chapter F after each IMC. An attempt to rectify this omission, by making specific reference to an “Editorial Committee for Fungi”, was made via a proposal from the floor at the FNS of the San Juan IMC (Prop. F-010). However, at the FNS this proposal was withdrawn (May & al. in IMA Fungus 9(2): xxii–xxvii. 2018) after discussions made it clear that the proposal was most likely outside the mandate of the FNS – because the governance provisions in Div. III state that the FNS deals with “proposals relating to the content of Chapter F” but “excluding any other content”. In order to proceed with production of the San Juan Chapter F, an ad hoc “Editorial Committee for Fungi”, as allowed under Div. III Prov. 5.2(e) and 8.1, was approved by the FNS of the San Juan IMC at the beginning of the FNS, prior to voting on individual proposals (May & al. in IMA Fungus 10(21). 2019). This “Editorial Committee for Fungi” produced the San Juan Chapter F (May & al., l.c. 2019). The proposed changes enable formal approval of the “Editorial Committee for Fungi” as one of the suite of Permanent Nomenclature Committees under Div. III Prov. 7. The Editorial Committee for Fungi will make any necessary changes to the Chapter F arising from the FNS of an IMC. Proposed wording is based on existing provisions of Div. III, dealing with governance, following the principle adhered to in the original changes to Div. III in relation to governance of names of fungi (May in Taxon 65: 921–925. 2016) – which was to mirror existing procedures as closely as possible. IBCs are normally held every six years while IMCs are normally held every four years. To reflect these different cycles, we also propose to alter the timing of appointment of the Deputy Secretary of the Fungal Nomenclature Bureau from the current “no later than three years prior” to the IMC to two years prior, i.e. halfway through the time between IMCs. This change does not preclude the appointment being made earlier. “4.12. The Nominating Committee is charged with preparing lists of candidates to serve on the Permanent Nomenclature Committees (with the exception of the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi and the Editorial Committee for Fungi; see Prov. 4.13), in consultation with the current secretaries of those committees, and to propose the Rapporteur-général for the next International Botanical Congress. The nominations of the Nominating Committee are subject to approval by the Nomenclature Section.” “4.13. The Nominating Committee of the Fungal Nomenclature Session (Prov. 8.1) is charged with preparing lists of candidates (a) to serve on the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi, in consultation with the current Secretary of that Committee, and (b) to serve on the Editorial Committee for Fungi; and to propose the Secretary of the Fungal Nomenclature Bureau for the next International Mycological Congress. The nominations of the Nominating Committee of the Fungal Nomenclature Session are subject to approval by the Fungal Nomenclature Session.” “7.1. There are nine ten Permanent Nomenclature Committees, including five specialist committees (clauses (e f)–(i j)): (a) General Committee; (b) Editorial Committee; (c) Editorial Committee for Fungi; (c d) Committee on Institutional Votes; (d e) Registration Committee; (e f) Nomenclature Committee for Vascular Plants; (f g) Nomenclature Committee for Bryophytes; (g h) Nomenclature Committee for Fungi; (h i) Nomenclature Committee for Algae; (i j) Nomenclature Committee for Fossils.” “7.4bis. The Editorial Committee for Fungi is elected by an International Mycological Congress and comprises individuals who should preferably have been present at the Fungal Nomenclature Session of the relevant International Mycological Congress and includes the Secretary of the Editorial Committee for this Code. The Secretary and Deputy Secretary of the Fungal Nomenclature Session of the relevant International Mycological Congress serve as Chair and Secretary, respectively, of the Editorial Committee for Fungi.” [Based on existing Prov. 7.4] Renumber existing Prov. 7.5–7.11 accordingly. “7.11bis. The Editorial Committee for Fungi is charged with the preparation and publication of Chapter F in conformity with the decisions approved by the relevant International Mycological Congress. It is empowered to make the editorial modifications specified in Prov. 7.11.” [Based on existing Prov. 7.11] Renumber existing Prov. 7.12–7.15 accordingly. “8.1. For proposals relating to the content of Chapter F, which brings together the provisions of this Code that deal solely with names of organisms treated as fungi (but excluding any other content), exactly the same procedures outlined in Prov. 1–7 are to be followed except that in Prov. 1, 2, 4, and 5 mentions of International Botanical Congress, Nomenclature Section [of that Congress], Bureau of Nomenclature, and Nominating Committee, and Editorial Committee are to be replaced by International Mycological Congress, Fungal Nomenclature Session [of that Congress], Fungal Nomenclature Bureau, and Nominating Committee of the Fungal Nomenclature Session, and Editorial Committee for Fungi, respectively; and officers such as President, Rapporteur-général, and Vice-rapporteur (these specifically renamed Chair, Secretary, and Deputy Secretary, respectively) are to be understood as members of the Fungal Nomenclature Bureau rather than the Bureau of Nomenclature (specifically in Prov. 1.1, 1.2, 1.4 footnote, 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 4.2, 4.4, 4.5, 4.7, 4.8, 4.10, 4.11, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, and 5.8; but not in Prov. 5.3 and 5.4; and the following clauses do not apply: Prov. 5.1(e) and (f) and Prov. 5.2(g)). See also Prov. 4.12, 4.13, 7.1, 7.4bis, and 7.11bis.” “8.5. The Fungal Nomenclature Session has the following functions: […] (e) elects the ordinary members of the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi; (f) elects the ordinary members of the Editorial Committee for Fungi; (f g) elects the Secretary of the Fungal Nomenclature Bureau for the next International Mycological Congress; (g h) receives reports of Special-purpose Committees dealing with matters relating solely to names of organisms treated as fungi.” “8.10. The decisions taken at the Fungal Nomenclature Session of an International Mycological Congress relating solely to names of organisms treated as fungi, once accepted by a subsequent plenary session of the same Congress, are binding on the Nomenclature Section convened at the subsequent International Botanical Congress. Such decisions will, however, be open for any editorial adjustments deemed necessary by the Editorial Committee for Fungi after consultation with the Editorial Committee for this Code.” “8.11. Certain publications, which may be electronic or printed or both, appear as soon as feasible after an International Mycological Congress, not necessarily in this sequence: (a) the Congress-approved decisions and elections of the Fungal Nomenclature Session including the results of the preliminary guiding vote; (b) the announcement of Special-purpose Committees and their membership; (c) the new edition of Chapter F of this Code; (d) a transcript of the Fungal Nomenclature Session.” “8.7. In the Fungal Nomenclature Bureau, the Deputy Secretary is appointed by the Secretary and approved by the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi in consultation with the General Committee no later than three two years prior to the International Mycological Congress. The Deputy Secretary assists and, if necessary, serves in place of the Secretary.”

ABSTRACT The rapid pace of name changes of medically important fungi is creating challenges for clinical laboratories and clinicians involved in patient care. We describe two sources of name change which have different drivers, at the species versus the genus level. Some suggestions are made here to reduce the number of name changes. We urge taxonomists to provide diagnostic markers of taxonomic novelties. Given the instability of phylogenetic trees due to variable taxon sampling, we advocate to maintain genera at the largest possible size. Reporting of identified species in complexes or series should where possible comprise both the name of the overarching species and that of the molecular sibling, often cryptic species. Because the use of different names for the same species will be unavoidable for many years to come, an open access online database of the names of all medically important fungi, with proper nomenclatural designation and synonymy, is essential. We further recommend that while taxonomic discovery continues, the adaptation of new name changes by clinical laboratories and clinicians be reviewed routinely by a standing committee for validation and stability over time, with reference to an open access database, wherein reasons for changes are listed in a transparent way.

Ganoderma is a large and diverse, cosmopolitan fungal genus in the Basidiomycota, comprises species with prized medicinal properties, valuable biotechnological applications and of significant phytopathological interest. In Europe, the number of Ganoderma species is low compared to North America, East Asia or the tropics. Among the seven accepted Ganoderma species in Europe, only one has a perennial basidiome with a resinous layer on the pileus surface and dark brown context. In the scientific literature, this species appears under the name G. pfeifferi or G. cupreolaccatum. However, Quelet provided a detailed watercolour painting of a single basidiome under the name Fomes advena in 1872, which shows similar morphological features. Considering that F. advena was validly and effectively published well before G. pfeifferi and "Polyporus cupreolaccatus", the nomenclatural status of this forgotten and overlooked name is discussed.

Phylogenetic analyses of ITS and RBP2 sequence data from Phaeocollybia collections made at Cascade Head Experimental Forest in Oregon support recognition of a new species, P. chefensis. Collections of the new species were previously referred to P. tibiikauffmanii. Sequence analyses also establish that P. tibiikauffmanii is a synonym of P. spadicea, P. rifflipes is a synonym of P. lilacifolia, and P. rufotubulina is a synonym of P. californica. A revised general key to Pacific Northwest Phaeocollybia species is provided.

The genus Pythium (nom. cons.) sensu lato (s.l.) is composed of many important species of plant pathogens. Early molecular phylogenetic studies suggested paraphyly of Pythium, which led to a formal proposal by Uzuhashi and colleagues in 2010 to split the genus into Pythium sensu stricto (s.s.), Elongisporangium, Globisporangium, Ovatisporangium (= Phytopythium), and Pilasporangium using morphological characters and phylogenies of the mt cytochrome c oxidase subunit 2 (cox2) and D1–D2 domains of nuc 28S rDNA. Although the split was fairly justified by the delineating morphological characters, there were weaknesses in the molecular analyses, which created reluctance in the scientific community to adopt these new genera for the description of new species. In this study, this issue was addressed using phylogenomics. Whole genomes of 109 strains of Pythium and close relatives were sequenced, assembled, and annotated. These data were combined with 10 genomes sequenced in previous studies. Phylogenomic analyses were performed with 148 single-copy genes represented in at least 90% of the taxa in the data set. The results showed support for the division of Pythium s.l. The status of alternative generic names that have been used for species of Pythium in the past (e.g., Artotrogus, Cystosiphon, Eupythium, Nematosporangium, Rheosporangium, Sphaerosporangium) was investigated. Based on our molecular analyses and review of the Pythium generic concepts, we urge the scientific community to adopt the generic names Pythium, Elongisporangium, Globisporangium, and their concepts as proposed by Uzuhashi and colleagues in 2010 in their work going forward. In order to consolidate the taxonomy of these genera, some of the recently described Pythium spp. are transferred to Elongisporangium and Globisporangium.

It is now a decade since The International Commission on the Taxonomy of Fungi (ICTF) produced an overview of requirements and best practices for describing a new fungal species. In the meantime the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICNafp) has changed from its former name (the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature ) and introduced new formal requirements for valid publication of species scientific names, including the separation of provisions specific to Fungi and organisms treated as fungi in a new Chapter F. Equally transformative have been changes in the data collection, data dissemination, and analytical tools available to mycologists. This paper provides an updated and expanded discussion of current publication requirements along with best practices for the description of new fungal species and publication of new names and for improving accessibility of their associated metadata that have developed over the last 10 years. Additionally, we provide: (1) model papers for different fungal groups and circumstances; (2) a checklist to simplify meeting ( i ) the requirements of the ICNafp to ensure the effective, valid and legitimate publication of names of new taxa, and ( ii ) minimally accepted standards for description; and, (3) templates for preparing standardized species descriptions.

With the change to one scientific name for fungal taxa, generic names typified by species with sexual or asexual morph types are being evaluated to determine which names represent the same genus and thus compete for use. In this paper generic names of the Agaricomycotina ( Basidiomycota ) were evaluated to determine synonymy based on their type. Forty-seven sets of sexually and asexually typified names were determined to be congeneric and recommendations are made for which generic name to use. In most cases the principle of priority is followed. However, 16 generic names are recommended for use that do not have priority and thus need to be protected: Aleurocystis over Matula; Armillaria over Acurtis and Rhizomorpha; Asterophora over Ugola; Botryobasidium over Acladium , Allescheriella, Alysidium, Haplotrichum , Physospora, and Sporocephalium; Coprinellus over Ozonium; Coprinopsis over Rhacophyllus; Dendrocollybia over Sclerostilbum and Tilachlidiopsis; Diacanthodes over Bornetina; Echinoporia over Echinodia; Neolentinus over Digitellus; Postia over Ptychogaster; Riopa over Sporotrichum; Scytinostroma over Artocreas, Michenera , and Stereofomes; Tulasnella over Hormomyces; Typhula over Sclerotium; and Wolfiporia over Gemmularia and Pachyma. Nine species names are proposed for protection: Botryobasidium aureum, B. conspersum , B. croceum , B. simile, Pellicularia lembosporum (syn. B. lembosporum ), Phanerochaete chrysosporium , Polyporus metamorphosus (syn. Riopa metamorphosa ), Polyporus mylittae (syn. Laccocephalum mylittae ), and Polyporus ptychogaster (syn . Postia ptychogaster ). Two families are proposed for protection: Psathyrellaceae and Typhulaceae . Three new species names and 30 new combinations are established, and one lectotype is designated.

It is common practice in scientific journals to print genus and species names in italics. This is not only historical as species names were traditionally derived from Greek or Latin. Importantly, it also facilitates the rapid recognition of genus and species names when skimming through manuscripts. However, names above the genus level are not always italicized, except in some journals which have adopted this practice for all scientific names. Since scientific names treated under the various Codes of nomenclature are without exception treated as Latin, there is no reason why names above genus level should be handled differently, particularly as higher taxon names are becoming increasingly relevant in systematic and evolutionary studies and their italicization would aid the unambiguous recognition of formal scientific names distinguishing them from colloquial names. Several leading mycological and botanical journals have already adopted italics for names of all taxa regardless of rank over recent decades, as is the practice in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae , fungi, and plants, and we hereby recommend that this practice be taken up broadly in scientific journals and textbooks.

Mushrooms named Gymnopilus spectabilis and G. junonius have been reported widely in North America on both dead hardwood or dead or living conifers. Based on DNA sequences of the internal transcribed spacer region (ITS) and large ribosomal subunit (LSU), we found that although Gymnopilus junonius (= G. spectabilis s. auct.) is widespread in Europe, South America, and Australia, none of the limited sequences available from North America represent this species. We report five species of this group from North America, including three previously described species, G. luteus, G. subspectabilis, and G. ventricosus, and two new species, Gymnopilus voitkii and Gymnopilus speciosissimus. We recognize a sister species to G. luteus, based on sequences previously reported as G. spectabilis from China, Japan, and the Russian Far East, but, lacking material to describe it as a new species, we give it an informal clade name, /sororiluteus. Another new species in this complex is described from Japan, as Gymnopilus orientispectabilis. Species in this group may be distinguished by their ITS sequences as well as by macro- and micromorphology, substrate, and geography.

Donald John Stoddart Barr (FIG. 1) was born on September 18, 1937, and grew up in wartime England near Guildford in Surrey. With a large garden, forests, and fields around his country home, Donald,...

Two new species, Fomitopsis mounceae and F. schrenkii (Polyporales, Basidiomycota) in the F. pinicola species complex in North America, are described and illustrated. Previous molecular phylogenetic analyses identified three well-delimited lineages that represent F. mounceae and F. ochracea from Canada, the Appalachian Mountains, and the northern United States and F. schrenkii from western and southwestern regions of the United States. Fomitopsis pinicola sensu stricto is restricted to Eurasia and does not occur in North America. Morphological descriptions of basidiocarps and cultures for F. mounceae, F. schrenkii, and F. ochracea are presented. The three species are readily differentiated by nuc rDNA internal transcribed spacer (ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 = ITS) sequence, geographic distribution, and basidiospore size. Polyporus ponderosus H. Schrenk is an earlier illegitimate synonym of F. schrenkii. Both F. mounceae and F. schrenkii have a heterothallic multiallelic incompatibility system.