Agaricineae. This
happens when we can't automatically assign an identification to one of the
output taxa.
Review identifications of Agaricaceae 47394
Taxonomic Split 87855
(Committed on 01-17-2021)
|
|
split into |
|
Comments
It's all a matter of choice. One family with five well delimited subclades, or five families all closely related. We have been maintaining Lycoperdaceae as separate anyway.
Well, that's the thing; it is not really a matter of choice. As you can see in Varga et al (2019) and Sánchez-García et al (2020), if you apply these splits you are creating polyphyletic groupings. However, maintaining it as Agaricaceae, keeps it as a monophyletic group, which is preferred.
Varga, T., Krizsán, K., Földi, C., Dima, B., Sánchez-García, M., Sánchez-Ramírez, S., et al. (2019). Megaphylogeny resolves global patterns of mushroom evolution. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 3(4), 668–678. http://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0834-1
Sánchez-García, M., Ryberg, M., Khan, F. K., Varga, T., Nagy, L. G., & Hibbett, D. S. (2020). Fruiting body form, not nutritional mode, is the major driver of diversification in mushroom-forming fungi. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 3, 201922539–7. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1922539117
In the first reference, the tree is not clear enough to make much out other than that they accept Agaricaceae and Lycoperdaceae. Looking at the second reference, the five families are definitely monophyletic. The only possible issue is Micropsalliota, though it doesn't look like the type species was included. That lineage might be another family, but it isn't clear what would go in it. You can also note that the two papers seem to contradict each other; the first recognizes Lycoperdaceae as a separate family, which the second seems to indicate makes Agaricaceae s. str. polyphyletic (without exclusion of the Micropsalliota clade).
Why has this split been made? Is there any scientific basis? As far as I am aware the latest literature all direct to keep this all together.