The Amsterdam Declaration on Fungal Nomenclature

The Amsterdam Declaration on Fungal Nomenclature was agreed at an international symposium convened in Amsterdam on 19–20 April 2011 under the auspices of the International Commission on the Taxonomy of Fungi (ICTF). The purpose of the symposium was to address the issue of whether or how the current system of naming pleomorphic fungi should be maintained or changed now that molecular data are routinely available. The issue is urgent as mycologists currently follow different practices, and no consensus was achieved by a Special Committee appointed in 2005 by the International Botanical Congress to advise on the problem. The Declaration recognizes the need for an orderly transitition to a single-name nomenclatural system for all fungi, and to provide mechanisms to protect names that otherwise then become endangered. That is, meaning that priority should be given to the first described name, except where that is a younger name in general use when the first author to select a name of a pleomorphic monophyletic genus is to be followed, and suggests controversial cases are referred to a body, such as the ICTF, which will report to the Committee for Fungi. If appropriate, the ICTF could be mandated to promote the implementation of the Declaration. In addition, but not forming part of the Declaration, are reports of discussions held during the symposium on the governance of the nomenclature of fungi, and the naming of fungi known only from an environmental nucleic acid sequence in particular. Possible amendments to the Draft BioCode (2011) to allow for the needs of mycologists are suggested for further consideration, and a possible example of how a fungus only known from the environment might be described is presented

Survival of thermophilic fungi in various preservation methods: A comparative study

© 2021 Elsevier Inc.Thermophilic fungi have several biotechnological and industrial applications such as thermostable enzyme production, biodegradation, and tobacco processing, etc. Thermophilic fungi cannot survive at temperatures below 20 °C. Owing to their inability to grow at low temperatures, they are not stable, so stocking is very difficult. Although a large number of different storage methods are available and described, no method can be universally applied to all fungi. Thermophilic fungi present “heat-loving” characteristics, and therefore a new challenge for its preservation and there is no universal protocol for the preservation of thermophilic fungi. The aim of this study was to evaluate the viability, contamination and stability of thermophilic fungi stored under different preservation methods. In this work, 25 thermophilic fungal isolates of species Thermomyces thermophilus, Rhizomucor pusillus, Trichocladium griseum, Melanocarpus albomyces, Malbranchea cinnamomea, Thermothelomyces thermophilus, Thermothelomyces hinnuleus, Thermothielavioides terrestris, Mycothermus thermophilus, Humicola insolens maintained constant sub-culturing at room temperature, +4 °C and +20 °C, lyophilization at +4 °C, freezing at −20 °C, freezing block at −20 °C and a new technique liquid preservation at room temperature for the periods ranging 5 years. We evaluated the effect of preservation methods by sub-culturing onto either sabouraud dextrose agar (SDA) or yeast extract soluble starch agar (YpSs) on growth, production and viability of spores and macro- and micromorphology. In this study, preservation methods for thermophilic fungi were investigated extensively for the first time and it is clearly shown that freezing block at −20 °C method and lyophilization were better methods for long-term preservation up to 5 years