San Juan Chapter F (2019)

CHAPTER F

NAMES OF ORGANISMS TREATED AS FUNGI

(SAN JUAN VERSION)

This Chapter brings together the provisions of this Code that deal solely
with names of organisms treated as fungi.

Content in this Chapter may be modified by action of the Fungal Nomen-
clature Session of an International Mycological Congress (IMC) (see Div.
III Prov. 8). The current version of this Chapter, the San Juan Chapter F,
embodies the decisions accepted by the 11th IMC in San Juan (Puerto
Rico) on 21 July 2018.

Always consult the online version of this Code (http://www.iapt-taxon.
org/nomen/main.php) in case of changes resulting from subsequent IMCs.
The next IMC will be held in Amsterdam (The Netherlands) in 2022.

The following changes were introduced in the San Juan Chapter F:

Art. F.3.7. The Article was reworded to improve clarity, and two Exam-
ples were added.

Art. F.3.9. Two Examples were added.

Rec. F.3A. The option of using a colon to indicate sanctioning was remo-
ved. If it is desired to indicate sanctioning, it is recommended that
this be done by using the abbreviation “nom. sanct.”

Art. F.5. Several new provisions were added concerning aspects of the
       registration of names and nomenclatural acts. Art. F.5.6 allows cor-
       rectability of incorrectly cited identifiers; Art. F.5.7 specifies that, in
       order for a designation that may be associated with an existing iden-

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 1 –

__________________________________________________________________

       tifier to become a validly published name, a new identifier must be
       obtained; and Art. F.5.8 extends correctability to identifiers issued for
       type designations. Rec. F.5A.1 was enlarged to encourage authors of
       names to provide electronic versions of their publications to recogni-
       zed repositories. A footnote was added to Art. F.5.2 noting the prac-
       tice of assigning new identifiers to names with corrected orthography.
       Note that because Art. F.5.6 is not date-limited, it is retroactive (Prin-
       ciple VI), and consequently validations of names associated with in-
       correctly cited identifiers are later isonyms and may be disregarded
       (Art. 6 Note 2).

Art. F.10. A new Article was added concerning the use of identifiers in
place of author citations.

Mycologists should note that the content of this Code outside of Chapter
F pertains to all organisms covered by this Code, including fungi, unless
expressly limited. This content includes rules about effective publication,
valid publication, typification, legitimacy, and priority of names; citation
and orthography; and names of hybrids.

Some provisions in the Preamble, Principles, Articles, and Recommenda-
tions elsewhere in this Code, such as those listed below, while not restricted
to fungi, are of particular relevance to mycologists. The full wording of
these and all other relevant provisions of this Code should be consulted
in all cases.

Pre. 8. The provisions of this Code apply to all organisms traditionally
treated as fungi, whether fossil or non-fossil, including chytrids, oomy-
cetes, and slime moulds (but excluding Microsporidia).

Principle I. This Code applies to names of taxonomic groups treated as
fungi, whether or not these groups were originally so treated.

Art. 4 Note 4. In classifying parasites, especially fungi, authors may distin-
       guish within the species special forms (formae speciales) characterized
       by their adaptation to different hosts, but the nomenclature of special
       forms is not governed by the provisions of this Code.

Art. 8.4 (see also Art. 8 Ex. 12, Rec. 8B, Art. 40 Note 3, and Art. 40.8).
       Cultures of fungi are acceptable as types if preserved in a metaboli-
       cally inactive state, and on or after 1 January 2019 this must be stated
       in the protologue.

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 2 –

__________________________________________________________________

Art. 14.15 and Art. 14 Note 4(c)(2). Before 1 January 1954, decisions on
       conservation of names made by the Special Committee for Fungi,
       became effective on 20 July 1950 at the VII International Botanical
       Congress in Stockholm.

Art. 16.3. Automatically typified suprafamilial names of fungi end as fol-
       lows: division or phylum in -mycota, subdivision or subphylum in
       -mycotina, class in -mycetes, and subclass in -mycetidae. Automatically
       typified names not in accordance with these terminations are to be
       corrected.

Rec. 38E.1. The hosts should be indicated in descriptions or diagnoses of
new taxa of parasitic organisms, especially fungi.

Art. 40.5. The type of a name of a new species or infraspecific taxon of non-
       fossil microfungi may be an effectively published illustration if there
       are technical difficulties of specimen preservation or if it is impossible
       to preserve a specimen that would show the features attributed to the
       taxon by the author of the name (but see Art. 40 Ex. 6, which treats
       representations of DNA sequences as falling outside of the definition
       of illustrations in Art. 6.1 footnote).

Art. 41.8(b) (see also Art. 41 Ex. 26). Failure to cite the place of valid pub-
lication of a basionym or replaced synonym, when explained by the
backward shift of the starting date for some fungi, is a correctable error.

Art. 45.1 (see also Art. 45 Ex. 6 and 7 and Note 1). If a taxon originally
       assigned to a group not covered by this Code is treated as belonging to
       the algae or fungi, any of its names need satisfy only the requirements
       of the relevant other Code that the author was using for status equiva-
       lent to valid publication under this Code. Note especially that names of
       Microsporidia are not covered by this Code even when Microsporidia
       are considered as fungi.

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 3 –

__________________________________________________________________

SECTION 1

LIMITATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PRIORITY

ARTICLE F.1

NOMENCLATURAL STARTING-POINT

F.1.1. Valid publication of names for non-fossil fungi (Pre. 8) is treated
as beginning at 1 May 1753 (Linnaeus, Species plantarum, ed. 1, treated
as having been published on that date; see Art. 13.1). For nomenclatural
purposes, names given to lichens apply to their fungal component. Names
of Microsporidia are governed by the International Code of Zoological
Nomenclature (see Pre. 8).

Note 1. For fossil fungi, see Art. 13.1(f).

ARTICLE F.2

PROTECTED NAMES

F.2.1. In the interest of nomenclatural stability, for organisms treated as
fungi, lists of names proposed for protection may be submitted to the Gen-
eral Committee, which will refer them to the Nomenclature Committee
for Fungi (see Div. III Prov. 2.2, 7.9, and 7.10) for examination by subcom-
mittees established by that Committee in consultation with the General
Committee and appropriate international bodies. Protected names on these
lists, which become part of the Appendices of the Code (see App. IIA,
III, and IV) once reviewed and approved by the Nomenclature Commit-
tee for Fungi and the General Committee (see Art. 14.15 and Rec. 14A.1),
are to be listed with their types and are treated as conserved against any
competing listed or unlisted synonyms or homonyms (including sanctioned
names), although conservation under Art. 14 overrides this protection. The
lists of protected names remain open for revision through the procedures
described in this Article (see also Art. F.7.1).

ARTICLE F.3

SANCTIONED NAMES

F.3.1. Names in Uredinales, Ustilaginales, and Gasteromycetes (s. l.)
adopted by Persoon (Synopsis methodica fungorum, 1801) and names
of other fungi (excluding slime moulds) adopted by Fries (Systema

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 4 –

__________________________________________________________________

mycologicum, vol. 1–3. 1821–1832, with additional Index, 1832; and Elen-
chus fungorum, vol. 1–2. 1828), are sanctioned.

F.3.2. Names sanctioned are treated as if conserved against earlier homo-
nyms and competing synonyms. Such names, once sanctioned, remain
sanctioned even if elsewhere in the sanctioning works the sanctioning
author does not recognize them. The spelling used when the name was
sanctioned is treated as conserved, except for changes mandated by Art.
60 and F.9.

Ex. 1. The name Strigula smaragdula Fr. (in Linnaea 5: 550. 1830) was accepted by
Fries (Syst. Mycol., Index: 184. 1832) and therefore sanctioned. It is treated as if
conserved against the competing earlier synonym Phyllochoris elegans Fée (Essai
Crypt. Ecorc: xciv. 1825), which is the basionym of Strigula elegans (Fée) Müll. Arg.
(in Linnaea 43: 41. 1880).

Ex. 2. Agaricus ericetorum Pers. (Observ. Mycol. 1: 50. 1796) was accepted by Fries
(Syst. Mycol. 1: 165. 1821), but later (Elench. Fung. 1: 22. 1828) regarded by him as
a synonym of A. umbelliferus L. (Sp. Pl.: 1175. 1753) and not included in his Index
(p. 18. 1832) as an accepted name. Nevertheless A. ericetorum Pers. is a sanctioned
name.

Ex. 3. The spelling used when the name Merulius lacrimans (Wulfen) Schumach.
was sanctioned (Fries, Syst. Mycol. 1: 328. 1821) is to be maintained, even though
the epithet was spelled ‘lacrymans’ by Schumacher (Enum. Pl. 2: 371. 1803) and the
basionym was originally published as Boletus ‘lacrymans’ Wulfen (in Jacquin, Misc.
Austriac. 2: 111. 1781).

F.3.3. A sanctioned name is illegitimate if it is a later homonym of another
sanctioned name (see also Art. 53).

F.3.4. An earlier homonym of a sanctioned name is not made illegitimate
by that sanctioning but is unavailable for use; if not otherwise illegitimate,
it may serve as a basionym of another name or combination based on the
same type (see also Art. 55.3).

Ex. 4. Patellaria Hoffm. (Descr. Pl. Cl. Crypt. 1: 33, 54, 55. 1789) is an earlier homonym
of the sanctioned generic name Patellaria Fr. (Syst. Mycol. 2: 158. 1822). Hoffmann’s
name is legitimate but unavailable for use. Lecanidion Endl. (Fl. Poson.: 46. 1830), based
on the same type as Patellaria Fr., nom. sanct., is illegitimate under Art. 52.1.

Ex. 5. Antennaria Gaertn. (Fruct. Sem. Pl. 2: 410. 1791), in order to become available
for use, required conservation against the later homonym Antennaria Link (in Neues J.
Bot. 3(1,2): 16. 1809), nom. sanct. (Fries, Syst. Mycol. 1: xlvii. 1821).

Ex. 6. Agaricus cervinus Schaeff. (Fung. Bavar. Palat. Nasc. 4: 6. 1774) is an ear-
lier homonym of the sanctioned name A. cervinus Hoffm. (Nomencl. Fung. 1: t. 2,
fig. 2. 1789), nom. sanct. (Fries, Syst. Mycol. 1: 82. 1821); Schaeffer’s name is un-

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 5 –

__________________________________________________________________

available for use, but it is legitimate and may serve as basionym for combinations in
other genera. In Pluteus Fr. the combination is cited as P. cervinus (Schaeff.) P. Kumm.
and has priority over the heterotypic (taxonomic) synonym P. atricapillus (Batsch)
Fayod, based on A. atricapillus Batsch (Elench. Fun g.: 77. 1786).

F.3.5. When, for a taxon at a rank from family to genus, inclusive, two or
more sanctioned names compete, Art. 11.3 governs the choice of the correct
name (see also Art. F.3.7).

F.3.6. When, for a taxon at a rank lower than genus, two or more sanctioned
names and/or two or more names with the same final epithet and type as a
sanctioned name compete, Art. 11.4 governs the choice of the correct name.

Note 1. The date of sanctioning does not affect the date of valid publication,
and therefore priority (Art. 11), of a sanctioned name. In particular, when two or
more homonyms are sanctioned only the earliest of them may be used because the
later one(s) are illegitimate under Art. F.3.3.

Ex. 7. Fries (Syst. Mycol. 1: 41. 1821) accepted and thus sanctioned Agaricus flavo-
virens Pers. (in Hoffmann, Abbild. Schwämme 3: t. 24. 1793) and treated A. equestris
L. (Sp. Pl.: 1173. 1753) as a synonym. He later (Elench. Fung. 1: 6. 1828) accepted
A. equestris, stating “Nomen prius et aptius certe restituendum [The prior and more
apt name is certainly to be restored]”. Both names are sanctioned, but, when they are
treated as synonyms, A. equestris L., nom. sanct. is to be used because it has priority.

F.3.7. A name that neither is sanctioned nor has the same type and final
epithet as a sanctioned name at the same rank may not be used for a taxon
that includes the type of a sanctioned name at that rank unless the final
epithet of the sanctioned name is not available for the required combina-
tion (see Art. 11.4(c)).

Ex. 8. The name Agaricus involutus Batsch (Elench. Fung.: 39. 1786) was sanctioned
by Fries (Syst. Mycol. 1: 271. 1821) and therefore, when treated in Paxillus Fr. with
the earlier but non-sanctioned name A. contiguus Bull. (Herb. Fr. 5: t. 240. 1785) as
a synonym, the correct name is P. involutus (Batsch) Fr.

Ex. 9. The name Polyporus brumalis (Pers.) Fr. (Observ. Mycol. 2: 255. 1818), nom.
sanct. (Fries, Syst. Mycol. 1: 348. 1821), based on Boletus brumalis Pers. (in Neues
Mag. Bot. 1: 107. 1794), was treated by Zmitrovich & Kovalenko (in Int. J. Med.
Mushr. 18: 23–38, suppl. 2: [2]. 2015) as synonymous with B. hypocrateriformis
Schrank (Baier. Fl. 2: 621. 1789) and placed in Lentinus Fr., nom. sanct., in which
the correct name is L. brumalis (Pers.) Zmitr. (in Int. J. Med. Mushr. 12: 88. 2010).

F.3.8. Conservation (Art. 14), protection (Art. F.2), and explicit rejection
(56 and F.7) override sanctioning.

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 6 –

__________________________________________________________________

F.3.9. The type of a name of a species or infraspecific taxon adopted in
one of the works specified in Art. F.3.1, and thereby sanctioned, may be
selected from among the elements associated with the name in the proto-
logue and/or the sanctioning treatment.

Note 2. For names falling under Art. F.3.9, elements from the context of the
protologue are original material and those from the context of the sanctioning
work are considered as equivalent to original material.

Ex. 10. When Stadler & al. (in IMA Fungus 5: 61. 2014) designated the lectotype of
Clavaria hypoxylon L. (Sp. Pl.: 1182. 1753), sanctioned by Fries (Syst. Mycol. 2: 327.
1823) as Sphaeria hypoxylon (L.) Pers. (Observ. Mycol. 1: 20. 1796), they selected
a specimen in K distributed by Fries (Scler. Suec. No. 181) and cited by him in the
sanctioning treatment rather than any of the elements associated with the protologue.

Ex. 11. In the absence of any specimens or illustrations from the context of the proto-
logue that are original material, Peterson (in Amer. J. Bot. 63: 313. 1976) designated
a specimen in L as the neotype of Clavaria formosa Pers. (Comm. Fung. Clav.: 41.
1797), nom. sanct. However, when sanctioning C. formosa, Fries (Syst. Mycol. 1:
466. 1821) cited several illustrations, which are therefore considered as equivalent to
original material. Peterson’s neotypification was not therefore designated in conformity
with Art. 9.13 and is not to be followed (Art. 9.19). Instead, Franchi & Marchetti (in
Riv. Micol. 59: 323. 2017) designated as the lectotype of C. formosa one of the illus-
trations (Persoon, Icon. Desc. Fung. Min. Cognit. 1: t. III, fig. 6. 1798) that was cited
by Fries (l.c., as “f. 5”).

F.3.10. When a sanctioning author accepted an earlier name but did not
include, even implicitly, any element associated with its protologue, or
when the protologue did not include the subsequently designated type of
the sanctioned name, the sanctioning author is considered to have created a
later homonym, treated as if conserved (see also Art. 48).

Note 3. For typification of sanctioned generic names, see Art. 10.2. Note that
automatic typification under Art. 7.5 does not apply to sanctioned names. For
legitimacy of sanctioned names (or names based on them), see also Art. 6.4, 52.1,
53.1, and 55.3.

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 7 –

__________________________________________________________________

Recommendation F.3A

F.3A.1. W hen it is considered useful to indicate the nomenclatural status of a
sanctioned name (Art. F.3.1), the abbreviation “nom. sanct.” (nomen sanctionatum)
should be added in a formal citation; the place of sanctioning should also be added
in full nomenclatural citations.¹

Ex. 1. Boletus piperatus Bull. (Herb. France: t. 451, fig. 2. 1790) was adopted in Fries
(Syst. Mycol. 1: 388. 1821) and was thereby sanctioned. Depending on the level of
nomenclatural information being presented, it should be cited as B. piperatus Bull.,
nom. sanct.; or B. piperatus Bull. 1790, nom. sanct.; or B. piperatus Bull., Herb. France:
t. 451, fig. 2. 1790, nom. sanct.; or B. piperatus Bull., Herb. France: t. 451, fig. 2. 1790,
nom. sanct. (Fries, Syst. Mycol. 1: 388. 1821).

Ex. 2. Agaricus compactus [unranked] sarcocephalus (Fr.) Fr. was sanctioned when
adopted by Fries (Syst. Mycol. 1: 290. 1821). That status should be indicated by citing it
as A. compactus [unranked] sarcocephalus (Fr.) Fr., nom. sanct. The abbreviation “nom.
sanct.” should not be added when citing its basionym A. sarcocephalus Fr. (Observ.
Mycol. 1: 51. 1815) or when citing subsequent combinations such as Psathyrella sarco-
cephala (Fr.) Singer (in Lilloa 22: 468. 1949).

SECTION 2

VALID PUBLICATION AND TYPIFICATION OF NAMES

ARTICLE F.4

MISPLACED RANK-DENOTING TERMS

F.4.1. A name is not validly published if it is given to a taxon of which
the rank is at the same time, contrary to Art. 5, denoted by a misplaced
term (Art. 37.6), but an exception is made for names of the subdivisions of
genera termed tribes (tribus) in Fries’s Systema mycologicum, which are
treated as validly published names of unranked subdivisions of genera.

Ex. 1. Agaricus “tribus” [unranked] Pholiota Fr. (Syst. Mycol. 1: 240. 1821), sanctioned
in the same work, is the validly published basionym of the generic name Pholiota
(Fr.) P. Kumm. (Führer Pilzk.: 22. 1871) (see Art. 41 Ex. 9).

————————————

1 In Chapter F, sanctioning is indicated by “nom. sanct.”, but elsewhere in this
Code sanctioning remains indicated by “: Fr.” or “: Pers.”, following the wording
of Rec. F.3A.1 of the Shenzhen Code of 2018 before it was superseded by the
current wording accepted by the San Juan International Mycological Congress
on 21 July 2018.
163

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 8 –

__________________________________________________________________

ARTICLE F.5

REGISTRATION OF NAMES AND NOMENCLATURAL ACTS

F.5.1. In order to be validly published, nomenclatural novelties (Art. 6
Note 4) applied to organisms treated as fungi under this Code (Pre. 8; in-
cluding fossil fungi and lichen-forming fungi) and published on or after
1 January 2013 must, in the protologue, include citation of the identifier
issued for the name by a recognized repository (Art. F.5.3).

Ex. 1. The protologue of Albugo arenosa Mirzaee & Thines (in Mycol. Prog. 12: 50.
2013) complies with Art. F.5.1 because it includes citation of “MB 564515”, an identifier
issued by MycoBank, one of three recognized repositories. The decision by the Nomen-
clature Committee for Fungi to appoint (Art. F.5.3) Fungal Names, Index Fungorum,
and MycoBank as repositories (Redhead & Norvell in Taxon 62: 173–174. 2013) was
ratified (Art. F.5.3) by the 10th International Mycological Congress (May in Taxon 66:
484. 2017).

Ex. 2. The designation “Austropleospora archidendri” (Ariyawansa & al. in Fungal
Diversity 75: 64. 2015) is not a validly published new combination based on Para-
coniothyrium archidendri Verkley & al. (in Persoonia 32: 37. 2014) because it was
published without citing an identifier issued by a recognized repository, even though
the recognized repository Index Fungorum had previously issued the identifier “IF
551419” for the intended new combination.

Ex. 3. The designation “Priceomyces fermenticarens” (Gouliamova & al. in Persoonia
36: 429. 2016), intended as a new combination, was published with the identifier “MB
310255”, which refers to the identifier “IF 310255” that had been assigned to the
intended basionym, Candida fermenticarens Van der Walt & P. B. Baker (in Bothalia
12: 561. 1978) by Index Fungorum prior to registration becoming mandatory. The re-
cognized repository MycoBank assigned the identifier “MB 818676” for the intended
new combination after its publication, but because no identifier was issued prior to
its publication the intended combination was not validly published. Priceomyces fer-
menticarens (Van der Walt & P. B. Baker) Gouliam. & al. (in Persoonia 39: 289. 2017)
was subsequently validly published with citation of the identifier “MB 818692”, newly
issued by MycoBank.

F.5.2. For an identifier to be issued by a recognized repository as required
by Art. F.5.1, the minimum elements of information that must be acces-
sioned by author(s) of scientific names are the proposed name itself and
those elements required for valid publication under Art. 38.1(a) and 39.2
(validating description or diagnosis) and Art. 40.1 and 40.7 (type) or Art.
41.5 (reference to the basionym or replaced synonym). When the acces-

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 9 –

__________________________________________________________________

sioned and subsequently published information for a name with a given
identifier differ, the published information is considered definitive.¹

Note 1. Issuance of an identifier by a recognized repository presumes subse-
quent fulfilment of the requirements for valid publication of the name (Art. 32–45,
F.5.1, and F.5.2) but does not in itself constitute or guarantee valid publication.

Note 2. The words “name” and “names” are used in Art. F.5.1 and F.5.2 for
names that may not yet be validly published, in which case the definition in Art.
6.3 does not apply.

F.5.3. The Nomenclature Committee for Fungi (see Div. III Prov. 7) has
the power to (a) appoint one or more localized or decentralized, open and
accessible electronic repositories to accession the information required by
Art. F.5.2 and F.5.5 and issue the identifiers required by Art. F.5.1 and F.5.4;
(b) cancel such appointment at its discretion; and (c) set aside the require-
ments of Art. F.5.1, F.5.2, F.5.4, and F.5.5, should the repository mecha-
nism, or essential parts thereof, cease to function. Decisions made by this
Committee under these powers are subject to ratification by a subsequent
International Mycological Congress.

F.5.4. For purposes of priority (Art. 9.19, 9.20, and 10.5), designation of a
type, on or after 1 January 2019, of the name of an organism treated as a
fungus under this Code (Pre. 8), is achieved only if an identifier issued for
the type designation by a recognized repository (Art. F.5.3) is cited.

Note 3. Art. F.5.4 applies only to the designation of lectotypes (and their equiv-
alents under Art. 10), neotypes, and epitypes; it does not apply to the designation
of a holotype when publishing the name of a new taxon, for which see Art. F.5.2.

F.5.5. For an identifier to be issued by a recognized repository as required
by Art. F.5.4, the minimum elements of information that must be accessioned
by author(s) of type designations are the name being typified, the author des-
ignating the type, and those elements required by Art. 9.21, 9.22, and 9.23.

Note 4. Issuance of an identifier by a recognized repository presumes subse-
quent fulfilment of the requirements for effective type designation (Art. 7.8–7.11
and F.5.4) but does not in itself constitute or guarantee a type designation.

F.5.6. When the identifier issued for a name by a recognized repository is
cited incorrectly in the protologue, this is treated as a correctable error not
preventing valid publication of the name, provided that the identifier was
issued prior to the protologue.

————————————

1 It is the practice of repositories to assign a new identifier when an orthographical
correction is made to a name subsequent to the protologue.

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 10 –

__________________________________________________________________

Ex. 4. The identifier “MB 564220” was issued by MycoBank for Cortinarius peristeris
Soop (in Bresadoliana 1: 22. 2013) prior to publication of the name. Even though the
identifier was incorrectly cited as “MB 564” in the protologue, the name is validly
published.

F.5.7. An identifier remains associated with the name or designation for
which it was issued. If, when published, a designation for which an identifier
has been issued does not meet other requirements for valid publication, in
order for that designation to become a validly published name, a new iden-
tifier must be obtained.

Ex. 5. The designation “Nigelia” (Luangsa-ard & al. in Mycol. Progr. 16: 378. 2017)
was published without citation of an identifier. MycoBank assigned the identifier
“MB 823565” for this designation after publication. The designation was later vali-
dated as Nigelia Luangsa-ard & al. (in Index Fungorum 345: 1. 2017) with citation
of the identifier “IF 553229” newly issued by Index Fungorum.

F.5.8. When the identifier issued for a type designation by a recognized
repository is cited incorrectly in the typifying publication, this is treated
as a correctable error not preventing designation of the type, provided that
the identifier was issued prior to the typifying publication.

Recommendation F.5A

F.5A.1. Authors of names of organisms treated as fungi are encouraged to (a)
deposit the required elements of information for any nomenclatural novelty in a
recognized repository as soon as possible after a work is accepted for publication,
so as to obtain identifiers for each nomenclatural novelty; (b) inform the recogni-
zed repository that issued the identifier of the complete bibliographic details upon
publication of the name, including volume and part number, page number, date of
publication, and (for books) the publisher and place of publication; and (c) upon
publication of a name, supply an electronic version of the publication to the recog-
nized repository that issued the identifier associated with the name.

F.5A.2. In addition to meeting the requirements for effective publication of choices
of name (Art. 11.5 and 53.5), orthography (Art. 61.3), or gender (Art. 62.3), those
publishing such choices for names of organisms treated as fungi are encouraged
to record the choice in a recognized repository (Art. F.5.3) and cite the identifier
in the place of publication.

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 11 –

__________________________________________________________________

SECTION 3

REJECTION OF NAMES

ARTICLE F.6

F.6.1. The name of a taxon treated as a fungus published on or after 1
January 2019 is illegitimate if it is a later homonym of a prokaryotic or
protozoan name (see also Art. 54 and Rec. 54A).

ARTICLE F.7

F.7.1. In the interest of nomenclatural stability, for organisms treated as
fungi, lists of names proposed for rejection may be submitted to the General
Committee, which will refer them to the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi
(see Div. III Prov. 2.2, 7.9, and 7.10) for examination by subcommittees estab-
lished by that Committee in consultation with the General Committee and
appropriate international bodies. Names on these lists, which become part
of the Appendices of the Code once reviewed and approved by the Nomen-
clature Committee for Fungi and the General Committee (see Art. 56.3 and
Rec. 56A.1), are to be treated as rejected under Art. 56.1, except that they may
become eligible for use by conservation under Art. 14 (see also Art. F.2.1).

SECTION 4

NAMES OF FUNGI WITH A PLEOMORPHIC LIFE CYCLE

ARTICLE F.8

F.8.1. A name published prior to 1 January 2013 for a taxon of non-lichen-
forming Ascomycota and Basidiomycota, with the intent or implied intent
of applying to or being typified by one particular morph (e.g. anamorph or
teleomorph; see Note 2), may be legitimate even if it otherwise would be
illegitimate under Art. 52 on account of the protologue including a type (as
defined in Art. 52.2) referable to a different morph. If the name is otherwise
legitimate, it competes for priority (Art. 11.3 and 11.4).

Ex. 1. Penicillium brefeldianum B. O. Dodge (in Mycologia 25: 92. 1933) was described
and based on a type with both the anamorph and teleomorph (and therefore necessar-
ily typified by the teleomorph element alone under editions of the Code prior to the
Melbourne Code of 2012). The combination Eupenicillium brefeldianum (B. O. Dodge)
Stolk & D. B. Scott (in Persoonia 4: 400. 1967) for the teleomorph is legitimate. Peni-
cillium dodgei Pitt (Gen. Penicillium: 117. 1980), typified by the anamorph in a dried

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 12 –

__________________________________________________________________

culture “derived from Dodge’s type”, did not include the teleomorphic type of P. bre-
feldianum and therefore it too is legitimate. However, when considered a species of
Penicillium, the correct name for all its states is P. brefeldianum.

Note 1. Except as provided in Art. F.8.1, names of fungi with mitotic asexual
morphs (anamorphs) as well as a meiotic sexual morph (teleomorph) must con-
form to the same provisions of this Code as all other fungi.

Note 2. Editions of the Code prior to the Melbourne Code of 2012 provided for
separate names for mitotic asexual morphs (anamorphs) of certain pleomorphic
fungi and required that the name applicable to the whole fungus be typified by a
meiotic sexual morph (teleomorph). Under the current Code, however, all legiti-
mate fungal names are treated equally for the purposes of establishing priority,
regardless of the life-history stage of the type (see also Art. F.2.1).

Ex. 2. Mycosphaerella aleuritidis (Miyake) S. H. Ou (in Sinensia 11: 183. 1940), when
published as a new combination, was accompanied by a Latin diagnosis of the newly
discovered teleomorph corresponding to the anamorph on which the basionym Cerco-
spora aleuritidis Miyake (in Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 26: 66. 1912) was typified. Under edi-
tions of the Code prior to the Melbourne Code of 2012, M. aleuritidis was considered
to be the name of a new species with a teleomorph type, dating from 1940, and with
authorship attributed solely to Ou. Under the current Code, the name is cited as origi-
nally published, M. aleuritidis (Miyake) S. H. Ou, and is typified by the type of the
basionym.

Ex. 3. In the protologue of the teleomorph-typified Venturia acerina Plakidas ex M. E.
Barr (in Canad. J. Bot. 46: 814. 1968) the anamorph-typified Cladosporium humile
Davis (in Trans. Wisconsin Acad. Sci. 19: 702. 1919) was included as a synonym. Be-
cause it was published prior to 1 January 2013, the name V. acerina is not illegitimate,
but C. humile is the earliest legitimate name at the rank of species.

Note 3. Names proposed simultaneously for separate morphs (e.g. anamorph
and teleomorph) of a taxon of non-lichen-forming Ascomycota and Basidiomycota
are necessarily heterotypic and are not therefore alternative names as defined by
Art. 36.3.

Ex. 4. Hypocrea dorotheae Samuels & Dodd and Trichoderma dorotheae Samuels &
Dodd were simultaneously validly published (in Stud. Mycol. 56: 112. 2006) for what
the authors considered a single species with Samuels & Dodd 8657 (PDD 83839) as the
holotype. Because these names were published before 1 January 2013 (see Art. F.8.1
and Note 2), and because the authors explicitly indicated that the name T. dorotheae was
typified by the anamorphic element of PDD 83839, both names are validly published
and legitimate. They are not alternative names as defined in Art. 36.3.

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 13 –

__________________________________________________________________

SECTION 5

ORTHOGRAPHY OF NAMES

ARTICLE F.9

F.9.1. Epithets of fungal names derived from the generic name of an asso-
ciated organism are to be spelled in accordance with the accepted spelling
of the name of that organism; other spellings are regarded as orthographi-
cal variants to be corrected (see Art. 61).

Ex. 1. Phyllachora ‘anonicola’ Chardón (in Mycologia 32: 190. 1940) is to be cor-
rected to P. annonicola in accordance with the accepted spelling of Annona L.; Meli-
ola ‘albizziae’ Hansf. & Deighton (in Mycol. Pap. 23: 26. 1948) is to be corrected to
M. albiziae in accordance with the accepted spelling of Albizia Durazz.

Ex. 2. Dimeromyces ‘corynitis’ Thaxter (in Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts 48: 157. 1912) was
stated to occur “On the elytra of Corynites ruficollis Fabr.”, but the name of the host, a
species of beetle, is correctly spelled Corynetes ruficollis. The fungal name is therefore
to be spelled D. corynetis.

SECTION 5

AUTHOR CITATIONS

ARTICLE F.10

F.10.1. For names of organisms treated as fungi, the identifier issued for
the name by a recognized repository (Art. F.5.1) may be used subsequent
to the protologue in place of an author citation for the name but not to
replace the name itself (see also Art. 22.1 and 26.1).

Recommendation F.10A

F.10A.1. An identifier used in place of an author citation as permitted by Art.
F.10.1 should be presented with the symbol # preceding the numerical part of
the identifier, and the resulting string should be enclosed in square brackets. In
electronic publications, this string should be provided with a direct and stable
link to the corresponding record in one of the recognized repositories.

Ex. 1. Astrothelium meristosporoides [#816706]. The direct and stable link to a record
in a recognized repository would be either http://www.mycobank.org/MB/816706 or
http://www.indexfungorum.org/Names/NamesRecord.asp?RecordID=816706.

__________________________________________________________________

International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2019 — San Juan Chapter F

– 14 –

__________________________________________________________________

[ Not present in this edition ]

[ supposed to be capital M superscript c ]

[ sic ]