Placement of Triblidiaceae in Rhytismatales and comments on unique ascospore morphologies in Leotiomycetes (Fungi, Ascomycota)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Triblidiaceae is a family of uncommonly encountered, non-lichenized discomycetes. A recent classification circumscribed the family to includeTriblidium(4 spp. and 1 subsp.),Huangshania(2 spp.) andPseudographis(2 spp. and 1 var.). The apothecia of these fungi are persistent and drought-tolerant; they possess stromatic, highly melanized covering layers that open and close with fluctuations of humidity. Triblidialean fungi occur primarily on the bark ofQuercus, Pinaceae and Ericaceae, presumably as saprobes. Though the type species ofHuangshaniais from China, these fungi are mostly known from collections originating from Western Hemisphere temperate and boreal forests. The higher-rank classification of triblidialean fungi has been in flux due in part to an overemphasis on ascospore morphology. Muriform ascospores are observed in species ofTriblidiumand inPseudographiselatina. An intense, dark blue/purple ascospore wall reaction in iodine-based reagents is observed in species ofPseudographis. These morphologies have led, in part, to these genera being shuffled among unrelated taxa in Hysteriaceae (Dothideomycetes, Hysteriales) and Graphidaceae (Lecanoromycetes, Ostropales). Triblidiaceae has been placed within the monofamilial order Triblidiales (affinity Lecanoromycetes). Here, we demonstrate with a three-gene phylogenetic approach that triblidialean fungi are related to taxa in Rhytismatales (Leotiomycetes). We synonymize Triblidiales under Rhytismatales and emend Triblidiaceae to includeTriblidiumandHuangshania, withPseudographisplaced within Rhytismataceae. A history of Triblidiaceae is provided along with a description of the emended family. We discuss how the inclusion of triblidialean fungi in Rhytismatales brings some rarely observed or even unique ascospore morphologies to the order and to Leotiomycetes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".