New collection, iconography and molecular evidence for Tylopilus neofelleus (Boletaceae, Boletoideae) from southwestern China and the taxonomic status of T. plumbeoviolaceoides and T. microsporus

Abstract

(AAM) is copyrighted and published by Elsevier. It is posted here by agreement between Elsevier and the University of Turin. Changes resulting from the publishing process-such as editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms-may not be reflected in this version of the text. The definitive version of the text was subsequently published in MYCOSCIENCE, 55 (4), 2015, 10.1016/j.myc.2014.12.001. You may download, copy and otherwise use the AAM for non-commercial purposes provided that your license is limited by the following restrictions: (1) You may use this AAM for non-commercial purposes only under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND license. (2) The integrity of the work and identification of the author, copyright owner, and publisher must be preserved in any copy.

Two new species and one new record of the genus Tylopilus (Boletaceae) from Indian Himalaya with morphological details and phylogenetic estimations

“…During macrofungal surveys to different forested areas of Eastern Himalaya (Sikkim) and Western Himalaya, three interesting members of Tylopilus were collected separately. Detailed macro- and micromorphological studies followed by phylogenetic analyses based on nrLSU and nrITS sequences, confirm the novelty of two of them and are proposed here as T. himalayanus and T. pseudoballoui , whereas the third one appeared as conspecific to T. neofelleus (a species so far reported from Japan and China, Gelardi et al 2015) and is reported as a new record for Indian mycobiota.…”

“…Japan (Kawamura 1954; Hongo 1960; Imazeki et al 1970, 1988; Takahashi 1986; Gelardi et al 2015), China (Ying and Zang 1994; Li and Song 2000; Wang et al 2004; Fu et al 2006; Wu et al 2011; Gelardi et al 2015), Russia (Vasil’jeva 1978) and New Guinea (Hongo 1973). …”

“…Similarly, T. intermedius differs from the present Indian species by possessing a distinctively whitish pileus that stains pinkish buff to brown with age and context (pileus) that turns pinkish with FeSO 4 , but remains unchanged with KOH (Smith and Thiers 1971, Both 1993, Bessette et al 2010, 2016). Some other members of this genus, such as T. felleus (originally described from Europe and known from India as well without checking its conspecificity through phylogeny), T. neofellus (originally reported from Japan but reported here for the first time from India), T. plumbeoviolaceus Snell & Dick (originally reported from North America but also known from this country without verifying its conspecificity through phylogeny) and T. violatinctus T.J. Baroni & Both (originally reported from North America), can also be separated from T. himalayanus morphologically: T. felleus has brownish pileus and distinctively reticulate stipe (Lannoy and Estadès 2001, Muñoz 2005); T. neofellus and T. plumbeoviolaceus possess reddish-brown to violaceous-brown pileus and reticulate purplish-violaceous stipe (Snell and Dick 1941, Smith and Thiers 1971, Grund and Harrison 1976, Both 1993, Lakhanpal 1996, Bessette et al 2010, 2016, Gelardi et al 2015); T. violatinctus is easily distinguished by the more brightly coloured, bluish-violet to lilac-lavender or purple-greyish pileus, bruising dark rusty-violet when handled, the stipe turning yellowish on bruising, pileus surface and context staining yellowish-brown and negative to pinkish-brown with KOH, respectively, small basidiospores [(5.6–)7–9(–10) × 3–4 µm] and the growth in mixed woodlands possibly with Quercus , Fagus or Picea , in any case not in association pine or cedar trees (Baroni and Both 1998, Ortiz-Santana et al 2007, Bessette et al 2010). …”

“…However, T. felleus (originally reported from Europe, Munoz 2005) has a brown pileus with olive-grey colour and distinctively brown reticulation on its yellowish stipe-surface, while T. plumbeoviolaceus (originally reported from North America) has a deep violet-purplish, then purple-brown to dull cinnamon-brown pileus. Micromorphologically, basidiospores of T. plumbeoviolaceus are distinctively longer [10–13(–14) × 3–4(–5.5) µm, than those of T. neofelleus (Smith & Thiers 1971, Bessette et al 2000, 2006, Gelardi et al 2015). Tylopilus plumbeoviolaceoides T.H.…”

“…The nrLSU and nrITS datasets were assembled according to recent previous studies on this genus (Gelardi et al 2015, Magnago et al 2017) and from BLAST (Altschul et al 1997) searches in GenBank (Clark et al 2016). As most Tylopilus collections in GenBank are not provided with both molecular markers, we were unable to establish a combined nrITS+nrLSU dataset and so have opted for present separate nrLSU and nrITS phylogenetic inferences.…”