Taxonomic Swap 65756
(Guardado el 09/12/2019)
|
|
Reemplazado con |
|
Comentarios
Not my group, but the multi-gene phylogenetic data raises questions in my opinion. The type species comes out basal to the bulk of Trametes (and sister in some analyses), but so does Lenzites betulina. So, if people accept Lenzites as distinct then I'd say Pycnoporus is also worthy of separate recognition and should not be considered a synonym of Trametes. But - this needs a polypore mycologist to state the current consensus view among peers. Currently here in NZ (and Au) in our national checklists we have not combined them.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.funbio.2017.05.010 seems also to accept these (and Lenzites) in Trametes. Leif Ryvarden and Otto Miettinen are authors on that one, and from what I know are both pretty well respected. Ivan Zmitrovich (I don't know about his reputation, but he has published widely on polypores) is a coauthor on the recent Outline of Basidiomycota that also includes Pycnoporus and Lenzites in Trametes.
OK - there are a lot of well respected polypore experts on that paper, so go with it.
From an argument I've seen on a polypore Facebook page overseas it was either recombine Pycnoporus into Trametes or do further splits. iNat has already combined Lenzites into Trametes and Ganadermataceae into Polyporaceae.
@cooperj what are your thoughts about this?