ArticleIMA fungus2014
Lessons learned from moving to one scientific name for fungi.
Article in IMA fungus, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Homothallic or Heterothallic? A Genomic Investigation Into the Sexual Capabilities of the Ascomycete Fungus Clonostachys rosea.Molecular ecology · 2026Article
- Identification ofMycoKeys · 2026Article
- ReevaluatingIMA fungus · 2026Article
- Taxonomic reintroduction ofMycoKeys · 2024Article
- Fungal taxonomy: A puzzle with many missing piecesBiomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud · 2023Article
- RevisingStudies in mycology · 2023Article
- Three New Species ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- The GenusFrontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- A worldwide nomenclature revision of sequestrateFungal systematics and evolution · 2018Article
- Recommended names for pleomorphic genera in Dothideomycetes.IMA fungus · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the changes implemented in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants, fungi may no longer have more than one scientific name. Although determining which scientific name to use is based on the principle of priority, situations exist in which applying a strict principle of priority does not contribute to the nomenclatural stability of fungi, thus exceptions can be made to this principle. Examples are presented showing how the single scientific name is determined at both the generic and specific level. In addition procedures are outlined for making exceptions to this rule. Considerable progress has been made in determining which genus to use for major groups of fungi. Interested scientists are invited to participate in the process of moving to one scientific name for fungi by contacting members dealing with specific groups of fungi as listed on the website of the International Commission for the Taxonomy of Fungi (http://www.fungaltaxonomy.org/subcommissions). A new combination of Clonostachys is also made.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.