Phylogenetic and taxonomic updates of Agaricales, with an emphasis on Tricholomopsis

Figures & data

Figure 1. Phylogeny of Agaricales inferred from a matrix containing 555 single-copy orthologs based on the maximum likelihood (ML) analysis method. Nodes without numeric labels are supported with 100% BS.

Figure 2. Fifteen alternative topologies of Agaricales. Out, outgroup and basal clades of Agaricales (including Hygrophorineae, Typhulaceae, Clavariineae, and outgroups); Phy, Phyllotopsidineae; Sar, Sarcomyxineae; Ple, Pleurotineae; Oth, other clades in Agaricales (including Agaricineae, Pluteineae, Tricholomatineae, Marasmiineae, and Schizophyllineae).

Table 1. Topology tests of 15 alternative hypotheses for the relationships among Sarcomyxineae, Pleurotineae, Phyllotopsidineae, and the other clades within Agaricales.

Tree	logL	bp-RELL	p-KH	p-SH	c-ELW	p-AU
1	-101471281.2	1 +	1 +	1 +	1 +	1 +
2	-101475233	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	4.71E-05 -
3	-101472264.3	0 -	0 -	0.0001 -	2.01E-157 -	9.61E-10 -
4	-101473271.2	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	9.97E-07 -
5	-101479434.2	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	2.52E-63 -
6	-101479166.7	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	1.66E-49 -
7	-101477984.9	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	2.28E-106 -
8	-101479801	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	1.78E-06 -
9	-101477425.3	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	2.28E-51 -
10	-101476539.9	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	2.30E-05 -
11	-101478122.9	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	1.57E-42 -
12	-101479719	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	1.32E-05 -
13	-101478553.3	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	6.87E-28 -
14	-101472448.8	0 -	0 -	0 -	4.82E-272 -	8.35E-06 -
15	-101477106.8	0 -	0 -	0 -	0 -	2.11E-09 -

“+” signs denote the 95% confidence sets; “-” signs denote significant exclusion. logL, log likelihood; bp-RELL, bootstrap proportion using RELL method; p-KH, p-value of one-sided Kishino-Hasegawa test; p-SH, p-value of Shimodaira-Hasegawa test; c-ELW, expected likelihood weight; p-AU, p-value of approximately unbiased (AU) test.

Figure 3. (a) Phylogeny of Tricholomopsis inferred from a matrix containing 450 single-copy orthologous genes using the maximum likelihood (ML) analysis method. Nodes without numeric labels are supported with 100 BS. (b) Phylogeny of Tricholomopsis inferred from a matrix consisting of ITS-nrLSU-rpb2-tef1-α using Bayesian inference (BI) analysis. BI (BPP ≥ 0.90) and ML bootstrap support values (ML ≥ 70) are shown (BPP/ML). The habitats and ornamentations of pileus are labelled after each species.

Figure 4. Ancestral state reconstructions of substrate preference (left part) and ornamentations on pileus (right part) of Tricholomopsis using ape and phytools packages in R. The phylogenetic tree was based on the results of 450 single-copy orthologous genes, and pie chart of each node were summarised by stochastic character mapping under equal-rates model with 1,000 times. Names for each section in Tricholomopsis are labelled next to the corresponding branches.

Table 2. Comparisons of suborder divisions within Agaricales by different authors.

Dentinger et al. 2016	Olariaga et al. 2020	This study
Agaricineae	Agaricineae	Agaricineae
Pluteineae	Pluteineae	Pluteineae
Tricholomatineae	Tricholomatineae	Tricholomatineae
Marasmiineae	Marasmiineae + Schizophyllineae	Marasmiineae
		Mycenaceae clade
Schizophyllineae		Schizophyllineae
Pleurotineae	Pleurotineae	Pleurotineae
		Phyllotopsidineae
not included		Sarcomyxineae
not included		Typhulaceae clade
Hygrophorineae	Hygrophorineae	Hygrophorineae
	Clavariineae	Clavariineae

Table 3. Section divisions within Tricholomopsis by different authors.

Singer 1943	Smith 1960	Jayawardena et al. 2022	This study
sect. Tricholomopsis	sect. Tricholomopsis	clade rutilans	sect. Tricholomopsis
	sect. Decoramentum	clade decora	sect. Decoramentum
	sect. Lividae	not included	sect. Lividae (no molecular evidence)
	not included	clade rubroaurantiaca	sect. Bambusinae
not included	not included	clade aurea	sect. Glabrae
not included	not included	clade scabra	clade scabra
sect. Platyphyllae	sect. Platyphyllae	excluded	excluded

Figure 5. Microscopic features of Tricholomopsis aculeata (type, HKAS 129330). (a) Basidiospores; (b) Hymenium; (c) Pileipellis; (d) Cheilocystidia. Bars: a – b = 10 μm, c – d = 20 μm.

Figure 6. (a) Tricholomopsis aculeata (HKAS 129330, photo by Gengshen Wang); (b) T. bambusina (HKAS 129325, photo by Kuan Zhao); (c) T. sasae (HKAS 87193, photo by Xiao-Bin Liu); (d) T. rubroaurantiaca (HKAS 129324, photo by Jing-Wei Li). Bars: a – d = 1 cm.

Figure 7. (a) Tricholomopsis badinensis (HKAS 83622, photo by Qing Cai); (b) T. decora (HKAS 129327, photo by Jianwei Liu); (c – d) T. floccosa (HKAS 57681, photo by Gang Wu); (e) T. flava (HKAS 96940, photo by Yan-Jia Hao 105); (f) T. glabra (HKAS 129332, photo by Ting Guo).

Figure 8. Microscopic features of Tricholomopsis floccosa (type, HKAS 57681). (a) Basidiospores; (b) Hymenium; (c) Cheilocystidia; (d) Pileipellis. Bars: a – b = 10 μm, c – d = 20 μm.

Figure 9. Microscopic features of Tricholomopsis flava (type, HKAS 96940). (a) Basidiospores; (b) Basidia; (c) Pileipellis; (d) Cheilocystidia; (e) Caulocystidia. Bars: a – e = 10 μm. Drawing by Zhu-Liang Yang.

Figure 10. Microscopic features of Tricholomopsis glabra (type, HKAS 129332). (a) Hymenium; (b) Basidiospores; (c) Pileipellis. Bars: a – b = 10 μm; c = 20 μm.

Figure 11. Microscopic features of Tricholomopsis campestris (type, HKAS 116178). (a) Basidiospores; (b) Hymenium; (c) Pileipellis; (d) Cheilocystidia. Bars: a – b = 10 μm, c – d = 20 μm.

Figure 12. Microscopic features of Tricholomopsis depressa (type, HKAS 53624). (a) Basidiospores; (b) Hymenium; (c) Pileipellis; (d) Cheilocystidia. Bars: a – b = 10 μm, c – d = 20 μm.

Figure 13. (a – b) Tricholomopsis compestris (HKAS 116178, photo by Geng-Shen Wang); (c) T. depressa (HKAS 53624, photo by Zai-Wei Ge); (d) T. flammula (HKAS 116169, photo by Geng-Shen Wang); (e) T. mitirubicunda (HKAS 71469, photo by Yan-Jia Hao); (f) T. pallidolutea (HKAS 129339, photo by Jian-Wei Liu); (g) T. rutilans (HKAS 105394, photo by Xiao-Xia Ding); (h) Tricholomopsis sulfureoides (HKAS 51002, photo by Zaiwei Ge); (i) T. yunnanensis (HKAS 76311, photo by Yanjia Hao). Bars: a – i = 1 cm.

Dentinger BTM, Gaya E, O’Brien H, Suz LM, Lachlan R, Díaz-Valderrama JR, Koch RA, Aime MC. 2016. Tales from the crypt: genome mining from fungarium specimens improves resolution of the mushroom tree of life. Biol J Linn Soc. 117(1):11–32. doi: 10.1111/bij.12553.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Olariaga I, Huhtinen S, Læssøe T, Petersen JH, Hansen K. 2020. Phylogenetic origins and family classification of typhuloid fungi, with emphasis on Ceratellopsis, Macrotyphula and Typhula (Basidiomycota). Stud Mycology. 96:155–184. doi:10.1016/j.simyco.2020.05.003.

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Singer R. 1943. Type studies on basidiomycetes. II. Mycologia. 35(2):142–163. doi: 10.1080/00275514.1943.12017472.

 Google Scholar

Smith AH. 1960. Tricholomopsis (Agaricales) in the Western Hemisphere. Brittonia. 12(1):41–70. doi: 10.2307/2805334.

 Google Scholar

Jayawardena RS, Hyde KD, Wang S, Sun YR, Suwannarach N, Sysouphanthong P, Abdel-Wahab MA, Abdel-Aziz FA, Abeywickrama PD, Abreu VP, et al. 2022. Fungal diversity notes 1512–1610: taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions on genera and species of fungal taxa. Fungal Divers. 117(1): 1–272. doi: 10.1007/s13225-022-00513-0.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar