Overlooked competing asexual and sexually typified generic names of Ascomycota with recommendations for their use or protection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the change to one scientific name for fungal species, numerous papers have been published with recommendations for use or protection of competing generic names in major groups of ascomycetes. Although genera in each group of fungi were carefully considered, some competing generic names were overlooked. This paper makes recommendations for additional competing genera not considered in previous papers. Chairs of relevant Working Groups of the ICTF were consulted in the development of these recommendations. A number of generic names need protection, specifically Amarenographium over Amarenomyces, Amniculicola over Anguillospora, Balansia over Ephelis, Claviceps over Sphacelia, Drepanopeziza over Gloeosporidiella and Gloeosporium, Golovinomyces over Euoidium, Holwaya over Crinium, Hypocrella over Aschersonia, Labridella over Griphosphaerioma, Metacapnodium over Antennularia , and Neonectria over Cylindrocarpon and Heliscus. The following new combinations are made: Amniculicola longissima, Atichia maunauluana, Diaporthe columnaris, D. liquidambaris, D. longiparaphysata, D. palmicola, D. tersa, Elsinoë bucidae, E. caricae, E. choisyae, E. paeoniae, E. psidii, E. zorniae, Eupelte shoemakeri, Godronia myrtilli, G. raduloides, Sarcinella mirabilis, S. pulchra, Schizothyrium jamaicense , and Trichothallus niger. Finally, one new species name, Diaporthe azadirachte , is introduced to validate an earlier name, and the conservation of Discula with a new type, D. destructiva , is recommended.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.078 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.033 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".