Search for: All records

Society is confronted by interconnected threats to ecological sustainability. Among these is the devastation of forests by destructive non-native pathogens and insects introduced through global trade, leading to the loss of critical ecosystem services and a global forest health crisis. We argue that the forest health crisis is a public-good social dilemma and propose a response framework that incorporates principles of collective action. This framework enables scientists to better engage policymakers and empowers the public to advocate for proactive biosecurity and forest health management. Collective action in forest health features broadly inclusive stakeholder engagement to build trust and set goals; accountability for destructive pest introductions; pooled support for weakest-link partners; and inclusion of intrinsic and nonmarket values of forest ecosystems in risk assessment. We provide short-term and longer-term measures that incorporate the above principles to shift the societal and ecological forest health paradigm to a more resilient state. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Phytopathology, Volume 61 is September 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. 

Phytophthora is a long-established, well known and globally important genus of plant pathogens. Phylogenetic evidence has shown that the biologically distinct, obligate biotrophic downy mildews evolved from Phytophthora at least twice. Since, cladistically, this renders Phytophthora ‘paraphyletic’, it has been proposed that Phytophthora evolutionary clades be split into multiple genera (Runge et al. 2011; Crous et al. 2021; Thines et al. 2023; Thines 2024). In this letter, we review arguments for the retention of the generic name Phytophthora with a broad circumscription made by Brasier et al. (2022) and by many delegates at an open workshop organized by the American Phytopathological Society. We present our well-considered responses to this proposal in general terms and to the specific proposals for new genera; together with new information regarding the biological properties and mode of origin of the Phytophthora clades. We consider that the proposals for new genera are mostly non-rigorous and not supported by the scientific evidence. Further, given (1) the apparent lack of any distinguishing biological characteristics (synapomorphies) between the Phytophthora clades; (2) the fundamental monophyly of Phytophthora in the original Haeckelian sense; (3) the fact that paraphyly is not a justification for taxonomic splitting; and (4) the considerable likely damage to effective scientific communication and disease management from an unnecessary break-up of the genus, we report that Workshop delegates voted unanimously in favour of preserving the current generic concept and for seeking endorsement of this view by a working group of the International Commission on the Taxonomy of Fungi. 

This article is to alert medical mycologists and infectious disease specialists of recent name changes of medically important species of the filamentous moldFusarium.Fusariumspecies can cause localized and life-threating infections in humans. Of the 70Fusariumspecies that have been reported to cause infections, close to one-third are members of theFusarium solanispecies complex (FSSC), and they collectively account for approximately two-thirds of all reportedFusariuminfections. 

Scientific communication is facilitated by a data-driven, scientifically sound taxonomy that considers the end-user's needs and established successful practice. Previously (Geiser et al. 2013; Phytopathology 103:400-408. 2013), the Fusarium community voiced near unanimous support for a concept of Fusarium that represented a clade comprising all agriculturally and clinically important Fusarium species, including the F. solani Species Complex (FSSC). Subsequently, this concept was challenged by one research group (Lombard et al. 2015 Studies in Mycology 80: 189-245) who proposed dividing Fusarium into seven genera, including the FSSC as the genus Neocosmospora, with subsequent justification based on claims that the Geiser et al. (2013) concept of Fusarium is polyphyletic (Sandoval-Denis et al. 2018; Persoonia 41:109-129). Here we test this claim, and provide a phylogeny based on exonic nucleotide sequences of 19 orthologous protein-coding genes that strongly support the monophyly of Fusarium including the FSSC. We reassert the practical and scientific argument in support of a Fusarium that includes the FSSC and several other basal lineages, consistent with the longstanding use of this name among plant pathologists, medical mycologists, quarantine officials, regulatory agencies, students and researchers with a stake in its taxonomy. In recognition of this monophyly, 40 species recently described as Neocosmospora were recombined in Fusarium, and nine others were renamed Fusarium. Here the global Fusarium community voices strong support for the inclusion of the FSSC in Fusarium, as it remains the best scientific, nomenclatural and practical taxonomic option available.