Sareomycetes: More Diversity than Meets the Eye

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-81501/v1

Download PDF

Research

Sareomycetes: More Diversity than Meets the Eye

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-81501/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 16 Mar, 2021

Read the published version in IMA Fungus →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Since its resurrection, the resinicolous discomycete genus Sarea has been accepted as containing two species, one with black apothecia and pycnidia, and one with orange. We investigate this hypothesis using three ribosomal (nuITS, nuLSU, mtSSU) regions from and morphological examination of 70 specimens collected primarily in Europe and North America. The results of our analyses support separation of the traditional Sarea difformis s.l. and Sarea resinae s.l. into two distinct genera, Sarea and Zythia. Sarea as circumscribed is shown to comprise three phylospecies, with one corresponding to Sarea difformis s.s. and two, morphologically indistinguishable, corresponding to the newly combined Sarea coeloplata. Zythia is maintained as monotypic, containing only a genetically and morphologically variable Z. resinae. The new genus Atrozythia is erected for the new species A. klamathica. Arthrographis lignicola is placed in this genus on molecular grounds, expanding the concept of Sareomycetes by inclusion of a previously unknown type of anamorph. Dating analyses using additional marker regions indicate the emergence of the Sareomycetes was roughly concurrent with the diversification of the genus Pinus, suggesting that this group of fungi emerged to exploit the newly-available resinous ecological niche supplied by Pinus or another, extinct group of conifers. Our phylogeographic studies also permitted us to study the introductions of these fungi to areas where they are not native, including Antarctica, Cape Verde, and New Zealand and are consistent with historical hypotheses of introduction.

General Microbiology

Bioinorganic chemistry

Botany

4 new taxa

Atrozythia

cryptic diversity

integrative taxonomy

resinicolous fungi

Sarea

Zythia

Conifers, particularly in the families Araucariaceae, Pinaceae, and Cupressaceae, produce resins in their tissues (Langenheim 2003) as part of a complex defense system to protect against herbivores (Smith 1961; Rudinsky 1966; van Buijtenen and Santamour 1972), pathogenic fungi (Whitney and Denyer 1969; Gibbs 1972; Hart et al. 1975; Yamada 2001), protists (Krupa and Nylund 1972; Bunny and Tippett 1988), and bacteria (Hemingway and Greaves 1973; Hartmann et al. 1981). To protect against fungi, resins have the potential to act in several different manners. First, they present a physical barrier to penetration by fungal hyphae (Verrall 1938; Shain 1971; Rishbeth 1972; Prior 1976). When soft, resin can flow, trapping fungal hyphae and spores; when hard, the resin is difficult to penetrate. Furthermore, the components of the resin can inhibit the growth of fungi, acting as a chemical barrier (Cobb et al. 1968; Hintikka 1970; De Groot 1972; Fries 1973; Väisälä 1974; Chou and Zabkiewicz 1976; Bridges 1987; Yamamoto et al. 1997). Despite this apparently inhospitable environment, there are a number of so called "resinicolous" fungi that have evolved to exploit this niche (Cappelletti 1924; Selva and Tuovila 2016).

The study of fungi growing on conifer resins has a long history, dating back to the fathers of mycology (Persoon 1801; Fries 1815, 1822). The first species described was Helotium aureum, described in 1801 by Christiaan Persoon, though he made no mention of the resinicolous habit (Seifert and Carpenter 1987). Thus, the first author to describe fungi dwelling on resin was Elias Fries, who described three such fungi in 1815. Sphaeria resinae and Lecidea resinae were described as sharing the same habitat and easily confused; these were later determined to represent the anamorphic and teleomorphic states of the same fungus, currently known as Sarea resinae (Fr.) Kuntze (Ayers 1941; Hawksworth and Sherwood 1981). The third species, Racodium resinae, described from Picea resin, is a synnematous hyphomycete now called Sorocybe resinae (Fr.) Fr. (Seifert et al. 2007). These three Friesian species were followed by Cytospora resinae, described by Christian Ehrenberg in 1818 (Ehrenberg 1818); this was later determined to be a synonym of Fries' Sphaeria resinae (Fries 1823; von Thümen 1880). The last of these early species was described in 1822, again by Fries, as Peziza difformis [now Sarea difformis (Fr.)Fr.]. No new resinicolous taxa were noted until Arnold (1858).

The two species assigned to the genus Sarea, S. resinae and S. difformis, are the most commonly collected and reported of these resinicolous fungi. A search of the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) database for S. resinae yielded 1261 records, and a search for "Sarea resinae" on Google Scholar yields 249 results, with S. difformis giving 519 records and 196 results, respectively. In contrast, Sorocybe resinae gives only 24 records and 56 results (accessed 13 July 2020). In addition to frequent reports, the two Sarea species have also been a subject of some interest regarding their systematic placement, which has been unclear (Reeb et al. 2004; Miadlikowska et al. 2014). A recent study resolved the uncertainty and has supported the erection of a new class in Pezizomycotina, Sareomycetes (Beimforde et al. 2020). This study, as well as a recent study that yielded 31 endolichenic isolates of Sarea species (Masumoto and Degawa 2019), have illustrated that both Sarea species are genetically diverse. This pattern is present in published sequences of both Sarea species deposited in public repositories. Sequence similarity and phylogenetic analyses also suggest that Arthrographis lignicola Sigler, though morphologically unlike Sarea species, is a close relative (Giraldo et al. 2014). This, combined with the wide distributions of these species, suggest a higher than known diversity, both obvious and cryptic, in Sareomycetes. The aim of this study is to assess this diversity.

To assess this diversity within Sareomycetes, an integrative taxonomic approach was employed. Fresh and fungarium specimens of orange (Sarea resinae) and black (S. difformis) species from around the world were borrowed or collected and examined morphologically. Where possible, DNA was extracted, and several regions amplified and sequenced. Two multi-locus datasets were assembled to investigate species boundaries and their phylogenetic relationships, as well as to provide further insights on the evolutionary history of Sareomycetes on a temporal and spatial scale.

Specimens Examined and Microscopic Examination

During the course of this study, a number of specimens of Sarea were collected and examined by the authors. The host range and distribution of these specimens were broad, with collections from the United States (California, Georgia, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont) made by the first author and collections from Austria, Cape Verde, Spain and Switzerland made by the second author. Further specimens were collected by and lent by Tomás J. Curtis (Ohio), Alden C. Dirks (Michigan, Wisconsin), Michael Haldeman (Idaho, Washington), Jason M. Karakehian (Maine, Massachusetts, Newfoundland), Elizabeth Kneiper (Maine, Massachusetts), Jiří Malíček (Czechia), Rubén Negrín Piñero (Canary Islands), Donald H. Pfister (Dominican Republic), Michaela Schmull (New York), Judi Thomas (Missouri), Per Vetlesen (Norway), and Andrus Voitk (Newfoundland). Further specimens of Sarea and other critical materials from the following fungaria were studied: B, CANL, DUKE, FH, H, K, LD, MICH, NCSLG, NY, TFM, TNS, and TROM (acronyms following Index Herbariorum, http://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/ih/).

Microscopic examination of hymenial elements was conducted using free-hand sections cut under a dissecting microscope (Wild M5; Leica Geosystems, Heerbrugg, Switzerland) and of the excipulum using sections made on a freezing microtome. Microtome sections were prepared by stabilizing water-hydrated apothecia on a freezing stage (Physitemp BFS-MP; Physitemp Instruments LLC, Clifton, NJ) with a diluted gum arabic solution and sectioning with a sliding microtome (Bausch & Lomb Optical Co., Rochester, NY) set at approximately 25 µm. The resulting sections were applied serially to a clean glass slide and allowed to adhere by drying in the remaining gum arabic. Slides were prepared under a dissecting microscope (Olympus SZX9; Olympus Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) and studied with a compound microscope (Olympus BX40; Olympus Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). Digital images were captured with an Olympus XC50 USB camera (Olympus Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). Hand sections were studied with a compound microscope (Motic B1; Motic, Hong Kong, China). Except for two fresh collections studied alive in tap water (Fig. 1, b1-d2, Fig. 2, b1-d3) and a culture studied on PDA (Fig. 1, n), all the other specimens (Fig. 1, g1-m2, o1-o4, Fig. 2, e2-e9, f2-f9, g2-g9, h2-h9, i2-i9, j2-j9, k2-k9, l2-l9, m2-m9, Fig. 3, b1-d4), were pre-treated in 5% KOH prior to morphological studies. Melzer’s reagent (MLZ) was used to test amyloidicity and Congo red (CR) to contrast cells walls. Images were captured with a Moticam 2500 USB camera and processed with the software Motic images Plus 2.0 (Motic, Hong Kong, China). The 95% confidence intervals of the median were calculated with SPSS 15.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) for each morphological feature. Measurements are given as follows: (the smallest single measurement) smallest value for percentile of 95% - Largest value for percentile of 95% (largest single measurement). Whenever possible, biometric values are based on ≥ 10 measurements for each character on an individual specimen.

Culturing

Some specimens were grown in axenic culture. Cultures were generated from ascospore shoots. A living apothecium was placed oriented upward on a dab of petroleum jelly on a filter paper. This assemblage was then placed in the lid of an upside-down, sterile petri dish containing either potato dextrose agar (PDA) or cornmeal agar (CMA) prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions (HiMedia Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, India). The filter paper was saturated with water, and the chamber sealed with Parafilm (Bemis Company, Inc., Neenah, WI). After incubation at room temperature for one or two days, the lid was removed and replaced with another sterile lid. The culture was then allowed to grow at 25 °C for up to one month before sampling.

DNA Extraction, PCR, and Sequencing

DNA extractions were performed from axenic culture when available and from fresh or preserved apothecia or pycnidia otherwise. Fresh or plentiful dried material was extracted by grinding 1–2 apothecia, 3–4 pycnidia, or a rice grain-sized slice of a culture and employing the DNeasy Plant Mini Kit (QIAGEN, Venlo, Netherlands) following the manufacturer's recommendations. Preserved or scanty material was extracted by grinding .25 − 2 apothecia or 2–3 pycnidia and employing the QIAamp DNA Micro Kit (QIAGEN, Venlo, Netherlands), again following the manufacturer's recommendations.

Three rDNA regions were amplified: the internal transcribed spacer regions plus 5.8S gene (nuITS), the nuclear large subunit ribosomal RNA gene (nuLSU), and the mitochondrial small subunit ribosomal RNA gene (mtSSU). For older material, nuITS was obtained in two parts by employing the primer pairs ITS1-F (Gardes and Bruns 1993) + 5.8S (Vilgalys and Hester 1990) and 5.8S-R (Vilgalys and Hester 1990) + ITS4 (White et al. 1990). For other extractions nuITS + nuLSU was amplified in one or two pieces, using the primer pairs ITS1-F + LR5 (Vilgalys and Hester 1990), ITS1-F + LR3 (Vilgalys and Hester 1990) and LR0R (Rehner and Samuels 1994) + LR5, or ITS1-F + ITS4 and LR0R + LR5. The region mtSSU was amplified using the primer pair mrSSU1 + mrSSU3R (Zoller et al. 1999). For our dating analysis, two additional genes were obtained for a small subset of fresh specimens, the nuclear small subunit ribosomal RNA gene (nuSSU) and the second largest subunit of RNA polymerase II gene (RPB2). The nuSSU was obtained employing the primer pair NS1 + NS4 (White et al. 1990). RPB2 was amplified in two pieces, employing the primer pairs fRPB2-5F + fRPB2-7cR and fRPB2-7cF + fRPB2-11aR (Liu et al. 1999). All primers were purchased from Integrated DNA Technologies (Coralville, IA).

When nuITS + nuLSU was amplified in a single piece, REDExtract-N-Amp PCR ReadyMix (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) was used; when amplified in multiple parts or amplifying nuSSU, EconoTaq DNA Polymerase (Lucigen, Middleton, WI) was used. Amplification was performed for mtSSU and RPB2 using Q5 High-Fidelity DNA Polymerase (New England BioLabs, Ipswich, MA). All PCR reactions were performed using 5 µL of full strength, 1/10 dilution, or 1/100 dilutions of the DNA extracts as templates in a total reaction volume of 25 µL and utilized either a Mastercycler ep gradient (Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany) or a C1000 Touch Thermal Cycler (Bio-rad, Hercules, CA). All PCR protocols are included in File S1.

PCR products sometimes contained multiple bands. In these cases, the band of interest was excised from a 2% agarose gel and purified using either a QIAquick Gel Extraction Kit (QIAGEN, Venlo, Netherlands) or a Monarch DNA Gel Extraction Kit (New England BioLabs, Inc.). Otherwise, single-band PCR products were purified with a QIAquick PCR Purification Kit (QIAGEN) or a Monarch PCR & DNA Cleanup Kit (New England BioLabs, Ipswich, MA). In the case of faint PCR products, reamplification was performed using 5 µL of a 1/100 dilution of the previous PCR product as template in a total reaction volume of 25 µL using the same polymerase, primers, reaction recipe, and cycling parameters as previously.

In preparation for sequencing, all purified products were run on a 1% agarose gel with 0.0001% GelRed Nucleic Acid Stain, 10,000X in Water (Biotium, Hayward, CA) added for DNA visualization and using Gel Loading Dye Purple (6x), no SDS (New England BioLabs, Ipswich, MA). UV photographs of gels were taken with an AlphaImager EP (Alpha Innotech, San Leandro, CA), and band fluorescence was estimated using the AlphaView software (Alpha Innotech, San Leandro, CA). Purified PCR product concentration was assessed by comparison with the fluorescence of the bands in Low DNA Mass Ladder (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) run on the same gel. All PCR products of all genes were sent to GeneWiz Inc. sequencing facilities (Cambridge, MA) for Sanger Sequencing. The forward and reverse sequences from each PCR product were edited and a consensus sequence generated using Sequencher v. 5.1 (GeneCodes, AnnArbor, MI). All sequences were submitted to GenBank, with accession numbers listed in Table S1. Our alignments were submitted to TreeBase (XXXXXXXXX).

Assembling Published Sareomycetes Sequences

Sequences of species in Sareomycetes, either already identified or identified by us through BLAST similarity, are available on public databases such as GenBank, UNITE (Nilsson et al. 2019), and the NARO Genebank Microorganism Search System (https://www.gene.affrc.go.jp/databases-micro_search_en.php). Those nuITS sequences used from these databases were restricted to complete or nearly complete (> 450 bp). The identified sequences were obtained by searching GenBank and the NARO Genebank Microorganism Search System for Sarea, Sarea resinae, Sarea difformis, or Arthrographis lignicola and downloading those sufficiently complete nuITS and nuLSU sequences (71 and 19 sequences, respectively).

Unidentified and misidentified sequences were found by searching GenBank using the Nucleotide Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) (Altschul 1997) with nuITS, nuLSU, and mtSSU sequences derived from morphologically identified specimens. The "distance tree of results" feature was employed, with sequences identified as Lecanoromycetes species excluded from consideration. The remaining sequences on branches with or adjacent to identified Sareomycetes sequences were downloaded and identified by comparison to further sequences of identified specimens. This yielded an additional 30 sequences. Two of these were discarded because they were identified as chimeric by BLASTing their nuITS1 and nuITS2 portions separately. This method was used to determine that KF274061 consists of a nuITS1 region from Sarea resinae s. lat. and a nuITS2 region from an unidentifiable fungus with affinities to Leotiomycetes, and KM104053 consists of a nuITS1 region from Sarea difformis s. lat. and a nuITS2 region from Sarea resinae s. lat. In addition, the UNITE database was searched by examining sequences unique to the UNITE database included in the 8 species hypotheses for the genus Sarea and the 11 species hypotheses for the genus Arthrographis. These were downloaded and identified by comparison with sequences of identified specimens; low similarity sequences were discarded. In this way, 8 sequences were identified.

Host, locality, and specimen/culture strain data were determined for all published sequences by consulting the information provided in the source database, relevant publications, and relevant culture collection databases (e.g. http://www.wi.knaw.nl/collections/, https://www.atcc.org/, and https://www.uamh.ca/searchCatalogue.php). These data as well as accession numbers and updated identifications are included in Table S1.

Sequence Alignments

MAFFT v. 7.308 (Katoh 2002; Katoh and Standley 2013) was used to generate a multiple sequence alignment (MSA) independently for each marker with the following parameters: the FFT-NS-I x1000 algorithm, the 200PAM / k = 2 scoring matrix, a gap open penalty of 1.5 and an offset value of 0.123. The resulting alignments were manually optimized in Geneious v. 9.0.2 (a) to replace gaps at the ends of shorter sequences with an IUPAC base representing any base (“N”), and (b) to trim ends of longer sequences in the nuITS MSA that included part of the 18S–28S ribosomal subunits. The software GBlocks v. 0.91b (Castresana 2000) was used to automatically remove ambiguously aligned regions in the nuITS and mtSSU MSAs using the least stringent parameters but allowing gaps in 50% of the sequences.

Phylogenetic Tree Inference

The online version of RAxML-HPC2 hosted at the CIPRES Science Gateway (Stamatakis 2006; Stamatakis et al. 2008; Miller et al. 2010) was used to estimate a three-locus phylogeny under a Maximum Likelihood (ML) framework based on a dataset comprising specimens with at least two available sequenced markers. Several specimens of Pycnora were included as outgroup to root phylogenetic trees. Prior to concatenation, and to test for topological incongruence among sequence datasets, we inferred ML trees independently for each locus with RAxML-HPC2, using 1000 bootstrap pseudoreplicates, and assumed bootstrap values ≥ 70% as significant for conflicting relationships among the same set of taxa (Mason-Gamer and Kellogg 1996). Because no conflicts were detected, the RAxML analysis was conducted using the GTRGAMMA substitution model for the four delimited partitions (nuITS1 + 2, 5.8S, nuLSU, mtSSU) and 1000 rapid bootstrap pseudoreplicates were implemented to evaluate nodal support. Evolutionary relationships were additionally inferred in a Bayesian context using MrBayes v. 3.2.6 (Ronquist et al. 2012). Optimal substitution models and partition schemes for these four sequence data partitions were estimated with PartitionFinder v. 1.1.1 (Lanfear et al. 2012) considering a model with linked branch lengths and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). This analysis favoured the SYM + Γ model for the nuITS1 + 2 partition, the K80 + I + Γ for the 5.8S + nuLSU, and the HKY + I + Γ for the mtSSU. The analysis was then conducted with two parallel, simultaneous four-chain runs executed over 5 × 10⁷ generations starting with a random tree, and sampling after every 500th step. The first 25% of data were discarded as burn-in, and the 50% majority-rule consensus tree and corresponding posterior probabilities were calculated from the remaining trees. Average standard deviation of split frequencies (ASDSF) values below 0.01 and potential scale reduction factor (PSRF) values approaching 1.00 were considered as indicators of chain convergence. Tree nodes showing bootstrap support (BP) values equal or higher than 70% (RAxML analysis) and Bayesian posterior probabilities (PP) equal or higher than 0.95 (MrBayes analysis) were regarded as significantly supported. Phylogenetic trees were visualized in FigTree v. 1.4 (available at http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/tracer/) and Adobe Illustrator CS5 was used for artwork.

Species Discovery-Validation Approach

Based on the existence of well-delimited and highly supported clades in the three-locus phylogenetic tree inferred above, we assessed species boundaries independently for the orange and black Sarea. To this end, we used the distance-based Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery method (ABGD) (Puillandre et al. 2012), restricting the analyses to specimens with available data for the fungal barcode nuITS. The analyses used the Kimura two-parameters (K2P) model to estimate genetic distances, a transition/transversion value of 3.95 (orange Sarea) and 3.07 (black Sarea) calculated with MEGA v.5.2 (Tamura et al. 2011), a Pmax of 0.01, and different values for the relative gap width (X). Subsequently, the Bayes Factor Delimitation (BFD) method, which allows for topological uncertainty in gene trees and incongruences among gene trees, was chosen to compare the two species boundary hypotheses generated for the black Sarea on the basis of our morphological study of the specimens, and the ABGD and phylogenetic results (Table 1). *BEAST (Heled and Drummond 2010; Drummond et al. 2012) was used to build the two competing models. These comprised a three-locus dataset in which specimens with identical sequences were removed to avoid sequence redundancies; the number of specimens left was 85, including outgroup specimens. The same optimal substitution models and partition schemes selected in the MrBayes analysis were used for the *BEAST analyses except for the substitution model TrNef + I + Γ, which was preferred for the 5.8S + nuLSU partition. An uncorrelated relaxed lognormal molecular clock was chosen for the three markers based on a preliminary assessment of the adequacy of strict clocks in MEGA 5.0 (Tamura et al. 2011) (see Table S2). The mean clock rate was fixed to 1.0 for nuITS whereas rates were co-estimated for nuLSU and mtSSU under a uniform prior (1 × 10^− 5, 5). A birth-death process tree prior was imposed after conducting preliminary Bayes factors comparisons of Maximum Likelihood Estimates (MLE) calculated with Path Sampling and Stepping-Stone (Lartillot and Philippe 2006; Xie et al. 2011) for models implementing alternative tree priors (see Table S2). By using this tree prior we accommodated incomplete sampling and speciation of nodes in the topology. The *BEAST analyses used a piecewise linear and constant root model for population size (Grummer et al. 2014). Hyperpriors for the birth-death process tree prior and species population mean were given an inverse gamma distribution with an initial value of 1 or 0.1, shape parameter of 1 or 2 and scale of 1 or 2, respectively. Default (but informative) priors were given for the remaining parameters across all analyses. Finally, *BEAST runs of 1.5 × 10⁸ generations, saving every 15000th tree, were performed using the CIPRES Science Gateway (Miller et al. 2010). Tracer v.1.7 (http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/tracer/) was used to check for convergence, assumed if effective sample sizes (ESS) were > 200. Then, MLE for the two species boundary models were calculated using Path Sampling and Stepping-Stone, with default settings. Bayes Factors were calculated following Hedin et al. (2015). 2lnBF > 10 indicate very strong evidence against a model as compared with the best (Kass and Raftery 1995).

Table 1

Species delimitation hypotheses in *Sarea*
	Distinct species	Motivation	Path Sampling		Stepping-Stone
			Ln (Marginal Likelihood)	2ln (Bayes Factor)	Ln (Marginal Likelihood)	2ln (Bayes Factor)
Model 1 (three Sarea spp.)	Sarea difformis / S. coeloplata 1 / S. coeloplata 2	Morphological observations and three-locus phylogenies (RAxML and MrBayes)	-7867.9101	N/A	-7868.3128	N/A
Model 2 (two Sarea spp.)	Sarea difformis + S. coeloplata 1 / S. coeloplata 2	ABGD nuITS	-7873.5589	11.2976	-7874.1365	11.6474

Marginal likelihood and Bayes factor values for two alternative species delimitation hypotheses in Sarea and their motivation. The best model is highlighted in bold.

Polymorphism Statistics, Haplotype Networks, and Neutrality Tests

DNA polymorphism was assessed for each candidate species delineated by the species discovery-validation approach. The software DnaSP v.5.10 (Librado and Rozas 2009) was used to compute the number of segregating sites (s), number of haplotypes (h), haplotype diversity (Hd) calculated without considering gap positions, and nucleotide diversity (π) using the Jukes & Cantor (1969) correction. For these calculations, we used the original nuITS dataset (i.e. not processed with GBlocks), and the GBlocks-trimmed mtSSU alignment because of the high occurrence of large indels. In the nuLSU dataset, three black Sarea sequences and 19 out of 51 orange Sarea sequences were removed due to the high number of “N” base calls. Next, statistical parsimony using the method TCS (Clement et al. 2002) as implemented in PopART v.1.7 (Leigh and Bryant 2015) was used to infer relationships among haplotypes of the orange and black Sarea s.l. These haplotypes were inferred with DnaSP v. 5.10 considering sites with alignment gaps and removing invariable sites and were labelled according to their geographic origin. Finally, deviations from neutrality, which are useful for interpreting past population size changes, were tested with Tajima’s D and Fu’s Fs statistics in DnaSP v.5.10 using the number of segregating sites. The significance of these tests was assessed based on 10⁴ coalescent simulations.

Estimating the Age of the Crown Node of Sareomycetes

To infer the age of the crown node of class Sareomycetes, a six-locus dataset was compiled using sequences from nine Sarea s.l. specimens and sequences retrieved from GenBank representing major clades in the Ascomycota tree of life. For ascomycete taxa compilation, we followed Pérez-Ortega et al. (2016), Lutzoni et al. (2018) and Voglmayr et al. (2019). Together with the four basidiomycete species included as outgroup, the final dataset consisted of 169 taxa (Table S3).

Alignments of the nuSSU, nuLSU, mtSSU, RPB1, RPB2 and tef1-α were carried out in MAFFT v. 7.308 as implemented in Geneious v. 9.0.2 using the same algorithm parameters as above. Manual optimization of the resulting MSAs consisted in removing clearly ambiguously aligned and intronic regions in rDNA marker datasets (nuSSU, nuLSU and mtSSU), as well as non-coding regions (introns) in the protein-coding markers (RPB1, RPB2 and tef1-α). Sequences of the latter three datasets were also translated into amino acids to spot misaligned regions generating stop codons. Finally, “N”s were used to fill gaps at the ends of shorter sequences. The resulting alignment lengths were: nuSSU (1629 bp), nuLSU (1305 bp), mtSSU (651 bp), RPB1 (1100 bp), RPB2 (2001 bp), tef1-α (1209 bp), for a total length of 7895 bp. PartitionFinder v. 1.1.1 was used to estimate the optimal number of partitions of the data along with their corresponding best-fitting nucleotide substitution model using the linked branch lengths option and the Bayesian Information Criterion for model selection. Eight independent data blocks were suggested: 1) nuSSU, 2) nuLSU, 3) tef1-α codon1, 4) tef1-α codon2, RPB1-codon2, RPB2-codon2, 5) tef1-α codon3, 6) RPB2-codon1, RPB1-codon1, 7) RPB2-codon3, RPB1-codon3, and 8) mtSSU. The GTR + I + Γ substitution model was selected for all partitions but 1 (SYM + I + Γ), 2 (TRN + I + Γ), 3 (HKY + I + Γ), and 5 (GTR + Γ). Before assembling the six-locus dataset, potential topological conflicts among markers were visually explored on single-locus ML phylogenetic trees calculated with the online version of RAxML-HPC2 with 1000 bootstrap pseudoreplicates conducted to retrieve nodal support values.

Among all available fossils that may be used to calibrate a class-wide fungal phylogeny (see Lücking & Nelsen 2018 and Samarakoon et al. 2019), we chose six ascomycete fossils, whose details and associated reference publications are in Table S4. Divergence times and a tree topology were then co-estimated in BEAST v. 1.8.1. XML files were prepared in BEAUti v 1.8.1 (Drummond et al. 2012) using the above-mentioned six-locus dataset with the corresponding partitions and nucleotide substitution models. Additional settings included selection of an uncorrelated lognormal relaxed clock for each marker and a birth-death prior, and the use of a rooted, strictly-bifurcating ML topology obtained in RAxML as a starting tree. This ML tree was previously transformed into ultrametric using the function chronos in the R package ape (Paradis et al. 2004). In the prior settings step, we forced to co-estimate the average rate of evolution of each locus by setting the priors for the ucld.mean parameter to uniform (10^− 5, 0.01). The taxa and prior distributions used to set the fossil calibrations are detailed in Table S4. Fourteen independent BEAST runs of 200 million generations each were carried out, logging parameters and trees every 2 × 10⁴ generations. Then, Tracer v. 1.7 was used to check for convergence and mixing, making sure that ESS were well above 200. After implementing an adequate burn-in portion to the sampled trees in each run, a total of 8 × 10⁴ remaining trees were combined in a single file using LogCombiner v1.8.1 (http://beast.bio.ed.ac.uk/logcombiner). Because the resulting file exceeded 6 GB and could not be handled by TreeAnnotator v.1.8.1 (http://beast.bio.ed.ac.uk/treeannotator), we implemented a custom script to generate ten files with 4 × 10⁴ randomly drawn trees each. These were then processed with TreeAnnotator v.1.8.1 to generate ten maximum clade credibility trees with annotated median node heights. Age estimates in million years ago (Ma), 95% High Posterior Density (HPD) intervals, and average substitution rates for markers reported in this study are the result of averaging over these ten annotated tree files.

Inferring a Time Frame for The Diversification of Sareomycetes

We implemented a secondary calibration approach in BEAST v.1.8.1 on the concatenated three-marker dataset used in the BFD analysis (see section Species discovery-validation approach) to estimate a temporal context for the diversification of the main lineages of Sareomycetes. First, a time estimate of 120.88 Ma (181.35–75.76 Ma, 95% HPD) was used to calibrate the crown node of Sareomycetes based on results of our previous six-locus dating analysis. This calibration was set as a prior using a normal distribution (mean = 120.88, stdev = 35); average substitution rates for the three loci (nuITS, nuLSU and mtSSU) were co-estimated under a uniform prior (10^− 5, 0.01). For comparison, we additionally estimated divergence ages using four different substitution rates: a) a mtSSU rate of 3.28 × 10^− 10 s/s/y inferred for the Sareomycetes clade in the six-locus dating approach, b) a nuLSU rate of 2.68 × 10^− 10 s/s/y inferred for the Sareomycetes clade as well, c) a nuITS rate of 2.52 × 10^− 9 s/s/y calculated for the fungal order Erysiphales by Takamatsu and Matsuda (2004), and d) a nuITS rate of 3.41 × 10^− 9 s/s/y calculated for the lichenized fungal genus Melanohalea by Leavitt et al. (2012).

For all analyses, remaining BEAST parameters, especially the clock and tree prior models were set identical to the BFD analyses, and the run consisted on 7.5 × 10⁷ generations, saving every 7500th tree. A 25% of burn-in was selected in the TreeAnnotator step. Chronograms were drawn with FigTree v. 1.4.

Molecular Sequence Data

Molecular data were obtained from 70 collections. From these, we produced 212 sequences: 70 nuITS, 63 nuLSU, 61 mtSSU, 9 RPB2, and 9 nuSSU (Tables S1 & S3). The nuITS alignment of the 202 sequences produced de novo and downloaded from GenBank was 524 bp long; 192 positions were variable and 38 were singleton sites. After processing the alignment with GBlocks, 482 positions (91% of the original alignment) were retained in 24 selected blocks; 172 positions were variable and 33 were singleton sites. The nuLSU alignment comprised 92 sequences and was 914 bp in length; the number of variable and singleton sites were 87 and 21, respectively. The original mtSSU alignment was composed of 75 sequences and 977 positions, of which 253 were variable and 21 were singleton sites. The use of GBlocks trimmed the alignment to 691 bp (70% of the original alignment), displaying 152 variable and ten singleton positions. Last, the concatenated three-locus (nuITS, nuLSU and mtSSU) dataset used for (a) estimating a phylogeny, (b) species validation with the BFD method, and (c) inferring the timing of diversification of Sareomycetes was composed of 87 specimens of which 63 had data for the three loci. The total number of bp was 2088, including 398 variable and 75 singleton sites.

Phylogenetic Reconstructions

The single-locus phylogenies produced with RAxML had lnL values of -3158.2564 (nuITS), -2229.9957 (nuLSU) and − 2375.8252 (mtSSU). The nuITS and mtSSU phylogenies showed strong nodal support for (a) a clade including all orange Sarea s.l. (hereafter referred to as Zythia resinae; see section Taxonomy below), and (b) a clade assigned to the new genus Atrozythia (see section Taxonomy below) including two species composed of a few specimens each (Figs. S1-S3). The two taxa referenced below as Sarea coeloplata 2 and S. difformis s.s. also formed well delimited and highly supported clades in these two phylogenies; however, S. coeloplata 1 was monophyletic with high support only in the mtSSU topology. A supported sister relationship was found for Zythia and Atrozythia, whereas a clade comprising the three Sarea species was only supported in the mtSSU topology, in which S. coeloplata 1 and S. difformis appeared as sister species. The nuLSU phylogeny only delimited the S. coeloplata 2 clade with support, and a specimen assigned to the new species A. klamathica was found interspersed in a non-supported clade including Z. resinae specimens (Fig. S2). No clear relationships among the main nuLSU lineages were inferred. On the other hand, three-locus phylogenies inferred with RAxML and MrBayes showed high support (100% BP, PP = 1) for the clades comprising the genera Zythia, Atrozythia and Sarea (Fig. 4). In Zythia, these two phylogenetic reconstruction methods were not coherent in delimiting well-supported subclades; only a basal lineage containing samples from Northern and Central Europe, North America, the Iberian Peninsula, and Macaronesia (Cape Verde Is.) showed strong nodal support by both methods. The Atrozythia clade was split into two well-supported clades, one corresponding to the new species A. klamathica (see section Taxonomy below), and the other to A. lignicola. The Sarea clade segregated in three well delimited and supported subclades, each corresponding to three different species: S. difformis and S. coeloplata 1 & 2. All three lineages are distributed across the Northern Hemisphere (North America and Europe) and occur mainly on Pinus and Picea resin. Interestingly, in S. coeloplata 1, samples from the Iberian Peninsula and Macaronesia (Cape Verde Is.) formed a well-supported subclade sister to the bulk of North American and Northern-Central European specimens. This situation also occurred, although not so markedly, in S. coeloplata 2.

Species Delimitation

The ABGD analyses conducted on the Zythia (orange specimens) and Sarea (epruinose black specimens) nuITS datasets did not reveal clear barcode gaps. In Zythia, ABGD rendered 6 to 52 different partitions (i.e., putative species) when the relative gap width (X) was set to 0.5, but initial and recursive partitions only converged in the 52-partitions solution (Fig. S4). With X = 1, convergence was found for 1 and 52-partition solutions. In agreement with our morphological data, we hereafter considered the existence of only one Zythia species. In Sarea, although a barcode gap was not strictly found, ABGD analyses using varying levels of X (0.5, 1 and 1.5) suggested the combination of specimens assigned to S. difformis and S. coeloplata 1 into one single partition (Fig. S5). As this solution contradicted our morphological observations of specimens suggesting the existence of three species in Sarea, a hypothesis in agreement with the multi-locus phylogenetic results, we compared the two alternative species delimitation models with the BFD method. Marginal likelihood values for the considered models calculated through Path Sampling and Stepping-Stone are shown in Table 1. Bayes factor comparisons favoured the three species model over the two species model.

Genetic Polymorphism, Neutrality Tests and Phylogeographic Structure

Genetic diversity indices, such as the numbers of segregating sites and haplotypes, were greater for Zythia resinae than for any Sarea species across different markers (Table 2). The nucleotide diversity index behaved in a similar way except for the mtSSU marker: though four times as many specimens of Z. resinae as S. difformis were included in their respective analyses, S. difformis showed slightly higher values than Z. resinae. Haplotype diversity values were comparable among species and markers, although S. coeloplata 2 consistently showed lower values. However, these results must be interpreted with caution due to the uneven number of studied specimens for each species, e.g. Z. resinae incorporated three to eight times more individuals in the analyses than the remaining species. Neutrality tests gave significant negative values of Fu’s Fs in S. coeloplata 1 and Z. resinae based on nuITS data (Table 2), indicating a population expansion. Negative values of Tajima’s D and Fu’s Fs were also obtained for the same species as well as S. difformis using the nuLSU dataset; however, these were not statistically significant. Tajima’s D tests of mtSSU data generated positive values for all species,

Table 2

Polymorphism statistics and neutrality tests for *Sarea* spp. and *Zythia resinae*.
Dataset	n	bp	Gaps/missing	s	h	Hd	π (JC)	Tajima’s D	Fu’s Fs
nuITS
Sarea coleoplata 1	22	482	48	17	14/20	0.948	0.00662	-1.41635	-7.954(**)
Sarea coleoplata 2	15	483	31	17	7/12	0.838	0.01186	0.05176	0.91
Sarea difformis	17	482	28	31	13/13	0.956	0.01754	-0.58929	-2.987
Zythia resinae	118	511	115	71	48/68	0.96	0.02835	-0.55575	-12.831(*)
nuLSU
Sarea coleoplata 1	8	909	382	4	4/7	0.786	0.00251	-0.62573	-0.674
Sarea coleoplata 2	8	907	381	13	4/6	0.75	0.00803	-0.84352	1.756
Sarea difformis	10	908	415	9	7/7	0.911	0.00548	-0.67784	-2.631
Zythia resinae	32	906	226	34	16/17	0.897	0.0114	-0.32928	-1.648
mtSSU
Sarea coleoplata 1	5	741	35	12	4/4	0.9	0.00973	1.30583	0.98
Sarea coleoplata 2	8	740	17	14	4/4	0.75	0.01013	1.74512	3.209
Sarea difformis	11	750	72	33	6/8	0.8	0.01919	0.61079	3.46
Zythia resinae	40	691	36	35	14/18	0.931	0.01301	0.08728	-0.796
: 0.01 < p-value < 0.05; *: p-value < 0.01

Polymorphism statistics and neutrality tests results for each marker (nuITS, nuLSU and mtSSU), and Sarea spp. and Zythia resinae. Columns contain the number of sequences (n), their length (in bp), the number of positions in the alignment with gaps and missing data, the number of segregating sites (s), the number of haplotypes (h; value after vertical bar was calculated considering gaps in the alignment), haplotype diversity (Hd), nucleotide diversity (π) using the Jukes and Cantor (1969) correction, and results of neutrality tests. but these were not significant as well.

Tokogenic relationships among the 48 nuITS haplotypes of Zythia resinae revealed no geographic structure as haplotypes from North America, Northern/Central Europe and Eastern Asia were widespread across the network (Fig. 5A). Identical haplotypes were shared among widely distant regions: (a) North America and Eastern Asia, and (b) North America, the whole of Europe and the Macaronesian islands. The two studied New Zealand haplotypes were not closely related: whereas one was relatively close to a haplotype shared between North America and Eastern Asia, the other was linked to a haplotype shared between Northern/Central Europe and the Macaronesia. The Caribbean haplotype was close to a North American one. As for Sarea s.l., the network delimited the three considered species well (Fig. 5B). These showed differing levels of intraspecific diversity. For instance, haplotypes of S. difformis were separated from each other by a higher number of mutations than haplotypes of S. coeloplata 1 & 2. At the geographical scale, whereas haplotypes from any of the considered Northern Hemisphere regions were widespread across the network, we found no haplotypes shared between widely distant localities, except for an Antarctic haplotype shared with Northern/Central Europe and the Iberian Peninsula. These observations may also be due to the limited number of specimens studied compared to the scenario revealed for Z. resinae. Finally, in S. coeloplata 1 & 2, some Iberian Peninsula and Macaronesian haplotypes showed an increased number of separating mutations; further, S. coeloplata 1 haplotypes from these two regions were closely related.

Age Estimates for the Crown Nodes of Sareomycetes and Main Lineages Within

The maximum clade credibility (MCC) tree with 169 fungal taxa and divergence estimates obtained with BEAST showed posterior probabilities (PP) of 1.0 for all inner nodes except for the sister relationship between the clades allocating Coniocybomycetes + Lichinomycetes and Lecanoromycetes + Xylobotryomycetes + Eurotiomycetes that received a support of PP = 0.96 (Fig. S6). The Orbiliomycetes and Pezizomycetes formed a clade at the base of Pezizomycotina which was dated back to 412.59 Ma (453–400 Ma, 95% HPD). This result is in agreement with previous dating studies of Beimforde et al. (2014) and Pérez-Ortega et al. (2016). The class Sareomycetes was revealed to be sister to Geoglossomycetes with high support (PP = 1.0). The split between these two lineages might have occurred during the Middle Jurassic (ca. 168.20 Ma; 327.24–109.14 Ma, 95% HPD). The crown node of class Sareomycetes was dated to the Lower Cretaceous, ca. 120.88 Ma (181.35–75.76 Ma, 95% HPD) according to our six-locus dating using several fossils as calibration points; however, the use of alternative dating methods in our second step (see section “Inferring a Time Frame for The Diversification of Sareomycetes” in Materials and Methods), which was based on a three-locus dataset, provided different time intervals for such an event (Fig. 6; Fig. S7; Table S5). Hence, median age estimates obtained with secondary calibrations drawn from our first, six-locus dating analysis generated similar time intervals as expected (ca. 101.33 to 134.59 Ma, Lower Cretaceous), whereas the use of the Erysiphales and Melanohalea nuITS substitution rates shifted this temporal window towards more recent geological times (Paleocene-Eocene, ca. 64.25–47.74 Ma). We then drew the corresponding rate of evolution of the Sareomycetes nuITS from the posterior distribution of our three-locus analysis (first analysis in section “Inferring a Time Frame for The Diversification of Sareomycetes” in Material and Methods) using the parameter .rate as reported in FigTree. The value was 1.269 × 10^− 3 s/s/Ma (minimum and maximum 95% HPD values: 8.528 × 10^− 5 and 3.075 × 10^− 3 s/s/Ma) which implies a more slower rate of evolution for this region compared to estimates in the Erysiphales (2.52 × 10^− 3 s/s/Ma) and Melanohalea (3.41 × 10^− 3 s/s/Ma).

The five chronograms inferred for estimating a time frame for the diversification of Sareomycetes showed high posterior probabilities supporting relationships among the main lineages except for the sister relationship between Sarea difformis and S. coeloplata 1 (PP = 0.93–0.94). Similar to previous results, divergence ages obtained with Erysiphales and Melanohalea nuITS substitution rates generated much more recent time estimates (Table S5). All in all, the origin and diversification of Zythia, Atrozythia and Sarea occurred during the Tertiary (Table S5). Thus, the crown nodes of Zythia and Sarea were estimated in the Eocene and Miocene, whereas that of Atrozythia in the Oligocene-Miocene (Fig. 6). The split between the two Atrozythia species (A. klamathica and A. lignicola) probably occurred during the Miocene. The crown nodes of the three Sarea species were placed in the Oligocene-Miocene. Finally, the different dating strategies estimated that intraspecific diversification in the three studied genera occurred < 10 Ma, in the Neogene and Pleistocene (Figs. S8-S12).

Taxonomy

Although the terms "holotype" and "lectotype" as defined in Article 9 of the International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi, and Plants (ICN) (Turland et al. 2018) do not apply to names at ranks higher than species, they will be used by analogy here to indicate type species of monotypic genera or type species selected by their authors and type species selected by later authors, respectively (Art. 10, Note 1). Exclamation points after specimen identifiers indicate that they were examined by the authors. Color coding refers to Inter-Society Color Council (1976).

Sareomycetes Beimforde, A.R. Schmidt, Rikkinen & J.K. Mitch., Fungal Syst. Evol. 6: 29 (2020).

Sareales Beimforde, A.R. Schmidt, Rikkinen & J.K. Mitch., Fungal Syst. Evol. 6: 29 (2020).

Zythiaceae Clem., Gen. Fung.: 128 (1909).

Synonym: Sareaceae Beimforde, A.R. Schmidt, Rikkinen & J.K. Mitch., Fungal Syst. Evol. 6: 29 (2020).

Atrozythia J.K. Mitch., Quijada, Garrido-Ben. & Pfister, gen. nov.

MycoBank XXXXXX.

Diagnosis: Apothecia of Atrozythia differ from Zythia in their color (black vs. orange) and from Sarea because of their white to light blue gray pruina. Paraphyses in Atrozythia are unbranched whereas those in Sarea are always branched or anastomose, at least in the basal cells. Zythia can have unbranched paraphyses but differs from Atrozythia in the amount and color of lipid guttules, orange and abundant vs. yellowish and sparse, respectively. Atrozythia has a hyaline ectal and medullary excipulum that are sharply delimited by a narrow dark brown pigmented layer; in Zythia there is no brown pigmented layer between these layers. In Sarea the medullary excipulum is always differentiated by its dark brown color.

Etymology: from the Latin for black (ater) and the genus name "Zythia," referring to the macroscopic resemblance to Zythia species, but with a dark coloration.

Holotype species: Atrozythia klamathica J.K. Mitch. & Quijada sp. nov.

Description: Teleomorph: See description for Atrozythia klamathica J.K. Mitch. & Quijada sp. nov. below. Anamorph: See description of Arthrographis lignicola Sigler in Sigler & Carmichael, Mycotaxon 18(2): 502–505 (1983).

Notes: This genus currently encompasses two species, both apparently uncommon or under-collected, with one known only in an apothecial teleomorphic state and the other only in a hyphomycetous anamorphic state. Both are found on dead or living conifers; there are some indications of a resinicolous habit in the type species, A. klamathica sp. nov., but additional information is needed to elucidate the ecology of these fungi. In our phylogenetic analyses, the affinities of this group apparently lie closer to the genus Zythia than to Sarea, but Atrozythia species are located on a relatively long branch compared to these two genera. There are apparently no closely matching, unnamed environmental sequences on GenBank assignable to this genus, possibly suggesting rarity rather than merely being overlooked.

Atrozythia klamathica J.K. Mitch. & Quijada sp. nov.

MycoBank XXXXXX.

Etymology: named for the collection locality of the holotype, Klamath National Forest.

Diagnosis: See generic diagnosis above.

Type: USA: California: Siskiyou County, Klamath National Forest, southwest side of Forest Route 17N11, 41°50'03.6"N 123°25'42.1"W, 566 m a.s.l., apothecia on resinous wounds of living young Chamaecyparis lawsoniana, 12 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0068 (FH XXXXXXXX! – holotype, MBT XXXXXXXX).

Description: Teleomorph apothecial. Apothecia discoid to cupulate, scattered, erumpent from the resin, consistency coriaceous and ascomata slightly shrunken when dry, but expanding and fleshy when moist, 0.7–1.2 mm diam., up to 1 mm high, subsessile to short-stipitate (0.1–0.3 × 0.2–0.3 mm), stipe narrower toward the base. Disc concave to plane, round or somewhat irregular by internal growing pressure, smooth or slightly wrinkled, black (267.black) to dark grayish brown (62.d.gy.Br), with or without light white (263.White) to light blue gray (190.l.bGray) coating pruina; margin distinct, raised when immature but not protruding beyond the hymenium when mature, 0.5–1 mm thick, entire and smooth or radially cracked, concolorous with hymenium and usually pruinose. Receptacle concolorous with hymenium and margin, strongly roughened, more heavily pruinose, pruina extending downward on the stipe, anchoring hyphae surrounding the receptacle from base of stipe to lower flank and rarely at margin. Pruina can be lost during development and is usually more frequent in immature apothecia. Asci (103)131–158(166) × (27.5)29.5–36.5(40.5) µm, cylindric-clavate, multispored, mature asci 35–50 µm below the hymenial surface prior to spore discharge, ascus dehiscence rostrate, inner wall material expanding, protruding c. 40–50 µm, reaching the hymenial surface at spore discharge; apex hemispherical, thick-walled, strongly staining in CR, apex with an apical chamber, apical wall 3–5 µm thick, chamber later disappearing and apical tip thickening, becoming 10–15.5 µm thick, projecting into the ascus, becoming dome-like, with intermediate morphologies also observed, inner wall not or faintly amyloid, outer wall intensely amyloid; lateral walls 1–3.5 µm thick, asci covered with an amyloid gel layer; base arising from a perforated crozier. Ascospores 1.8–2.3 µm diam, globose to subglobose, hyaline, inamyloid, aseptate, wall slightly thick and with one eccentric medium gray (265.med.Gy) lipid guttule. Paraphyses embedded in a thick, hyaline layer of gel, cylindrical, uninflated to medium clavate, straight or slightly wavy, terminal cell (5.5)6.5–9(11.5) × 2–3.3(4.5) µm, covered by a strong yellowish brown (74.syBr) to deep yellowish brown (78.d.yBr) amorphous exudate, lower cells (6.5)8.5–11 × 2–3 µm, basal cells (12.5)14.5–18(20.5) × 1.5–2 µm, simple, unbranched, hyaline, septate, septa strongly staining in CR, basal cells ± equidistantly septate, terminal and lower cells shorter, walls smooth, sparse tiny yellow gray (93.yGray) lipid guttules throughout, from the basal to terminal cells. Excipulum composed of two differentiated layers sharply delimited, ectal excipulum strongly gelatinized, (111)127–165(192) µm thick at lower flank and base, (32)48–124(132) µm thick at margin and upper flank, constituted of three layers; innermost layer of moderately packed textura intricata with immersed in a pigmented gel, strong brown (55.s.Br) to dark brown (59.d.Br), with sparse dark greyish yellow (91.d.gy.Y) refractive amorphous lumps; middle layer with loosely packed hyaline cells, strongly gelatinized, parallel to each other (sometimes interwoven) and oriented perpendicular to the outer surface, outermost layer with shorter, parallel and very tightly packed cells without intercellular spaces, walls pigmented and surrounded by a strong brown (55.s.Br) to dark brown (59.d.Br) amorphous exudate, cortical layer irregular and black (267.Black). Individual cells at middle layer of ectal excipulum (5)6.5–9(10) × 2–3.5 µm at margin, (6.5)8.5–12(15.5) × 2–3 µm at lower flank and base, cell walls 0.5–1.5(3.5) µm thick. Medullary excipulum of slightly gelatinized textura intricata, tightly packed, cells neither with intercellular spaces nor particular orientation, (10)12.5–16.5(19) × 2–3(3.5) µm. Anamorph unknown.

Notes: This species is known from two specimens (of which the holotype was sequenced twice) and is illustrated in Fig. 3. It was probably observed once in Alaska (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/41563051), but no specimen was collected. Little is known about its ecology or possible anamorphic states. Sequence and morphological data are sufficient to separate it from Sarea and Zythia, and it shows a closer affinity to the latter. Although apparently collected only twice, it is possible (given the rarity with which Sarea difformis is found on cupressaceous hosts) that A. klamathica is the fungus which was isolated as an endophyte of cupressaceous plants in central Oregon and reported as S. difformis (Petrini and Carroll 1981). Due to the lack of detailed data in the report, this supposition can neither be confirmed nor refuted. Culture work with fresh material should be done.

Additional material studied: USA: Washington: Whatcom County, Baker Lake, Boulder Creek Campground on Baker Lake Road, 48°42'53"N 121°41'40"W, 287 m a.s.l., apothecia on resin on bole of Tsuga heterophylla, 12 Mar. 2018, M. Haldeman 2748 (herb. Haldeman!).

Atrozythia lignicola (Sigler) J.K. Mitch., Garrido-Ben. & Pfister comb. nov.

MycoBank XXXXXX.

Basionym: Arthrographis lignicola Sigler in Sigler & Carmichael, Mycotaxon 18(2): 502 (1983).

Type: Canada: Alberta: Division No. 13, Westlock, dried culture isolated from conifer wood chips and bark from a logging truck, Feb. 1978, L. Sigler [isol. 14 Feb. 1978] (UAMH 4095 – holotype, MBT 16421; UAMH 4095 = ATCC 52699 = CBS 689.83 = IFM 52650 = IMI 282334 – ex-type cultures).

Description: Teleomorph unknown. Anamorph fully described in the protologue (Sigler and Carmichael 1983).

Notes: Although hyphomycetes producing arthroconidia are thus far unknown as anamorphs among members of the Sareomycetes, sequence data generated independently on four separate occasions from ex-type strains place this species as congeneric with Atrozythia klamathica (Murata et al. 2005; Kang et al. 2010; Giraldo et al. 2014; Saar 2018). This relationship with Sareomycetes has also been suggested in previous phylogenetic analyses (Giraldo et al. 2014). The species has been found both in North America (Sigler and Carmichael 1983; Wang and Zabel 1990; Lumley et al. 2001) and in Europe (Metzler 1997; Arhipova et al. 2011), identified as Arthrographis pinicola in the last publication. No teleomorphic state is known, and as with its congener, A. lignicola appears to be rarely found and recognized.

Sarea Fr., Syst. orb. veg. 1: 86 (1825), nom. sanct. (Fries, Elench. fung. 2: 14 (1828)).

Lectotype species: Peziza difformis Fr., nom. sanct., designated by Hawksworth & Sherwood, Canad. J. Bot. 59(3): 358 (1981).

Synonyms: Coniothyrium subgen. Epithyrium Sacc., Syll. fung. 10: 268 (1892).

Lectotype species: Coniothyrium resinae Sacc. & Berl., designated by Sutton, The Coelomycetes: 625 (1980).

Epithyrium (Sacc.) Trotter, Syll. fung. 25: 249 (1931).

"Biatoridina Schczedr." nom. inval. (Art. 40.1), Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 49(9): 1315 (1964).

Emended Description: Teleomorph apothecial. Apothecia black, erumpent from the resin, discoid, roundish to ellipsoid, coriaceous to fleshy, sessile with broad attachment. Hymenium and tissues in section purple or brown, turning blue or without change in KOH. Asci clavate, multispored, dehiscence rostrate, apex hemispherical, thick-walled, ascus apex staining strongly in CR, with an apical chamber and thin apical wall, chamber later disappearing and apical tip thickening, projecting into the ascus, becoming dome-like, inner wall not or faintly amyloid, outer wall intensely amyloid and covered with an amyloid gel, base short-stipitate with a crozier. Ascospores globose to subglobose, hyaline, inamyloid, aseptate, wall slightly thick and with one lipid guttule. Paraphyses embedded in gel, cylindrical, uninflated to slightly clavate, straight or slightly bent at the apex, terminal cell covered by a dark brownish amorphous exudate, lower cells and basal cells hyaline and containing tiny yellowish lipid guttules; branched, usually bifurcate, septa strongly staining in CR, basal cells ± equidistantly septate, but lower and terminal cells shorter, walls smooth. Excipulum at margin and upper (-lower) flank composed of two well-delimited layers, ectal and medullary excipulum at lower flank to base not always differentiated, tissues strongly gelatinized. Ectal excipulum with loosely packed cells running parallel to each other and surrounded by hyaline or brownish gel, frequently bifurcated and oriented perpendicular to the outer surface, cortical layer of shorter, parallel and very tightly packed cells covered by a dark brown to black amorphous exudate. Medullary excipulum of moderately packed textura intricata, cells gelatinized, gel dark brown, becoming lighter in the subhymenium. Anamorph pycnidial; see descriptions of Epithyrium (Sacc.) Sacc. & Trotter and Epithyrium resinae (Sacc. & Berl.) Trotter in Sutton (1980: 625–626) and Sarea difformis (Fr.) Fr. in Hawksworth & Sherwood (1981: 361–362).

Notes: The genus Sarea here is restricted to the group of species resembling the type, S. difformis. The two remaining species detected are morphologically indistinct but see notes under Sarea coeloplata.

No obvious morphological differences were detected among the (infrequently encountered) anamorphic stage of sequenced Sarea specimens; as a result, we retain all previously synonymized anamorph names as synonyms of the type species.

Sarea difformis (Fr.) Fr., Elench. fung. 2: 14 (1828).

Synonyms: Peziza difformis Fr., Syst. Mycol. 2(1): 151 (1822), nom. sanct. (Fries, l.c.).

Type: Germany: Bavaria: im Wald bei Sugenheim, an Fichten [Picea sp.] auf ausgeflossenem Harze, 1871, H. Rehm, Ascomyceten 577 (K – neotype, examined and designated by Hawksworth & Sherwood, Canad. J. Bot. 59(3): 366 (1981), MBT 389945; FH 00995483! & FH 01093951! – isoneotypes).

Patellaria difformis (Fr.) Schwein., Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., n s. 4(2): 236 (1832) [1834].

"Lecidea difformis (Fr.) Nyl.", nom. inval. (Art. 36.1), Observ. Peziz. Fenn.: 68 (1868).

Tromera difformis (Fr.) Arnold, Flora 57(6): 85 (1874).

Lecidea difformis (Fr.) Nyl. ex Vain., nom. illegit. (Art. 53.1), Meddeland. Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 2: 65 (1878).

Biatorella difformis (Fr.) Vain., Meddeland. Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 10: 143 (1883).

Biatora difformis (Fr.) Willey in Tuckerman, Syn. N. Amer. Lich. 2: 130 (1888).

"Biatorella difformis (Fr.) H. Olivier" later isonym (Art. 6.3), Mem. Real Acad. Ci. Barcelona, [n.s.] 11(15): 264 (1914).

Biatorina difformis (Fr.) Kirschst., Ann. Mycol. 36(5/6): 378 (1938).

"Tromera sarcogynoides A. Massal." nom. inval. (Art. 35.1), Flora 41(31): 507 (1858).

"Tromera myriospora var. sarcogynoides (A. Massal.) Kremp." nom. inval. (Art. 35.1), Denkschr. Königl.-Baier. Bot. Ges. Regensburg 4(2): 228 (1859).

"Tromera myriospora f. sarcogynoides (A. Massal.) Anzi" nom. inval. (Art. 35.1), Lichenes Rariores Langobardi Exsiccati 7: 267B (1862).

Lecidea resinae f. minor-denigrata Nyl., Lich. Lapp. Orient.: 185 (1866).

Coniothyrium resinae Sacc. & Berl., Atti Reale Ist. Veneto Sci. Lett. Arti, serie 6 3(4): 739 (1885) [1884–1885].

Holotype: Italy: Veneto: horto Patavino, in resina dejecta uda, D. Saccardo (PAD, in Herb. Saccardo – holotype, examined by Hawksworth, Persoonia 9(2): 194 (1977), MBT 389947).

Clisosporium resinae (Sacc. & Berl.) Kuntze, Revis. gen. pl. 3(3): 458 (1898).

Lichenoconium resinae (Sacc. & Berl.) Petr. & Syd., Repert. Spec. Nov. Regni Veg. Beih. 42(3): 436 (1927).

Epithyrium resinae (Sacc. & Berl.) Trotter, Syll. fung. 25: 250 (1931).

"Biatoridina pinastri Schczedr." nom. inval. (Art. 40.1), Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad) 49(9): 1315 (1964).

Emended Description: Apothecia discoid, roundish to ellipsoid, scattered or gregarious, erumpent from the resin, consistency coriaceous and apothecia slightly to moderately contracted when dry, expanding and fleshy when moist, 0.2–1.3 mm diam., up to 0.5 mm high, sessile, entirely black (267.Black). Disc and receptacle rough; margin distinct, slightly raised when immature or dry but not protruding from the hymenium after rehydration, 0.5–1 mm thick, rough or radially cracked, concolorous with hymenium and receptacle. Hymenium and tissues in section light purple (222.l.P) to deep purple (219.deepP), pigments turning brilliant blue (177.brill.B) to deep blue (179.deepB) in KOH. Asci (34)46.5–53.5(78) × (9.5)12.5–14.5(18.5) µm, clavate, multispored, mature asci 10–30 µm below the hymenial surface prior to spore discharge, ascus dehiscence rostrate, inner wall material expanding, protruding c. 9–15 µm, reaching the hymenial surface at spore discharge; apex hemispherical, thick-walled, strongly staining in CR, apex with an apical chamber, apical wall 2-3.5 µm thick, chamber later disappearing and apical tip thickening, becoming 7–11 µm thick, projecting into the ascus, becoming dome-like, inner wall not or faintly amyloid, outer wall intensely amyloid; lateral walls 0.5–1.5 µm thick, asci covered with an amyloid gel layer; base short-stipitate and arising from a crozier. Ascospores (1.7)2.1–2.3(3) µm diam, globose to subglobose, hyaline, inamyloid, aseptate, wall slightly thick and with one eccentric medium gray (265.med.Gy) lipid guttule. Paraphyses embedded in gel, cylindrical, uninflated to slightly clavate, straight or slightly curved at the apex, terminal cell (4)6–7.5(11.5) × 1.5–2.5(3) µm, covered with a deep brown (59.d.Br) to brown black (65.brBlack) amorphous exudate, lower cells (4.5)7.5–8.5(11.5) × 1.5–2.5 µm, basal cells (6.5)9–10(12) × 1.5–2.5 µm, bifurcate in lower cells, hyaline, septate, septa strongly staining in CR, basal cells ± equidistantly septate, but lower and terminal cells shorter, walls smooth, sparse tiny yellow gray (93.yGray) lipid guttules in all cells. Excipulum at margin and upper (-lower) flank composed of two well differentiated layers, lower flank to base not always differentiated into two types of tissues. Ectal excipulum strongly gelatinized, (41)57–67(92) µm thick at lower flank and base, (28)49–60(86) µm thick at margin and upper flank, cells loosely packed and surrounded by a light grayish brown (60.l.gy.Br) to medium brown (58.m.Br) gel, running parallel each other (sometimes interwoven), frequently bifurcated and oriented perpendicular to the outer surface, cortical layer with shorter, parallel and very tightly packed cells without intercellular spaces, walls strongly pigmented and surrounded by a dark brown (59.d.Br) to brown black (65.br.Black) amorphous exudate. Ectal cells (6.5)10–12.5(18.5) × 1.5–3 µm at upper flank and margin, (7)11–13.5(25.5) × 1–2.5 µm at lower flank and base, cell walls 0.5–1.5(2) thick. Medullary excipulum of textura intricata, cells moderately packed and gelatinized, gel dark brown (59.d.Br.) to brown black (65.brBlack), becoming lighter in the subhymenium, cells (6.5)10–12(20.5) × (1.5)2.5–4 µm.

Notes: The concept of Sarea difformis is here restricted to those specimens presenting a purple pigment in the hymenium which turns blue when a strong base is applied, a character clearly visible in one isoneotype (FH 00995483!) and illustrated in Fig. 1. The other isoneotype housed in FH (FH 01093951!) is quite poor, with only 2–3 intact apothecia. As a result, only a macromorphological examination was conducted of this specimen.

Additional material studied: Canada: British Columbia: Calvert Island, 51°39'18.0"N 128°08'16.8"W, resinicolous, 18 Jun. 2018, R.T. McMullin 19801 (CANL 132189!); Nova Scotia: Halifax County, Old Annapolis Road Nature Reserve, 44°45'03.9"N 63°56'33.5"W, resinicolous, 25 Jun. 2017, R.T. McMullin 17350 (CANL!); Ontario: Nipissing District, Algonquin Provincial Park, 45°54'08.5"N 77°53'13.1"W, Picea sp., 1 Sep. 2013, R.T. McMullin 12673 (CANL 132522!); Prince Edward Island: Kings County, Dromore Wildlife Management Area, 46°18'30.3"N 62°49'47.8"W, Picea resin, 7 Oct. 2014, R.T. McMullin 14881 (CANL 129879!); Queens County, Mount Stewart Wildlife Management Area, 46°22'55.9"N 62°51'40.0"W, Picea resin, 1 Oct. 2014, R.T. McMullin 14453 (CANL!); – Czechia: Central Bohemia: Brdy Hills, Nepomuk, 49°40'02"N 13°49'05"E, 765 m a.s.l., on resin of Picea abies, 15 Aug. 2018, J. Malíček & J. Vondrák 12001 (herb. Malíček!); Plzen: Srby, 49°31'21"N 13°34'25"E, 550 m a.s.l., on resin of Picea abies, 25 Oct. 2018, J. Malíček & J. Vondrák 12161 (herb. Malíček!); – Norway: Hedmark: Furuberget Quarry, 60°49'01.11"N 11°02'23.53”E, on resin of fallen Pinus sylvestris attacked by Cronartium flaccidum or Peridermium pini, 14 Sep. 2017, P. Vetlesen PV-D836 (FH XXXXXXX!); – USA: Arkansas: Faulkner County, Cove Creek Natural Area, 35°17'24"N 92°28'48"W, on Pinus resin, 7 Oct. 2010, J.C. Lendemer, D. Ladd & C.A. Morse 26230 (NY 01218605!); California: Del Norte County, Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Park, 41°48'44.3"N 124°06'32.3"W, 57 m a.s.l., on Tsuga heterophylla resin, 13 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0072 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., Redwoods National Park, 41°32'05.6"N 124°04'16.0"W, 10 m a.s.l., on Picea sitchensis resin, 14 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0074.1 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Plumas County, Plumas National Forest, 39°42'31.9"N 121°11'40.3"W, 1056 m a.s.l., on resin of Pinus lambertiana resin, 8 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0065.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Georgia: Douglas County, Sweetwater Creek State Park, 33°45'12.86"N 84°37'44.54”W, on Pinus cf. taeda resin, 21 Jul. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & M. Barrios JM0010.1 (FH XXXXXXXX!); White County, Unicoi State Park, 34°42'43.00"N 83°43'49.60”W, on Pinus sp. resin, 16 Jul. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0009.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Indiana: Monroe County, Morgan-Monroe State Forest, 39°18'16"N 86°23'24"W, 259 m a.s.l., on Pinus strobus resin, 13 Apr. 2017, J.C. Lendemer 51265 (NY 02795595!); ibid., 39°17'56"N 86°23'37"W, 232 m a.s.l., on Pinus strobus resin, 13 Apr. 2017, J.C. Lendemer 51272 (NY 02795588!); Maine: Washington County, Eagle Hill Institute, 44°27'35.03"N 67°55'53.01"W, 5 m a.s.l., on Picea rubens resin, 22 May 2017, E. Kneiper JMEK (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 44°27'23.36"N 67°55'44.11"W, 51 m a.s.l., on Pinus banksiana resin, 28 May 2017, J.M. Karakehian 17052821F (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 44°27'36.01"N 67°55'46.92”W, on Picea cf. glauca resin, 3 Jul. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0007 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 44°27'34.8"N 67°55'58.6"W, resinicolous on Picea, 7 Jun. 2018, R.T. McMullin 19157 (CANL!); Massachusetts: Middlesex County, Concord, Estabrook Woods, 42°28'59.96"N 71°21'24.97"W, on Pinus strobus resin, 19 September 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0015 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Suffolk County, Boston, Arnold Arboretum, 42°17'55.53"N 71°07'31.63"W, on Pinus strobus 'Contorta' resin, 13 May 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0001 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 42°17'55.34"N 71°07'33.38”W, on Pinus tabuliformis 16576N resin, 27 Jul. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0011 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Worcester County, Petersham, Harvard Forest, 42°32'15.03"N 72°10'58.94"W, on Picea mariana resin, 13 May 2018, J.K. Mitchell & L. Quijada, JM0082 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Minnesota: Isanti County, Cedar Creek Ecosystem Science Reserve, 45°25'15.39"N 93°11'48.88"W, 292 m a.s.l., on Pinus strobus resin, 11 Aug. 2019, J.K. Mitchell JM0108 (FH XXXXXXXX!); New Hampshire: Coos County, White Mountains National Forest, Tuckerman Ravine Trail, 44°15'41.45"N 71°16'02.38"W, 882 m a.s.l., on Abies balsamea resin, 16 Jun. 2018, J.K. Mitchell JM0091 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 44°15'49.75"N 71°16'40.29"W, 1049 m a.s.l., on Picea rubens resin, 16 Jun. 2018, J.K. Mitchell JM0092 (FH XXXXXXXX!); North Carolina: Swain County, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, 35°32'25–33'17"N 83°29'36"-44"W, 1768–1859 m a.s.l., 10 Oct. 2011, E.A. Tripp & J.C. Lendemer 2261 (NY 01685454!); Tennessee: Sevier County, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Boulevard Trail, 35°38'03"N 83°24'50"W, 1814 m a.s.l., 7 Aug. 2012, E.A. Tripp & J.C. Lendemer 3446 (NY 01685081!); ibid., Bullhead Trail, 35°39'36"-40'32"N 83°27'02"-29'08"W, on Picea sap, 9 Oct. 2011, J.C. Lendemer, E.A. Tripp & E. Darling 30379 (NY 01237252!); ibid., Sugarland Mountain Trail, resinicolous on Picea, 26 Oct. 2017, R.T. McMullin 19017 (NY 03303142!); Vermont: Washington County, Calais, Chickering Bog Natural Area, 44°19'26.30"N 72°28'39.20”W, on Picea sp. resin, 21 Oct. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & L. Quijada JM0031 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 44°19'31.30"N 72°28'48.30”W, on Larix laricina resin, 21 Oct. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & L. Quijada JM0032 (FH XXXXXXXX!).

Sarea coeloplata (Norman) J.K. Mitch., Garrido-Ben. & Quijada comb. nov.

MycoBank XXXXXXXX.

Basionym: Biatorella coeloplata Norman, Öfvers. Kongl. Vetensk.-Akad. Förh. 41(8): 32 (1884).

Type: Norway: Buskerud: prope Drammen ad Gulskoven [= Gulskogen], J.M. Norman (TROM L-565247! – lectotype, hic designatus, MBT XXXXXX; MICH 62597! – isolectotype).

Synonyms: ? Tympanis abietis P. Crouan & H. Crouan, Fl. Finistère: 43 (1867).

Type: France: Finistère, sur la partie rugueuse de l'écorce d'un sapin [Abies sp.] abattu, à la base des ergots, P.M. Crouan & H.M. Crouan (CO, in Herb. Crouan – holotype, examined by Le Gal, Rev. Mycol. (Paris) 18(2): 131 (1953), MBT 389946).

? Retinocyclus abietis (P. Crouan & H. Crouan) J. W. Groves & D. E. Wells, Mycologia 48(6): 869 (1957) [1956].

Biatorella coeloplata f. carbonata Norman, Öfvers. Kongl. Vetensk.-Akad. Förh. 41(8): 32 (1884).

Type: Norway: Buskerud: prope Drammen ad Gulskoven [= Gulskogen], J.M. Norman (TROM L-565247! – lectotype, hic designatus, MBT XXXXXX).

Emended Description: Apothecia macroscopically like Sarea difformis, sometimes larger, up to 1.5 mm in diameter. Hymenium and excipulum in section light grayish brown (60.l.gy.Br) to dark grayish brown (62.d.gy.Br) and not changing to blue in KOH. Asci (30.5)42.5–45.5(62.5) × (11.5)16–17.5(22.5) µm, ascospores 1.7–2.5 µm diam, morphology indistinguishable from S. difformis. Paraphyses cylindrical, uninflated to slightly clavate, straight or slightly bent in upper cells, terminal cell (4)5.5–6(8.5) × 1–3 µm, covered by a grayish brown (61.gy.Br) to deep brown (59.d.Br) amorphous exudate, terminal cell of lower cells (4)5.5–6.5(9.5) × 1–3 µm, terminal cell of basal cells (4.5)7–8.5(11.5) × 1–2.5 µm, branched, usually dichotomously and with connections close to terminal cell, but also below, in lower cells and basal cells; all other morphological features like S. difformis. Ectal and medullary excipulum morphology like S. difformis, but differing in color, light grayish brown (60.l.gy.Br) to dark grayish brown (62.d.gy.Br), ectal excipulum (23.5)51.5–60(78) µm thick at lower flank and base, (12.5)34–44.5(71) µm thick at margin and upper flank, mostly with strong differentiation in the color of ectal and medullary cells, being hyaline and surrounding by a colorless gel unlike S. difformis which is brownish. Ectal cells (5)7–10.5(20) × 2–3.5 µm at upper flank and margin, (5)7–9(12.5) × 1.5–3.5 µm at lower flank and base, cell walls 0.5–1(1.5) µm thick. Medullary cells (3.5)8–11.5(19.5) × 1.5–3.5 µm.

Notes: A specimen collected by Norman at the type locality and stored under the name Biatorella coeloplata in TROM is here designated the lectotype. Norman (1884) described a form, Biatorella coeloplata f. carbonata, for older apothecia; we use a single specimen to lectotypify this form as well as the species. Since it is clear that even Norman considered the two forms merely different developmental stages of the same fungus, we see no reason to consider this form a separate taxon.

The type of Tympanis abietis was not available for examination from CO. Its true affinities are unclear, but Le Gal's (1953) statement "L'hyménium est plongé dans une matière brunâtre qui en agglutine les éléments" in her description of the holotype likely place it in one of the two clades we assign to S. coeloplata s. lat.; morphological re-examination of the type should be conducted to verify its placement.

The description above applies to both Sarea coeloplata 1 and Sarea coeloplata 2 as presented in our phylogenetic analyses. We have been unable to separate the two morphologically, and thus we cannot assign the examined type to one clade or the other. We have observed morphological variations among collections (illustrated in Fig. 1) and are confident that the difficulty of characterizing the members of these two clades may be overcome by careful analyses involving DNA analysis and morphological examination of single apothecia. This will avoid the problem of mixed collections. For more information, see our discussion of mixed collections below.

Additional material examined: Canada: Newfoundland and Labrador: Newfoundland, Divison No. 5, Mount Ignoble top, 48°59'55.5"N 57°45'08.7"W, 283 m a.s.l., on Picea mariana resin, 26 May 2018, A. Voitk 18.05.26.AV04 (XXXX!); ibid., A. Voitk 18.05.26.AV05 (XXXX!); Prince Edward Island: Kings County, Southampton Wildlife Management Area, 46°21'01.9"N 62°34'10.6"W, Picea resin, 3 Oct. 2014, R.T. McMullin 14963 (CANL!); Prince County, Greenpark Provincial Park, 46°35'33.6"N 63°53'33.7"W, Picea resin, 30 Sep. 2014, R.T. McMullin 14565 (CANL 129898!); Yukon: 60°48'13"N 137°26'03"W, 670 m a.s.l., on conifer exudate [probably Picea sp.], 7 Jun. 2011, J.C. Lendemer 29136 (NY 01575087!); – Cape Verde: Santo Antão: Agua das Caldeiras, 17°06'58.91"N 25°04'10.68"W, 1387 m a.s.l., on Pinus cf. nigra resin, Aug. 2017, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB457 (MA XXXXXXXX!); – France: Sarthe: Bourg-le-Roi, sur la resine des pins [Pinus sp.], Aug. 1907, E. Monguillon 2092 (B 600006463!); – Germany: Hessen: Bergstraße-Odenwald, Oberschönmattenwag, Ellenbachtal, 300 m a.s.l., Picea-Harz, 3 May 1953, O. Behr 6699 (B 600006464!); North Rhine-Westphalia: Münster, zwischen Lütkenbeck u. Angelmotte [und Angelmodde], auf Wurzeln von Tannen [Abies or Pinus sp.], Jul. 1861 (B 600198626!); – Norway: Buskerud: prope Drammen ad Gulskoven [= Gulskogen], J.M. Norman (TROM L-42692!); Hedmark: Furuberget Quarry, 60°49'01.11"N 11°02'23.53”E, on resin of fallen Pinus sylvestris attacked by Cronartium flaccidum or Peridermium pini, 14 Sep. 2017, P. Vetlesen PV-D836-B (FH XXXXXXX!); – Spain: Madrid: San Lorenzo de el Escorial, Pinar de Abantos, 40°35'38.77"N 4°09'36.11"W, 1200 m a.s.l., on Pinus pinaster resin, 5 Jun. 2017, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB454 (MA XXXXXXXX!); Santa Cruz de Tenerife: Tenerife, Lomo de la Jara, on Pinus radiata resin, 23 May 2019, R.N. Piñero 19052301 (XXXX!); Soria: Abejar, Playa Pita, 41°50'16.42"N 2°46'43.85"W, 1090 m a.s.l., on Pinus sylvestris resin, 16 Mar. 2014, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB316 (MA XXXXXXXX!); Valencia: Barx, Pla de la Nevereta, 38°59'52.43"N 0°18'15.35"W, 677 m a.s.l., on Pinus halapensis resin, 4 Jan. 2018, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB452 (MA XXXXXXXX!); Quatretonda, Pla de Mora, 38°59'58.67"N 0°22'34.71"W, 223 m a.s.l., on Pinus halapensis resin, 27 Dec. 2017, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB448 (MA XXXXXXXX!); ibid., I. Garrido-Benavent IGB451 (MA XXXXXXXX!); – Switzerland: Grisons: Davos, Davos Lake, 46°49'07.06"N 9°51'25.33"E, 1579 m a.s.l., on Picea abies resin, 18 Jun. 2018, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB716 (MA XXXXXXXX!); ibid., I. Garrido-Benavent IGB717 (MA XXXXXXXX!); Wallis: Unter Wallis, Va. d'Herens, S. of Sion. Arbey, c. 1 km W of Evolène, c. 46°06'36.0"N 7°29'02.1"E, c. 1450 m a.s.l., 26 Jul. 1990, H. Sipman 30286 (B 600080177!); – USA: Arkansas: Faulkner County, Cove Creek Natural Area, 35°17'24"N 92°28'48"W, on Pinus resin, 7 Oct. 2010, J.C. Lendemer, D. Ladd & C.A. Morse 26230-A (NY 01218604!); California: Del Norte County, Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Park, 41°49'11.9"N 124°07'02.3"W, 35 m a.s.l., on Tsuga heterophylla resin, 13 Dec. 2017, leg. J.K. Mitchell JM0071 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 41°48'44.3"N 124°06'32.3"W, 57 m a.s.l., on Tsuga heterophylla resin, 13 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0072 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., Redwoods National Park, 41°32'05.6"N 124°04'16.0"W, 10 m a.s.l., on Picea sitchensis resin, 14 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0073.8 (FH XXXXXXXX!); El Dorado County, Eldorado National Forest, Placerville Ranger District Headquarters, 38°44'15.1"N 120°39'51.0"W, 985 m a.s.l., on Pinus ponderosa resin, 6 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0047 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., J.K. Mitchell JM0048 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 38°44'10.1"N 120°39'52.1"W, 1022 m a.s.l., on Pinus nigra subsp. laricio resin, 6 Dec. 2017, leg. J.K. Mitchell JM0049.1 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Humboldt County, Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park, 41°21'13.5"N 124°01'35.5"W, 32 m a.s.l., on Picea sitchensis resin, 14 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0075.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Nevada County, Tahoe National Forest, Supervisor's Office, 39°16'09.6"N 121°01'02.3"W, 784 m a.s.l., on Pinus ponderosa resin, 7 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0055 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Plumas County, Plumas National Forest, 39°42'26.7"N 121°11'39.8"W, 1060 m a.s.l., on Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii resin, 8 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0064.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Sierra County, Tahoe National Forest, 39°31'10.1"N 121°00'03.1"W, 668 m a.s.l., on Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii resin, 7 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0060.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 39°31'09.3"N 121°00'03.1"W, 668 m a.s.l., on Pinus ponderosa resin, 7 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0061.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Siskiyou County, Klamath National Forest, 41°50'04.5"N 123°25'35.0"W, 549 m, a.s.l., on Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii resin, 12 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0070.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Yuba County, Tahoe National Forest, 39°24'08.0"N 121°04'46.2"W, 505 m a.s.l., on Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii resin, 7 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0057.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 39°24'16.8"N 121°04'34.9"W, 524 m a.s.l., on Pinus ponderosa resin, 7 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0058.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 39°31'09.8"N 121°00'03.5"W, 668 m a.s.l., on Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii resin, 7 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0059 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Massachusetts: Essex County, Appleton Farms Grass Rides, 42°38'40.80"N 70°52'04.20"W, 21 May 2017, E. Kneiper & J.K. Mitchell JM0003 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Middlesex County, Concord, Estabrook Woods, 42°29'00.26"N 71°21'24.88"W, on Pinus strobus resin, 19 Sep. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0017 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 42°29'00.19"N 71°21'24.15"W, 67 m a.s.l., on resin of Pinus strobus, 25 Jan. 2020, J.K. Mitchell & D.E.W. Adamec JM0132 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Suffolk County, Arnold Arboretum, 42°17'55.34"N 71°07'33.38”W, on Pinus tabuliformis 16576N resin, 27 Jul. 2017, leg. J.K. Mitchell JM0011 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 42°17'53.71"N 71°07'40.06”W, on Picea glehnii 16485-B resin, 8 Oct. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & L. Quijada JM0020 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., Thompson Island, 42°18'44.69"N 71°00'39.81”W, on Pinus nigra resin, 17 May 2017, L.A. Kappler & J.K. Mitchell BHI-F925 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 42°18'44.96"N 71°00'40.93"W, on Pinus nigra resin, 17 May 2017, L.A. Kappler & J.K. Mitchell BHI-F926 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Worcester County, Devens Reserve Forces Training Area, 42°28'22.60"N 71°39'11.34"W, 87 m a.s.l., on hardened trunk resin of Pinus rigida, 10 Sep. 1998, E. Kneiper K987694 (FH 00405294!); New Hampshire: Hillsborough County, Antrim, Loveren's Mill Cedar Swamp Preserve, 43°14'22.96"N 72°01'28.19"W, 336 m a.s.l., on Abies balsamea resin, 10 Sep. 2018, J.K. Mitchell & Luis Quijada JM0104.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Ohio: Morgan County, Burr Oak State Park, 39°31'44.24"N 82°01'38.14”W, on Pinus strobus resin, 7 Oct. 2017, T.J. Curtis JM-TJC01 (KE XXXXXXXX!); Oregon: Lane County, Eugene, Hendricks Park, on Pseudotsuga resin, 5 Aug. 1978, M.A. Sherwood (FH XXXXXXXX!); Wisconsin: Door County, Whitefish Dunes State Park, 44°55'22.8"N 87°11'39.8"W, 190 m a.s.l., on resin of Thuja occidentalis, 10 May 2019, A.C. Dirks ACD0147.1 (MICH XXXXXXXX!); Vermont: Washington County, Calais, Chickering Bog Natural Area, 44°19'48.00"N 72°28'17.60”W, on Pinus cf. banksiana resin, 21 Oct. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & L. Quijada JM0024 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 44°19'43.30"N 72°28'17.50”W, on Pinus cf. banksiana resin, 21 Oct. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & L. Quijada JM0027 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 44°19'28.80"N 72°28'24.40”W, on Abies balsamea resin, 21 Oct. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & L. Quijada JM0029 (FH XXXXXXXX!).

Zythia Fr., Syst. orb. veg. 1: 118 (1825).

Lectotype species: Sphaeria resinae Fr., designated by Clements & Shear, Gen. fung., Ed. 2: 372 (1931).

Synonyms: "Tromera A. Massal." nom. inval. (Art. 38.1) in Arnold, Flora 41(31): 507 (1858).

Tromera A. Massal. ex Körb., Parerga lichenol. 5: 453 (1865).

Holotype species: Lecidea resinae Fr.

Retinocyclus Fuckel, Jahrb. Nassauischen Vereins Naturk. 25–26: 332 (1871) [1871-2].

Lectotype species: Lecidea resinae Fr., designated by Hawksworth & Sherwood, Canad. J. Bot. 59(3): 358 (1981).

Pycnidiella Höhn., Sitzungber. Kaiserl. Akad. Wiss., Wien. Math.-Naturwiss. Cl., Abt. 1 124(1–2): 91 (1915).

Lectotype species: Cytospora resinae Ehrenb., designated by Clements & Shear, Gen. Fung., Ed. 2: 372 (1931).

Emended Description: Teleomorph apothecial. Apothecia brilliant orange-yellow (67.brill.OY) to deep orange (51.deepO), erumpent from the resin, discoid to cupulate, roundish or slightly ellipsoid, coriaceous and darker when dry, fleshy and lighter after rehydration, hymenium and receptacle concolorous, margin usually differentiated and protruding slightly beyond the hymenium; sessile with broad attachment, sub-stipitate to prominently stipitate. Hymenium and tissue colors not changing in KOH. Asci and ascospores exhibiting morphology and reactions as in Sarea. Paraphyses cylindrical, uninflated to slightly or moderately clavate, straight or bent at the apex, completely surrounded by gel that contains hyaline or grey yellow (90.gy.Y) amorphous lumps, all cells with a high amount of brilliant orange-yellow (67.brill.OY) to vivid orange-yellow (66.v.OY) lipid guttules; terminal cell and 1–2 cells below covered by medium yellow (87.m.Y) rough amorphous exudate; usually branched at apical cells or cells below, rarely unbranched, frequently with anastomoses, septa frequently constricted and equidistantly septate with terminal and lower cells shorter (moniliform). Excipulum and medulla not well differentiated in section, although two layers can be noted mostly from the margin to the flanks because of the arrangement of cells and amount of pigments. Ectal excipulum in lower flank to margin strongly gelatinized, pigmented due to a high amount of brilliant orange-yellow (67.brill.OY) to vivid orange-yellow (66.v.OY) lipid guttules or not pigmented, cells moderately packed and running parallel each other and surrounded by hyaline gel sometimes including hyaline or grey yellow (90.gy.Y) amorphous lumps, cortical layer with shorter, parallel or unoriented, tightly packed cells without intercellular spaces, amorphous rough exudate covering the cortical cells, hyaline or colored between deep orange-yellow (72.d.OY) to brown orange (54.brO), usually more abundant at the margin, sometimes even appearing as glassy processes. Amyloid reaction present mostly in the ectal excipulum at the margin and flanks, or absent. Medullary excipulum composed of textura intricata, cells changing from ectal excipulum to medulla progressively, hyaline, less spaced and gelatinized; subhymenium somewhat similar or differentiated from medulla because of the presence of pigmented lipid guttules, cells without intercellular spaces and without gel. Anamorph pycnidial; see descriptions of Pycnidiella Höhn. and Pycnidiella resinae (Ehrenb.) Höhn. in Sutton (1980: 544) and Sarea resinae (Fr.) Kuntze in Hawksworth & Sherwood (1981: 365).

Notes: The history of typification in the genus Zythia is somewhat complicated. This is due both to the sparse protologue and apparent confusion among some authors as to whether or not Fries' Sphaeria resinae had been a combination of Ehrenberg's Cytospora resinae. This has been discussed at length in a recent publication on the matter (Mitchell and Quijada In Press).

Zythia resinae (Ehrenb.) P. Karst., Meddeland. Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 14: 104 (1887) [1888].

Synonyms: Cytospora resinae Ehrenb., Sylv. mycol. berol.: 28 (1818).

Type: [Germany: Berlin], Hasenheide & Grunewald, C.G. Ehrenberg (B 700016297 & HAL 3029 F – syntypes, seen by Braun, Schlechtendalia 30: 19 (2016), but see Mitchell & Quijada 2020).

Tubercularia resinae (Ehrenb.) Thüm., Oesterr. Bot. Z. 30(10): 313 (1880).

Knyaria resinae (Ehrenb.) Kuntze, Revis. gen. pl. 2: 856 (1891).

Pycnidiella resinae (Ehrenb.) Höhn., Sitzungber. Kaiserl. Akad. Wiss., Wien. Math.-Naturwiss. Cl., Abt. 1 124(1–2): 91 (1915).

Sphaeria resinae Fr., Observ. mycol. 1: 180 (1815), nom. sanct. (Fries, Syst. mycol. 2(2): 453 (1823)).

Type: Sweden, E.M. Fries, Scleromyceti Sueciae 37 (UPS F-541757 – lectotype, examined and designated by Hawksworth & Sherwood, Canad. J. Bot. 59(3): 366 (1981), MBT 389948; FH 00964792! – isolectotype).

Nectria resinae (Fr.) Fr., Summa veg. Scand. 2: 388 (1849).

Nectriella resinae (Fr.) Sacc., Syll. fung. 2: 451 (1883).

Dialonectria resinae (Fr.) Cooke, Grevillea 12(64): 109 (1884).

Lecidea resinae Fr., Observ. mycol. 1: 180 (1815).

Type: Sweden, E.M. Fries (H 951143/H-ACH 431 B – lectotype, examined and designated by Hawksworth & Sherwood, Canad. J. Bot. 59(3): 366 (1981), MBT 389944).

Peziza resinae (Fr.) Fr., Syst. mycol. 2(1): 149 (1822), nom. sanct. (Fries, l.c.).

"Lecidea resinae (Fr.) Nyl." later isonym (Art. 6.3), Mém. Soc. Imp. Sci. Nat. Cherbourg 3: 183 (1855).

Biatorella resinae (Fr.) Th. Fr., Lich. arct.: 199 (1860).

"Biatorella resinae (Fr.) Mudd" later isonym (Art. 6.3), Man. Brit. lich.: 191 (1861).

Biatoridium resinae (Fr.) Uloth, Ber. Oberhess. Ges. Natur-Heilk. 11(4): 95 (1865).

Tromera resinae (Fr.) Körb., Parerga lichenol. 5: 453 (1865).

Pezicula resinae (Fr.) Fuckel, Jahrb. Nassauischen Vereins Naturk. 23–24: 279 (1870) [1869-70].

Biatora resinae (Fr.) Tuck., Gen. lich.: 169 (1872).

Sarea resinae (Fr.) Kuntze, Revis. gen. pl. 3(3): 515 (1898).

Peziza myriospora Hepp nom. illegit. (Art. 52.1), Die Flechten Europas 6: 332 (1857).

"Tromera myriospora (Hepp) Anzi" nom. inval. (Art. 35.1), Cat. lich. Sondr.: 117 (1860).

Retinocyclus flavus Fuckel nom. illegit. (Art. 52.1), Jahrb. Nassauischen Vereins Naturk. 25–26: 332 (1871) [1871-2].

"Tromera xanthostigma A. Massal." nom. inval. (Art. 35.1) in Arnold, Flora 41(31): 507 (1858).

"Tromera myriospora var. xanthostigma (A. Massal.) Kremp." nom. inval. (Art. 35.1), Denkschr. Königl.-Baier. Bot. Ges. Regensburg 4(2): 228 (1859).

"Tromera myriospora f. xanthostigma (A. Massal.) Anzi" nom. inval. (Art. 35.1), Lichenes Rariores Langobardi Exsiccati 7: 267A (1862).

Tromera resinae var. stipitulata P. Karst., Acta Soc. Fauna Fl. Fenn. 2(6): 154 (1885).

Type: [Finland: Kanta-Häme:] Mustiala, Dec., P.A. Karsten, Fungi Fenniae Exsiccati 324 (FH 01093952! – lectotype, hic designatus, MBT XXXXXX).

Biatorella resinae var. stipitulata (P. Karst.) Boud., Hist. classific. discomyc. Europe: 157 (1907).

Emended Description: See emended description above for Zythia and notes below.

Notes: The status of the basionym of Zythia resinae is somewhat confused, with authors treating Cytospora resinae either as a new name or as a new combination of Fries' Sphaeria resinae. Examination of the protologue (Ehrenberg 1818) shows no references, direct or indirect, to Fries' earlier name, and Ehrenberg explicitly includes his species in the index of new species and attributes it to himself ("mihi"); we thus accept this as having been a species novum. It is desirable to conserve Cytospora resinae with the same type as Sphaeria resinae (UPS F-541747) because these names are 1) almost always treated as synonyms, 2) share the same epithet (and thus will demand a replacement name for one if they are taken out of synonymy and included in the same genus), and 3) are likely indistinguishable based on morphological features. This has been proposed in another publication (Mitchell and Quijada In Press).

We do not provide an additional description for Z. resinae since at present it is the only accepted species in this genus, and our emended description of the genus serves as a description of this species. It has been noted, however, that collections in our phylogenetic analyses do exhibit morphological variation, some visible in Fig. 2. Examples of this variation were found in the excipular tissues, i.e.: slightly amyloid reaction in the excipulum of specimens in clade 8 (Fig. 2, j2), specimens with sessile apothecia in clades 3, 6 and 9 (Fig. 2, e1, i1, m1) vs. stipitate apothecia in clades 5 and 12 (Fig. 2, h1, k1), specimens with a strongly pigmented cortical layer in clades 2 and 3 (Fig. 2, f2, e2), an almost hyaline ectal excipulum in clades 1, 6 and 12 (Fig. 2, g2, i2, k2), ectal excipulum with high content of pigments in clades 9 and 13 (Fig. 2, m2, l2) and margin with glassy processes in clade 12 (Fig. 2, k2) (clade names are from Fig. S1). We also found examples of variation in the hymenium, i.e.: the presence of an additional amyloid thick gel layer in specimens in clade 3 (Fig. 2, e5), and paraphyses simple and not branched in the apical or lower cells in clades 6, 8 and 9 (Fig. 2, i9, j9, m9) vs. bifurcate or branched at apical cell in clades 2, 3, 6 and 12 (Fig. 2, f9, e9, l9, k9). We have not separated species within what is almost certainly a species complex because of questions of the prevalence of mixed collections and our inability to examine type material of Lecidea resinae. For additional information, see our discussion of mixed collections below.

Additional material examined: Cape Verde: Santiago: São Miguel, Serra Malagueta, 15°10'46.99"N 23°40'21.11"W, 1029 m a.s.l., on Pinus canariensis resin, 29 Jul.2017, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB456 (MA XXXXXXXX!); – China: Heilongjiang: Jixi, Hulin, Dōngfāng hóng, on Pinus koraiensis resin, 4 Sep. 1986, T. Kobayashi & J.-Z. Zhao FPH-6930 (TFM!); Mudanjiang, Ning'an, Dōngjīng zhèn, on Pinus koraiensis resin, 11 Sep. 1986, T. Kobayashi & J.-Z. Zhao FPH-6932 (TFM!); ibid., Jiangshanjiao Experimental Forest Farm, on Pinus koraiensis resin, 9 Sep. 1986, T. Kobayashi FPH-6926 (TFM!); Qitaihe, Boli, on Pinus koraiensis resin, 15 Sep. 1986, T. Kobayashi & J.-Z. Zhao FPH-6931 (TFM!); Yunnan: Lijiang County, Lijiang, Elephant Mountain, 26°53'18"N 100°14'12"E, 2400 m a.s.l., on resinous trunk of Pinus sp., 20 Oct. 2002, H. Sipman 49954 (B 600202098!); ibid., 26°53'13"N 100°14'05"E, 2550 m a.s.l., on Pinus sp. resin, 20 Oct. 2002, A. Aptroot 56089 (DUKE 0133124!); – Czechia: Central Bohemia: Brdy Hills, 49°44'52"N 13°56'44"E, 650 m a.s.l., on resin of Larix decidua, 30 Aug. 2018, J. Malíček & J. Vondrák 12020 (herb. Malíček!); ibid., Jince, 49°45'44"N 13°56'21"E, 580 m a.s.l., on resin of Larix decidua, 27 Aug. 2018, J. Malíček & J. Vondrák 12018 (herb. Malíček!); ibid., Nepomuk, 49°40'06"N 13°49'34"E, 730 m a.s.l., on resin of Picea abies, 15 Aug. 2018, J. Malíček & J. Vondrák 12005 (herb. Malíček!); ibid., Strasice, 49°43'34"N 13°47'56"E, 610 m a.s.l., on resin of Larix decidua, 20 Aug. 2018, J. Malíček & J. Vondrák 11998 (herb. Malíček!); Plzen: Srby, 49°31'21"N 13°34'25"E, 550 m a.s.l., on resin of Larix decidua, 25 Oct. 2018, J. Malíček & J. Vondrák 12159 (herb. Malíček!); – Dominican Republic: La Vega Province: Parque Nacional Juan B. Perez, on resin of Pinus occidentalis, 7 Jan. 2002, S. Cantrell, T. Iturriaga, J. Lodge, D.H. Pfister & M. de la Cruz DR-56 (FH XXXXXXXX!); – Japan: Ibaraki Prefecture: Naka-gun, Hitachiota-shi, Mchiya, on Pinus bark and resin, 9 Nov. 2002, T. Hosoya THX-134 (TNS-F-41522!); – Norway: Hedmark: Furuberget Quarry, 60°49'01.11"N 11°02'23.53”E, on resin of fallen Pinus sylvestris attacked by Cronartium flaccidum or Peridermium pini, 14 Sep. 2017, P. Vetlesen PV-D836-B (FH XXXXXXXX!); – Spain: Santa Cruz de Tenerife: Tenerife, Los Revolcaderos, on Pinus radiata resin, 16 Dec. 2017, R.N. Piñero 17121601 (XXXX!); ibid., 11 Apr. 2018, R.N. Piñero 18041101 (XXXX!); Soria: Abejar, Playa Pita, 41°50'16.42"N 2°46'43.85"W, 1090 m a.s.l., on Pinus sylvestris resin, 16 Mar. 2014, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB316 (MA XXXXXXXX!); Valencia: Barx, Pla de la Nevereta, 38°59'52.43"N 0°18'15.35"W, 677 m a.s.l., on Pinus halapensis resin, 4 Jan. 2018, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB453 (MA XXXXXXXX!); Quatretonda, 38°57'46.35"N 0°22'31.18"W, 367 m a.s.l., on Cupressus arizonica resin, 20 Aug. 2013, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB317 (MA XXXXXXXX!); ibid., Pla de Mora, 38°59'58.67"N 0°22'34.71"W, 223 m a.s.l., on Pinus halapensis resin, 27 Dec. 2017, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB449 (MA XXXXXXXX!); ibid., on Cupressus sempervirens resin, 27 Dec. 2017, I. Garrido-Benavent IGB450 (MA XXXXXXXX!); – USA: Arizona: Coconino County, San Francisco Peaks, 35°21'N 111°41'W, 3450 m a.s.l., on Pinus aristata resinous bark, 12 Jun. 1998, M. Westberg 851 (LD 1356193!); California: Del Norte County, Redwoods National Park, 41°32'05.6"N 124°04'16.0"W, 10 m a.s.l., on Picea sitchensis resin, 14 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0074.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Plumas County, Plumas National Forest, 39°42'26.7"N 121°11'39.8"W, 1060 m a.s.l., on Pseudotsuga menziesii resin, 8 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0064.1 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 39°42'31.9"N 121°11'40.3"W, 1056 m a.s.l., on Pinus lambertiana resin, 8 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0065.1 (FH XXXXXXXX!); San Diego County, Cleveland National Forest, 32°51'13.1"N 116°34'40.5"W, 1170 m a.s.l., on Cupressus forbesii bark and resin, 27 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & M.D. Mitchell JM0077 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Siskiyou County, Klamath National Forest, 41°50'03.6"N 123°25'42.1"W, 566 m a.s.l., on Chamaecyparis lawsoniana resin, 12 Dec. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0068 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Georgia: Douglas County, Sweetwater Creek State Park, 33°45'12.86"N 84°37'44.54”W, on Pinus cf. taeda resin, 21 Jul. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & M. Barrios JM0010.2 (FH XXXXXXXX!); White County, Unicoi State Park, 34°42'43.00"N 83°43'49.60”W, on Pinus sp. resin, 16 Jul. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0009.1 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Idaho: Clearwater County, 2 km NE of Southwick, 46°37'20.42"N 116°27'05.98”W, 785 m a.s.l., on resin on bark of bole of Pseudotsuga menziesii, 26 Aug. 2017, M. Haldeman 2514 (herb. Haldeman!); Maine: Lincoln County, Southport, Pratts Island, on resin of Picea, 19 Feb. 1989, D.H. Pfister (FH 00965332!); Washington County, Eagle Hill Institute, 44°27'36.00"N 67°55'49.40”W, on Picea cf. glauca resin, 3 Jul. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0006 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., Milbridge, 44°32'24.10"N 67°52'52.60”W, on Picea glauca resin, 6 Jul. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0008 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Massachusetts: Barnstable County, Cape Cod National Seashore, Marconi Beach, 41°54'41.37"N 69°58'49.03"W, 9 m a.s.l., on resin of Chamaecyparis thyoides, 18 Oct. 2019, J.K. Mitchell & D.E.W. Adamec JM0120 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., on Chamaecyparis thyoides canker, 15 Oct. 2011, J.M. Karakehian 11101502 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Essex County, Appleton Farms Grass Rides, 42°38'30.10"N 70°51'49.30”W, on Pinus sp. resin, 21 May 2017, E. Kneiper & J.K. Mitchell JM0004 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Middlesex County, Concord, Estabrook Woods, 42°29'00.15”N 71°21'23.47”W, 67 m a.s.l., on resin of Pinus strobus, 25 Jan. 2020, J.K. Mitchell & D.E.W. Adamec JM0131 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Norfolk County, Blue Hills Reservation, on resin on bark, 18 Apr. 1993, D.H. Pfister (FH 00965333!); ibid., Webb Memorial State Park, 42°15'29.58"N 70°55'22.62"W, 1 m a.s.l., on resin of live Pinus nigra tree, 29 Mar. 2017, A.C. Dirks & J.K. Mitchell BHI-F779 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Plymouth County, Grape Island, 42°16'15.67"N 70°55'07.43”W, on resin flow of Pinus strobus tree, 3 May 2017, L.A. Kappler & J.K. Mitchell BHI-F871 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Suffolk County, Arnold Arboretum, 42°17'55.49"N 71°07'33.83”W, on Pinus sylvestris 438-57-B resin, 27 Jul. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0012 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., 42°17'54.93"N 71°07'29.95”W, on Chamaecyparis obtusa resin, 30 Oct. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & L. Quijada JM0036 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Worcester County, Devens Reserve Forces Training Area, 42°28'22.60"N 71°39'11.34"W, 87 m a.s.l., on hardened trunk resin of Pinus rigida, 10 Sep. 1998, E. Kneiper K987694 (FH 00405294!); ibid., Petersham, Harvard Forest, 42°32'09.37"N 72°11'16.15”W, on resin of a live Pinus strobus tree, 18 Aug. 2017, J.K. Mitchell JM0014 (FH XXXXXXXX!); ibid., Princeton, Mass Audubon's Wachusett Meadow Wildlife Sanctuary, 42°27'20.1"N 71°54'18.7"W, 312 m a.s.l., on resin of planted Juniperus virginiana, 28 Dec. 2019, J.K. Mitchell JM0125 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Michigan: Washtenaw County, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan North Campus, 42°17'43.8"N 83°43'29.9"W, 289 m a.s.l., on resin of Pinus sylvestris, 9 Nov. 2019, A.C. Dirks ACD0229 (MICH XXXXXXXX!), Minnesota: Isanti County, Cedar Creek Ecosystem Science Reserve, 45°25'15.39"N 93°11'48.88"W, 292 m a.s.l., on resin of Pinus strobus, 11 Aug. 2019, J.K. Mitchell JM0107 (FH XXXXXXXX!); North Carolina: Camden County, North River Game Land, 36°21'24"N 76°13'06"W, 0 m a.s.l., on Taxodium exudate, 12 Apr. 2012, B. P. Hodkinson, J. Allen, R. C. Harris & J. C. Lendemer 18239 (NY 01886893!); Onslow County, Jacksonville, on Juniperus scopulorum ‘SkyRocket’ resinous wound, 7 Apr. 2006, J. Morton (NCSLG 17391!); Oregon: Lane County, Eugene, Hendricks Park, on Pseudotsuga resin, 5 Aug. 1978, M.A. Sherwood (FH 00965334!); Rhode Island: Washington County, Ell Pond Preserve, 41°30'22.00"N 71°46'46.66”W, on Chamaecyparis thyoides resin, 26 Nov. 2017, J.K. Mitchell & L. Quijada JM0044 (FH XXXXXXXX!); Washington: Whatcom County, Baker Lake, 48°42'53"N 121°41'40"W, 287 m a.s.l., on resin on bole of 71 cm diameter Pseudotsuga menziesii, 12 Mar. 2018, M. Haldeman 2747 (herb. Haldeman!); Wisconsin: Dane County, Mazomanie Bottoms State Natural Area, 43°13'34.7"N 89°48'14.0"W, 225 m a.s.l., on resin of Pinus sp., 4 May 2019, A.C. Dirks ACD0083.1 (MICH XXXXXXXX!); Door County, Whitefish Dunes State Park, 44°55'22.8"N 87°11'39.8"W, 190 m a.s.l., on resin of Thuja occidentalis, 10 May 2019, A.C. Dirks ACD0147.3 (MICH XXXXXXXX!).

Excluded Species and Misapplications:

Lecidea tantilla Nyl., Lecidea resinae var. tantilla Nyl., & Lecidea tantilla Nyl. ex Leight.

The invalid (Art. 35.2) names "Lecidea tantilla Nyl." and "Lecidea resinae var. tantilla Nyl.", which are, paradoxically, cited with the same protologue (Nylander 1857a), have historically been considered synonyms of Sarea difformis. Two specimens matching the original description were found in H (H-NYL 19509/H9510278 and H-NYL 21581/H9510242) and examined; both proved to be typical Strangospora pinicola (A. Massal.) Körb. The name was accepted and validly published at species level by Leighton in 1871; four of the nine specimens he cites were found in K (K(M)263364!, K(M)263365!, K(M)263366!, and XXXXXXXX) (Leighton 1871). Most of these were Strangospora pinicola (A. Massal.) Körb., with only one specimen being Strangospora moriformis (Ach.) Stein. Based on these studies, we propose the following synonymies:

Strangospora pinicola (A. Massal.) Körb., Parerga lichenol. 2: 173 (1860) [1865].

Synonyms: "Lecidea tantilla Nyl." nom. inval. (Art. 35.2), Actes Soc. Linn. Bordeaux, sér. 3 21: 363 (1857) [1856].

"Lecidea resinae var. tantilla Nyl." nom. inval. (Art. 35.2), Actes Soc. Linn. Bordeaux, sér. 3 21: 363 (1857) [1856].

Lecidea tantilla Nyl. ex Leight., Lich. Fl. Gr. Brit., ed. [1]: 354 (1871).

Type: [United Kingdom: England: West Midlands,] Shropshire, Wilcot[t], 12 May 1871, W.A. Leighton (K(M)263366 – lectotype, hic designatus, MBT XXXXXX).

Biatorella tantilla (Nyl. ex Leight.) H. Olivier, Mem. Real Acad. Ci. Barcelona, [n.s.] 11(5): 8 (264) (1914).

Lecidea resinae sensu auct. brit. & Biatorella resinae sensu auct. brit.

The specimen issued as "Lecidea resinae Fr." under number 277 of Leighton's Lichenes Britannici Exsiccati (FH 00964658!) is Biatoridium monasteriense J. Lahm ex Körb., which had not been described at the time of issue (Leighton 1858). Mudd (1861), citing this and other specimens, described Z. resinae as having a green thallus, brown apothecia, a thin margin, ellipsoid spores, and having been collected on elms (Ulmus sp.). None of these traits characterize any species in Sareomycetes. That his conception of Z. resinae was incorrect and at least partly based on B. monasteriense is confirmed by Magnusson's examination and reidentification of one of Mudd's specimens in the Rehm herbarium (Magnusson 1935). Mudd (1861) also described the new variety Biatorella resinae var. rubicundula, which has been accepted as being an synonym of a Strangospora species (Fries 1874; Rehm 1889a); unfortunately, type material could not be located at K or BM for examination (Angela Bond & Gothamie Weerakoon, pers. comm.). Many subsequent authors cite specimens cited or issued by Mudd and Leighton (Crombie 1870; Leighton 1872, 1879; Smith 1926), perpetuating this error. We list the following misapplications, specifically citing those which contain in no part the true concept of Zythia resinae:

Biatoridium monasteriense J. Lahm ex Körb., Parerga lichenol. 2: 172 (1860) [1865].

Synonyms: Lecidea resinae sensu Leighton, Lichenes Britannici Exsiccati 9: 277 (1858).

Biatorella resinae sensu Mudd p.p., Man. Brit. lich: 191 (1861).

Lecidea resinae sensu Crombie p.p., Lich. brit.: 76 (1870).

Lecidea resinae sensu auct. brit. p.p.

Biatorella resinae sensu auct. brit. p.p.

Biatora resinae sensu Hasse, Lecidea resinae sensu Hasse, & Biatorella resinae sensu Hasse

A similar case to the preceding arose in Southern California around the turn of the twentieth century. Hasse reported Z. resinae from the area three times, first in a publication by McClatchie (1897), then in two of his own (Hasse 1898, 1908). He describes the substrate of the specimens as bark, and in the last publication describes the species with black apothecia turning brown when moist, and without margins. These features are all uncharacteristic of species in Sareomycetes. Examination of a specimen labelled "Lecidea (Biatora) resinae Fr." (= Zythia resinae) sent by Hasse to George Knox Merrill (FH 00964657!) revealed that it was a specimen of Strangospora moriformis (Ach.) Stein. Additionally, the collecting information matches that given in his 1898 publication, suggesting that this is the specimen he based that report on. An additional Farlow Herbarium specimen (FH 00480746!) matches the collecting information and description of the 1908 publication and was originally determined by Hasse as "Biatorella resinae (Fr.)" (= Zythia resinae) but later changed by him to "Biatorella moriformis (Ach.) Th. Fr." (≡ Strangospora moriformis) with the later identification confirmed by an annotation by Magnusson. These specimens, along with his description, suggest that his concept of Z. resinae was at the time partly or completely based on S. moriformis, but that he later realized his error. By 1913, Hasse removed Zythia resinae from his list of Southern California lichens entirely (Hasse 1913). We list the following misapplications:

Strangospora moriformis (Ach.) Stein, in Cohn, Krypt.-Fl. Schlesien 2(2): 176 (1879).

Synonyms: ? Biatora resinae sensu Hasse, in McClatchie, Proc. S. Calif. Acad. Sci. 1: 366 (1897).

Lecidea resinae sensu Hasse, Lich. S. Calif.: 14 (1898).

Biatorella resinae sensu Hasse, Bryologist 11(3): 56 (1908).

Species Diversity

The number of species in Sarea s.l. (= Sareomycetes) has long been a matter of discussion. Hawksworth and Sherwood (1981) traced the idea of there being only a single species for both black and orange fungi to Johann Hepp's (illegitimate) publication of Peziza myriospora in his Die Flechten Europas (1857), noting that he designated two forms ("a" being orange and "b" being black). Hepp's designation of these two forms could not be verified by examining either the specimen in the complete, unbound exsiccata (FH 00964656!) or the specimen from the Patouillard Herbarium (FH 00964655!). Each contains a single specimen, and the labels make no mention of color or forms. The labels of the specimens at Kew were also examined (Lee Davies, pers. comm.), as well as the schedae with the same results (Hepp 1857a). It is possible that these "forms" were annotations in the bound, boxed specimens prepared by Hepp (Sayre 1969), but this has yet to be verified. A Sarea species dominates in both specimens in FH, and Hepp cited Peziza resinae (Fr.) Fr. (= Zythia resinae) as a synonym of his proposed new name; it is likely that he considered both orange and black fungi to be a single species (Hepp 1857b). Consideration of the orange and black apothecia as representing a single species carried into the 20th century (Nylander 1857b, 1866; Koerber 1865; Leighton 1872; Fink 1935). As stated by Hawksworth and Sherwood (1981), the orange and black fungi, each treated as a single species, rested in separate genera (for S. resinae, Biatorella; for S. difformis, Retinocyclus) for much of the 20th century. Based on morphological similarities, they were then united in a single genus, Sarea, where they stood as two separate species, easily differentiated by color (Hawksworth and Sherwood 1981).

The current study employed integrative taxonomy (Goulding and Dayrat 2016; Haelewaters et al. 2018; Lücking et al. 2020) to assess the number of species in Sareomycetes. In addition to two species in the new genus Atrozythia, one previously undescribed and one not previously recognized as a relative of this group, it was determined that the black and orange fungi deserve to each be treated in separate genera with at least three and one species, respectively. The black fungi are recognized as the core genus Sarea and are recovered here as three phylospecies and two morphospecies. Sarea difformis, the type species of the genus, is quite distinctive and specimens are easily identifiable based on the purple pigment in the hymenium and (sometimes) stipe that turns blue in application of strong base (e.g. Figure 1, g1-5). The remaining morphospecies and two phylospecies represent Biatorella coeloplata, here combined as Sarea coeloplata; the type could not be assigned to a single phylospecies due to issues addressed in our discussion of Mixed Collections. The orange fungi are recognized in the genus Zythia and are provisionally retained as a single species, Zythia resinae. The results of morphological and molecular analyses indicate that there are likely many species, but due to inability to examine the type specimen of Lecidea resinae and the issues caused by mixed collections, we refrain from naming any new species.

This previously unrecognized diversity was suggested by available data on the Sareomycetes. Both Sarea and Zythia are widely distributed in Europe, North America, Asia, and Africa, with Z. resinae also present in Australasia (Hawksworth and Sherwood 1981; Gadgil and Dick 1999; Beimforde et al. 2020). Records from the Southern Hemisphere almost certainly represent anthropogenic introductions, but the Northern Hemisphere distribution is still broad. Similar broad distributions are known in other taxa, and although not necessarily indicative of cryptic diversity (Pringle et al. 2005; Quijada et al. 2016; Liu et al. 2017; Baral et al. 2018), can suggest it (Zhong and Pfister 2004; Stadler et al. 2014; Lücking et al. 2014, 2017; Skrede et al. 2017; Tanney and Seifert 2019). In addition to the broad geographic range, Sareomycetes species are found on the resin of a wide variety of host species. Sarea species are found on the resin of seven genera in Pinaceae and Z. resinae is found on twelve or thirteen genera in Cupressaceae and Pinaceae (see Table S6). This broad host range is again not necessarily indicative of cryptic diversity (Johnston and Park 2005; Baral et al. 2018), but is suggestive (Herrera et al. 2015; Martinović et al. 2016; Pärtel et al. 2017). Finally, published nuITS sequences assignable to the Sareomycetes are variable at levels greater than the standard 3% threshold for species delimitation in fungi (Izzo et al. 2005; Ciardo et al. 2006; Blaalid et al. 2013; Geml et al. 2014; Gweon et al. 2015), and greater than even the genus threshold (5.7% difference) suggested for filamentous fungi in a recent study (Vu et al. 2019). While such thresholds are known to not be constant across kingdom Fungi (Nilsson et al. 2008; Kõljalg et al. 2013; Lücking et al. 2020), this was particularly suggestive evidence of cryptic diversity.

Biogeography and Host Specificity

Little to no phylogeographic pattern in the studied Sareomycetes species is recovered in our analyses. This may be due to the fact that conifers in Pinaceae and Cupressaceae have been widely introduced around the world for ornamental and commercial purposes (Farjon 2017). We hypothesize that a number of Sareomycetes strains have been distributed worldwide, travelling on the resin of hosts, or as endophytes. The most obvious example is the introduction of S. coeloplata 1 to Antarctica reported in a study of the wood decay fungi on huts dating from the early 20th century (Held et al. 2003; Arenz et al. 2006). This fungus presumably was inhabiting the pinaceous timber brought to build the Discovery Hut on Ross Island (77° S), during the Discovery Expedition (1901–1904). Our haplotype network suggests that the origin of the fungal strain was in Northern or Central Europe, where the countries supplying materials for these expeditions are located. The persistence of this species over the course of a century is perhaps an indication of how easy it would be to accidentally introduce these fungi to a new area. Another clear and relatively recent introduction is that of both Zythia resinae and S. coeloplata 1 to Cape Verde (reported in this study). Since no conifers are native to Cape Verde, we can again be sure that this is a case of human introduction (Hansen and Sunding 1993; Arechavaleta Hernández et al. 2005; Farjon 2017); Pinus spp. and Cupressus spp. have been widely introduced to Cape Verde (Frahm et al. 1996). At least two haplotypes of Zythia resinae and Sarea coeloplata 1 from Macaronesia (Cape Verde and the Canary Islands) are identical, or closely related, to haplotypes from the Iberian Peninsula. This makes sense since these archipelagos have close historical relationships with Spain and Portugal. The reports of Zythia resinae from New Zealand almost certainly represent a third instance of anthropogenic introduction. Pinaceae and Cupressaceae are, the only families known to host fungi in Sareomycetes; of these families, only two species in Cupressaceae are native to New Zealand (De Lange and Rolfe 2010), but all reports of Zythia are from Abies, Pinus, and Pseudotsuga, in Pinaceae (Gadgil and Dick 1999; Beimforde et al. 2020). A final apparent indicator of ease of transmission through wood projects are a series of seven nuITS sequences uploaded to Genbank and misidentified as "Hormococcus conorum" and "Zythia pinastri" (NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) 2020a, b, c, d, e, f, g). Since these are part of a project titled "Imported wood products to United States as vectors for potential invasive fungal species," it may be surmised that these were generated from imported wood products. On the other hand, the almost complete lack of genetic structure in the geographic distributions of species and the extensive geographic distribution in the Northern Hemisphere of some genetic lineages may be also due to long-distance dispersal of minute spores by wind, or even migratory birds, which use coniferous trees as perches in their migration routes (Hallenberg and Kúffer 2001; Muñoz et al. 2004; Wilkinson et al. 2012; Viana et al. 2016). Based on age estimates for the divergence among closely related haplotypes in all Sareomycetes species, intercontinental dispersal of lineages could have occurred during the Quaternary (< 2.59 Ma), and this could have been concomitant with events of population expansion, as suggested by neutrality test results in the nuITS and nuLSU markers. Larger datasets assembled with a population-genetics scope are needed to evaluate these hypotheses. Nevertheless, there are exceptions to this general pattern, since seven clades in total contain only specimens from a relatively restricted, and sometimes sympatric, ranges: one from the eastern US (Zythia resinae clade 13 in Fig. S1), one from New England (Zythia resinae clade 5 in Fig. S1), one from the Pacific Slope (Atrozythia klamathica), and three from Japan (Zythia resinae clades 2, 4, & 7 in Fig. S1). Without broader sampling, particularly in Asia and Africa, and considering all available environmental sequences, it is difficult to determine if these are truly lineages of limited range, or a sampling artifact.

Likewise, there is little overall pattern of host specificity, except perhaps at the host family level. This might be expected, since resin composition is broadly similar within each conifer family (Langenheim 2003; Lambert et al. 2005) but still varies among species (Lambert et al. 2007) and even varies within a single species (Tappert et al. 2011). If there is a pattern of specificity even at family level, it appears not to hold for all species. For example, Sarea coeloplata 1 was found growing on Thuja occidentalis (ACD0147.1) in addition to a number of species in Pinaceae. Similarly, Zythia resinae clade 8 (in Fig. S1) encompasses primarily specimens on Pinaceae, but also a specimen found growing on Cupressus forbesii (JM0077), and the two known specimens of Atrozythia klamathica are from hosts in different families. Although this could be explained by a complete lack of host specificity, an alternative explanation is that different strains/species in Sareomycetes in some way selectively grow on resin containing or lacking certain components. Production of specific resin components need not mirror evolutionary relationships (Tappert et al. 2011), so what currently appears random may still contain a hidden pattern. Nonetheless, there are clades suggestive of host specificity at the host generic or specific level, even if most clades are found on mixed hosts. Zythia resinae clade 4 (in Fig. S1) contains only samples found associated with Chamaecyparis obtusa. Zythia resinae clade 5 (in Fig. S1) and an unnumbered clade appearing only in our three-gene and mtSSU analyses appear to be found only on Chamaecyparis spp. and Cupressus spp., respectively. Perhaps significantly, each of these clades also shows a fairly restricted geographic pattern, noted above, and each of these clades are among the least well-sampled, supported groups in our phylogeny. Wider, more robust sampling could change the pattern seen. Ultimately, a more detailed understanding of the specific ecology of species in Sareomycetes is needed to generate and test hypotheses regarding host specificity.

Our dating analyses provide additional insight into host specificity in Sareomycetes at the temporal scale (Fig. 6). The results of our dating analyses match well with estimates of the diversification of the tree host genera of these fungi. Our estimate of 120.88 Ma (181.35–75.76 Ma, 95% HPD) for the crown node of Sareomycetes places the origin of this group concurrent with or after the origins of Cupressaceae and Pinaceae in the Cretaceous Period (Mao et al. 2012; Lu et al. 2014; Leslie et al. 2018), and roughly concurrent with the origin of the genus Pinus in the Jurassic Period (Saladin et al. 2017; Leslie et al. 2018). This suggests that the Sareomycetes evolved to exploit the new niche of resin provided by Pinus or another, now extinct taxon (Smith et al. 2017; Leslie et al. 2018). The origins of the genera Atrozythia, Sarea, and Zythia and subsequent diversification in Sarea (specific estimates given in Table S5) also correspond well with a later period of diversification of host genera in Cupressaceae and Pinaceae of these fungi in the Cenozoic Era (Leslie et al. 2018). This occurred during and following a period of global cooling (Scotese 2016) together with some of the last important geological events, including Cenozoic orogenies, which influenced the worldwide distribution of conifers. Close evolutionary histories among fungi and their hosts are well known in several parasitic and ectomycorrhizal fungal clades (Takamatsu 2013; Sánchez-Ramírez et al. 2017; Looney et al. 2020)

Mixed Collections

An unexpected complicating problem was uncovered during these investigations. Prior to this study, authors have noted that both Sarea and Zythia species can be found growing on the same piece of resin (Hawksworth and Sherwood 1981; Spier and Aptroot 2000; Yatsyna 2017). This was noted in our study of specimens: Atrozythia klamathica was found growing alongside Zythia resinae (JM0068), and Zythia resinae was found growing with Sarea difformis (e.g. PV-D863), Sarea coeloplata 1 (e.g. ACD0147), and Sarea coeloplata 2 (e.g. IGB316). Less obviously, it was discovered that multiple clades of Zythia resinae or species of Sarea can be found mixed in a single collection. This was first seen when sequencing multiple loci for specimen BHI-F779. An initial DNA extraction, PCR, and sequencing yielded sequences matching Zythia resinae clade 1; a subsequent round of sequencing from the same collection yielded sequences matching Zythia resinae clade 13. Later, Sarea difformis was detected living alongside Sarea coeloplata 1 (JM0072) and Sarea coeloplata 2 (JM0011). This ability to share substrate with closely related species, while ecologically interesting, poses serious challenges to the identification of morphological synapomorphies and matching them with the corresponding phylogenetic clade. Given the frequency with which we have found mixed collections, it cannot be excluded that some of the specimens we sequenced and examined morphologically contain mixes of Sarea coeloplata 1 and Sarea coeloplata 2, or mixes of multiple Zythia resinae clades. This could account for the lack of consistent morphology observed during our investigations of these species and informs our decision to not name these clades.

Based on our experience, future investigation of this family should be conducted by extracting DNA, examining micromorphology, and performing culture work from single apothecia. While this can be a challenge, given that apothecia are typically < 1 mm in diameter, we feel that this is the only reliable way of accurately characterizing this group of fungi.

Morphological Observations

Color Changes in Sections

We observed that microtome cut sections of Zythia resinae stored out of light in dried gum arabic solution on glass slides for a period of several months showed a marked degradation of pigment. Only the high concentration of pigments in the ectal excipulum and in the epithecium remained evident. A similar pattern was observed in sections permanently mounted in glycerin. In addition to color loss, the encrusting layer over the ectal excipulum and the epithecium was found to dissolve, further altering morphological characters of the fungus.

Such changes posed a challenge to morphological examination, since they create artificial morphological patterns that differ from those seen in recent or fresh material, or even in fungarium material. For these reasons, to accurately assess pigment-related and other morphological characters, we recommend that any morphological examination of Zythia species be done on newly sectioned material rather than material sectioned by previous investigators and stored on glass slides or mounted.

Ascus Dehiscence

Previous authors have reported the asci of Sareomycetes as "not functionally bitunicate" (Hawksworth and Sherwood 1981; Nash et al. 2008) or of the broadly defined "archaeascé" type (Letrouit-Galinou 1973). Our observations indicate that all three genera, and Atrozythia in particular, have ascus dehiscence characterized by a rupture of the outer layer at the tip of the ascus and protrusion of an inner wall. The inner wall extends some distance beyond the outer wall, varying among species. This agrees with the electron microscopic examination of a Sarea species performed by Bellemère (1994). It is not clear in our observations whether there is any zone of full wall separation between the inner and outer layers; we thus view this as the "rostrate" type of ascus dehiscence (Eriksson 1981; Bellemère 1994a).

Ecology

Are Sareomycetes Lichens?

The controversy regarding the ecology of species in Sarea and Zythia is long-standing; they have often been thought of as lichens. This is reflected in the taxonomy of the synonymous names. This idea goes back to Fries' original publication, in which he placed Zythia resinae in the lichen genus Lecidea and included the phrase "crusta tenuissima membranacea contigua cinerascenti" apparently describing a lichen thallus (Fries 1815). Hawksworth and Sherwood (1981) also offered evidence that he had corresponded regarding it with his colleague, the eminent lichenologist Erik Acharius. Since Fries' time, various authors have included Sarea and Zythia species among the lichens (Arnold 1858; Tulasne and Tulasne 1861; von Krempelhuber 1861; Nylander 1866; Vainio 1883; Fink 1935; Tucker and Jordan 1979; Etayo 1996; Purahong et al. 2017). A number of other authors were vaguer. Hepp (1857b) included an unnumbered, mixed specimen of Zythia resinae and a Sarea sp. in his exsiccata, Die Flechten Europas. His opinion of whether it was a lichen or fungus, however, is obscured by the fact that the specimen was provided as an example of something easily confused with the black-apothecial lichen he included as number 332 ("Calicium inquinans γ. sessile"). Other authors referred to species in Sareomycetes as intermediate between lichens and fungi, sometimes placing them in named groups (e.g. "Lichenes ambigua," "Lichenes parasitici," "Pseudolichenes," "Hybridolichenes," and "Fungilli lichenoides") (Anzi 1860; Fries 1860; Koerber 1865; Ohlert 1870; Lettau 1912). One of the more unusual cases is that of Carlo Cappelletti (1924), who stated that S. difformis could be found both lichenized and non-lichenized in different samples. This situation is known in some fungi (Wedin et al. 2004, 2006), but the fact that Cappelletti reported this relationship in several resinicolous fungi casts doubt on his observations. Additionally, the concepts of some authors accepting species in Sareomycetes as lichens have been based on incorrectly identified material; these cases are treated in the "Excluded Names and Misapplications" section of the Taxonomy section above. Other mycologists and lichenologists, including the majority of modern authors, treat species in Sareomycetes as non-lichenized (Berkeley and Broome 1866; Cooke 1871; Fuckel 1871; Tuckerman 1872; von Thümen 1880; Karsten 1885; Willey 1888; Rehm 1889b; Saccardo 1889; Massee 1895; von Keißler 1909; Ramsbottom 1913; Nannfeldt 1932; Magnusson 1935; Dennis 1960; Lamb 1963; Poelt and Vězda 1977; Hawksworth and Sherwood 1981; Kobayashi and Zhao 1989; Wirth 1995; Otte et al. 2000; Spier and Aptroot 2000; LaGreca et al. 2005; Kukwa et al. 2008; Nash et al. 2008; Knudsen and Kocourková 2012; Tarasova et al. 2015; McMullin 2015; Kuznetsova et al. 2016; Lendemer and Noell 2018; Morse and Lendemer 2019). We accept them as non-lichenized fungi.

Are Sareomycetes Parasitic?

The occurrence of these fungi on resinous wounds, has inevitably raised the question of whether they are parasitic (Kujala 1950; Groves and Wells 1956; Malençon 1979; Hawksworth 1980; Suto and Kanamori 1990). This question has been investigated by attempting to satisfy Koch's postulates, with varying results. The first of these was conducted by Ayers (1941), who used one of his cultures of Z. resinae to attempt to infect Pinus strobus; he saw no effect. Researchers in the northwestern USSR used inoculation studies to investigate a disease of pines. They called the fungus they identified as the causal agent "Biatoridina pinastri," which they proved was the anamorphic state of a Sarea species (Shchedrova 1964, 1965). In a broad study of conifer associated discomycetes, Smerlis (1973) concluded that Z. resinae was mildly pathogenic, producing cankers on every pinaceous host tested. An inoculation study conducted in the 1980s to determine the cause of a disease of Pinus koraiensis in northeastern China also found no evidence of infection by Z. resinae and identified the true causal agent, Tympanis confusa (Sūn et al. 1983; Cuī et al. 1984; Xiang et al. 1985; Xiang and Song 1988; Kobayashi et al. 1990). A similar study in Japan on a disease of Pinus thunbergii gave the same results; inoculations with Z. resinae produced no symptoms, but inoculations with a species of Ascocalyx did (Kobayashi and Kusunoki 1985; Kobayashi and Zhao 1989). Additional studies to determine the causal agent of the resinous stem canker of Chamaecyparis obtusa determined that Z. resinae did not cause symptoms on hosts in Pinaceae or Cupressaceae, and identified the causal agent as Cistella japonica (Hayashi and Kobayashi 1985; Yokozawa et al. 1986, 1989; Suto 1987, 1992, 1997, 1998; Kobayashi et al. 1990). The varying results and generality of these tests leave unresolved the question of pathogenicity of species in Sareomycetes; some authors assume pathogenicity and others accept a saprobic lifestyle, as summarized by Beimforde et al. (2020).

Sareomycetes as Endosymbionts of Photosynthetic Organisms

Other aspects of the ecology of species in Sareomycetes have been established with more certainty. These fungi have frequently been isolated as endophytes of conifers in Pinaceae (Petrini and Fisher 1988; Kowalski and Kehr 1992; Giordano et al. 2009; Koukol et al. 2012; Arhipova et al. 2015; Sanz-Ros et al. 2015; U’Ren and Arnold 2016; Marmolejo Monciváis 2018) and Cupressaceae (Petrini and Carroll 1981; Suto and Ougi 1999; Sieber 2007). This pattern is consistent with previous studies that have shown both saprobes and parasites living within their potential hosts (Fisher and Petrini 1992; Kogel et al. 2006; Oses et al. 2008). Somewhat more unusually, species in Sareomycetes have also been isolated as an endophytes of grasses (Sánchez Márquez et al. 2008), mistletoes (Peršoh 2013), and possibly deciduous woody plants (Novas and Carmarán 2008). Apart from the Pinus-dwelling mistletoe, which presumably allows the fungus close access to the resin seeping from any wounds created by the mistletoe, the occurrence of these fungi in these various hosts is difficult to explain. A closer look at the Cupressaceous endophytisms reveals a similarly difficult-to-explain pattern: a Sarea species was isolated (Petrini and Carroll 1981), but the current work represents the first report of a Sarea species fruiting on a cupressaceous host. Several studies have found Sarea and Zythia species living within thalli of foliose and fruticose lichens in Europe and Asia (Peršoh and Rambold 2012; NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) 2018a, b; Masumoto and Degawa 2019; Yang et al. 2020). One group of researchers has apparently even recovered Sarea coeloplata 1 (identified as Hormococcus conorum) associated with a marine alga, Fucus vesiculosus, in the Venetian Lagoon (NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) 2013). Many questions about the ecology of this family remain.

The Ecology of Atrozythia Species

This uncertainty extends to our new genus, Atrozythia. Some cellulolytic capacity has been reported for Atrozythia lignicola (Sigler and Carmichael 1983), and the fungus has been recovered from both diseased (Sigler and Carmichael 1983) and dead/rotting wood (Sigler and Carmichael 1983; Wang and Zabel 1990; Metzler 1997; Lumley et al. 2001; Arhipova et al. 2011) of Pinus and Picea (although the possibility of isolation from Populus tremuloides by Lumley et al. (2001) cannot be excluded entirely). Additional study is needed to determine if A. lignicola is resinicolous, since all other members of Sareomycetes seem to be, or if it has some other lifestyle. Atrozythia klamathica, known thus far from only two specimens, was found fruiting directly on the resin of Chamaecyparis lawsoniana and Tsuga heterophylla; it presumably shares a similar ecology with other members of Sareomycetes.

Taxonomic Placement

The placement of species in Sareomycetes in the fungal tree of life has had a long and confused history, which we attempt to elucidate here with more details than Beimforde et al. (2020). In the late nineteenth century authors grouped species generally among the fleshy discomycetes (Crouan and Crouan 1867; Cooke 1871; Saccardo 1889) and more specifically with the Dermateaceae (Karsten 1885; Saccardo 1889) or Patellariaceae (Fuckel 1871), or among the lichens in Lecideaceae, allied with Biatora (Tuckerman 1872; Stein 1879). A number of mycologists between 1889 and 1934 (starting with Rehm) placed species among the Patellariaceae (see Table S7). Researchers later placed species variously in Lecanorales and Helotiales, or declined to place them; for instance, the first (and several subsequent) edition(s) of the Dictionary of the Fungi list Retinocyclus as belonging with the lichens or in Helotiales, and Sarea as being of uncertain placement (Ainsworth and Bisby 1943, 1950). Placement was stabilized in 1981, when Hawksworth and Sherwood, based on morphological similarities with Agyrium rufum, placed Sarea and Zythia in Agyriaceae (Lecanorales) (Hawksworth and Sherwood 1981). Molecular evidence indicating that A. rufum was unrelated to the remainder of Agyriaceae (Lumbsch et al. 2007; Lumbsch and Huhndorf 2010) resulted in the move of Sarea and Zythia to Trapeliaceae (Hodkinson and Lendemer 2011). Not all authors followed these placements. In the course of an electron microscopical study of asci, Bellemère stated that the placement of both Sarea difformis and Zythia resinae based on ascus ultrastructure was uncertain, and noted that the two species differed in their method of ascus dehiscence (Bellemère 1994b). This study must be considered with some caution, since the substrate of the Z. resinae specimen used was said to be stone, indicating that the specimen was likely misidentified. Schultheis, Tholl, Baral and Marson placed Sarea difformis under the heading "Ascomycetes Incertae Sedis" (Schultheis et al. 2001). The application of molecular techniques was needed to properly place these taxa.

The history of the multiple publications attempting to elucidate the taxonomic position of these fungi using molecular data is outlined by Beimforde, et al. (2020). Reliance on these publications is likely the reason for uncertain placements or placements in Leotiomycetes by several subsequent authors (Lumbsch et al. 2007; Kirk et al. 2008; Eriksson 2014; Hüseyin and Selçuk 2014; Miadlikowska et al. 2014; Garrido-Benavent 2015). Recently, use of information from six genes and sampling taxa throughout Pezizomycotina resulted in the erection of a new class, Sareomycetes, to accomodate Sarea and Zythia (Beimforde et al. 2020). This placement explains over two centuries of confusion and uncertainty.

Our studies of species in Sareomycetes have revealed the existence of three genera, one described as new. Sarea is restricted to the group of species traditionally identified as Sarea difformis, but shown to be at least three phylospecies, Sarea difformis s. str., with a purple hymenial pigment, and two cryptic species lacking such a pigment and identifiable morphologically with the type of Biatorella coeloplata, combined here as Sarea coeloplata. Zythia is resurrected for Zythia resinae (= Sarea resinae), which is retained provisionally as a single, highly diverse species. Atrozythia and the new species Atrozythia klamathica are described, and a combination is made for Arthrographis lignicola. The family name Zythiaceae is resurrected as an earlier name for Sareaceae. This family displays few biogeographic patterns and little evidence of host specificity. It is shown to have arisen in the late Jurassic or Cretaceous; subsequent diversification occurred roughly concurrently with the diversification of Cupressaceae and Pinaceae. Further work on this family is recommended, including: type studies on Lecidea resinae and Tympanis abietis, use of precise methodologies to study the two phylospecies assignable to S. coeloplata and to split the Zythia resinae complex, and collection of the data required to do population genetic analyses at least for Zythia.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Adherence to national and international regulations

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and material

The datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are available in the TreeBase repository, XXXXXXXXX.

Competing interests

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Funding

Funding for this project was primarily granted by the Friends of the Farlow and a Graduate Student Fellowship from the New England Botanical Club. Some sequencing of relevant specimens and collecting trips were funded by the Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area Fungal All-Taxa Biodiversity Inventory Project.

Authors' contributions

JKM performed all culturing, molecular work, collection of most fresh specimens, nomenclatural portions, and some morphological examination. LQ performed the remainder of morphological examinations and assisted in collection of some specimens. IGB collected many of the fresh specimens and performed all analyses. DHP provided conceptual guidance and advice for the project. All authors were major contributors in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the immense help of the librarians at the Harvard University Botany Libraries for their aid in finding and borrowing obscure sources. Yasuo Suto is also thanked for mailing reprints of many of his difficult-to-access papers, which have been given to the Harvard University Botany Libraries. Katherine LoBuglio, Jason Karakehian, and Danny Haelewaters are thanked for their advice and instruction in molecular methods. Kanchi Gandhi is also thanked for his advice on nomenclatural issues.

The collections staff of FH are also thanked for their aid in searching the collections, permission for sampling, and processing loans from other institutions; the collections staff of these institutions are also thanked for sending material and allowing sampling, where appropriate. Additionally, all collectors are thanked for their contributions of specimens. The Nature Conservancies of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont, Clearwater Creek State Park, the Arnold Arboretum, all National Forests in California, Redwoods National Park, and Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Park are thanked for issuing collecting permits. The Mycological Society of America is thanked for arranging permitting for the forays at their annual meetings. The Friends of the Farlow and The New England Botanical Club are thanked for their financial support, and the Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area is thanked for both permission to collect and funding for sequencing some specimens associated with the All-Taxa Biodiversity Inventory being conducted there. Without them, the geographic sampling we obtained would have been impossible.

The first author also thanks his partner, Daniel Adamec, for his continued support, particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic, without which this work would not have been possible.

The third author acknowledges the Harvard University Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology and the Farlow Fellowship for providing postdoctoral funding while he has worked on this project.

Ainsworth GC, Bisby GR (1943) A Dictionary of the Fungi, 1st edn. The Imperial Mycological Institute, Kew, Surrey
Ainsworth GC, Bisby GR (1950) A Dictionary of the Fungi, 3rd edn. The Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew, Surrey
Altschul S (1997) Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 25:3389–3402. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/25.17.3389
Anzi M (1860) Catalogus Lichenum Quos in Provincia Sondriensi et Circa Novum-Comum Collegit et in Ordinem Systematicum Digessit. Ex Officina Caroli Franchi Bibliopolae, Novi-Comi
Arechavaleta Hernández M, Zurita Pérez N, Marrero Gómez M del C, Martín Esquivel JL (eds) (2005) Lista preliminar de especies silvestres de Cabo Verde (Hongos, Plantas y Animales Terrestres). 2005. Consejería de Medio Ambiente y Ordenación Territorial, Gobierno de Canarias, La Laguna
Arenz BE, Held BW, Jurgens JA, et al (2006) Fungal diversity in soils and historic wood from the Ross Sea Region of Antarctica. Soil Biol Biochem 38:3057–3064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.01.016
Arhipova N, Gaitnieks T, Donis J, et al (2011) Butt rot incidence, causal fungi, and related yield loss in Picea abies stands of Latvia. Can J For Res 41:2337–2345. https://doi.org/10.1139/x11-141
Arhipova N, Jansons A, Zaluma A, et al (2015) Bark stripping of Pinus contorta caused by moose and deer: wounding patterns, discoloration of wood, and associated fungi. Can J For Res 45:1434–1438. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2015-0119
Arnold FCG (1858) Die Lichenen des fränkischen Jura (Fortsetzung). Flora 41:500–508
Ayers TT (1941) Biatorella resinae: The Perfect Stage of Zythia resinae. Mycologia 33:130. https://doi.org/10.2307/3754744
Baral HO, Weber E, Marson G, Quijada L (2018) A new connection between wood saprobism and beetle endosymbiosis: the rarely reported saprobic discomycete Tromeropsis is congeneric with the symbiotic yeast Symbiotaphrina (Symbiotaphrinales, Xylonomycetes) and two asexual morphs misplaced in Hyphozyma. Mycol Prog 17:215–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11557-017-1340-y
Beimforde C, Feldberg K, Nylinder S, et al (2014) Estimating the Phanerozoic history of the Ascomycota lineages: Combining fossil and molecular data. Mol Phylogenetics Evol 78:386–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2014.04.024
Beimforde C, Mitchell JK, Rikkinen J, Schmidt AR (2020) Sareomycetes cl. nov.: A new proposal for placement of the resinicolous genus Sarea (Ascomycota, Pezizomycotina). Fungal Syst Evol 6:25–37. https://doi.org/10.3114/fuse.2020.06.02
Bellemère A (1994a) Asci and ascospores in ascomycete systematics. In: Hawksworth DL (ed) Ascomycete systematics: problems and perspectives in the nineties. Plenum Press, New York, pp 111–126
Bellemère A (1994b) Documents et commentaires sur l’ultrastructure des asques polysporés des Acarospora, de quelques genres de la famille des Acarosporaceae et de genres similaires. Bull Soc Linn Provence 45:355–388
Berkeley MJ, Broome CE (1866) Notices of British Fungi. Ann Mag Nat Hist Ser III 18:121–129
Blaalid R, Kumar S, Nilsson RH, et al (2013) ITS1 versus ITS2 as DNA metabarcodes for fungi. Mol Ecol Resour 13:218–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12065
Bridges JR (1987) Effects of Terpenoid Compounds on Growth of Symbiotic Fungi Associated with the Southern Pine Beetle. Phytopathology 77:83–85. https://doi.org/10.1094/Phyto-77-83
Bunny F, Tippett J (1988) Inhibitory Effects of Pinus radiata and P. pinaster Resin on Growth of Four Phytophthora Species. Australas Plant Pathol 17:14–16. https://doi.org/10.1071/APP9880014
Cappelletti C (1924) Studî su la vegetazione resinicola. Ann Bot (Rome) 16:253–297
Castresana J (2000) Selection of Conserved Blocks from Multiple Alignments for Their Use in Phylogenetic Analysis. Mol Biol Evol 17:540–552. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026334
Chou CKS, Zabkiewicz JA (1976) Toxicity of monoterpenes from Pinus radiata cortical oleoresin to Diplodia pinea spores. Eur J For Pathol 6:354–359. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1976.tb00549.x
Ciardo DE, Schar G, Bottger EC, et al (2006) Internal Transcribed Spacer Sequencing versus Biochemical Profiling for Identification of Medically Important Yeasts. J Clin Microbiol 44:77–84. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.44.1.77-84.2006
Clement M, Snell Q, Walker P, et al (2002) TCS: estimating gene genealogies. In: Proceedings 16th International Parallel Distributed Processing Symposium. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, p 184
Cobb FW Jr, Krstic M, Zavarin E, Barber HW Jr (1968) Inhibitory Effects of Volatile Oleoresin Components on Fomes annosus and Four Ceratocystis Species. Phytopathology 58:1327–1335
Cooke MC (1871) Handbook of British Fungi, With full Descriptions of all the Species, and Illustrations of the Genera. Macmillan and Co., London
Crombie JM (1870) Lichenes Britannici: seu lichenum in Anglia, Scotia, et Hibernia Vigentium, enumeratio cum eorum stationibus et distributione. L. Reeve, Londini
Crouan HM, Crouan PL (1867) Florule du Finistère. Contenant les descriptions de 360 espèces nouvelles de sporagames, de nombreuses observations et une synonymie des plantes cellulaires et vasculaires qui croissent spontanément dans ce département. Friedrich Klincksieck, Paris
Cuī B, Gé L, Xú X (1984) Hóng sōng kuìyáng bìng de fángzhì shìyàn. For Sci Technol 1984:30. https://doi.org/10.13456/j.cnki.lykt.1984.03.014
De Groot RC (1972) Growth of Wood-Inhabiting Fungi in Saturated Atmospheres of Monoterpenoids. Mycologia 64:863–870. https://doi.org/10.2307/3757941
De Lange PJ, Rolfe JR (2010) New Zealand indigenous vascular plant checklist 2010. New Zealand Plant Conservation Network, Wellington, N.Z.
Dennis RWG (1960) British cup fungi and their allies: an introduction to the Ascomycetes. Printed for the Ray Society, London
Drummond AJ, Suchard MA, Xie D, Rambaut A (2012) Bayesian Phylogenetics with BEAUti and the BEAST 1.7. Mol Phylogenetics Evol 29:1969–1973. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mss075
Ehrenberg CG (1818) Sylvae Mycologicae Berolinenses. Formis Theophili Bruschcke, Berolini
Eriksson OE (1981) The families of bitunicate ascomycetes. Council for Nordic Publications in Botany, Copenhagen
Eriksson OE (2014) Checklist of the non-lichenized ascomycetes of Sweden. Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala
Etayo J (1996) Contribution to the lichen flora of the Canary Islands. II. Epiphytic lichens from La Palma. Osterr Z Pilzkd 5:149–159
Farjon A (2017) A handbook of the world’s conifers, Second, revised edition. Brill, Leiden; Boston
Fink B (1935) The lichen flora of the United States. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor
Fisher PJ, Petrini O (1992) Fungal saprobes and pathogens as endophytes of rice (Oryza sativa L.). New Phytol 120:137–143
Frahm J-P, Lindlar A, Sollman P, Fischer E (1996) Bryophytes from the Cape Verde Islands. Trop Bryol 12:123–153
Fries EM (1815) Observationes Mycologicae. Sumptibus Gerhardi Bonnier, Havniæ
Fries EM (1822) Systema mycologicum: sistens fungorum ordines, genera et species, huc usque cognitas, quas ad normam methodi naturalis determinavit, disposuit atque descripsit Elias Fries. Volumen II. Sectio I. Ex Officina Berlingiana, Lundæ
Fries EM (1823) Systema mycologicum: sistens fungorum ordines, genera et species, huc usque cognitas, quas ad normam methodi naturalis determinavit, disposuit atque descripsit Elias Fries. Volumen II. [Sectio II.]. Ex Officina Berlingiana, Lundæ
Fries N (1973) The growth-promoting activity of terpenoids on wood-decomposing fungi. Eur J For Pathol 3:169–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1973.tb00391.x
Fries TM (1874) Lichenographia scandinavica sive dispositio lichenum in Dania, Suecia, Norvegia, Fennia, Lapponia rossica hactenus collectorum. Ed. Berling., Uppsala
Fries TM (1860) Lichenes arctoi Europae Groenlandiaeque hactenus cogniti. C. A. Leffler, Uppsala
Fuckel KWGL (1871) Symbolae Mycologicae: Beiträge zur kenntniss der Rheinischen Pilze. Nachtrag 1. Jahrb Nassau Ver Naturkd 25–26:287–346
Gadgil PD, Dick M (1999) Fungi Silvicolae Novaezelandiae: 1. N Z J For Sci 29:428–439
Gardes M, Bruns TD (1993) ITS primers with enhanced specificity for basidiomycetes - application to the identification of mycorrhizae and rusts. Mol Ecol 2:113–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.1993.tb00005.x
Garrido-Benavent I (2015) Contribución al conocimiento del género Sarea Fr. (Ascomycota, Incertae Sedis) en la Península Ibérica. Errotari 12:42–51
Geml J, Gravendeel B, van der Gaag KJ, et al (2014) The Contribution of DNA Metabarcoding to Fungal Conservation: Diversity Assessment, Habitat Partitioning and Mapping Red-Listed Fungi in Protected Coastal Salix repens Communities in the Netherlands. PLOS ONE 9:e99852. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099852
Gibbs JN (1972) Tolerance of Fomes annosus isolates to pine oleoresins and pinosylvins. Eur J For Pathol 2:147–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1972.tb00356.x
Giordano L, Gonthier P, Varese GC, et al (2009) Mycobiota inhabiting sapwood of healthy and declining Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) trees in the Alps. Fungal Divers 38:69–83
Giraldo A, Gené J, Sutton DA, et al (2014) Phylogenetic circumscription of Arthrographis (Eremomycetaceae, Dothideomycetes). Persoonia 32:102–114. https://doi.org/10.3767/003158514X680207
Goulding TC, Dayrat B (2016) Integrative taxonomy: ten years of practice and looking into the future. Arch Zool Mus Lomonosov Mosc State Univ 54:116–133
Groves JW, Wells DE (1956) The Genus Retinocyclus. Mycologia 48:865. https://doi.org/10.2307/3755713
Grummer JA, Bryson RW, Reeder TW (2014) Species Delimitation Using Bayes Factors: Simulations and Application to the Sceloporus scalaris Species Group (Squamata: Phrynosomatidae). Syst Biol 63:119–133. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syt069
Gweon HS, Oliver A, Taylor J, et al (2015) PIPITS: an automated pipeline for analyses of fungal internal transcribed spacer sequences from the Illumina sequencing platform. Methods Ecol Evol 6:973–980. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12399
Haelewaters D, De Kesel A, Pfister DH (2018) Integrative taxonomy reveals hidden species within a common fungal parasite of ladybirds. Sci Rep 8:15966. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-34319-5
Hallenberg N, Kúffer N (2001) Long-distance spore dispersal in wood-inhabiting Basidiomycetes. Nord J Bot 21:431–436. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-1051.2001.tb00793.x
Hansen A, Sunding P (1993) Flora of Macaronesia: checklist of vascular plants, 4., rev. ed. Botanical Garden and Museum, Univ. of Oslo, Oslo
Hart JH, Wardell JF, Hemingway RW (1975) Formation of Oleoresin and Lignans in Sapwood of White Spruce in Response to Wounding. Phytopathology 65:412–417
Hartmann E, Renz B, Jung JA (1981) Untersuchungen über Bakterien- und Pilzhemmstoffe in höheren Pflanzen: Isolierung, Identifizierung und Wirkungsspektrum von zwei Harzsäuren aus Fichtenrinden. Phytopathol Z 101:31–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0434.1981.tb03318.x
Hasse HE (1898) Lichens of Southern California, 2nd edn. B. R. Baumgardt & Co., Los Angeles
Hasse HE (1908) Lichens Collected in the Tehachepi Mountains, California, June, 1907. Bryologist 11:55. https://doi.org/10.2307/3238216
Hasse HE (1913) The Lichen Flora of Southern California. Contrib U S Natl Herb 17:1–132
Hawksworth DL (1980) C.M.I. descriptions of pathogenic fungi and bacteria no. 677. Sarea resinae. Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew
Hawksworth DL, Sherwood MA (1981) A reassessment of three widespread resinicolous discomycetes. Can J Bot 59:357–372. https://doi.org/10.1139/b81-049
Hayashi H, Kobayashi T (1985) Etiological studies of resinous diseases of hinoki, Chamaecyparis obtusa (II) Pathogenicity of certain fungi, isolated from resinous lesions, to various conifers. Nihon ringakkai taikai happyō ronbun-shū 96:479–480
Hedin M, Carlson D, Coyle F (2015) Sky island diversification meets the multispecies coalescent-divergence in the spruce-fir moss spider (Microhexura montivaga, Araneae, Mygalomorphae) on the highest peaks of southern Appalachia. Mol Ecol 24:3467–3484. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13248
Held BW, Blanchette RA, Jurgens JA, et al (2003) Deterioration and Conservation Issues Associated with Antarctica’s Historic Huts. In: Koestler RJ, Koestler VH, Charola AE, Nieto-Fernandez FE (eds) Art, Biology, and Conservation: Biodeterioration of Works of Art. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, pp 370–389
Heled J, Drummond AJ (2010) Bayesian Inference of Species Trees from Multilocus Data. Mol Biol Evol 27:570–580. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msp274
Hemingway RW, Greaves H (1973) Biodegradation of resin acid sodium salts. Tappi 56:189–192
Hepp JAP (1857a) Abbildungen und Beschreibung der Sporen zum V. VI. VII. und VIII. Band der Flechten Europas in getrockneten mikroscopisch unteruchten Exemplaren. [Meyer und Zeller], Zürich
Hepp JAP (1857b) Die Flechten Europas in Getrockneten Mikroscopisch Untersuchen Exemplaren mit Beschreibung und Abbildung ihrer Sporen. Meyer und Zeller, Zürich
Herrera CS, Rossman AY, Samuels GJ, et al (2015) Systematics of the Cosmospora viliuscula species complex. Mycologia 107:532–557. https://doi.org/10.3852/14-122
Hintikka V (1970) Selective effect of terpenes on wood-decomposing Hymenomycetes. Karstenia 11:28–32. https://doi.org/10.29203/ka.1970.67
Hodkinson BP, Lendemer JC (2011) The orders of Ostropomycetidae (Lecanoromycetes, Ascomycota): Recognition of Sarrameanales and Trapeliales with a request to retain Pertusariales over Agyriales. Phytologia 93:407–412
Hüseyin E, Selçuk F (2014) Coelomycetous Fungi in Several Forest Ecosystems of Black Sea Provinces of Turkey. Agric For 60:19–32
Inter-Society Color Council (1976) ISCC-NBS Color-name charts illustrated with centroid colors. National Bureau of Standards, Washington, DC
Izzo A, Agbowo J, Bruns TD (2005) Detection of plot-level changes in ectomycorrhizal communities across years in an old-growth mixed-conifer forest. New Phytol 166:619–630. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01354.x
Johnston PR, Park D (2005) Chlorociboria (Fungi, Helotiales) in New Zealand. N Z J Bot 43:679–719. https://doi.org/10.1080/0028825X.2005.9512985
Jukes TH, Cantor CR (1969) Evolution of protein molecules. In: Munro HN (ed) Mammalian protein metabolism, III. Academic Press, New York, pp 21–132
Kang H-J, Sigler L, Lee J, et al (2010) Xylogone ganodermophthora sp. nov., an ascomycetous pathogen causing yellow rot on cultivated mushroom Ganoderma lucidum in Korea. Mycologia 102:1167–1184. https://doi.org/10.3852/09-304
Karsten PA (1885) Revisio Monographica Atque Synopsis Ascomycetum in Fennia Hucusqve Detectorum. Acta Soc Fauna Flora Fenn 2:[1]-174
Kass RE, Raftery AE (1995) Bayes factors. J Am Stat Assoc 90:773–795
Katoh K (2002) MAFFT: a novel method for rapid multiple sequence alignment based on fast Fourier transform. Nucleic Acids Res 30:3059–3066. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkf436
Katoh K, Standley DM (2013) MAFFT Multiple Sequence Alignment Software Version 7: Improvements in Performance and Usability. Mol Biol Evol 30:772–780. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst010
Kirk PM, Cannon PF, Minter DW, Stalpers JA (eds) (2008) Ainsworth & Bisby’s Dictionary of the Fungi, 10th edn. CABI, Wallingford, Oxon, UK
Knudsen K, Kocourková J (2012) The annotated checklist of lichens, lichenicolous and allied fungi of Channel Islands National Park. Opusc Philolichenum 11:145–302
Kobayashi T, Hayashi H, Kubono T, et al (1990) Etiological and Pathological Studies on the Resinous Stem canker of Hinoki cypress, Chamaecyparis obtusa Sieb. et Zucc. I. Detection, identification and pathogenicity of the causal fungus. Bull For For Prod Res Inst 357:51–93
Kobayashi T, Kusunoki M (1985) Kuromatsu jukan no rōshi-sei gan shi ~yu-shō no byōin. Ann Phytopathol Soc Jpn 51:323. https://doi.org/10.3186/jjphytopath.51.318
Kobayashi T, Zhao J-Z (1989) Notes on diseases of woody plants and their causal fungi in Heilongjiang province, China, 1. Trans Mycol Soc Jpn 30:277–293
Koerber GW (1865) Parerga lichenologica: Ergänzungen zum Systema lichenum Germaniae. Eduard Trewendt, Breslau
Kogel K-H, Franken P, Hückelhoven R (2006) Endophyte or parasite – what decides? Curr Opin Plant Biol 9:358–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2006.05.001
Kõljalg U, Nilsson RH, Abarenkov K, et al (2013) Towards a unified paradigm for sequence-based identification of fungi. Mol Ecol 22:5271–5277. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12481
Koukol O, Kolařík M, Kolářová Z, Baldrian P (2012) Diversity of foliar endophytes in wind-fallen Picea abies trees. Fungal Divers 54:69–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-011-0112-2
Kowalski T, Kehr RD (1992) Endophytic fungal colonization of branch bases in several forest tree species. Sydowia 44:137–168
Krupa S, Nylund J-E (1972) Studies on Ectomycorrhizae of Pine.: III. Growth Inhibition of two Root Pathogenic Fungi by Volatile Organic Constituents of Ectomycorrhizal Root Systems of Pinus sylvestris L. Eur J For Pathol 2:88–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1972.tb00347.x
Kujala V (1950) Über die Kleinpilze der Koniferen in Finnland. Ascomycetes, Fungi Imperfecti, Uredinales. Metsät Tutkimusl Julk 38:1–121
Kukwa M, Schiefelbein U, Czarnota P, et al (2008) Notes on some noteworthy lichens and allied fungi found in the Białowieża Primeval Forest in Poland. Bryonora 41:1–11
Kuznetsova ES, Kataeva OA, Himelbrant DE, Motiejūnaitė J (2016) Lichens and allied fungi of the Ragusha River Protected Area (Leningrad Region, Russia). Folia Cryptogam Estonica 53:71. https://doi.org/10.12697/fce.2016.53.09
LaGreca S, Lay E, Greene D, et al (2005) The lichens and bryophytes of the Boston Harbor Islands. Northeast Nat 12:77–98
Lamb IM (1963) Index nominum lichenum: inter annos 1932 et 1960 divulgatorum. The Ronald Press Company, New York
Lambert JB, Kozminski MA, Fahlstrom CA, Santiago-Blay JA (2007) Proton Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Characterization of Resins from the Family Pinaceae. J Nat Prod 70:188–195. https://doi.org/10.1021/np060486i
Lambert JB, Wu Y, Santiago-Blay JA (2005) Taxonomic and Chemical Relationships Revealed by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectra of Plant Exudates. J Nat Prod 68:635–648
Lanfear R, Calcott B, Ho SYW, Guindon S (2012) PartitionFinder: Combined Selection of Partitioning Schemes and Substitution Models for Phylogenetic Analyses. Mol Biol Evol 29:1695–1701. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mss020
Langenheim JH (2003) Plant resins: chemistry, evolution, ecology, and ethnobotany. Timber Press, Portland, OR
Lartillot N, Philippe H (2006) Computing Bayes Factors Using Thermodynamic Integration. Syst Biol 55:195–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150500433722
Leavitt SD, Esslinger TL, Divakar PK, Lumbsch H (2012) Miocene and Pliocene dominated diversification of the lichen-forming fungal genus Melanohalea (Parmeliaceae, Ascomycota) and Pleistocene population expansions. BMC Evol Biol 12:176. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-12-176
Leigh JW, Bryant D (2015) POPART: full‐feature software for haplotype network construction. Methods Ecol Evol 6:1110–1116. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12410
Leighton WA (1871) The Lichen-Flora of Great Britain, Ireland and the Channel Islands. Printed for the Author, Shrewsbury [Eng.]
Leighton WA (1858) Lichenes Britannici Exsiccati. Pamplin, London
Leighton WA (1872) Lichenological Memorabilia.-No. 2. The Lichens of Bettws-y-Coed, North Wales. Grevillea 1:57–60
Leighton WA (1879) The lichen-flora of Great Britain, Ireland, and the Channel Islands, 3rd edn. Printed for the Author, Shrewsbury [Eng.]
Lendemer JC, Noell N (2018) Delmarva lichens: an illustrated manual. Torrey Botanical Society, Bronx, N.Y.
Leslie AB, Beaulieu J, Holman G, et al (2018) An overview of extant conifer evolution from the perspective of the fossil record. Am J Bot 105:1531–1544. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajb2.1143
Letrouit-Galinou M-A (1973) Les Asques des Lichens et le type archaeascé. Bryologist 76:30–47
Lettau G (1912) Beiträge zur lichenenflora von Ost- und Westpreussen. In: Festschrift zum 50 jährigen bestehen des Preussischen botanischen vereins e.v. 1862-1912. Hartungsche Buchdruckerei, Königsberg, pp 17–91
Librado P, Rozas J (2009) DnaSP v5: a software for comprehensive analysis of DNA polymorphism data. Bioinformatics 25:1451–1452. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp187
Liu D, Wang H, Park JS, Hur J-S (2017) The Genus Chlorociboria, Blue-Green Micromycetes in South Korea. Mycobiology 45:57–63. https://doi.org/10.5941/MYCO.2017.45.2.57
Liu YJ, Whelen S, Hall BD (1999) Phylogenetic relationships among ascomycetes: evidence from an RNA polymerse II subunit. Mol Biol Evol 16:1799–1808. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026092
Looney BP, Adamčík S, Matheny PB (2020) Coalescent-based delimitation and species-tree estimations reveal Appalachian origin and Neogene diversification in Russula subsection Roseinae. Mol Phylogenetics Evol 147:106787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2020.106787
Lu Y, Ran J-H, Guo D-M, et al (2014) Phylogeny and Divergence Times of Gymnosperms Inferred from Single-Copy Nuclear Genes. PLOS ONE 9:e107679. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107679
Lücking R, Aime MC, Robbertse B, et al (2020) Unambiguous identification of fungi: where do we stand and how accurate and precise is fungal DNA barcoding? IMA Fungus 11:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43008-020-00033-z
Lücking R, Dal-Forno M, Sikaroodi M, et al (2014) A single macrolichen constitutes hundreds of unrecognized species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:11091–11096. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1403517111
Lücking R, Moncada B, McCune B, et al (2017) Pseudocyphellaria crocata (Ascomycota: Lobariaceae) in the Americas is revealed to be thirteen species, and none of them is P. crocata. Bryologist 120:441. https://doi.org/10.1639/0007-2745-120.4.14
Lücking R, Nelsen MP (2018) Ediacarans, Protolichens, and Lichen-Derived Penicillium. In: Transformative Paleobotany. Elsevier, pp 551–590
Lumbsch HT, Huhndorf SM (2010) Myconet Volume 14. Part One. Outline of Ascomycota—2009. Part Two. Notes on Ascomycete Systematics. Nos. 4751–5113. Fieldiana Life Earth Sci 1:1–64. https://doi.org/10.3158/1557.1
Lumbsch HT, Schmitt I, Mangold A, Wedin M (2007) Ascus types are phylogenetically misleading in Trapeliaceae and Agyriaceae (Ostropomycetidae, Ascomycota). Mycol Res 111:1133–1141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mycres.2007.06.016
Lumley TC, Gignac LD, Currah RS (2001) Microfungus communities of white spruce and trembling aspen logs at different stages of decay in disturbed and undisturbed sites in the boreal mixedwood region of Alberta. Can J Bot 79:76–92. https://doi.org/10.1139/b00-135
Lutzoni F, Nowak MD, Alfaro ME, et al (2018) Contemporaneous radiations of fungi and plants linked to symbiosis. Nat Commun 9:5451. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07849-9
Magnusson AH (1935) Acarosporaceae und Thelocarpaceae. Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H., Leipzig
Malençon G (1979) Nouvelles Contributions a la Flore Mycologique du Maroc - II. Bull Trimest Soc Mycol Fr 95:119–137
Mao K, Milne RI, Zhang L, et al (2012) Distribution of living Cupressaceae reflects the breakup of Pangea. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:7793–7798. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1114319109
Marmolejo Monciváis JG (2018) Distribución vertical de hongos en hojas de tres especies de pinos en Nuevo León, México. Rev Mex Cienc For 9:379–399. https://doi.org/10.29298/rmcf.v9i50.253
Martinović T, Koukol O, Hirose D (2016) Distinct phylogeographic structure recognized within Desmazierella acicola. Mycologia 108:20–30. https://doi.org/10.3852/14-291
Mason-Gamer RJ, Kellogg EA (1996) Testing for Phylogenetic Conflict Among Molecular Data Sets in the Tribe Triticeae (Gramineae). Syst Biol 45:524–545. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/45.4.524
Massee G (1895) British fungus-flora: a classified text-book of mycology. George Bell & Sons, London
Masumoto H, Degawa Y (2019) The effect of surface sterilization and the type of sterilizer on the genus composition of lichen-inhabiting fungi with notes on some frequently isolated genera. Mycoscience 60:331–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.myc.2019.07.004
McClatchie AJ (1897) Seedless plants of southern California. Protophytes -- Pteridophytes. Proc South Calif Acad Sci 1:337–395
McMullin RT (2015) The Lichens of Prince Edward Island, Canada: A Second Checklist, with Species Ranked for Conservation Status. Rhodora 117:454–484. https://doi.org/10.3119/15-12
Metzler B (1997) Quantitative assessment of fungal colonization in Norway spruce after green pruning. Eur J For Pathol 27:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1997.tb00848.x
Miadlikowska J, Kauff F, Högnabba F, et al (2014) A multigene phylogenetic synthesis for the class Lecanoromycetes (Ascomycota): 1307 fungi representing 1139 infrageneric taxa, 317 genera and 66 families. Mol Phylogenetics Evol 79:132–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2014.04.003
Miller MA, Pfeiffer W, Schwartz T (2010) Creating the CIPRES Science Gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. In: 2010 Gateway Computing Environments Workshop (GCE). IEEE, New Orleans, LA, USA, pp 1–8
Mitchell JK, Quijada L (In Press) Proposal to conserve the name Cytospora resinae (Zythia resinae) with a conserved type (Ascomycota). Taxon In Press:
Morse CA, Lendemer JC (2019) A new Biatoridium from eastern North America, with comments on the disposition of species of Biatorella sensu Magnusson. Bryologist 122:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1639/0007-2745-122.1.001
Mudd W (1861) A manual of British lichens: containing descriptions of all the species and varieties, and five plates, with figures of the spores of one hundred and thirty species, illustrative of the genera. Harrison Penney, Darlington
Muñoz J, Felicísimo ÁM, Cabezas F, et al (2004) Wind as a Long-Distance Dispersal Vehicle in the Southern Hemisphere. Science 304:1144–1147. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1095210
Murata Y, Sano A, Kamei K, Nishimura K (2005) [The first isolation of Arthrographis kalrae (Tewari et Macpherson) Sigler et Carmichel 1976 from the oral cavity of a canine in Japan]. Nihon’ishinkingakkai sōkai puroguramu shōroku-shū 49:162. https://doi.org/10.11534/jsmm.49.0.162.0
Nannfeldt JA (1932) Studien über die morphologie und systematik der nicht-lichenisierten inoperculaten discomyceten. Nov Acta Reg Soc Sci Ups Ser IV 8:1–368
Nash TH, Gries C, Bungartz F (eds) (2008) Lichen flora of the greater Sonoran Desert region Volume III (Balance of the microlichens, and the lichenicolous fungi). Lichens Unlimited, Arizona State University, Tempe, Ariz
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2020a) Accession No. MN547391.1, Zythia pinastri isolate 31 small subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN547392.1. Accessed 13 May 2020
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2020b) Accession No. MN547392.1, Hormococcus conorum isolate 33 small subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN547392.1. Accessed 13 May 2020
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2020c) Accession No. MN547393.1, Hormococcus conorum isolate 34 small subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN547393.1. Accessed 13 May 2020
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2020d) Accession No. MN547394.1, Hormococcus conorum isolate 35 small subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN547394.1. Accessed 13 May 2020
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2020e) Accession No. MN547395.1, Hormococcus conorum isolate 36 small subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN547395.1. Accessed 13 May 2020
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2020f) Accession No. MN547396.1, Hormococcus conorum isolate 37 small subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN547396.1. Accessed 13 May 2020
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2020g) Accession No. MN547397.1, Hormococcus conorum isolate 38 small subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN547397.1. Accessed 13 May 2020
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2018a) Accession No. MH425275.1, Sarea resinae voucher Hao & Guo & Han 150105 small subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MH425275.1. Accessed 20 Sep 2019
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2018b) Accession No. MH425297.1, Sarea resinae voucher Hao & Guo & Han 160704a small subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MH425297.1. Accessed 20 Sep 2019
NCBI, NLM, Bethesda (MD) (2013) Accession No. KF993412.1, Hormococcus conorum isolate PAV-M 1.092 18S ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence; internal transcribed spacer 1, 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene, and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and 28S ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence. In: Nucleotide [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KF993412.1. Accessed 20 Sep 2019
Nilsson RH, Kristiansson E, Ryberg M, et al (2008) Intraspecific ITS Variability in the Kingdom Fungi as Expressed in the International Sequence Databases and Its Implications for Molecular Species Identification. Evol Bioinform 4:EBO.S653. https://doi.org/10.4137/EBO.S653
Nilsson RH, Larsson K-H, Taylor AFS, et al (2019) The UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi: handling dark taxa and parallel taxonomic classifications. Nucleic Acids Res 47:D259–D264. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky1022
Novas MV, Carmarán CC (2008) Studies on diversity of foliar fungal endophytes of naturalised trees from Argentina, with a description of Haplotrichum minutissimum sp. nov. Flora Morphol Distrib Funct Ecol Plants 203:610–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flora.2007.09.010
Nylander W (1857a) Prodromus Lichenographiæ Galliæ et Algeriæ. Actes Soc Linn Bordx 21:249–467
Nylander W (1857b) Die Flechten Europas, von Philipp Hepp. Fascic. V-VIII. Flora 40:538–543
Nylander W (1866) Prodromi Lichenographiae Scandinaviae Supplementum. Lichenes Lapponiae Orientalis. ex typis Simelii haeredum, Helsingforsiae
Ohlert A (1870) Zusammenstellung der Lichenen der Provinz Preussen. E. J. Dalkowski, Königsberg
Oses R, Valenzuela S, Freer J, et al (2008) Fungal endophytes in xylem of healthy Chilean trees and their possible role in early wood decay. Fungal Divers 33:77–86
Otte V, Rätzel S, Sipman HJM, Kummer V (2000) Bemerkenswerte Flechtenfunde aus Brandenburg V. Verh Bot Ver Berl Brandenbg 133:461–481
Paradis E, Claude J, Strimmer K (2004) APE: Analyses of Phylogenetics and Evolution in R language. Bioinformatics 20:289–290. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btg412
Pärtel K, Baral H-O, Tamm H, Põldmaa K (2017) Evidence for the polyphyly of Encoelia and Encoelioideae with reconsideration of respective families in Leotiomycetes. Fungal Divers 82:183–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-016-0370-0
Pérez-Ortega S, Garrido-Benavent I, Grube M, et al (2016) Hidden diversity of marine borderline lichens and a new order of fungi: Collemopsidiales (Dothideomyceta). Fungal Divers 80:285–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-016-0361-1
Peršoh D (2013) Factors shaping community structure of endophytic fungi–evidence from the Pinus-Viscum-system. Fungal Divers 60:55–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-013-0225-x
Peršoh D, Rambold G (2012) Lichen-associated fungi of the Letharietum vulpinae. Mycol Prog 11:753–760. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11557-011-0786-6
Persoon CH (1801) Synopsis methodica fungorum: sistens enumerationem omnium huc usque detectarum specierum, cum brevibus descriptionibus nec non synonymis et observationibus selectis. Apud Henricvm Dieterich, Gottingae
Petrini O, Carroll G (1981) Endophytic fungi in foliage of some Cupressaceae in Oregon. Can J Bot 59:629–636. https://doi.org/10.1139/b81-089
Petrini O, Fisher PJ (1988) A comparative study of fungal endophytes in xylem and whole stem of Pinus sylvestris and Fagus sylvatica. Trans Br Mycol Soc 91:233–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1536(88)80210-9
Poelt J, Vězda A (1977) Biatorella de Not. In: Bestimmungsschlüssel europäischer Flechten: Ergänzungsheft I. J. Cramer, Vaduz, pp 23–27
Pringle A, Baker DM, Platt JL, et al (2005) Cryptic Speciation in the Cosmopolitan and Clonal Human Pathogenic Fungus Aspergillus fumigatus. Evolution 59:1886–1899. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2005.tb01059.x
Prior C (1976) Resistance by Corsican Pine to Attack by Heterobasidion annosum. Ann Bot (Oxford) 40:261–279. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a085128
Puillandre N, Lambert A, Brouillet S, Achaz G (2012) ABGD, Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery for primary species delimitation: ABGD, AUTOMATIC BARCODE GAP DISCOVERY. Mol Ecol 21:1864–1877. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05239.x
Purahong W, Pietsch KA, Lentendu G, et al (2017) Characterization of Unexplored Deadwood Mycobiome in Highly Diverse Subtropical Forests Using Culture-independent Molecular Technique. Front Microbiol 8:574. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00574
Quijada L, Baral H-O, Beltrán-Tejera E (2016) A revision of the genus Orbilia in the Canary Islands. Phytotaxa 284:231. https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.284.4.1
Ramsbottom J (1913) A list of the British species of Discomycetes arranged according to Boudier’s system, with a key to the genera. Trans Br Mycol Soc 4:343–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1536(12)80038-6
Reeb V, Lutzoni F, Roux C (2004) Contribution of RPB2 to multilocus phylogenetic studies of the euascomycetes (Pezizomycotina, Fungi) with special emphasis on the lichen-forming Acarosporaceae and evolution of polyspory. Mol Phylogenetics Evol 32:1036–1060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2004.04.012
Rehm H (1889a) Lieferung 32: Patellariaceae-Eupatellarieae. In: Die Pilze Deutschlands, Oesterreichs und der Schweiz. III. Abtheilung: Ascomyceten: Hysteriaceen und Discomyceten, 2nd edn. Eduard Kummer, Leipzig, pp 291–336
Rehm H (1889b) Lieferung 31: Dermateae. In: Die Pilze Deutschlands, Oesterreichs und der Schweiz. III. Abtheilung: Ascomyceten: Hysteriaceen und Discomyceten, 2nd edn. Eduard Kummer, Leipzig, pp 241–272
Rehner SA, Samuels GJ (1994) Taxonomy and phylogeny of Gliocladium analysed from nuclear large subunit ribosomal DNA sequences. Mycol Res 98:625–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0953-7562(09)80409-7
Rishbeth J (1972) Resistance to fungal pathogens of tree roots. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 181:333–351. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1972.0054
Ronquist F, Teslenko M, van der Mark P, et al (2012) MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference and Model Choice Across a Large Model Space. Syst Biol 61:539–542. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/sys029
Rudinsky JA (1966) Host Selection and Invasion by the Douglas-fir Beetle, Dendroctonus pseudotsugae Hopkins, in Coastal Douglas-fir Forests. Can Entomol 98:98–111. https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent9898-1
Saar I (2018) UNITE sequence: ATCC52699|UDB035129. In: UNITE Community. unite.ut.ee/bl_forw.php?id=853415. Accessed 4 Oct 2019
Saccardo PA (1889) Sylloge Discomycetum et Phymatosphaeriacearum. In: Saccardo PA (ed) Sylloge Fungorum Omnium Hucusque Cognitorum. Typis Seminarii, Patavii, pp 1–859
Saladin B, Leslie AB, Wüest RO, et al (2017) Fossils matter: improved estimates of divergence times in Pinus reveal older diversification. BMC Evol Biol 17:95. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-017-0941-z
Samarakoon MC, Hyde KD, Hongsanan S, et al (2019) Divergence time calibrations for ancient lineages of Ascomycota classification based on a modern review of estimations. Fungal Divers 96:285–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-019-00423-8
Sánchez Márquez S, Bills GF, Zabalgogeazcoa I (2008) Diversity and structure of the fungal endophytic assemblages from two sympatric coastal grasses. Fungal Divers 33:87–100
Sánchez-Ramírez S, Wilson AW, Ryberg M (2017) Overview of Phylogenetic Approaches to Mycorrhizal Biogeography, Diversity and Evolution. In: Tedersoo L (ed) Biogeography of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 1–37
Sanz-Ros AV, Müller MM, San Martín R, Diez JJ (2015) Fungal endophytic communities on twigs of fast and slow growing Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in northern Spain. Fungal Biol 119:870–883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funbio.2015.06.008
Sayre G (1969) Cryptogamae exsiccatae: an annotated bibliography of published exsiccatae of algae, lichenes, hepaticae, and musci. New York Botanical Garden, New York
Schultheis B, Tholl M-T, Baral H-O, Marson G (2001) Journées luxembourgeoises de mycologie vernale 2000. Bull Soc Nat Luxemb 102:23–43
Scotese C (2016) A new global temperature curve for the Phanerozoic. In: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. pp 74–31
Seifert KA, Carpenter SE (1987) Bisporella resinicola comb. nov. and its Eustilbum anamorph. Can J Bot 65:1262–1267. https://doi.org/10.1139/b87-176
Seifert KA, Hughes SJ, Boulay H, Louis-Seize G (2007) Taxonomy, nomenclature and phylogeny of three Cladosporium-like hyphomycetes, Sorocybe resinae, Seifertia azaleae and the Hormoconis anamorph of Amorphotheca resinae. Stud Mycol 58:235–245. https://doi.org/10.3114/sim.2007.58.09
Selva SB, Tuovila H (2016) Two new resinicolous mycocalicioid fungi from the Acadian Forest: One new to science, the other new to North America. Bryologist 119:417–422. https://doi.org/10.1639/0007-2745-119.4.417
Shain L (1971) The Response of Sapwood of Norway Spruce to Infection by Fomes annosus. Phytopathology 61:301–307. https://doi.org/10.1094/Phyto-61-301
Shchedrova VI (1964) Vozbuditel’ YAzvennogo Raka Sosny Obyknovennoy. Botanicheskiy Zhurnal 49:1314–1317
Shchedrova VI (1965) YAzvennyy Rak—Bolezn’ Sosnovogo Podrosta Predvaritel’nogo Vozobnovleniya. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedeniy: Lesnoy Zhurnal 3:40–45
Sieber TN (2007) Endophytic fungi in forest trees: are they mutualists? Fungal Biol Rev 21:75–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbr.2007.05.004
Sigler L, Carmichael JW (1983) Redisposition of some fungi referred to Oidium microspermum and a review of Arthrographis. Mycotaxon 18:495–507
Skrede I, Carlsen T, Schumacher T (2017) A synopsis of the saddle fungi (Helvella: Ascomycota) in Europe – species delimitation, taxonomy and typification. Persoonia 39:201–253. https://doi.org/10.3767/persoonia.2017.39.09
Smerlis E (1973) Pathogenicity Tests of Some Discomycetes Occurring on Conifers. Can J For Res 3:7–16. https://doi.org/10.1139/x73-002
Smith AL (1926) A Monograph of the British Lichens. A descriptive Catalogue of the Species in the Department of Botany, British Museum, 2nd edn. The Trustees of the British Museum, London
Smith RH (1961) Techniques for Determining the Toxicity of Pine Resin Vapors to Dendroctonus brevicomis and D. jeffreyi. J Econ Entomol 54:359–365. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/54.2.359
Smith SY, Stockey RA, Rothwell GW, Little SA (2017) A new species of Pityostrobus (Pinaceae) from the Cretaceous of California: moving towards understanding the Cretaceous radiation of Pinaceae. J Syst Palaeontol 15:69–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/14772019.2016.1143885
Spier L, Aptroot A (2000) Twee soorten harsbekertjes in Nederland. Coolia 44:115–116
Stadler M, Læssøe T, Fournier J, et al (2014) A polyphasic taxonomy of Daldinia (Xylariaceae). Stud Mycol 77:1–143. https://doi.org/10.3114/sim0016
Stamatakis A (2006) RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics 22:2688–2690. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btl446
Stamatakis A, Hoover P, Rougemont J (2008) A Rapid Bootstrap Algorithm for the RAxML Web Servers. Syst Biol 57:758–771. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150802429642
Stein B (1879) Flechten. J. U. Kern’s Verlag, Breslau
Sūn B, Jiě H, Wáng J, et al (1983) Hóng sōng liú zhī bìng de chūbù yánjiū. Sēnlín bìng chóng tōngxùn 1983:4–6
Suto Y (1987) Hinoki no rōshi-shō,`jushi dōgarebyō’ o nozoku rōshi-shō no hassei seitai to gen’in kyūmei. For Pests 36:117–122
Suto Y (1992) Inoculation tests with Cryptosporiopsis abietina and Sarea resinae to Chamaecyparis obtusa and Cryptomeria japonica. Nihon ringakkai taikai happyō ronbun-shū 103:559–560
Suto Y (1997) Etiology of the Resinous Stem Canker of Chamaecyparis obtusa: Cistella japonica as the Causal Agent. J For Res 2:59–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02348264
Suto Y (1998) Traumatic Resin-Canal Formation Caused by Inoculation with Cistella japonica in Secondary Phloem of Chamaecyparis obtusa. J For Res 3:99–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02760309
Suto Y, Kanamori H (1990) Studies of Damage and Causal Agent of Resinous Stem Canker of Chamaecyparis obtusa in Shimane Prefecture, Japan. Shimane Hayashi Giken-hō 41:31–50
Suto Y, Ougi D (1999) Symptom Development of the Resinous Stem Canker Caused by Inoculation with Cistella japonica onto Chamaecyparis obtusa. J For Res 4:177–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02762244
Takamatsu S (2013) Origin and evolution of the powdery mildews (Ascomycota, Erysiphales). Mycoscience 54:75–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.myc.2012.08.004
Takamatsu S, Matsuda S (2004) Estimation of molecular clocks for ITS and 28S rDNA in Erysiphales. Mycoscience 45:340–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10267-004-0187-7
Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, et al (2011) MEGA5: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Using Maximum Likelihood, Evolutionary Distance, and Maximum Parsimony Methods. Mol Biol Evol 28:2731–2739. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msr121
Tanney JB, Seifert KA (2019) Tryblidiopsis magnesii sp. nov. from Picea glauca in Eastern Canada. Fungal Syst Evol 4:13–20. https://doi.org/10.3114/fuse.2019.04.02
Tappert R, Wolfe AP, McKellar RC, et al (2011) Characterizing Modern and Fossil Gymnosperm Exudates Using Micro-Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy. Int J Plant Sci 172:120–138. https://doi.org/10.1086/657277
Tarasova V, Androsova V, Sonina A, Ahti T (2015) The lichens from the City of Petrozavodsk in the Herbarium of the Botanical Museum, University of Helsinki. Folia Cryptogam Estonica 52:41–50. https://doi.org/10.12697/fce.2015.52.06
Tucker SC, Jordan WP (1979) A Catalog of California Lichens. Wasmann J Biol 36:1–105
Tuckerman E (1872) Genera lichenum: an arrangement of the North American lichens. Edwin Nelson, Amherst [Mass.]
Tulasne L-R, Tulasne C (1861) Selecta Fungorum Carpologia, ea Documenta et Icones Potissimum Exhibens Quae Varia Fructuum et Seminum Genera in Eodem Fungo Simul aut Vicissim Adesse Demonstrent. Imperatoris Jussu, In Imperiali Typographeo Excudebatur, Parisiis
Turland N, Wiersema J, Barrie F, et al (eds) (2018) International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants. Koeltz Botanical Books, Glashütten
U’Ren JM, Arnold AE (2016) Diversity, taxonomic composition, and functional aspects of fungal communities in living, senesced, and fallen leaves at five sites across North America. PeerJ 4:e2768. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2768
Vainio EA (1883) Adjumenta ad Lichenographiam Lapponiae fennicae atque Fenniae borealis. II. Medd Soc Fauna Flora Fenn 10:1–230
Väisälä L (1974) Effects of terpene compounds on the growth of wood-decomposing fungi. Ann Bot Fenn 11:275–278
van Buijtenen JP, Santamour FS (1972) Resin Crystallization Related to Weevil Resistance in White Pine (Pinus strobus). Can Entomol 104:215–219. https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent104215-2
Verrall AF (1938) The Probable Mechanism of the Protective Action of Resin in Fire Wounds on Red Pine. J For 36:1231–1233
Viana DS, Gangoso L, Bouten W, Figuerola J (2016) Overseas seed dispersal by migratory birds. Proc R Soc B 283:20152406. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.2406
Vilgalys R, Hester M (1990) Rapid genetic identification and mapping of enzymatically amplified ribosomal DNA from several Cryptococcus species. J Bacteriol 172:4238–4246. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.172.8.4238-4246.1990
von Keißler K (1909) Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Pilzflora Dalmatiens. Osterr Bot Z 59:275–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01793179
von Krempelhuber A (1861) Die Lichenen-Flora Bayerns; oder Auzählung der bisher in Bayern (diesseits des Rheins) aufgefundenen Lichenen mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der verticalen Verbreitung dieser Gewächse in den Alpen. Denkschr Königl-Bayer Bot Ges Regensbg 4:1–317
von Thümen F (1880) Symbolae ad Floram Mycologicam Austriacam IV. Osterr Bot Z 30:311–314
Vu D, Groenewald M, de Vries M, et al (2019) Large-scale generation and analysis of filamentous fungal DNA barcodes boosts coverage for kingdom fungi and reveals thresholds for fungal species and higher taxon delimitation. Stud Mycol 92:135–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simyco.2018.05.001
Wang C-JK, Zabel RA (eds) (1990) Identification manual for fungi from utility poles in the eastern United States. American Type Culture Collection, Rockville, MD
Wedin M, Döring H, Gilenstam G (2004) Saprotrophy and lichenization as options for the same fungal species on different substrata: environmental plasticity and fungal lifestyles in the Stictis-Conotrema complex. New Phytol 164:459–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01198.x
Wedin M, Döring H, Gilenstam G (2006) Stictis s. lat. (Ostropales, Ascomycota) in northern Scandinavia, with a key and notes on morphological variation in relation to lifestyle. Mycol Res 110:773–789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mycres.2006.04.010
White TJ, Bruns TD, Lee S, Taylor JW (1990) 38 - Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for Phylogenetics. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ (eds) PCR Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications. Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, pp 315–322
Whitney RD, Denyer WBG (1969) Resin as a Barrier to Infection of White Spruce by Heartrotting Fungi. For Sci 15:266–267
Wilkinson DM, Koumoutsaris S, Mitchell EAD, Bey I (2012) Modelling the effect of size on the aerial dispersal of microorganisms: Modelling the aerial dispersal of microorganisms. J Biogeogr 39:89–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02569.x
Willey H (1888) Appendix. In: A synopsis of the North American lichens: Part II., Comprising the Lecideacei, and (in part) the Graphidacei. S. E. Cassino, Boston, pp 129–162
Wirth V (1995) Die Flechten Baden-Württembergs, 2nd edn. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart
Xiang C-T, Song R-Q (1988) Research on Tympanis in North-Eastern China. Bull Bot Res 8:147–152
Xiang C-T, Song Y-S, Jiang J-Q, et al (1985) Study on Bleeding Canker of Korean Pine. J North-East For Univ 13:28-42+138-139
Xie W, Lewis PO, Fan Y, et al (2011) Improving Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Bayesian Phylogenetic Model Selection. Syst Biol 60:150–160. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syq085
Yamada T (2001) Defense Mechanisms in the Sapwood of Living Trees against Microbial Infection. J For Res 6:127–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02767083
Yamamoto H, Asano N, Sawano C, et al (1997) Diterpenes isolated from the resin of the resinous stem canker of Japanese cypress, Chamaecyparis obtusa. Mokuzai Gakkaishi 43:558–565
Yang JH, Kim W, Hur J-S (2020) A-32: Remarkable difference in alpha diversity of isolated fungi on a medium containing lichen host substance. Kor Soc Mycol Newsl 32:98
Yatsyna AP (2017) Lichens and Closely Related Fungi of the Reserve “Krasny Bor.” Viesnik Viciebskaha Dziaržaŭnaha Ŭniviersiteta 2017:81–89
Yokozawa Y, Kaneko S, Kubono T (1989) Hinoki rōshi-shō kanbu kara no bunri kin ni yoru sesshu shiken (2) sesshu-go 5-nen-me made no keika. Nihon ringakkai Tōhoku shibu kaishi 41:199–201
Yokozawa Y, Kaneko S, Zinno Y (1986) Hinoki rōshi-shō kanbu kara no bunri kin ni yoru sesshu shiken (I) sesshu-go 2-nen-me made no keika. Nihon ringakkai Tōhoku shibu kaishi 38:207–208
Zhong Z, Pfister DH (2004) Phylogenetic relationships among species of Leotia (Leotiales) based on ITS and RPB2 sequences. Mycol Prog 3:237–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11557-006-0094-8
Zoller S, Scheidegger C, Sperisen C (1999) PCR Primers for the Amplification of Mitochondrial Small Subunit Ribosomal DNA of Lichen-forming Ascomycetes. Lichenologist 31:511–516. https://doi.org/10.1006/lich.1999.0220

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 16 Mar, 2021

Read the published version in IMA Fungus →

Editorial decision: Major revision
25 Nov, 2020
Review #1 received at journal
24 Nov, 2020
Review #2 received at journal
23 Nov, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed at journal
31 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed at journal
31 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited by journal
25 Sep, 2020
First submitted to journal
22 Sep, 2020
Editor assigned by journal
22 Sep, 2020
Submission checks completed at journal
21 Sep, 2020
Editor invited by journal
21 Sep, 2020

You are reading this latest preprint version

Sareomycetes: More Diversity than Meets the Eye

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Materials And Methods

Specimens Examined and Microscopic Examination

Culturing

DNA Extraction, PCR, and Sequencing

Assembling Published Sareomycetes Sequences

Sequence Alignments

Phylogenetic Tree Inference

Species Discovery-Validation Approach

Polymorphism Statistics, Haplotype Networks, and Neutrality Tests

Estimating the Age of the Crown Node of Sareomycetes

Inferring a Time Frame for The Diversification of Sareomycetes

Results

Molecular Sequence Data

Phylogenetic Reconstructions

Species Delimitation

Genetic Polymorphism, Neutrality Tests and Phylogeographic Structure

Age Estimates for the Crown Nodes of Sareomycetes and Main Lineages Within

Taxonomy

Excluded Species and Misapplications:

Discussion

Species Diversity

Biogeography and Host Specificity

Mixed Collections

Morphological Observations

Color Changes in Sections

Ascus Dehiscence

Ecology

Sareomycetes as Endosymbionts of Photosynthetic Organisms

The Ecology of Atrozythia Species

Taxonomic Placement

Conclusion

Declarations

References

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1