Inoculum 52(5)2001, p. 5

AN INFORMAL POLL FOR MSA MEMBERS:
SHOULD THE TYPE OF COPRINUS BE CHANGED?

Lorelei Norvell


Based on recent molecular studies published by Hopple & Vilgalys in 1999 (Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution 13: 1-19), Redhead, Vilgalys, Moncalvo, Johnson & Hopple (2001. Taxon 50: 203-241) recently split the large and well-known agaric genus Coprinus Pers. taxonomically into four genera and two families. Coprinus comatus , the universally recognized lectotype for Coprinus , and two other species are now recognized as belonging with Lepiota and Agaricus in the Agaricaceae. This transfer renders the younger name (Coprinaceae) synonymous and superfluous. Over 95% of the remaining former Coprinus species are now treated with Psathyrella in a separate family, for which the name Psathyrellaceae has been proposed. Except for C. comatus and close allies, all former Coprinus species have now been distributed into Coprinopsis, Coprinellus, and Parasola within the Psathyrellaceae.

   The International Association of Plant Taxonomists (IAPT) Nomenclature Committee for Fungi is now entertaining a proposal (Taxon , 2001 August issue) to change the long-standing lectotype of the genus Coprinus from Coprinus comatus to Coprinus atramentarius. Typification of the genus by C. atramentarius would accomplish the following:
      1. At least 50% of the former coprini would remain in the genus Coprinus.
      2. It would restore the name Coprinaceae to active use and place the name Psathyrellaceae into synonymy.
      3. It would force a change in genus name for Coprinus comatus .
      4. It would establish a precedent for changing a type based on molecular phylogenetic conflicts.

   Coprinus comatus, or the "shaggy mane", is among the best-known Coprinus species, both commercially and among amateur/field mycologists. In the scientific literature, however, Coprinus cinereus is cited much more frequently. Now Coprinopsis cinerea, that species would again become Coprinus cinereus if the type of the genus were changed to C. atramentarius. Currently, there is considerable debate in both Europe and North America as to which solution is least harmful: changing the genus name of C. comatus, or changing the type of Coprinus. Although caught between "a rock and a hard place", the IAPT Nomenclature Committee for Fungi must make recommendations one way or the other.

   In order to assist the fifteen international committee members in their deliberations, those with opinions should contact an elected committee member directly. As the only MSA agaricologist currently on the Committee, I am interested in hearing views from MSA members [and all and sundry others who may have an opinion!] and collating your responses. Which would you prefer: Coprinus comatus ? OR Coprinus atramentarius ? You can't have both! No matter what the final decision of the next International Botanical Congress (IBC), the old genus Coprinus will be split into several genera to reflect both morphological and genetic considerations.

   Ultimately, the majority decision made by the IBC will be binding, so now is a good time to let your voices be heard. Send me your thoughts via Email to Lorelei Norvell. Please note your preference by writing either "comatus for Coprinus type" or "atramentarius for Coprinus type" in the subject line (this will greatly aid final vote tallying). Learned dissertations, bitter recriminations, and rending of garments should be relegated to the body of the message, which I promise to read diligently. (Only one "vote" per person, please!)

   Other MSA members currently on the IAPT Nomenclature Committee for Fungi include Chairman Vincent Demoulin (Belgium), Secretary Walter Gams (Netherlands), Lee Crane (USA), Paul Kirk (UK), Pavel Lizon (Slovak Republic), Erast Parmasto (Estonia), Gary Samuels (USA), and Trond Schumacher (Norway). A full membership roster and nomenclatural debates can be viewed at the Centraal Bureau voor Schimmelcultures (CBS) site: Committee for Fungi.


[see also: Redhead, Scott A. 2001. Bully for Coprinus - A story of manure, minutia and molecules. Field Mycology 2: 118-126.]


Return to Mycolegium homepage