Skip to main content
ARS Home » Midwest Area » Peoria, Illinois » National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research » Mycotoxin Prevention and Applied Microbiology Research » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #307570
Title: Name changes in medically important fungi and their implications for clinical practice

Author
item DE HOOG, G. SYBREN - Fungal Biodiversity
item CHATURVEDI, VISHNU - New York State Department Of Health
item WALSH, THOMAS - Weill Medical College - Cornell
item MEYER, WIELAND - University Of Sydney
item BOEKHOUT, TEUN - Fungal Biodiversity
item CHAKRABARTI, ARUNALOKE - Postgraduate Institute Of Medical Education And Research
item COLE, GARRY - University Of Texas At San Antonio
item CORNELY, OLIVIER - University Of Cologne
item DWON-CHUNG, KYUNG-JOO - National Institutes Of Health (NIH)
item O Donnell, Kerry

Submitted to: Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Publication Type: Review Article
Publication Acceptance Date: 10/8/2014
Publication Date: 4/1/2015
Citation: de Hoog, G.S., Chaturvedi, V., Denning, D.W., Dyer, P.S., Frisvad, J.C., Geiser, D., Graser, Y., Guarro, J., Haase, G., Kwon-Chung, K.J., Meis, J.F., Meyer, W., Pitt, J.I., Samson, R.A., Taylor, J.W., Tintelnot, K., Vitale, R.G., Walsh, T.J., Lackner, M., O'Donnell, K. 2015. Name changes in medically important fungi and their implications for clinical practice. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 53(4):1056-1062.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: Dual fungal nomenclature using ana- and teleomorph names for the same fungus has been abolished as a result of the ‘Amsterdam Declaration on Fungal Nomenclature’. From 1 January 2013 onward fungi have only a single name. In modern taxonomy, names are based primarily on their phylogenetic position in the fungal kingdom – the most significant paradigm change since the introduction of the microscope. A transitional period of nomenclatural instability is expected, which is likely to be resolved only when a sufficient representation of Nature’s diversity is achieved, both in materials, and in methods. Problems are expected at both the genus and species levels, and they are fundamentally different. For genera the problem is mainly material-driven: phylogenetic trees are based on comparative data and may change considerably when better sampling is achieved. During this process, nomenclature should follow the best taxonomy, based itself on sufficient data and thoughtful analyses. The problem of species level is primarily method-driven: we witness splitting up of classical species on the basis of new techniques and insights. This type of species recognition can be a major advance for understanding pathology, routes of infection, and disease management. If, however, molecular siblings are identical in medically relevant parameters and do not imply different treatment strategies for daily routine it is recommended to unite such species in “complexes.” Some examples of undisputed as well as of debated nomenclatural choices are presented.