Isolation, Culture and Characterization of Hirsutella sinensis Mycelium from Caterpillar Fungus Fruiting Body

The caterpillar fungus Ophiocordyceps sinensis (previously called Cordyceps sinensis) has been used for centuries in Asia as a tonic to improve health and longevity. Recent studies show that O. sinensis produces a wide range of biological effects on cells, laboratory animals and humans, including anti-fatigue, anti-infection, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and anti-tumor activities. In view of the rarity of O. sinensis fruiting bodies in nature, cultivation of its anamorph mycelium represents a useful alternative for large-scale production. However, O. sinensis fruiting bodies harvested in nature harbor several fungal contaminants, a phenomenon that led to the isolation and characterization of a large number of incorrect mycelium strains. We report here the isolation of a mycelium from a fruiting body of O. sinensis and we identify the isolate as O. sinensis’ anamorph (also called Hirsutella sinensis) based on multi-locus sequence typing of several fungal genes (ITS, nrSSU, nrLSU, RPB1, RPB2, MCM7, β-tubulin, TEF-1α, and ATP6). The main characteristics of the isolated mycelium, including its optimal growth at low temperature (16°C) and its biochemical composition, are similar to that of O. sinensis fruiting bodies, indicating that the mycelium strain characterized here may be used as a substitute for the rare and expensive O. sinensis fruiting bodies found in nature

New scientific discoveries : plants and fungi

Scientific discovery, including naming new taxa, is important because without a scientific name, a species is invisible to science and the possibilities of researching its ecology, applications and threats, and conserving it, are greatly reduced. We review new scientific discoveries in the plant and fungal kingdoms, based largely on new names of taxa published in 2019 and indexed in the International Plant Names Index and Index Fungorum. Numbers of new species in both kingdoms were similar with 1942 new species of plant published and 1882 species of fungi. However, while >50% of plant species have likely been discovered, >90% of fungi remain unknown. This gulf likely explains the greater number of higher order taxa for fungi published in 2019: three classes, 18 orders, 48 families and 214 genera versus one new family and 87 new genera for plants. We compare the kingdoms in terms of rates of scientific discovery, globally and in different taxonomic groups and geographic areas, and with regard to the use of DNA in discovery. We review species new to science, especially those of interest to humanity as new products, and also by life‐form. We consider where future such discoveries can be expected. We recommend an urgent increase in investment in scientific discovery of plant and fungal species, while they still survive. Priorities include more investment in training taxonomists, in building and equipping collections‐based research centers for them, especially in species‐rich, income‐poor countries where the bulk of species as yet unknown to science are thought to occur

The 2024 Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa

With the simultaneous growth in interest from the mycological community to discover fungal species and classify them, there is also an important need to assemble all taxonomic information onto common platforms. Fungal classification is facing a rapidly evolving landscape and organizing genera into an appropriate taxonomic hierarchy is central to better structure a unified classification scheme and avoid incorrect taxonomic inferences. With this in mind, the Outlines of Fungi and fungus-like taxa (2020, 2022) were published as an open-source taxonomic scheme to assist mycologists to better understand the taxonomic position of species within the Fungal Kingdom as well as to improve the accuracy and consistency of our taxonomic language. In this paper, the third contribution to the series of Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa prepared by the Global Consortium for the Classification of Fungi and fungus-like taxa is published. The former is updated considering our previous reviews and the taxonomic changes based on recent taxonomic work. In addition, it is more comprehensive and derives more input and consensus from a larger number of mycologists worldwide. Apart from listing the position of a particular genus in a taxonomic level, nearly 1000 notes are provided for newly established genera and higher taxa introduced since 2022. The notes section emphasizes on recent findings with corresponding references, discusses background information to support the current taxonomic status and some controversial taxonomic issues are also highlighted. To elicit maximum taxonomic information, notes/taxa are linked to recognized databases such as Index Fungorum, Faces of Fungi, MycoBank and GenBank, Species Fungorum and others. A new feature includes links to Fungalpedia, offering notes in the Compendium of Fungi and fungus-like Organisms. When specific notes are not provided, links are available to webpages and relevant publications for genera or higher taxa to ease data accessibility. Following the recent synonymization of Caulochytriomycota under Chytridiomycota, with Caulochytriomycetes now classified as a class within the latter, based on formally described and currently accepted data, the Fungi comprises 19 Phyla, 83 classes, 1,220 families, 10,685 genera and ca 140,000 species. Of the genera, 39.5% are monotypic and this begs the question whether mycologists split genera unnecessarily or are we going to find other species in these genera as more parts of the world are surveyed? They are 433 speciose genera with more than 50 species. The document also highlights discussion of some important topics including number of genera categorized as incertae sedis status in higher level fungal classification. The number of species at the higher taxonomic level has always been a contentious issue especially when mycologists consider either a lumping or a splitting approach and herein we provide figures. Herein a summary of updates in the outline of Basidiomycota is provided with discussion on whether there are too many genera of Boletales, Ceratobasidiaceae, and speciose genera such as Colletotrichum. Specific case studies deal with Cortinarius, early diverging fungi, Glomeromycota, a diverse early divergent lineage of symbiotic fungi, Eurotiomycetes, marine fungi, Myxomycetes, Phyllosticta, Hymenochaetaceae and Polyporaceae and the longstanding practice of misapplying intercontinental conspecificity. The outline will aid to better stabilize fungal taxonomy and serves as a necessary tool for mycologists and other scientists interested in the classification of the Fungi

The 2024 Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa

With the simultaneous growth in interest from the mycological community to discover fungal species and classify them, there is also an important need to assemble all taxonomic information onto common platforms. Fungal classification is facing a rapidly evolving landscape and organizing genera into an appropriate taxonomic hierarchy is central to better structure a unified classification scheme and avoid incorrect taxonomic inferences. With this in mind, the Outlines of Fungi and fungus-like taxa (2020, 2022) were published as an open-source taxonomic scheme to assist mycologists to better understand the taxonomic position of species within the Fungal Kingdom as well as to improve the accuracy and consistency of our taxonomic language. In this paper, the third contribution to the series of Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa prepared by the Global Consortium for the Classification of Fungi and fungus-like taxa is published. The former is updated considering our previous reviews and the taxonomic changes based on recent taxonomic work. In addition, it is more comprehensive and derives more input and consensus from a larger number of mycologists worldwide. Apart from listing the position of a particular genus in a taxonomic level, nearly 1000 notes are provided for newly established genera and higher taxa introduced since 2022. The notes section emphasizes on recent findings with corresponding references, discusses background information to support the current taxonomic status and some controversial taxonomic issues are also highlighted. To elicit maximum taxonomic information, notes/taxa are linked to recognized databases such as Index Fungorum, Faces of Fungi, MycoBank and GenBank, Species Fungorum and others. A new feature includes links to Fungalpedia, offering notes in the Compendium of Fungi and fungus-like Organisms. When specific notes are not provided, links are available to webpages and relevant publications for genera or higher taxa to ease data accessibility. Following the recent synonymization of Caulochytriomycota under Chytridiomycota, with Caulochytriomycetes now classified as a class within the latter, based on formally described and currently accepted data, the Fungi comprises 19 Phyla, 83 classes, 1,220 families, 10,685 genera and ca 140,000 species. Of the genera, 39.5% are monotypic and this begs the question whether mycologists split genera unnecessarily or are we going to find other species in these genera as more parts of the world are surveyed? They are 433 speciose genera with more than 50 species. The document also highlights discussion of some important topics including number of genera categorized as incertae sedis status in higher level fungal classification. The number of species at the higher taxonomic level has always been a contentious issue especially when mycologists consider either a lumping or a splitting approach and herein we provide figures. Herein a summary of updates in the outline of Basidiomycota is provided with discussion on whether there are too many genera of Boletales, Ceratobasidiaceae, and speciose genera such as Colletotrichum. Specific case studies deal with Cortinarius, early diverging fungi, Glomeromycota, a diverse early divergent lineage of symbiotic fungi, Eurotiomycetes, marine fungi, Myxomycetes, Phyllosticta, Hymenochaetaceae and Polyporaceae and the longstanding practice of misapplying intercontinental conspecificity.The outline will aid to better stabilize fungal taxonomy and serves as a necessary tool for mycologists and other scientists interested in the classification of the Fungi

The 2024 Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa

With the simultaneous growth in interest from the mycological community to discover fungal species and classify them, there is also an important need to assemble all taxonomic information onto common platforms. Fungal classification is facing a rapidly evolving landscape and organizing genera into an appropriate taxonomic hierarchy is central to better structure a unified classification scheme and avoid incorrect taxonomic inferences. With this in mind, the Outlines of Fungi and fungus-like taxa (2020, 2022) were published as an open-source taxonomic scheme to assist mycologists to better understand the taxonomic position of species within the Fungal Kingdom as well as to improve the accuracy and consistency of our taxonomic language. In this paper, the third contribution to the series of Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa prepared by the Global Consortium for the Classification of Fungi and fungus-like taxa is published. The former is updated considering our previous reviews and the taxonomic changes based on recent taxonomic work. In addition, it is more comprehensive and derives more input and consensus from a larger number of mycologists worldwide. Apart from listing the position of a particular genus in a taxonomic level, nearly 1000 notes are provided for newly established genera and higher taxa introduced since 2022. The notes section emphasizes on recent findings with corresponding references, discusses background information to support the current taxonomic status and some controversial taxonomic issues are also highlighted. To elicit maximum taxonomic information, notes/taxa are linked to recognized databases such as Index Fungorum, Faces of Fungi, MycoBank and GenBank, Species Fungorum and others. A new feature includes links to Fungalpedia, offering notes in the Compendium of Fungi and fungus-like Organisms. When specific notes are not provided, links are available to webpages and relevant publications for genera or higher taxa to ease data accessibility. Following the recent synonymization of Caulochytriomycota under Chytridiomycota, with Caulochytriomycetes now classified as a class within the latter, based on formally described and currently accepted data, the Fungi comprises 19 Phyla, 83 classes, 1,220 families, 10,685 genera and ca 140,000 species. Of the genera, 39.5% are monotypic and this begs the question whether mycologists split genera unnecessarily or are we going to find other species in these genera as more parts of the world are surveyed? They are 433 speciose genera with more than 50 species. The document also highlights discussion of some important topics including number of genera categorized as incertae sedis status in higher level fungal classification. The number of species at the higher taxonomic level has always been a contentious issue especially when mycologists consider either a lumping or a splitting approach and herein we provide figures. Herein a summary of updates in the outline of Basidiomycota is provided with discussion on whether there are too many genera of Boletales, Ceratobasidiaceae, and speciose genera such as Colletotrichum. Specific case studies deal with Cortinarius, early diverging fungi, Glomeromycota, a diverse early divergent lineage of symbiotic fungi, Eurotiomycetes, marine fungi, Myxomycetes, Phyllosticta, Hymenochaetaceae and Polyporaceae and the longstanding practice of misapplying intercontinental conspecificity. The outline will aid to better stabilize fungal taxonomy and serves as a necessary tool for mycologists and other scientists interested in the classification of the Fungi

Fusarium : more than a node or a foot-shaped basal cell

Recent publications have argued that there are potentially serious consequences for researchers in recognising distinct genera in the terminal fusarioid clade of the family Nectriaceae. Thus, an alternate hypothesis, namely a very broad concept of the genus Fusarium was proposed. In doing so, however, a significant body of data that supports distinct genera in Nectriaceae based on morphology, biology, and phylogeny is disregarded. A DNA phylogeny based on 19 orthologous protein-coding genes was presented to support a very broad concept of Fusarium at the F1 node in Nectriaceae. Here, we demonstrate that re-analyses of this dataset show that all 19 genes support the F3 node that represents Fusarium sensu stricto as defined by F. sambucinum (sexual morph synonym Gibberella pulicaris). The backbone of the phylogeny is resolved by the concatenated alignment, but only six of the 19 genes fully support the F1 node, representing the broad circumscription of Fusarium. Furthermore, a re-analysis of the concatenated dataset revealed alternate topologies in different phylogenetic algorithms, highlighting the deep divergence and unresolved placement of various Nectriaceae lineages proposed as members of Fusarium. Species of Fusarium s. str. are characterised by Gibberella sexual morphs, asexual morphs with thin- or thick-walled macroconidia that have variously shaped apical and basal cells, and trichothecene mycotoxin production, which separates them from other fusarioid genera. Here we show that the Wollenweber concept of Fusarium presently accounts for 20 segregate genera with clear-cut synapomorphic traits, and that fusarioid macroconidia represent a character that has been gained or lost multiple times throughout Nectriaceae. Thus, the very broad circumscription of Fusarium is blurry and without apparent synapomorphies, and does not include all genera with fusarium-like macroconidia, which are spread throughout Nectriaceae (e.g., Cosmosporella, Macroconia, Microcera). In this study four new genera are introduced, along with 18 new species and 16 new combinations. These names convey information about relationships, morphology, and ecological preference that would otherwise be lost in a broader definition of Fusarium. To assist users to correctly identify fusarioid genera and species, we introduce a new online identification database, Fusarioid-ID, accessible at www.fusarium.org. The database comprises partial sequences from multiple genes commonly used to identify fusarioid taxa (act1, CaM, his3, rpb1, rpb2, tef1, tub2, ITS, and LSU). In this paper, we also present a nomenclator of names that have been introduced in Fusarium up to January 2021 as well as their current status, types, and diagnostic DNA barcode data. In this study, researchers from 46 countries, representing taxonomists, plant pathologists, medical mycologists, quarantine officials, regulatory agencies, and students, strongly support the application and use of a more precisely delimited Fusarium (= Gibberella) concept to accommodate taxa from the robust monophyletic node F3 on the basis of a well-defined and unique combination of morphological and biochemical features. This F3 node includes, among others, species of the F. fujikuroi, F. incarnatum-equiseti, F. oxysporum, and F. sambucinum species complexes, but not species of Bisifusarium [F. dimerum species complex (SC)], Cyanonectria (F. buxicola SC), Geejayessia (F. staphyleae SC), Neocosmospora (F. solani SC) or Rectifusarium (F. ventricosum SC). The present study represents the first step to generating a new online monograph of Fusarium and allied fusarioid genera (www.fusarium.org).http://www.studiesinmycology.org/BiochemistryForestry and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute (FABI)GeneticsMicrobiology and Plant PathologyPlant Production and Soil Scienc

Fusarium: more than a node or a foot-shaped basal cell

Recent publications have argued that there are potentially serious consequences for researchers in recognising distinct genera in the terminal fusarioid clade of the family Nectriaceae. Thus, an alternate hypothesis, namely a very broad concept of the genus Fusarium was proposed. In doing so, however, a significant body of data that supports distinct genera in Nectriaceae based on morphology, biology, and phylogeny is disregarded. A DNA phylogeny based on 19 orthologous protein-coding genes was presented to support a very broad concept of Fusarium at the F1 node in Nectriaceae. Here, we demonstrate that re-analyses of this dataset show that all 19 genes support the F3 node that represents Fusarium sensu stricto as defined by F. sambucinum (sexual morph synonym Gibberella pulicaris). The backbone of the phylogeny is resolved by the concatenated alignment, but only six of the 19 genes fully support the F1 node, representing the broad circumscription of Fusarium. Furthermore, a re-analysis of the concatenated dataset revealed alternate topologies in different phylogenetic algorithms, highlighting the deep divergence and unresolved placement of various Nectriaceae lineages proposed as members of Fusarium. Species of Fusarium s. str. are characterised by Gibberella sexual morphs, asexual morphs with thin- or thick-walled macroconidia that have variously shaped apical and basal cells, and trichothecene mycotoxin production, which separates them from other fusarioid genera. Here we show that the Wollenweber concept of Fusarium presently accounts for 20 segregate genera with clear-cut synapomorphic traits, and that fusarioid macroconidia represent a character that has been gained or lost multiple times throughout Nectriaceae. Thus, the very broad circumscription of Fusarium is blurry and without apparent synapomorphies, and does not include all genera with fusarium-like macroconidia, which are spread throughout Nectriaceae (e.g., Cosmosporella, Macroconia, Microcera). In this study four new genera are introduced, along with 18 new species and 16 new combinations. These names convey information about relationships, morphology, and ecological preference that would otherwise be lost in a broader definition of Fusarium. To assist users to correctly identify fusarioid genera and species, we introduce a new online identification database, Fusarioid-ID, accessible at www.fusarium.org. The database comprises partial sequences from multiple genes commonly used to identify fusarioid taxa (act1, CaM, his3, rpb1, rpb2, tef1, tub2, ITS, and LSU). In this paper, we also present a nomenclator of names that have been introduced in Fusarium up to January 2021 as well as their current status, types, and diagnostic DNA barcode data. In this study, researchers from 46 countries, representing taxonomists, plant pathologists, medical mycologists, quarantine officials, regulatory agencies, and students, strongly support the application and use of a more precisely delimited Fusarium (= Gibberella) concept to accommodate taxa from the robust monophyletic node F3 on the basis of a well-defined and unique combination of morphological and biochemical features. This F3 node includes, among others, species of the F. fujikuroi, F. incarnatum-equiseti, F. oxysporum, and F. sambucinum species complexes, but not species of Bisifusarium [F. dimerum species complex (SC)], Cyanonectria (F. buxicola SC), Geejayessia (F. staphyleae SC), Neocosmospora (F. solani SC) or Rectifusarium (F. ventricosum SC). The present study represents the first step to generating a new online monograph of Fusarium and allied fusarioid genera (www.fusarium.org)