New #checklist dataset in @gbif.org: Rise up, Rhizoctonia: moving to one fungus, one name in the Ceratobasidiaceae (Agaricomycetes, Cantharellales) (47 species occurrences) https://www.gbif.org/dataset/f3d173db-3f9c-4945-a3d9-7bf51de2309b

We argue that the continued use of anamorph/teleomorph-typified generic names in #Ceratobasidiaceae hinders a holistic understanding of this family, when it is clear that pathogenic and symbiotic species are likely united in their fundamental biology.

We reiterate the fact that the genera within Ceratobasidiaceae are paraphyletic, and formalise the recognition of a single genus; Rhizoctonia. We present 32 new combinations, to make a total of 52 accepted species of Rhizoctonia.

At long last, our manuscript ‘Rise up, Rhizoctonia: moving to one fungus, one name in the Ceratobasidiaceae’ has finally been published in Persoonia 🎉
Here we resolve several longstanding taxonomic issues within Ceratobasidiaceae and present a unified Rhizoctonia
www.persoonia.org/images/Volum...

🎉🆕📰🎉: Temporal turnover of Ceratobasidiaceae orchid mycorrhizal fungal communities with ontogenetic and phenological development in Prasophyllum (Orchidaceae)

🎉🆕📰🎉: How important is important? A commentary on ‘Temporal turnover of Ceratobasidiaceae orchid mycorrhizal fungal communities with ontogenetic and phenological development in Prasophyllum (Orchidaceae)’

🔥ADVANCE ACCESS🔥: How important is important? A commentary on ‘Temporal turnover of Ceratobasidiaceae orchid mycorrhizal fungal communities with ontogenetic and phenological development in Prasophyllum (Orchidaceae)’

We sequenced a transcriptome for the rare mycoheterotrophic underground orchid Rhizanthella, which has eluded phylogenetic placement due to its degraded plastome. For the 1st time we recovered Rhizanthella as sister to Prasophyllum, supported by their exclusive partnerships with Ceratobasidiaceae

Including an entry I wrote with Tom May on the Ceratobasidiaceae. Our full manuscript dealing with this has come back from review and I’m currently working through the changes, but hopefully this work should be out soon 🤞

This is of course extremely confusing and highly deleterious. We put forth suggestions for how this may be dealt with formally, and proposals necessary to conserve the name Ceratobasidiaceae will be submitted shortly.

As Ceratobasidium calosporum has most recently been treated as belonging within the Sebacinaceae, the family name attached to it (Ceratobasidiaceae) technically predates the family name Sebacinaceae, and the name for the Sebacinaceae should technically be Ceratobasidiaceae.

Additionally, since the type species of the type genus of Ceratobasidiaceae (Ceratobasidium calosporum) is decidedly not related to the other members of this family, the family should now technically be the Cejpomycetaceae.

Our Outline of #Fungi 2024 note for Ceratobasidiaceae is finally online! In collaboration with Tom May, we provide a brief summary of the challenging taxonomic issues that have plagued this economically and ecologically significant family. Check it out at shorturl.at/bdhy3