Phylogeny and taxonomy of Glomeromycota ('arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) and related fungi')
we do not adopt to the recently suggested placing of AMF at sub-phylum rank ("Glomeromycotina"). Reason: the Glomeromycota as a phylum was erected to get towards a more natural systematics with respect to the evolutionary lineages.
To our opinion, the "Glomeromycotina" will not last for long, because eventually the AMF will be, again, treated as individual phylum, as it is likely that at least one additional "zygomycetous" phylum will be erected. This does not mean that we do not agree wit the topology showing that Glomeromycota share common ancestry with other zygomycetous branches - but these branches are very old.
For your information:
names above the rank of family are not governed by priority in the Botanical Code - so you are free to use whichever name you prefer, above family.
'The study of plants without their mycorrhizas is the study of artefacts.
The majority of plants, strictly speaking, do not have roots; they have mycorrhizas.'
BEG-Committee, 25th May 1993
In the taxonomy section you find the recent taxonomy and sytematics of AM fungi.
In the species list links to pdf-files of formal descriptions and emendations are provided. Under 'downloads' you find some supplementary material (alignments, etc.).
Phylogenetic trees (based on SSU rDNA sequences, click on titles to jump to trees):
4) The current classification of Glomeromycota bases mainly on Redekcer et al. (2013), for phylogeny see: Redecker D, Schüßler A, Stockinger H, Stürmer SL, Morton JB, Walker C (2013) An evidence-based consensus for the classification of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (Glomeromycota). Mycorrhiza 23: 515-531 [full text PDF from publisher].
3) Phylogenetic tree (SSU rRNA gene, near full
length sequences) implementing the most recent changes in the taxonomy
and classification of the Glomeromycota
(Schüßler and Walker 2010).
frequently studied 'model species' are shown
with their new names, in a 'natural' (phylogeny based) classification.
For example, the model AM fungus 'Glomus
is Diversispora epigaea
BEG47 and 'Glomus intraradices
is Rhizophagus irregularis
We want to mention, that these changes are the result of a relatively conservative attempt. We tried to only introduce changes absolutely necessary and keep the number of new taxa as low as possible. However, mis-identifications and mis-synonymisations that had never been investigated in detail before needed to be corrected, and our long proposed (Schwarzott et al. 2001) split of the Glomerales was now necessary, to base research on AM fungi on an evolutionary framework. The anchoring of the genus Glomus could only very recently be fixed by culturing and characterising its generic type species, Glomus macrocarpum. At the moment Glomus is monospecific, but from environmental sequencing it is evident that it is a diverse group (which corresponds to former Glomus Group Ac).
back to the top
2) New classification of the Diversisporales (2004). The new families Pacisporaceae and Diversisporaceae contain species formerly described as 'Glomus'. The numbers above the branch show the support (NJ,MP,ML,ML-QP analysis, respectively) of the sister-group relationship of Pacisporaceae (= Gerdemanniaceae) and Gigasporaceae, see: Walker C, Blaszkowski L, Schwarzott D, Schüßler A (2004) Gerdemannia gen. nov., a genus separated from Glomus, and Gerdemanniaceae fam. nov., a new family in the Glomeromycota. Mycological Research 108(6): 707-718 [full text paper is linked from the 'species list']; Walker C, Schüßler A (2004) Nomenclatural clarifications and new taxa in the Glomeromycota. Mycological Research 108: 981-982 [full text paper is linked from the 'species list'].
A paper describing the genus Gerdemannia and the family Gerdemanniaceae
was submitted while the same genus was described as Pacispora (erroneously placed in the Glomeraceae). This
happened despite the authors of Pacispora knew that we were in
process of publishing Gerdemannia (by a public talk and email) before both publications were submitted.
We did not know anything about their intention to describe the same group
of fungi. Despite the evidence of the need for a different higher taxon
placing, we were not informed by any plans to publish
the same genus under a different name, until the Pacispora paper
was in press and announced as such, by email. At that point our Gerdemannia paper was also in press,
and could not be withdrawn any more (we tried to do so!). We are
sorry for any inconvenience, but from our side everything that could have
avoided this parallel description was communicated, so this was just not
in our hands. We could not even modify our paper by changing the taxon names
by a note added in proof (to adopt to the Pacispora paper
because the Pacispora authors did not even agree to show us their manuscript
when it was in press.
Therefore, the Pacispora paper was published shortly before
Gerdemannia, and therefore the genus name Gerdemannia is a later synonym of Pacispora and the latter takes precedence.
Consequently, Pacispora is the correct generic name to be used for the former Glomus scintillans, G. dominikii, G. chimonobambusae, and similar organisms, see: Walker C, Schüßler A (2004) Nomenclatural clarifications and new taxa in the Glomeromycota. Mycological Research 108: 981-982 [full text paper linked from the 'species list'].
back to the top
1) Phylogenetic tree of AM fungi with focus on the non-monoyphyletic 'genus' Glomus (2001), already indicating the structure (different Glomus Groups in different families) recently formalised in Schüßler and Walker (2010). Schwarzott D, Walker C, Schüßler A (2001) Glomus, the largest genus of the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (Glomales), is non-monophyletic. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 21: 190-197 Abstract, 'downloads'
back to the top