Back to the future: cordycipitoid fungi in a postgenomic world

Abstract

The massive – but nearly uninterpretable – work of Kobayasi on Cordyceps species (many of which were illustrated gorgeously by D. Shimizu’s paintings) was made useful and modernised by the phylogenetically based reclassification by Gi-Ho Sung and others in 2007. The rejection of dual nomenclature in favour of the new standard for the names of pleomorphic fungi that allow only a single valid name for any one organism has resulted in uncertainties and confusions about what names should be used, and these doubts will certainly continue until at least the 2023 International Botanical Congress. Enough genomic and molecular information has now accumulated about so many of these cordycipitoid fungi, however, that it is appropriate to step back from the thermocyclers that now dominate so many biological laboratories to consider how these genomic findings may be used to advance our understanding of these fungi and their activities in the real world (as opposed to their genomic dissections in a thermocycler). Questions to be considered include how genomic information might help guide future research on such diverse issues as understanding the natural ecology of these fungi, the interactions of biotic and abiotic factors needed to initiate their sexual stages, and better clues about how to elicit the productions of a wide range of biologically active compounds known to be produced by cordycipitoid fungi.

Keywords

• Nomenclature
• 1F = 1N
• typification of scientific names
• genomic databases
• fungal endophytes
• rhizosphere associations
• pharmacology
• biochemistry
• developmental biology