@ARTICLE{TreeBASE2Ref16236, author = {Thomas L?ss?e and Karen Hansen}, title = {Truffle trouble ?? what happened to the Tuberales?}, year = {2007}, keywords = {}, doi = {}, url = {}, pmid = {}, journal = {Mycological Research}, volume = {}, number = {}, pages = {}, abstract = {An overview of truffles now considered to belong in the Pezizales, but formerly treated in the Tuberales, is presented, including a discussion on morphological and biological traits characterizing this form group. Accepted genera are listed and discussed according to a system based on molecular results combined with morphological characters. Phylogenetic analyses of LSU rDNA sequences from 55 hypogeous and 139 epigeous taxa of Pezizales were performed to examine their relationships. Parsimony, maximum likelihood and Bayesian analyses of these sequences indicate that the truffles studied represent at least 15 independent lineages within the Pezizales. Sequences from hypogeous representatives referred to the following families and genera were analyzed: Discinaceae-Morchellaceae (Fischerula, Hydnotrya, Leucangium), Helvellaceae (Balsamia and Barssia), Pezizaceae (Amylascus, Cazia, Eremiomyces, Hydnotryopsis, Kaliharituber, Mattirolomyces, Pachyphloeus, Peziza, Ruhlandiella, Stephensia, Terfezia and Tirmania), Pyronemataceae (Genea, Geopora, Paurocotylis and Stephensia) and Tuberaceae (Choiromyces, Dingleya, Labyrinthomyces, Reddellomyces and Tuber). The different types of hypogeous ascomata were found within most major evolutinary lines often nesting close to apothecial species. Although the Pezizaceae traditionally have been defined mainly on the presence of amyloid reactions of the ascus wall several truffles appear to have lost this character. The value of the number of nuclei in mature ascospores as a delimiting family character is evaluated and found to be more variable than generally assumed.} }

• Go to search
• Citation
• Taxa
• Matrices
• Trees
• Analyses
• 

CiteULike

Delicious

Connotea