Lably
Skip to content

Megasporaceae

Family of lichen-forming fungi

  • 8 min read
  • 4 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Fungus and Data set

Taxonomy

Megasporaceae was erected as a new family in 1994 by H. Thorsten Lumbsch and colleagues to accommodate the genus Megaspora. In their reinterpretation, Megaspora (previously treated in the Hymeneliaceae within Lecanorales) was transferred to the order Pertusariales because it was considered to share key characters with pertusarialean lichens, especially the Pertusariaceae. Lumbsch and co-authors nevertheless treated Megaspora as sufficiently distinct from Pertusariaceae to warrant its own family, emphasising differences such as weakly amyloid asci and the reported absence of a chambre oculaire (an internal cavity). As originally circumscribed, Megasporaceae was monotypic and explicitly typified by Megaspora.

DNA-based phylogenetic studies later showed that some traditional family concepts in Pertusariales did not correspond to single evolutionary lineages (meaning they were not monophyletic), with Pertusariaceae in particular resolving as polyphyletic in broad sampling. Using nuclear LSU and mitochondrial SSU rDNA, Schmitt and co-authors recovered Megaspora in a clade with Aspicilia and Lobothallia rather than with Pertusaria in the narrow sense (sensu stricto). They therefore expanded Megasporaceae to include Aspicilia and Lobothallia and restricted Pertusariaceae to a narrower concept centred on Pertusaria sensu stricto (together with Loxosporopsis). In doing so, they treated the previously suggested but never validly published family name Aspiciliaceae as a synonym of Megasporaceae.

The systematic position of Aspicilia had long been debated, and for much of the 20th century it was commonly treated as part of the genus Lecanora rather than as a distinct pertusarialean lineage. A focused two-locus phylogeny (nrLSU and mtSSU) with denser sampling across the group recovered Megasporaceae as a well-supported monophyletic family and provided a framework for revising generic limits within it. Anders Nordin and co-authors showed that Aspicilia in the broad sense (sensu lato) is heterogeneous in these analyses and proposed recognising five genera within Megasporaceae, retaining Aspicilia for the clade containing the type species A. cinerea. In that classification, Lobothallia was resolved as sister to the rest of Megasporaceae, while the monotypic Megaspora was recovered close to Circinaria. They resurrected the generic names Circinaria and Sagedia for clades segregated from Aspicilia and made new combinations to match those circumscriptions. Their analyses also placed Aspilidea outside Megasporaceae (though close to it), indicating uncertainty at the family boundary with neighbouring pertusarialean lineages in some datasets.

Subsequent multilocus work identified an additional, strongly supported lineage within Megasporaceae that did not fit the genera recognised by Nordin and co-authors, leading to the resurrection of the genus Aspiciliella for a clade containing species previously placed in Aspicilia. In a phylogeny based on ITS, nuLSU and mtSSU, Aspiciliella was recovered as a well-supported sister group to the remaining Megasporaceae genera, and new combinations were proposed to reflect this delimitation.

A later five-locus phylogeny across Megasporaceae provided stronger support for relationships among most recognised genera and recovered Aspilidea as an early-diverging lineage within the family. In the same analysis, the species then known as Aspicilia brucei formed a distinct clade between Aspilidea and the remainder of Megasporaceae and was placed in the newly described genus Antidea. Wheeler and co-authors also noted that although many intergeneric relationships were well supported, some placements (including the position of Megaspora) remained weakly supported.

Sign in to keep reading

3 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Plants