An on-line database, MycoBank (http://www.MycoBank.org), is launched with a remit to document mycological nomenclatural novelties and their associated descriptions and illustrations. The nomenclatural novelties will each be allocated a unique accession number that can be cited in the publication where the nomenclatural novelty is introduced. These accession numbers will also be incorporated into Life Science Identifiers (LSIDs) (http://www-124.ibm.com/ developerworks/oss/lsid) allocated by the nomenclatural database Index Fungorum (http://www.IndexFungorum.org), with which MycoBank is associated. Nomenclatural experts will be available to check the validity, legitimacy and linguistic correctness of the proposed names; nomenclatural errors will thus be detected before publication but no censorship (either nomenclatural or taxonomic) will be exerted by MycoBank. MycoBank will (when applicable) provide onward links to other databases containing, for example, living cultures, DNA data, reference specimens and pleomorphic names linked to the same holomorph. Names will remain strictly confidential until after publication, when they will be accessible both in MycoBank, Index Fungorum, GBIF and other international biodiversity initiatives, where they will further be linked to other databases to realise a species bank that eventually links all databases of life. Authors intending to publish nomenclatural novelties are encouraged to contribute to this new initiative

Crous, P.W.

Gams, W.

Robert, V.

Stalpers, J.A.

Stegehuis, G.

NARCIS 

MycoBank: an online initiative to launch mycology into the 21st century

Wageningen Yield 

STUDIES IN MYCOLOGY 50: 19–22. 2004. 
19 
 
 
MycoBank: an online initiative to launch mycology into the 21st century  
 
 
 
Pedro W. Crous
*
, Walter Gams, Joost A. Stalpers, Vincent Robert and Gerrit Stegehuis  
 
Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, P.O. Box 85167, 3508 AD Utrecht, The Netherlands 
 
*Correspondence: Pedro W. Crous, crous@cbs.knaw.nl 
 
Abstract: An on-line database, MycoBank (http://www.MycoBank.org), is launched with a remit to document mycological 
nomenclatural novelties and their associated descriptions and illustrations. The nomenclatural novelties will each be allocated 
a unique accession number that can be cited in the publication where the nomenclatural novelty is introduced. These 
accession numbers will also be incorporated into Life Science Identifiers (LSIDs) (http://www-
124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/lsid) allocated by the nomenclatural database Index Fungorum 
(http://www.IndexFungorum.org), with which MycoBank is associated. Nomenclatural experts will be available to check the 
validity, legitimacy and linguistic correctness of the proposed names; nomenclatural errors will thus be detected before 
publication but no censorship (either nomenclatural or taxonomic) will be exerted by MycoBank.  MycoBank will (when 
applicable) provide onward links to other databases containing, for example, living cultures, DNA data, reference specimens 
and pleomorphic names linked to the same holomorph.  Names will remain strictly confidential until after publication, when 
they will be accessible both in MycoBank, Index Fungorum, GBIF and other international biodiversity initiatives, where they 
will further be linked to other databases to realise a species bank that eventually links all databases of life. Authors intending 
to publish nomenclatural novelties are encouraged to contribute to this new initiative. 
 
Key words: fungal systematics, Index Fungorum, Index of Fungi, International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, Myco-
Bank, mycology, online database. 
 
 
Names of organisms are the key to information, and 
access to correct and complete information has a 
major economic impact on, for example, agriculture 
(phytopathology, epidemiology) or pharmaceutics 
(ethnobiology), and in fact on the total scientific 
community.  The naming of fungi is regulated by the 
International Code of Botanical Nomenclature 
(ICBN; Greuter et al. 2000a), which rules on the 
effective and valid publication of a name.  The ICBN 
does not recognize any restrictions in respect of 
journals, books or other printed publications in which 
new names can be published, in strong contrast with 
new names of bacteria, which must be either 
published in or listed in the International Journal of 
Systematic Bacteriology (IJSB) or in the International 
Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 
(IJSEM).  Hence, new names of fungi can be 
published in a wide range of botanical, 
microbiological, phytopathological or other scientific 
journals, books or proceedings.  This makes it 
extremely difficult to be aware of new taxa as they are 
named or as existing species names are recombined 
into other genera.  A possible solution to this problem 
is the formal registration of names.   
 The first idea of a registration system, which 
entailed sending copies of publications to a documen-
tation centre, was discussed in a nomenclature meet-
ing in 1954 (Hawksworth 1992). Subsequent propos-
als were formulated in the years 1991–1998 (Brum-
mitt et al. 1986, Greuter & von Raab-Straube 1998, 
Wilson 1997, 1998), with the aim of making the 
registration of names of new taxa and other nomencla-
tural novelties compulsory before they are accepted as 
validly published (Faegri 1991, Borgen et al. 1997, 
Greuter & Hawksworth 1999). The main aim of this 
proposed system was to obtain a mechanism that 
would help solve problems encountered in determin-
ing which names are effectively published (Art. 29.1) 
and when (Art. 32.1). Proposals made by a committee 
for registration and formulated by Faegri (1991) were 
not approved at the meeting of the nomenclatural 
section preceding the Tokyo Botanical Congress 
(Greuter et al. 1994b, pp. 138–156, 168–169), but a 
sentence forecasting such a procedure was included in 
the Tokyo Code (Greuter et al. 1994a: Art. 32.1, last 
sentence). Following publication of fervent objections 
(Turland & Davidse 1998, Eggli 1998) and failure of 
the proposals concerned with registration in the mail 
vote, they were withdrawn during the meeting of the 
Nomenclatural Section preceeding the St. Louis 
Congress (Barrie & Greuter 1999). During that meet-
ing a motion from the floor (Greuter et al. 2000b, pp. 
160–165) resulted in the clauses concerned with 
registration being removed from the Code (Greuter et 
al. 2000a).  
 Presently the biological community benefits 
greatly from central institutions that generate indexes 
such as, for example, the Index of Fungi, a 6-monthly 
CROUS ET AL. 
 20 
publication of new fungal
1
 names, compiled by CABI 
Bioscience, UK and published by CABI Publishing.  
This index intends to cover all nomenclatural novel-
ties published for fungi (both extant and extinct), and 
is an indispensable source of information, the content 
having been assessed for validity, legitimacy and 
orthography. Another related initiative is the on-line 
database Index Fungorum, maintained by the Index 
Fungorum Partnership (CABI Bioscience, UK; the 
Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, the Nether-
lands; and Landcare Research, New Zealand). This 
index is accessible on the Internet at http:// 
www.indexfungorum.org. 
 In recent years other databases, such as those for 
DNA sequences (GenBank, EMBL, etc.) have grown 
almost automatically, with the spontaneous on-line 
input from individual contributors who, after a mini-
mal screening of their submission, receive an acces-
sion number for each deposited sequence that is 
almost invariably cited in the ensuing publication, a 
requirement imposed by many scientific journals. 
These sequence banks have become an indispensable 
source of information and have gained worldwide 
appreciation. 
 A similar procedure to record fungal nomenclatural 
novelties (MycoBank), was recently proposed by 
Crous et al. (2004).  A two-step procedure was pro-
posed. (1) At the time a paper is editorially accepted 
by a journal (or book editor/publisher), the author 
submits the relevant protologue (Latin diagnosis, a 
description in another language, illustrations (optional 
but recommended) and typification, or proposed 
recombinations with basionyms and indication of 
types), electronically to MycoBank. The proposed 
name(s) are to be screened with respect to validity, 
legitimacy and orthography and placed in the on-line 
database; however, access to unpublished names is 
initially to be restricted to maintain confidentiality. 
Each nomenclatural novelty will receive a unique 
accession number, analogous to a GenBank accession 
number issued for each sequence submitted, that 
would be communicated to the author and would be 
cited in the final version of the paper. In cases where 
the proposed names do not fulfil the requirements of 
the Code, the author would be informed and invited to 
make a correction. (2) Immediately after effective 
publication, the author(s) communicate(s) the exact 
date and bibliographic details to MycoBank, in order 
to lift the restrictions in the database put in place at 
accession, making all information (name, text and 
illustrations) freely accessible. Direct communication 
of nomenclatural novelties to MycoBank by the pub-
lishing journals at the very moment of publication 
would of course speed up the procedure.   
                                                 
1Here interpreted in a traditional way as organisms studied 
by mycologists (Kirk et al. 2001). 
 The responsibility for submitting details of pro-
posed nomenclatural novelties rests with the author(s), 
but this was envisaged as a process which would be 
imposed on authors by high quality journals as a good 
editorial practice, in the same way that incorporation 
of GenBank accession numbers is now an accepted 
practice.  This could become a mandatory require-
ment, if the ICBN were to be modified. The date for 
priority purposes will remain, as it is at present, the 
date of effective publication, assuming the name 
complies with all requirements for valid publication. 
 Although this procedure requires some extra activi-
ties from the author(s) of nomenclatural novelties, it 
will not be more cumbersome than the submission of 
DNA sequences to GenBank (an accepted practice), 
and it has substantial advantages. For example, the 
MycoBank can advise the author(s), prior to publica-
tion, of deficiencies in the submission so as to ensure 
effective and valid publication. However, whatever 
the author(s) decide(s), no censorship will be exerted 
by MycoBank. The indexing centre will then be able 
to focus its efforts elsewhere in maintaining the con-
currency, completeness and integrity of the database. 
The biological community gets immediate, post publi-
cation, access to all nomenclatural novelties on-line.  
The nomenclatural database will remain as Index 
Fungorum, while the additional data linked to these 
names will be available via MycoBank.  Nomenclatu-
ral novelties can thus easily be linked to other data-
bases (GenBank, culture collection databases, refer-
ence collections (“herbaria”), e-journals, pleomorphic 
life form database, etc.).  MycoBank will be a freely 
available database, but its success will wholly rely on 
the collaboration of scientists, and of the editors of 
journals insisting on the use of MycoBank accession 
numbers as part of their publication policies and 
quality control, with editors and scientists sharing a 
vision of an eventual species bank that links all related 
ecological, molecular, metabolite, publication and 
other data with the species, its distribution, biological 
associations (e.g. as parasites, mycorrhizal partners) or 
substratum.  MycoBank will thus form an essential 
and fundamental digital link to and for information on 
fungi.   
 As names and associated data are accessed into 
MycoBank, LSIDs will subsequently be available 
from Index Fungorum and these will be associated 
with the basic nomenclatural data.  Names entering 
Index Fungorum via the quarterly updates from the 
Index of Fungi will also receive associated LSIDs, 
though they will only appear in Index Fungorum;  it 
will be the responsibility of authors to submit names 
with accompanying data to MycoBank.  The Index 
Fungorum Partnership has a Memorandum of Coop-
eration with GBIF to supply nomenclatural data to the 
ECAT (http://www.gbif.org/prog/ecat), and as such all 
names, and associated LSIDs, will also be available 
MYCOBANK  
 21
through the GBIF portal (http://www.gbif.net), where 
they will be further linked with other databases. 
 
 
 
Fig. 1. Aspergillus westerdijkiae. MycoBank accession 
number MB500000 (Frisvad et al. 2004). 
 
 Participants of the Eleventh International Congress 
on Yeasts (15–20 August 2004, Rio de Janeiro, Bra-
zil), have welcomed this initiative and decided to 
support it. Yeasts researchers will be able to include 
their new species descriptions online. This will in-
clude all morphological, physiological and molecular 
data. Pictures, textual descriptions, bibliographical 
references and relevant internet hyperlinks (GenBank, 
PubMed) will also be made available. The research 
community will thus have free access to an online 
polyphasic and constantly updated database. 
 In this special centennial issue of Studies in 
Mycology, which appears in celebration of the 
centenary of the Centraalbureau voor Schimmel-
cultures, more than 100 new species are being 
described to celebrate the 100 years existence of the 
Fungal Biodiversity Centre CBS.  In view of this 
special occasion, we use the opportunity to launch 
MycoBank.  The first nomenclatural novelty in this 
volume, Aspergillus westerdijkiae (Fig. 1), will be 
allocated the MycoBank accession number 
MB500000.  The name and associated nomenclatu-
ral data will then be permanently linked to this 
number, which will subsequently be associated 
with the LSID  urn:lsid:indexfungorum.org: 
names:500000. Henceforward we encourage authors 
and journal editors to follow this lead and deposit 
their novelties at http://www.MycoBank.org. 
 
 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 
 
The authors are grateful to Drs Paul F. Cannon, Paul M. 
Kirk, John C. David (CABI Bioscience, U.K.) and Dagmar 
Triebel (Botanische Staatssammlung München, Germany), 
for their constructive comments on this script. 
 
 
REFERENCES  
 
Barrie FR, Greuter W (1999). XVI International Botanical 
Congress: preliminary mail vote and report of Congress 
action on nomenclature proposals. Taxon 48: 771–784. 
Borgen L, Greuter W, Hawksworth DL, Nicolson DH, 
Zimmer B (1997). Announcing a test and trial phase for 
the registration of new plant names (1998–1999). Taxon 
46: 811–814. 
Brummitt RK, Hawksworth DL, McNeill J (1986). (226–
228B) Proposals for a method of defining effective pub-
lication by means of approved publications. Taxon 35: 
823–826. 
Crous PW, Gams W, Stalpers JA, Cannon PF, Kirk PM, 
David JC, Triebel D (2004). An online database of 
names and descriptions as an alternative to registration.  
Mycological Research 108: 1236–1238. 
Eggli U (1998). Why we don’t need registration. Taxon 47: 
963–965. 
Faegri K (1991). (50–53) Proposals on registration of new 
names and combinations, and report of Special Commit-
tee 4.  Taxon 40: 681–683. 
Frisvad JC, Frank JM, Houbraken JAMP, Kuijpers AFA, 
Samson RA (2004). New ochratoxin producing species 
of Aspergillus section Circumdati. Studies in Mycology 
50: 23–43. 
Greuter W, Barrie FR, Burdet HM, Chaloner WG, De-
moulin V, Hawksworth DL, Jørgensen PM,  Nicolson 
DH, Silva PC, Trehane P, McNeill J. (1994a). Interna-
tional Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Tokyo Code).  
Regnum Vegetabile 131, Koeltz, Königstein. 
CROUS ET AL. 
 22 
Greuter W, Hawksworth DL (1999). Synopsis of Proposals 
on Botanical Nomenclature - St Louis 1999. Taxon 48: 
69–128. 
Greuter W, McNeill J, Barrie FR, (1994b) Report on 
botanical nomenclature – Yokohama 1993. Englera 14: 
1–265. 
Greuter W, McNeill J, Barrie FR, Burdet HM, Demoulin V, 
Filgueras TS, Nicolson DH, Silva PC, Skog JE, Trehane 
P, Turland NJ, Hawksworth DL (2000a). International 
Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Saint Louis Code).  
Regnum Vegetabile 138, Koeltz, Königstein. 
Greuter W, McNeill J, Hawksworth DL,  Barrie FR 
(2000b). Report on botanical nomenclature – Saint 
Louis 1999. Englera 20: 1–253. 
Greuter W, Raab-Straube E von (1998). Registration 
progress report, 1. Taxon 47: 497–502.  
Hawksworth DL (1992). The need for a more effective 
biological nomenclature for the 21st century. Botanical 
Journal of the Linnaean Society 109: 543–567. 
Kirk PM, Cannon PF, David JC, Stalpers JA (2001). Dic-
tionary of the fungi. 9th ed., CABI Publishing, Walling-
ford. 
Turland NJ, Davidse G (1998). Registration of plant names: 
undesirable, unnecessary, and unworkable. Taxon 47: 
957–962. 
Wilson KL (1997). Registration as a positive step. Taxon 
46: 811. 
Wilson KL (1998). Why we need registration. Taxon 47: 
967–968. 
 
 


KNAW Repository

Name not available

MycoBank: an online initiative to launch mycology into the 21st century

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NARCIS

Wageningen Yield

KNAW Repository

NARCIS

Name not available