Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2017
DOI: 10.7872/crym/v38.iss1.2017.101
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fungal Biodiversity Profiles 21–30

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
17
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
17
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The multigene phylogenetic analysis and morphological revision of European sequestrate Russulaceae taxa carried out in this work, allowed us to clarify several taxonomic issues at specific and supraspecific levels. The overall topology of the multigenic analyses was not different from those obtained by other studies focused on gymnocarpic species (Shimono et al 2004, Verbeken et al 2014b, Kong et al 2015, Looney et al 2016, Buyck et al 2017), except for lower support values for some supraspecific lineages of Lactarius . These differences could be due to phylogenetic noise introduced by some sequences analyzed in the present work, or differences in the alignment of the highly variable ITS rDNA region.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 55%
“…The multigene phylogenetic analysis and morphological revision of European sequestrate Russulaceae taxa carried out in this work, allowed us to clarify several taxonomic issues at specific and supraspecific levels. The overall topology of the multigenic analyses was not different from those obtained by other studies focused on gymnocarpic species (Shimono et al 2004, Verbeken et al 2014b, Kong et al 2015, Looney et al 2016, Buyck et al 2017), except for lower support values for some supraspecific lineages of Lactarius . These differences could be due to phylogenetic noise introduced by some sequences analyzed in the present work, or differences in the alignment of the highly variable ITS rDNA region.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 55%
“…Commentary : This species is by far the smallest species of all Multifurca ( Fig 5A ), in our opinion a consequence of the toxic metallic soils in which the host trees are living, because the exceptional small size is an almost general phenomenon for most of the local ectomycorrhizal fungi [ 84 ]. This species often has a strongly eccentric to laterally implanted stipe, which again, might be related to the often steep to vertical slopes on which this species often sporulates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Initial phylogenetic studies of European Hydnum revealed higher than expected taxonomic diversity in the genus, with thirteen molecularly recognized clades masquerading under four morphologically-defined species names (Grebenc et al 2009), which have since been described as new species (Olariaga et al 2012, Vizzini et al 2013, Niskanen et al 2018). Following a global survey of diversity in the genus which estimated 31 species worldwide based on molecular phylogenetic analysis (Feng et al 2016), additional taxonomic work in Europe and North America has raised the global species count to 34 (Buyck et al 2017, Niskanen et al 2018), which is estimated to be less than half of the total number of Hydnum species (Niskanen et al 2018). This previously overlooked diversity may be due to morphological stasis in evolution of basidiome morphology and lack of attention to regional characterization of the Hydnum flora in locations outside Europe.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%