Skip to main content
Journal of Fungi logoLink to Journal of Fungi
. 2024 Mar 18;10(3):220. doi: 10.3390/jof10030220

Five New Species of Gymnopilus from Xizang Autonomous Region of China and Surrounding Areas

Wen-Qiang Yang 1,2, Jia-Xin Li 2,3, Mao-Qiang He 2, Shi-Hui Wang 2, Xin-Yu Zhu 2, Dorji Phurbu 4, Jian-Min Yun 5,*, Rui-Lin Zhao 2,3,*
Editor: Philippe Silar
PMCID: PMC10971015  PMID: 38535228

Abstract

The species of Gymnopilus (Hymenogastraceae, Agricales) are commonly recognized as wood-decaying fungi. Certain members of this genus have been identified as psilocybin-producing mushrooms. Gymnopilus exhibits a diverse range and has a global distribution. In this study, a total of seventy-eight specimens were gathered from ten provinces in China. A comprehensive molecular phylogenetic analysis was conducted, employing gene sequences including ITS, nrLSU, nrSSU, rpb1, rpb2, and tef1-α. Additionally, morphological examinations were also carried out. The phylogenetic topology of Gymnopilus from this study generally agreed with previous studies and facilitated the identification of all those specimens. As a result, eleven species, including five newly discovered ones named Gy. gyirongensis, Gy. variisporus, Gy. tomentosiceps, Gy. tenuibasidialis, and Gy. aurantipileatus, were recognized. Significantly, four of the five newly identified species are native to the Xizang Autonomous Region, emphasizing their specialization in this distinctive habitat. This research contributes to our comprehension of Gymnopilus diversity and lays the groundwork for the conservation and sustainable utilization of Gymnopilus resources.

Keywords: agaricoid fungi, molecular phylogeny, taxonomy, hymenogastraceae

1. Introduction

The genus Gymnopilus P. Karst. (Hymenogastraceae, Agaricales), which was originally described in Sweden in 1879, has more than 200 species in the world [1,2,3]. The species of Gymnopilus are commonly known as wood-decaying fungi in forests and play the role of decomposers in the cycle of matter [1,4]. Gymnopilus species can be characterized by the morphological characteristics of their hemispherical or convex cap; yellowish, brownish, greenish, or purplish pileus; adnate or adnexed lamellae; fibrous and sometimes membranous or filamentous curtain; the presence of an arachnoid to membranous veil; roughened or verrucose appearance; and basidiospores that are yellow to yellowish brown and then rusty brown. Some species usually have a bitter taste and clamp connections present on almost all kinds of hyphae [5,6,7,8,9]. The majority of Gymnopilus species are saprobes, and some species generate psilocybin, a psychedelic compound that can lead to nerve poisoning [7,10].

Romagnesi (1942) first divided the genus into two groups: Annulatae Romagn. (1942: 89) and Cortinatae Romagn. (1942: 89). Group Annulatae is characterized by having a persistent, membranous annulus, while in the other group, the annulus is absent. Hesler (1969) and Singer (1986) accepted those two groups of Gymnopilus and put this genus under Cortinariaceae, while Kühner (1980) and Guzmán-Dávalos et al. (2003) classified it under Strophariaceae. Kirk et al. (2008) considered it to belong to Hymenogastraceae [1,2]. Later, Guzmán-Dávalos (1995) established a section, Macrospori Guzm.-Dáv (1995: 119) to Gymnopilus, which contains species characterized by large spores and a lack of an annulus [7,11]. Recently, morphological examination combined with molecular phylogenetic analysis has been widely used to study this genus and describe new species from different parts of the world [2,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20].

The taxonomic study of Gymnopilus started relatively late in China, and Shu-Qun Deng (1963) was the first person to record Gymnopilus species from China in his monumental work Fungi of China. Recently, Li (2012) reported a total of thirty Gymnopilus species, including six new species from the tropical region [7,21]. Liu (2019) reported a species from northeast China, and she also constructed a phylogenetic tree of Gymnopilus based on ITS sequences. This phylogenetic tree, which was identical to those of previous studies, showed six stable clades [5,7,12]. In terms of geographic distribution, most Gymnopilus species were found in parts of southern China, such as the Guangdong, Yunnan, Sichuan, and Hainan provinces, and some were from northeastern China (Jilin province). Generally, the species of Gymnopilus in China is poorly reported, and up to now, only thirty-one species have been recorded [7,21].

In this study, we collected seventy-eight Gymnopilus specimens from ten provinces of China and two from Thailand. Molecular phylogenetic analysis combined with morphological examination revealed they belong to eleven species, of which five are proposed as new species.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Specimen Collection and Morphological Study

We collected specimens in the field from the Xizang Autonomous Region and surrounding provinces of China and Thailand. The macroscopic features of the collected specimens were photographed and recorded, along with their odor and the fresh specimens’ changes in color upon injury. The specimens were dried completely overnight at 55 °C using a food desiccator, sealed in plastic bags, and deposited in the Herbarium Mycologicum Academiae Sinicae, Beijing, China (HMAS).

The anatomical and cytological features, including lamellae, pileipellis, basidiospores, basidia, and cystidia, of the dried specimens were observed following the protocols described in [22]. For microscopic characterization, the sections were mounted in 5% KOH solution. Thirty measurements of mature spores were taken for each specimen, along with twenty measurements of basidia and cystidia, which included x, the mean of length by width ± SD; Q, the quotient of basidiospore length to width; and Qm, the mean of Q-values ± SD [23]. The hymenial cystidia and pileocystidia were stained with 1% aqueous Congo red solution [24]. The color designation referred to methuen handbook of colour.

2.2. DNA Extraction, PCR Amplification, and Sequencing

Genomic DNA was extracted from 5 to 10 mg of dried specimen using a Broad-spectrum Plant Rapid Genomic DNA Kit (Biomed, Beijing, China) and preserved at −20 °C.

We used primers ITS4 and ITS5 [25] for the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of the nuclear ribosomal DNA repeat, primers LROR and LR5 [26] for the Large Subunit (LSU) region, primers NS1 and NS4 [27] for the nuclear nrSSU-rDNA region, primers EF1-983F and EF1-1567R [28] for translation elongation factor alpha (tef1-α), and RNA polymerase II gene (rpb2) with 6F/7CR [29] and primers Af/Cr for RNA polymerase II (largest subunit) (rpb1) [30]. Genes were amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using the procedures mentioned in [26,28,29,31]. The PCR products were sent to a commercial biotech company (Baimaide Biotechnique Company, Beijing, China) for sequencing.

2.3. Molecular Phylogenetic Study

The sequences produced from this study and some generated by a previous work and deposited in the NCBI GenBank database were used in our phylogenetic analyses [2,7,9,19,20,32,33] (Table 1). Sequences of multigene data were aligned separately using Muscle version 3.6 [34], then manually adjusted to remove ambiguous regions in BioEdit version 7.0.4 [35]. The six partitions were assembled in PhyloSuite v1.2.2 [36] in the order of six loci (ITS, nrLSU, nrSSU, rpb1, rpb2, tef1-α). Maximum likelihood (ML) analysis was performed using RAxmlGUI 1.3 under a GTRGAMMA model with one thousand rapid bootstrap (BS) replicates [37]. Bayesian Inference (BI) analysis was performed using MrBayes v3.2.6 [38]. Six Markov chains were run for 2,000,000 generations, and trees were sampled every 100th generation. Burn-ins were determined in Tracer version 1.6 with an ESS value higher than 200, and the remaining trees were used to calculate Bayesian posterior probabilities (PP). The trees were displayed in Fig Tree version 1.4.0 [39].

Table 1.

Information of the sequences generated from this study. Missing sequences are indicated by “-”.

Species Specimen-Voucher Country ITS LSU SSU rpb1 rpb2 tef1- α Source
Gymnopilus penetrans HMAS 287405 China: Yunnan - OR915134 OR915221 - PP058997 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287412 China: Zhejiang OR913484 OR915135 OR915178 PP210943 PP058994 PP165679 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287413 China: Zhejiang OR913499 OR915128 OR915204 - - - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287415 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913483 OR915122 OR915208 PP210941 PP058992 PP165677 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287417 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913494 OR915118 OR915190 PP210948 PP058998 PP165675 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287418 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913504 OR915130 OR915174 - - PP165678 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287419 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913497 OR915117 OR915179 PP210937 - PP165676 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287423 China: Gansu OR913486 OR915114 OR915222 - - - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287424 China: Yunnan OR982115 OR915132 OR915180 PP210947 PP058990 PP165668 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287426 China: Yunnan OR982116 OR915133 OR915188 PP210946 PP058996 PP165669 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287433 China: Yunnan OR982119 OR915125 OR915173 - PP059007 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287434 China: Yunnan OR982120 OR915126 OR915193 - PP059009 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287438 China: Sichuan OR913507 OR915140 OR915201 - PP058989 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287439 China: Sichuan OR913506 OR915129 OR915210 PP210940 PP058988 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287441 China: Sichuan OR913496 OR915112 OR915176 - PP059002 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287442 China: Sichuan OR913489 OR915119 OR915177 - PP059000 PP165674 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287450 China: Sichuan OR913501 OR915124 OR915192 - PP059003 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287451 China: Sichuan OR913493 OR915127 OR915195 - PP059004 PP165680 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287452 China: Yunnan OR913524 - OR915220 - - - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287445 China: Sichuan OR913485 OR915121 OR915191 - PP059005 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287454 China: Sichuan OR913508 OR915131 OR915182 PP210942 PP058999 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287455 China: Sichuan OR913495 OR915139 OR915189 - PP059008 PP165681 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287456 China: Sichuan OR913492 OR915115 OR915197 - PP059001 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287457 China: Sichuan OR913500 OR915137 OR915214 PP210939 PP058993 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287465 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913505 OR915120 OR915183 PP210944 PP059006 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287469 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913488 OR915141 OR915206 PP210950 PP058987 PP165673 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287482 China: Hubei OR913502 - - - - - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287483 China: Hubei OR982114 OR976241 - - - PP165671 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287452 China: Yunnan OR913524 - OR915220 - - - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287471 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913503 OR915138 OR915185 PP210949 PP058986 PP165682 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287472 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913487 OR915113 OR915203 PP210951 PP058995 - This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287473 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913491 OR915123 OR915199 PP210945 PP058985 PP165670 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287475 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913498 OR915116 OR915186 PP210938 PP058991 PP165683 This study
Gy. penetrans HMAS 287477 China: Chongqing OR913490 OR915136 OR915196 - PP059010 PP165672 This study
Gy. penetrans TNS-F-61961 Japan KT368684 - - - - - Kasuya et al. (2016)
Gy. penetrans TNS-F-61963 Japan KT368685 - - - - - Khan et al. (2017)
Gy. penetrans PRM 901944 Czech R. MW750184 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. penetrans PRM 900954 Czech R. MW750186 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. penetrans PRM 901951 Czech R. MW750185 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. penetrans PRM 946166 Poland MW750183 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. hybridus MT163 China MK036417 - - - - - Liu and Bau (2019)
Gy. hybridus IB-78-226 Sweden AF501548 - - - - - Liu and Bau (2019)
Gy. hybridus BH11 USA MF773630 - - - - - Liu and Bau (2019)
Gy. hybridus HMAS 287432 China: Heilongjiang OR913479 - - - - - This study
Gy. hybridus HMAS 287414 China: Heilongjiang OR913478 OR915144 OR915200 - PP059011 - This study
Gy. suberis PRM-923698 Czech Republic HG969653 - - - - - Liu and Bau (2019)
Gy. suberis PRM-923697 Czech Republic HG969652 - - - - - Holec et al. (2016)
Gy. suberis PRM-923203 Spain HG969654 - - - - - Holec et al. (2016)
Gy. suberis TNS-F-61959 Japan KT368689 - - - - - Khan et al. (2017)
Gy. suberis HMAS 287416 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913522 OR915107 OR915209 - PP059023 - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287435 China: Sichuan OR913520 OR915106 OR915194 - PP059021 - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287440 China: Sichuan OR913523 OR915103 OR915211 - - - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287431 China: Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region OR913521 OR915108 OR915175 - PP059020 - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287443 China: Sichuan OR913518 OR915105 OR915181 - PP059024 - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287476 China: Yunnan OR913519 OR915104 OR915186 - PP059022 - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287421 Thailand: Nan OR913511 OR915098 OR915225 - PP059016 - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287422 Thailand: Nan OR913512 OR915099 OR915205 - PP059014 - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287425 China: Yunnan OR913509 OR915100 OR915223 - PP059018 - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287427 China: Yunnan OR913515 OR976239 OR976274 - - - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287428 China: Guangxi OR913514 OR915101 OR915226 - PP059017 - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287429 China: Guangxi OR913513 OR976240 OR915224 - - - This study
Gy. suberis HMAS 287430 China: Guangxi OR913510 OR976238 OR915227 - PP059015 - This study
Gy. dilepis INM-2-71867 Japan KT368680 - - - - - Khan et al. (2017)
Gy. dilepis TNS-F-61955 Japan KT368681 - - - - - Khan et al. (2017)
Gy. dilepis TNS-F-70390 Japan KU727215 - - - - - Kasuya et al. (2016)
Gy. picreus HMAS 287406 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913466 OR915146 OR915171 - PP058976 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287407 China: Zhejiang OR913470 OR915145 OR915164 - - - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287408 China: Zhejiang OR913471 OR915147 OR915168 - PP058970 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287409 China: Zhejiang OR913461 OR915149 OR915172 - PP058971 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287410 China: Zhejiang OR913469 OR915148 OR915165 - PP058969 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287436 China: Sichuan OR913462 OR915157 OR915169 - PP058972 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287437 China: Sichuan OR913463 - OR915161 - PP058968 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287448 China: Sichuan OR913467 OR915154 OR915162 - PP058974 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287449 China: Sichuan OR913465 OR915153 OR915167 - PP058973 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287464 China: Xizang Autonomous Region - OR915151 OR915170 - PP058977 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287462 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913468 OR915152 OR915163 - PP058978 - This study
Gy. picreus HMAS 287444 China: Sichuan OR913464 OR915155 OR915166 - PP058975 - This study
Gy. picreus TNS-F-61965 Japan KT368687 - - - - - Kasuya et al. (2016)
Gy. picreus TNS-F-61964 Japan KT368686 - - - - - Kasuya et al. (2016)
Gy. picreus IBUG-H Finland AY281003 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. picreus AS 97-103 Australia AF501557 - - - - - Rees et al.. (2002)
Gy. minisporus HMAS 287468 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913517 - OR915228 - - - This study
Gy. minisporus HMAS 287447 China: Sichuan OR913516 OR915096 OR915212 - PP058982 - This study
Gy. minisporus MT005 China MK036415 - - - - - Liu and Bau (2019)
Gy. minisporus MT012 China MK036416 - - - - - Liu and Bau (2019)
Gy. sp. HMAS 287470 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913480 OR915097 OR915219 - PP058981 - This study
Gy. sp. HMAS 287453 China: Sichuan OR913460 OR915150 OR915213 - PP058967 - This study
Gy. sp. HMAS 287458 China: Yunnan OR982118 OR915109 OR915215 - - - This study
Gy. sp. HMAS 287459 China: Yunnan OR982117 OR915102 OR915216 - PP059019 - This study
Gy. sp. HMAS 287411 China: Zhejiang OR913457 OR915094 OR915207 - PP058979 - This study
Gy. aurantipileatus HMAS 287460 China: Yunnan OR913458 OR915110 OR915159 - PP058965 - This study
Gy. aurantipileatus HMAS 287461 China: Yunnan OR913459 OR915111 OR915160 - PP058966 - This study
Gy. tomentosiceps HMAS 287463 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913481 OR915142 OR915217 - PP059012 - This study
Gy. tomentosiceps HMAS 287466 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913482 OR915143 OR915184 - PP059013 - This study
Gy. tenuibasidialis HMAS 287467 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913456 OR915095 OR915218 - PP058980 - This study
Gy. gyirongensis HMAS 287478 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913476 OR976246 OR976275 - - - This study
Gy. gyirongensis HMAS 287479 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913477 OR976245 OR976276 - - - This study
Gy. gyirongensis HMAS 287474 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913475 OR915156 OR915198 - PP058984 - This study
Gy. gyirongensis HMAS 287446 China: Sichuan OR913474 OR976244 OR915202 - PP058983 - This study
Gy. variisporus HMAS 287480 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913472 OR976242 OR976272 - - - This study
Gy. variisporus HMAS 287481 China: Xizang Autonomous Region OR913473 OR976243 OR976273 - - - This study
Gy. sapineus PRM 924999 Czech R. MW750187 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. sapineus PRM 915496 Czech R. MW750188 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. stabilis PRM 954258 Czech R. MW750182 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. stabilis M 0159312 Germany MW750189 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. subspectabilis TRTC 152281 Canada MN206898 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. subspectabilis CMMF001425 Canada MN206902 - - - - - Thorn et al. (2020)
Gy. subspectabilis MICH 10995 USA MN206901 - - - - - Thorn et al. (2020)
Gy. swaticus SWAT 000133 Pakistan MF149864 MF149865 - - - - R. Khurshid et al. (2023)
Gy. swaticus GJ1640 Pakistan MF149866 MF149867 - - - - R. Khurshid et al. (2023)
Gy. swaticus GJ1612 Pakistan MF149863 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. turficola IB 1998098a Norway AF325669 - - - - - Holec et al. (2021)
Gy. voitkii NBM-F00947 Canada MN206872 - - - - - Thorn et al. (2020)
Gy. voitkii FNL 2009 MS7-056 Canada MN206879 - - - - - Thorn et al. (2020)
Gy. voitkii NBM-F00943 Canada MN206867 - - - - - Thorn et al. (2020)
Gy. arenophilus GDA-47384 Spain EU518421 - - - - - Khan et al. (2017)
Gy. maritimus M.Contu s.n. IBUG Italy EU518419 - - - - - Guzmán-Dávalos et al. (2009)
Gy. orientispectabilis TMI37361 Japan MN206910 - - - - - Thorn et al. (2020)
Gy. speciosissimus CMMF002481 Canada MN206895 - - - - - Thorn et al. (2020)
Gy. luteus CMMF006463 Canada MN206889 - - - - - Thorn et al. (2020)
Gy. dunensis Hum-46 Pakistan MK088249 - - - - - R. Khurshid et al. (2023)
Gy. dunensis L90 Pakistan MK088248 - - - - - R. Khurshid et al. (2023)
Gy. dunensis L04 Pakistan MK088247 - - - - - R. Khurshid et al. (2023)
Gy. rubellus LAH36995 Pakistan OL964420 OL964421 - - - - R. Khurshid et al. (2023)
Gy. rubellus LAH36996 Pakistan OL964403 OL964404 - - - - R. Khurshid et al. (2023)
Gy. crociphyllus TNS-F-61956 Japan KT368675 - - - - - Kasuya et al. (2016)
Gy. crociphyllus TNS-F-61966 Japan KT368679 - - - - - Kasuya et al. (2016)
Gy. crociphyllus INM-2-87471 Japan KU727211 - - - - - Kasuya et al. (2016)
Gy. crociphyllus INM-2-87449 Japan KU727210 - - - - - Kasuya et al. (2016)
Gy. spectabilis TNS-F-61962 Japan KT368688 - - - - - Kasuya et al. (2016)
Gy. purpureosquamulosus IBUG-89-16 Switzerland AY280998 - - - - - R. Khurshid et al. (2023)
Gy. purpureosquamulosus K(M) 75214 Nigeria AY280979 - - - - - Liu and Bau (2019)
Gy. bellulus TENN 069859 USA KY744149 - - - - - Liu and Bau (2019)
Gy. bellulus SMNS-STU-F-0900398 Germany MF039254 - - - - - Eberhardt et al. (2018)
Gy. austropicreus OTA 60208 New Zealand OQ064819 - - - - - Beaumont
et al. (2002)
Gy. austropicreus OTA 70412 New Zealand OQ064892 - - - - - Beaumont
et al. (2002)
Galerina marginata LE-BIN-2272 Russia KY327302 - - - - - Liu and Bau (2019)
Ga. marginata IBUG-5246 Mexico AY281020 - - - - - R. Khurshid et al. (2023)

The bolded parts are the sequences generated in this study.

A total of fifty-nine ITS sequences and four nrLSU sequences of Gymnopilus were downloaded from GenBank for phylogenetic analysis. Galerina marginata (Batsch) Kühner was selected as the outgroup. The newly generated sequence samples from this study have been deposited in GenBank.

The resulting file after tree construction was used to view the phylogenetic tree using iTOL [40]. Bootstrap Support (BS) ≥ 70% was considered significantly supported. Bayesian posterior probability (PP) ≥ 0.90 was regarded as significant.

3. Results

3.1. Molecular Phylogenetic Analysis Results

The seventy-eight specimens of Gymnopilus collected in this study, which represented eleven species, were included in the phylogenetic analyses with the outgroup species Galerina marginata. During our study, seventy-six ITS sequences, seventy-three nrLSU sequences, seventy-five nrSSU sequences, fifteen rpb1 sequences, sixty rpb2 sequences, and sixteen tef1-α sequences were newly generated in this study (Table 1). There was a total of five thousand and thirty-one bp (base pairs) in the final alignment after assembling those six gene sequences, of which eight hundred and ninety-one characters are from nrLSU, five hundred and forty-four characters are from tef1-α, seven hundred and six characters are from rpb2, one thousand three hundred and twenty-seven characters are from rpb1, eight hundred and ninety characters are from nrSSU, and six hundred and seventy-three characters are from ITS. The phylogenetic tree of the ML and MrBayes topology were generally the same using those six gene sequences. The Maximum Likelihood tree is shown in Figure 1, with bootstrap and posterior probability values indicated on the branches.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Maximum Likelihood (ML) phylogram of Gymnopilus inferred from partial ITS, nrLSU, nrSSU, rpb1, rpb2, and tef1-α sequences. The tree is rooted by Ga. marginata. Maximum Likelihood support values (>70) and posterior probabilities (>0.90) are shown on the branch (ML/PP). The sequences produced from this study are in bold. “T” refers to the sequences from the types of specimens in this study.

3.2. Taxonomy

Gymnopilus gyirongensis R.L. Zhao and W.Q. Yang, sp. nov., Figure 2.

Fungal Names: FN 571665.

Etymology: —‘gyirong’ refers to the location where the type specimen was collected.

Typification: China, Xizang Autonomous Region, Shigatse, Gyirong County, Gyirong Town, N 28°23′45″, E 85°23′34″, 3441 m asl, 2 August 2022, collected by Rui-Lin Zhao and Xin-Yu Zhu, ZRL20220779 (holotype HMAS 287478).

Diagnosis: Pileus medium-sized with orange–yellow to brownish orange, covered with yellowish rust squamules and umbonate center; basidiospores medium-sized (6.2–6.8 × 3.4–4.3) μm with ornamentation moderately developed; scattered or gathered on mossy wood with rotting pine needles.

Macroscopic description: Pileus 12–30 mm diameter, plano-convex to plane, with a low broad umbo, orange-–yellow (4–6AB4–6) to brownish orange (5–6BC4–5), slightly wavy to serrate margins, moist surface covered with yellow and rust squamules, denser and darker in the middle of the cap. Context thin, pale white (1A1) to pale yellow (2B3), color unchanging upon cutting. Lamellae adnate to slightly adnexed, pale yellow (4A3) to yellowish brown (4B8), with a few ferruginous spots (7B6), crowded, unequal, L = 0.7–1.3 cm, I = 4.8–6.1 mm. Stipe 2.8–3.6 × 0.2–0.5 cm, cylindrical hollow, sometimes thickening at the base, fibrillose, pale white (1A1) from to the top and brown (7E7) from center to the base, color changing to yellowish brown (4B8), base with whitish or cream mycelium. Odor indistinct.

Microscopic description: Basidiospores (5.9–)6.2–6.8(–7.0) × (2.9–)3.4–4.3(–4.5) μm, Q = 1.6–1.8, avQ = 1.7, broadly ellipsoid, distinct suprahilar depression in side view, ornamentation moderately developed, germ pore absent. Basidia (18.5–)19.5–21.4(–21.8) × 5.1–6.0 μm, narrowly clavate, mostly four-sterigmate, rarely two-sterigmate, sterigmata 2.2–3.5 μm long, hyaline in KOH, oil-like droplets present. Cheilocystidia 21.2–26.8 × 4.8–6.8 μm, lecythiform to narrowly utriform, cylindrical, narrowly clavate, capitate to sub-capitate, hyaline, oil droplets present, thin-walled, well-defined basal clamp. Pleurocystidia not observed. Pileipellis is a cutis of filamentous hyphae, 3.6–11 μm diam, with very light rusty brown plasmatic pigment, thin-walled. Stipitipellis filamentous hyphae 4.4–7.5 μm diam, some inflated hyphae observed with constrictions at septa, thin-walled, clamp connections present. A yellowish pigment dissolves when lamellae are mounted in KOH.

Habitat: —Scattered or clustered on mossy, damp wood with rotting pine needles.

Other material examined: China, Xizang Autonomous Region, Shigatse, Gyirong County, Gyiron Town, N 28°23′45″, E 85°23′34″, 3441 m asl, 2 August 2022, collected by Rui-Lin Zhao and Xin-Yu Zhu, ZRL20220790 (HMAS 287479); China, Xizang Autonomous Region, Nyingchi City, Forest ecological monitoring station, N 29°39′2″, E 94°42′58″, 3880 m asl, 27 July 2021, collected by Bin Cao and Xin-Yu Zhu, ZRL20211058 (HMAS 287474); China, Sichuan Province, Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Garzê, Yajiang County, Gexigou National Nature Reserve, 15 August 2020, collected by Rui-Lin Zhao and Xi-Xi Han, ZRL20200269 (HMAS 287446).

Notes: Gymnopilus gyirongensis sp. nov. can be easily distinguished by its orange-yellow to orange–brown pileus covered with yellowish rust squamules and umbonate center. Microscopically, this new species has medium-sized spores with moderately developed ornamentation. In the field, another proposed new species, Gy. tomentosiceps, may be confused with Gy. gyirongensis due to the fact that they both have yellowish caps; however, they have different habitats: Gy. tomentosiceps usually grows on mossy, soil under coniferous forest trees, but Gy. gyirongensis prefers fruiting on damp wood with rotting pine needles. In this study, phylogenetic analysis demonstrated that four specimens of this new species formed a cohesive cluster with full support. Additionally, they were positioned closely to Gy. penetrans, Gy. hybridus, and Gy. tomentosiceps (Figure 1). Gymnopilus penetrans is similar to Gy. gyirongensis because they share the characteristic of a smooth pileus covered with yellow and rusty brown squamules on the surface and can be found under conifers and deciduous trees [2,32]. However, Gy. penetrans develop bigger basidiopores (7.2–9.9 × 4–5.5 μm) than those of Gy. gyirongensis [6]. Moreover, these two species have 29 base pair differences in their ITS sequences. The four ITS sequences of this new species display four or five base pair differences. Another similar species, Gy. hybridus, can easily be distinguished from this species due to it having bigger basidiospores (6–8 × 4–4.5 μm) and basidia (20–28 × 5–8 μm) [5,7,41].

Figure 2.

Figure 2

The morphology of Gymnopilus gyirongensis sp. nov. of holotype ZRL20220779 (HMAS 287478). (A) Basidiomata; (B,C) basidiospores; (D) basidia; (E) cheilocystidia; (F) pileipellis; (G) stipitipellis. Scale bar = 1 cm for (A); 5 μm for (BD); 4 μm for (E); 5 μm for (F,G).

Gymnopilus variisporus R.L. Zhao and W.Q. Yang, sp. nov., Figure 3.

Fungal Names: FN 571764.

Etymology: —‘variisporus’ refers to variable ornamentation on the spore surface during maturity.

Typification: China, Xizang Autonomous Region, Shigatse, Gyirong County, Gyirong Town, N 28°23′45″, E 85°23′34″, 3441 m asl, 2 August 2022, collected by Mao-Qiang He and Bin Cao, ZRL20220827 (holotype HMAS 287480).

Diagnosis: Pileus medium-sized, covered with yellow to rusty squamules; stipe yellowish brown to rusty brown; basidiospores 6.7–7.3 × 4.5–5.1 μm, golden brown to yellow–brown; scattered or clustered in meadows on moist ground of decaying pine needles.

Macroscopic description: Pileus 4–39 mm across, convex to plano-convex when young, becoming hemispherical to plano-convex or slightly concaved at maturity, yellow–brown (4B8), smooth in dried specimens, glabrous, with inflexed to involute margin, moist surface covered with yellow and rusty squamules. Context thin but thicker at the center, pale white (1A1) to yellowish brown (4B8), unchanging upon cutting. Lamellae adnate to slightly adnexed, crowded to close, pale yellow (4A3) to yellowish brown (4B8), and finally ferruginous with spots (7B6). Stipe 2.9–6.3 × 0.2–0.7 cm, cylindrical, hollow, fibrous, yellowish brown to rusty brown (2B3–5C5), base with white mycelium, lacking veil. Odor indistinct.

Microscopic description: Basidiospores (6.5–)6.7–7.3(–7.6) × (3.8)4.5–5.1(–5.4) μm, Q = 1.43–1.49, avQ = 1.46, ellipsoid, distinct suprahilar depression in side view, ornamentation moderately developed, not more than 0.2 μm high, golden brown to yellow–brown. Basidia 14.1–16.9 × 4.3–5.0 μm, clavate, colorless, with oil droplets or pigment, sterigmata 1.6–2.3 μm long with yellowish brown. Cheilocystidia 14.1–18.0 × 5.2–5.6 μm, utriform to narrowly lageniform, some cylindrical to narrowly clavate, hyaline, with obtuse or sub-capitate apex, base pedunculate or pedicellate, non-gut, well-defined basal clamp. Pleurocystidia absent. Pileipellis cutis hyphae 4–7 (8.5) µm in diameter, septate, crowded, branched, clamp connection present, non-guttulated, thin-walled. Stipitipellis cutis hyphae 6.5–9 µm in diameter, branched, filamentous, clamp connection present. A yellowish pigment dissolves when lamellae are mounted in KOH.

Habitat: —Scattered or clustered in meadows on moist ground of decaying pine needles, characterized by the absence of bark and cork, summer.

Other material examined: China, Xizang Autonomous Region, Shigatse, Gyirong County, Gyirong Town, N 28°23′45″, E 85°23′34″, 3441 m asl, 2 August 2022, collected by Mao-Qiang He and Bin Cao, ZRL20220830 (HMAS 287481).

Notes:Gymnopilus variisporus sp. nov. is distinctive in having a hemispherical to plano-convex pileus covered with yellowish squamules and possessing ellipsoid spores with moderate ornamentation. In the field, Gy. variisporus has relatively similar features to Gy. gyirongensis sp. nov. because they both possess yellowish pileus covered with rust squamules, but Gy. variisporus has bigger basidiospores (6.7–7.3 × 4.5–5.1 μm). Phylogenetic analyses in this study showed that Gy. variisporus formed a distinct lineage with fully supported values and was a sister to Gy. swaticus, Gy. stabilis, and Gy. sapineus (Figure 1). The three known species have bigger basidiospores and different habitats compared to this new species. Their respective characterization are Gy. stabilis having yellowish orange to light orange pilei and possessing bigger basidispores (7.5–8.5 × 4.5–5 µm), growing in sandy soil [32]; Gy. sapineus has yellowish brown to rusty brown pileus covered with fibrillose-tomentum to tomentum–scaly, and it possess bigger basidiospores (7.3–8.2 × 4.5–5.2 µm), fruiting on dead wood, but Gy. variisporus usually scatter or cluster in meadows, specifically on moist ground [6,32]; Gy. swaticus has velutinous to slightly tomentose and pileus and bigger basidiospores (8.6–10.0 × 4.5–5.6 μm), growing on Piceae smithiana [2,19].

Figure 3.

Figure 3

The morphology of Gy. variisporus sp. nov. of holotype ZRL20220827 (HMAS 287480). (A). Basidiomata; (B,C) basidiospores; (D) basidia; (E) cheilocystidia; (F) pileipellis; (G) stipitipellis. Scale bar = 1 cm for (A); 5 μm for (BD); 4 μm for (E); 5 μm for (F,G).

Gymnopilus tomentosiceps R.L. Zhao and W.Q. Yang, sp. nov., Figure 4.

Fungal Names: FN 571765.

Etymology: —‘tomentosiceps’ means the pileus of this species is covered with tomentose scales.

Typification: China, Xizang Autonomous Region, Zayü County, N 28°36′46″, E 98°5′22″, 4110 m asl, 21 July 2021, collected by Rui-Lin Zhao, Ming-Yu Zhu, and Bin Cao, ZRL20210594 (holotype HMAS 287463).

Diagnosis: Pileus medium-sized, covered with tomentose scales; basidiospores 5.5–6.8 × 3.8–4.5 μm, coarsely roughened with large and irregular wart; cheilocystidia present, 21.2–26.8 × 4.8–6.8 μm, lecythiform to narrowly utriform, capitate to sub-capitate.

Macroscopic description: Pileus 8–26 mm diameter, hemispherical, pale yellow (4A3) to darker ochre–yellow (6C8), with undulating margin, covered with tomentose scales. Context thin, pale white (1A1) to yellowish brown (4B8), unchanging upon cutting. Lamellae adnate to slightly adnexed, pale yellow (4A3) to yellowish brown (4B8), with ferruginous spots and slightly wrinkled in dried specimens, glabrous, crowded, unequal, L = 0.7–1.3 cm, I = 4.8–6.1 mm. Stipe 2.4–3.9 × 0.2–0.4 cm, cylindrical, hollow, sometimes tapering at base, pearl white to brown (3B1-7E7), base with or without whitish or cream mycelium. Pleats yellow to rusty brown. Odor indistinct.

Microscopic description: Basidiospores (4.6–)5.5–6.8(–7.1) × (3.7–)3.8–4.5(–4.8) μm, Q = 1.45–1.51 μm, aveQ = 1.48 μm, ellipsoid, distinct suprahilar depression in side view, slightly thickened wall, coarsely roughened with large and irregular wart, germ pore absent, yellowish brown. Basidia 14.5–19.1 × 4.5–5.0 μm, narrowly clavate, hyaline, oil-like droplets present, two to four sterigmata, sterigmata 2.8–3.6 μm long. Cheilocystidia 21.2–26.8 × 4.8–6.8 μm, lecythiform to narrowly utriform, capitate to sub-capitate, hyaline, oil droplets present, thin-walled, well-defined basal clamp. Pileipellis cutis hyphae 2.7–7.1 µm in diameter, septate, crowded, branched, clamp connection present, non-guttulated, thin-walled. Stipitipellis hyphae 1.2–4.8 µm in diameter, branched, filamentous, clamp connection present. A yellowish pigment dissolves when lamellae are mounted in KOH.

Habitat: —Grows on mossy, moist soil under coniferous forest trees.

Other material examined: China, Xizang Autonomous Region, Bomi County, N 29°47′30″, E 95°41′50″, 3670 m asl, 24 July 2021, collected by Xin-Yu Zhu, Ming-Zhe Zhang, ZRL20210795 (HMAS 287466).

Notes: Gymnopilus tomentosiceps sp. nov. is easily distinguished by its pileus, which is completely covered with a pale yellow tinge. In the field, Gy. tomentosiceps is morphologically similar to Gy. orientispectabilis because it possesses minutely fibrillose–scaly, but Gy. orientispectabilis has bigger basidiospores (7.2–9.0 × 4.8–6 μm) and basidia (22.2–36.0 × 6.6–9.6 μm) [20]. In the phylogenetic tree (Figure 1), Gy. penetrans and Gy. arenophilus are sisters to Gy. tomentosiceps, consistent with previous studies [2,7,41]. Morphologically, they can be easily distinguished. Gymnopilus penetrans has finely innately rusty ochre to rusty brown fibrillose-striped pileus and moderately developed ornamentation in terms of the ellipsoidal spores, growing on the dead wood of conifers and deciduous trees, and all of those are different from Gy. tomentosiceps. [2,32]. Gy. arenophilus differs by its bigger basidiospores (8.5–10.5 × 5.5–6.5 μm) and longer basidia (26–35 × 7–9 μm). Additionally, it exhibits distinct growing conditions, being found on sandy soil and occasionally attached to wood chips or charcoal [14].

Figure 4.

Figure 4

The morphology of Gy. tomentosiceps sp. nov. of holotype ZRL20210594 (HMAS 287463). (A). Basidiomata; (B,C) basidiospores; (D) basidia; (E) cheilocystidia; (F) pileipellis; (G) stipitipellis. Scale bar = 1 cm for (A); 5 μm for (B,C); 6 μm for (D,E); 1 μm for (F); 1 μm for (G).

Gymnopilus tenuibasidialis R.L. Zhao and W.Q. Yang, sp. nov., Figure 5.

Fungal Names: FN 571766.

Etymology: —‘tenuibasidialis’ refers to the shape of the basidia of this species (narrow and long).

Typification: China, Xizang Autonomous Region, Nyingchi City, Bomi County, Spruce forest, N 29°52′50″, E 95°34′43″, 2700 m asl, 26 July 2021, collected by Xin-Yu Zhu and Ming-Zhe Zhang, ZRL20210911 (holotype HMAS 287467).

Diagnosis: Pileus medium-sized, abrupt papilla, yellowish to mustard with brown patches of varying sizes; basidiospores 4.8–5.1 × 3.7–4.0 μm, broadly ellipsoid; cheilocystidia present, 30.1–35.5 × 3.7–4.8 μm, slender.

Macroscopic description: Pileus 18–34 mm diameter, with abrupt papilla, yellowish to mustard (4B6–5C8), surface fibrillose, brown patches of varying sizes. Context thin, pale white (1A1), color unchanging upon cutting. Lamellae 4–6 mm broad, yellowish brown (4B8), adnate to sinuate, straight, sparser, unequal in length, edge entire or slightly serrulate, lamellulae mostly in two tiers. Stipe 1.3–5.7 × 0.2–0.6 cm, yellowish brown (4B8), cylindrical, hollow, fibrillose, dull surface, equal in thickness at the top and bottom. Odor indistinct.

Microscopic description: Basidiospores (4.1–)4.8–5.1(–5.6) × (3.5–)3.7–4.0(–4.2) μm, Q = 1.28–1.30 μm, broadly ellipsoid, with broadly rounded apices, moderately roughened with irregular warts and short ridges, non-dextrinoid to obscurely dextrinoid. Basidia 21.4–24.0 × 3.6–4.8 μm, four-spored, sterigmata 1.8–5.1 μm long, clavate to cylindrical, oil-like droplets present, usually constricted near or above the middle. Cheilocystidia 30.1–35.5 × 3.7–4.8 μm, lecythiform to narrowly utriform, capitate to sub-capitate but occasionally without a swollen apex, hyaline, well-defined basal clamp. Pleurocystidia not observed. Pileipellis cutis hyphae 3.8–13.2 µm in diameter, septate, crowded, branched, clamp connection present, non-guttulated, thin-walled. Stipitipellis hyphae 1.4–7.4 µm in diameter, branched, filamentous, clamp connection present. A yellowish pigment dissolves when lamellae are mounted in KOH.

Habitat: —Single or scattered under pines, usually in a wet environment.

Other material examined: No other specimens.

Notes: Gymnopilus tenuibasidialis sp. nov. is easily distinguished by possessing abrupt papill pileus with brown patches and presenting slender cheilocystidia (30.1–35.5 × 3.7–4.8 μm). In the phylogenetic tree (Figure 1), Gy. tenuibasidialis formed a distinct lineage separated from other Gymnopilus species with fully supported lineages. Gymnopilus purpureosquamulosus, Gy. dunensis, Gy. suberis, and Gy. dilepis were close to this new species in phylogeny; however, they can be easily distinguished by macro- and micro-morphology. Gymnopilus dilepis can differ by its convex to plano-convex pileus with ruby to violet brown squamules, bigger basidiospores (6–7.5 × 4.8–6 µm), shorter and thicker cheilocystidia (20–30.2 × 8–12 µm) [12,42]. Gymnopilus purpureosquamulosus differs in having brown–purple to purple pileus with a central depression, a surface covered with reddish violet squamules and lamellae that turn grey with KOH and FeSO4, and bigger basidiospores (7–8 × 4–5.5 µm) [18]. Gymnopilus dunensis can differ by its pileus, covered with greyish squamules when young; bigger basidiospores (8.5–10.7 × 4.9–6.6 μm) and basidia (24.9–29.4 × 8.5–9.7 μm); and the fact that it is gregarious in small groups on sandy soil [19]. Gymnopilus suberis can differ by its pileus (initially cream to white before finally tunin sulfur yellow), a fibrous stipe with a cortinoid veil, and bigger basidiospores (7.2–8.8 × 4.4–4.8 µm) and basidia (24–27 × 6.5 µm) [17]. Phylogenetically, an unidentified specimen represented by ZRL20151336 (HMAS 287411) is a sister to this new species; however, they exhibit large differences in spore ornamentation (Figure 1).

Figure 5.

Figure 5

The morphology of Gy. tenuibasidialis sp. nov. of holotype ZRL20210911 (HMAS 287467). (A). Basidiomata; (B,C) basidiospores; (D) basidia; (E) cheilocystidia; (F) pileipellis; (G) stipitipellis. Scale bar = 1 cm for (A); 5 μm for (B,C); 6 μm for (D); 4 μm for (E); 5 μm for (F,G).

Gymnopilus aurantipileatus R.L. Zhao and W.Q. Yang, sp. nov., Figure 6.

Fungal Names: FN 571767.

Etymology: —‘aurantipileatus’ means the pileus color of the type of specimen is orange.

Typification: China, Yunnan Province, Jingdong Yi Autonomous County, Ailao Mountains, N 23°36′–24°56′, E 100°44′–101°30′, 3166 m asl, 4 July 2021, collected by Rui-Lin Zhao, Mao-Qiang He, Min-Zhe Zhang, Xin-Yu Zhu, and Mei-Qi Wang, ZRL20210361 (HMAS 287460).

Diagnosis: Pileus medium-sized, with lemon yellow to orange yellow, not scaly; stipe 0.7–1.9 × 0.1–0.3 cm, yellowish brown; basidiospores 5.7–6.5 × 4.5–5.3 μm, ornamentation developed; scattered or clumped on damp wood.

Macroscopic description: Pileus 2–30 mm diameter, hemispherical, lemon yellow (4A8) to orange–yellow (5A8), surface smooth and glabrous, not scaly. Context thin, yellowish brown (4B8), unchanging upon cutting. Lamella adnate, pale yellow (4A3), close to crowded, with ferruginous patches, edge even. Stipe 0.7–1.9 × 0.1–0.3 cm, moderately yellowish brown (4B8), hollow, terete, equal or widened to the base, context moist, with spots of the same color as the lamella and gradually becomes denser near the cap. Odor indistinct.

Microscopic description: Basidiospores (5.3–)5.7–6.5(–6.8) × (4.3–)4.5–5.3(–6.0) μm, Q = 1.2–1.3 μm, broadly ellipsoid, verrucose with small to medium warts, coarsely roughened with large and irregular warts, ornamentation developed, golden brown to yellow-brown. Basidia 19.4–23.1 × 5.4–7.0 μm, four- or two-spored, clavate, colorless, with oil droplets or pigment, sterigmata 2.3–4.2 μm long, yellow–brown with occasional individual sterigmata yellowish brown. Cheilocystidia 9–16.5 × 3–4.8 μm, clavate, lageniform to narrowly lageniform with capitate apex, yellowish brown. Pleurocystidia not seen. Pileipellis cutis hyphae 2.4–6.7 µm in diameter, septate, crowded, branched, clamp connection present, non-guttulated, thin-walled. Stipitipellis hyphae 3.2–6.3 µm in diameter, branched, filamentous, clamp connection present. A yellowish pigment dissolves when lamellae are mounted in KOH.

Habitat: —Scattered or in clusters overgrown with wood, usually in a wet environment.

Other material examined: China, Yunnan Province, Jingdong Yi Autonomous County, Ailao Mountains, N 23°36′–24°56′, E 100°44′–101°30′, 3166 m asl, 4 July 2021, collected by Rui-Lin Zhao, Mao-Qiang He, Ming-Zhe Zhang, Xin-Yu Zhu, and Mei-Qi Wang, ZRL20210364 (HMAS 287461).

Notes: Gymnopilus aurantipileatus sp. nov. is easily distinguished by having smooth to glabrous pileus and small cheilocystidia (9–16.5 × 3–4.8 μm). In the field, Gy. aurantipileatus sp. nov. is similar to Gy. purpureosquamulosus, because they both have pileus broadly convex to plano-convex, light orange to orange–yellow. Gymnopilus picreus and this new species have the type of same habitat, dead coniferous trees. However, Gy. picreus is distinguished by its squamulose pileus, rusty stained lamellae, dark brown stipe with white pulverulence, and bigger basidiospores (7.0–9.5 × 4.5–6.0 μm) [7]. Compared to Gy. crociphyllus, which has oxide yellow to light brown pileus and sometimes mustard yellowish smudges, bigger basidia (27.8–30.9 × 6.3–7.5 μm) and bigger cheilocystidia (23.3–26.9 × 6.7–8.7 μm) [43], Gy. aurantipileatus sp. nov. is also different. Gy. austropicreus differs by featuring a pale lemon-yellow pileus and lamellae that darken to black with the application of KOH. Furthermore, it possesses bigger basidiospores (6.6–9 × 4.5–6 µm) and cheilocystidia (15–27 × 4–6 µm) [44].

Figure 6.

Figure 6

The morphology of Gy. aurantipileatus sp. nov. of holotype ZRL20210361 (HMAS 287460). (A). Basidiomata; (B,C) basidiospores; (D) basidia; (E) cheilocystidia; (F) pileipellis; (G) stipitipellis. Scale bar = 1 cm for (A); 4 μm for (B,C); 5 μm for (D); 3 μm for (E); 3 μm for (F,G).

4. Discussion

Based on a combination of morphological and phylogenetic analyses, seventy-eight specimens were identified as eleven Gymnopilus species. Six of them are known species, and they are Gy. penetrans (Fr) Murrill, Gy. hybridus (Gillet) Maire, Gy. suberis (Maire) Singer, Gy. dilepis (Berk. & Broome) Singer, Gy. minisporus (T. Bau & M. T. Liu), and Gy. picreus (Pers.) P. Karst. These known species have been reported in tropical and subtropical areas based on previous studies [2,4,5,6,7,8,42,45], and in this study, we found them in ten provinces. Five new species—Gy. gyirongensis sp. nov.; Gy. tomentosiceps sp. nov.; Gy. variisporus sp. nov.; Gy. aurantipileatus sp. nov.; Gy. tenuibasidialis sp. nov.—mainly from the Xizang Autonomous Region and surrounding provinces of China have been described.

In this study, the macroscopic and microscopic morphology of those five new species are described in detail. Some macro- and micro-differences can be used to separate them from each other. Gymnopilus tomentosiceps is characterized by having a small and tomentose cap, while Gy. tenuibasidialis has an abrupt papilla cap. The mature spores of these five new species are all distinct, with suprahilar depressions in side view, but the shapes and ornamentation on the surface (Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6) are different among these species. The basidiospores of Gy. variisporus and Gy. tomentosiceps are ellipsoid, while those of the other species are broadly ellipsoid; Gy. aurantipileatus has developed ornamentation on basidiospores, while the ornamentation of Gy. variisporus and Gy. aurantipileatus is very variable in the process of maturity (Figure 3 and Figure 6). In general, even though these five new species have similar macro characteristics, their characteristics in terms of spore shape and ornamentation are distinct and different from each other, as supported by our molecular phylogenetic analysis.

In the phylogenetic tree (Figure 1), twenty-nine included species of Gymnopilus segregate into three distinct clades (/penetrans, /crociphyllus, and /picreus), and these three clades are part of the six clades delineated in a previous study and are phylogenetically positioned in the same location [7,12]. In the /penetrans clade, Gy. hybridus is regarded as a synonym of Gy. penetrans by Holec (2005) [6]. However, in Europe, Gy. penetrans is classified as a singular species, with Gy. hybridus considered as a synonym [44,45], or as distinct and formed as two separate species (Gy. penetrans and Gy. hybridus) [46], and these species differ in color, the development of the veil, the presence of rusty spots on lamellae, and the shape of cystidia [6]. In our phylogenetic tree (Figure 1), Gy. tomentosiceps, Gy. hybridus, and Gy. penetrans show a close relationship but in different phylogenetic positions. Furthermore, a total of 21 nucleotide differences were detected in the ITS region between Gy. tomentosiceps and Gy. penetrans, and 24 nucleotide differences were detected between Gy. tomentosiceps and Gy. hybridus. Thus, those three species are identified as separate species. Differences in macro characteristics exist: Gy. prnetrans typically exhibits smooth or slightly wrinkled caps and stipe with white fibrillose partial veil remnants; Gy. hybrids feature hygrophanous streaks, as well as smooth and scale-free caps; and Gy. tomentosiceps is characterized by a cap covered with tomentose scales. Gymnopilus crociphyllus (Cooke and Massee) Pegler has distinctive characteristics, such as a fasciculate fruiting body, large pileus size, and a rumpled pileus margin [43]. In the /picreus clade, which includes Gy. austropicreus B.J. Rees and Gy. aurantipileatus sp. nov, this clade can be morphologcially characterized as having the same ornamentation on spores encased in a membrane which will gradually fall off with maturity. In another study [46], Gy. picreus (FT.) P. Karsten and Gy. austropicreus always emerged basal to the remainder of the species in the phylogenetic tree, which could refer to how they may be ancestral to other species in the genus [47]. Gymnopilus picreus groups grow as a saprophytes on the dead wood of conifers (mostly Picea abies; less frequently Pinus sylvestris) and, rarely, deciduous trees (Betula, Fagus sylvatica) [6], but other Gymnopilus species could grow on dead wood or on mulch-rich soil [2]. Thus, we suspect that the rationale for the types of wood rot they seek for nutrition is possibly ancestral in this genus.

In China, a total of thirty-one Gymnopilus species, including seven species originally described to be from China, have been published so far [7,9,21]. Gymnopilus is a species-rich genus, and the previous studies from China included several provinces, such as the Guangdong, Yunnan, Sichuan, Hainan, and Jilin provinces. In this paper, we have reported species from more parts of China, namely the Xizang Autonomous Region, resulting in a total of thirty-six species of Gymnopilus that have been recorded in China. Furthermore, four of the five new species are originally from the Xizang Autonomous Region, which indicates the special nature of the species, as they are from such a unique habitat. This study complements our understanding of Gymnopilus diversity and lays a foundation for the conservation and utilization of related Gymnopilus resources.

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by the Survey of Wildlife Resources in Key Areas of Tibet (ZL202203601); the Projects of Science and Technology Programs of Tibet (Project ID: XZ202202YD0031C), the Biological Resources Programme, Chinese Academy of Sciences (KFJ-BRP-009); the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project ID: 31961143010, 31970010, 31470152); the Biodiversity Survey and Assessment Project of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, China (2019HJ2096001006). We thank Bin Cao, Ming-Yu Zhu, Min-Zhe Zhang, Xi-Xi Han and Mei-Qi Wang for assistance in specimen collecting and Luis A. Parra for the changes to the naming of these new species.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, W.-Q.Y.; methodology, W.-Q.Y.; validation, W.-Q.Y. and J.-X.L.; formal analysis, W.-Q.Y. and J.-X.L.; resources, M.-Q.H., X.-Y.Z., S.-H.W. and D.P.; data curation, W.-Q.Y. and J.-X.L.; writing—original draft preparation, W.-Q.Y.; writing—review and editing, R.-L.Z. and J.-M.Y.; supervision, R.-L.Z.; project administration, R.-L.Z.; funding acquisition, R.-L.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All sequence data are available in NCBI GenBank following the accession numbers in the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.

Funding Statement

This research was funded by the Survey of Wildlife Resources in Key Areas of Tibet (ZL202203601); the Projects of Science and Technology Programs of Tibet (Project ID: XZ202202YD0031C), the Biological Resources Programme, Chinese Academy of Sciences (KFJ-BRP-009); the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project ID: 31961143010, 31970010, 31470152); the Biodiversity Survey and Assessment Project of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, China (2019HJ2096001006).

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

References

  • 1.Kirk P., Cannon P., Minter D., Stalpers J. Dictionary of the Fungi. CABI; Wallingford, UK: 2008. p. 335. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Khan J., Kiran M., Jabeen S., Sher H., Khalid A.N. Gymnopilus penetrans and G. swaticus sp. nov. (Agaricomycota: Hymenogastraceae); A new record and a new species from northwest Pakistan. Phytotaxa. 2017;312:60–70. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.312.1.4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.He M.-Q., Zhao R.-L., Hyde K.D., Begerow D., Kemler M., Yurkov A., McKenzie E.H.C., Raspé O., Kakishima M., Sánchez-Ramírez S., et al. Notes, outline and divergence times of Basidiomycota. Fungal Divers. 2019;99:105–367. doi: 10.1007/s13225-019-00435-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hesler H. North American Species of Gymnopilus. Mycol Mem 3. Volume 3. Hafner Publishing Company; New York, NY, USA: London, UK: 1969. pp. 1–117. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Rees B.J., Zuccarello G.C., Orlovich D.A. Relationships between Australian and Northern Hemisphere Gymnopilus species II. A preliminary phylogeny of species of Gymnopilus and related genera based on Internal Transcribed Spacer (ITS) region of ribosomal DNA. Mycotaxon. 2002;84:93–110. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Holec J. Taxonomy and nomenclature of Gymnopilus bellulus and G. microsporus (Agaricales, Cortinariaceae) Mycotaxon. 2005;92:361–370. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Liu M., Bau T. Gymnopilus minisporus sp. nov., a new species and a new record of the European species G. hybridus from northeast China. Phytotaxa. 2019;397:159–168. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.397.2.3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Guzmán-Dávalos L. Type studies of Gymnopilus (Agaricales) I. Mycotaxon. 2003;86:395–423. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Khurshid R., Naseer A., Khalid A.N. Gymnopilus rubellus sp. nov. from the coniferous forests of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Plant Syst. Evol. 2023;309:3. doi: 10.1007/s00606-022-01838-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Gartz J. Occurrence of psilocybin, psilocin and baeocystin in Gymnopilus purpuratus. Persoonia. 1989;14:19–22. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Guzman-Davalos L. Further investigations on Gymnopilus (Agaricales, Cortinariaceae). A new section and a new species from Mexico. Mycotaxon. 1995;54:117–124. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Guzmán-Dávalos L., Mueller G.M., Cifuentes J., Miller A.N., Santerre A. Traditional infrageneric classification of Gymnopilus is not supported by ribosomal DNA sequence data. Mycologia. 2003;95:1204–1214. doi: 10.1080/15572536.2004.11833028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Guzmán-Dávalos L., Contu M., Ortega A., Vizzini A., Herrera M., Ovrebo C., Rodríguez A., Villalobos-Arámbula A., Palomera V., Vargas G., et al. New morphological and molecular data on Gymnopilus purpureosquamulosus and its phylogenetic relationships among similar species. Sydowia. 2008;60:41–56. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Guzmán-Dávalos L., Ortega A., Contu M., Vizzini A., Rodríguez A., Villalobos-Arámbula A.R., Santerre A. Gymnopilus maritimus (Basidiomycota, Agaricales), a new species from coastal psammophilous plant communities of northern Sardinia, Italy, and notes on G. arenophilus. Mycol. Prog. 2009;8:195–205. doi: 10.1007/s11557-009-0591-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Rees B., Marchant A., Zuccarello G. A tale of two species—Possible origins of red to purple-coloured Gymnopilus species in Europe. Australas. Mycol. 2004;22:57–72. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ortega A., Esteve-Raventós F. A new species of Gymnopilus (Cortinariaceae) from sandy soils in Pinus forests. Persoonia. 2005;18:505–510. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Holec J., Kříž M., Kolařík M., Žák M. Mediterranean fungus Gymnopilus suberis discovered in Central Europe–A consequence of global warming. Sydowia. 2016;68:69–85. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Acharya K., Paloi S., Dutta A.K., Sikder R., Saha T. Gymnopilus purpureosquamulosus Høil. (Agaricales, Basidiomycota): A new distributional record from India. Check List. 2017;13:2064. doi: 10.15560/13.2.2064. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Bashir H., Jabeen S., Bashir H., Khalid A.N. Gymnopilus dunensis, a new species from Punjab province, Pakistan. Phytotaxa. 2020;428:51–59. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.428.1.5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Thorn R.G., Malloch D.W., Saar I., Lamoureux Y., Nagasawa E., Redhead S.A., Margaritescu S., Moncalvo J.-M. New species in the Gymnopilus junonius group (Basidiomycota: Agaricales) Botany. 2020;98:293–315. doi: 10.1139/cjb-2020-0006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Li Y.J., Li T.H., Tu L.G. Distribution of known species of Gymnopilus from China and a new record to the Chinese mainland. J. Fungal Res. 2012;10:8–12. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Li J.-X., He M.-Q., Zhao R.-L. Three new species of Micropsalliota (Agaricaceae, Agaricales) from China. Phytotaxa. 2021;491:167–176. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.491.2.6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.He M., Hyde K.D., Cheewangkoon R., Zhao R. Two new species of Micropsalliota (Agaricaceae/Agaricales) from Thailand. Phytotaxa. 2020;453:137–144. doi: 10.11646/phytotaxa.453.2.5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Heilmann-Clausen J., Verbeken A., Vesterholt J., Leonard P. The genus Lactarius: Book review. Field Mycol. 2000;1:6. doi: 10.1016/S1468-1641(10)60005-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.White T.J., Bruns T., Lee S., Taylor J. PCR Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications. Volume 18. Academic Press; New York, NY, USA: 1990. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics; pp. 315–322. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Moncalvo J.-M., Lutzoni F.M., Rehner S.A., Johnson J., Vilgalys R. Phylogenetic Relationships of Agaric Fungi Based on Nuclear Large Subunit Ribosomal DNA Sequences. Syst. Biol. 2000;49:278–305. doi: 10.1093/sysbio/49.2.278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.O’Donnell K., Cigelnik E., Weber N.S., Trappe J.M. Phylogenetic relationships among ascomycetous truffles and the true and false morels inferred from 18S and 28S ribosomal DNA sequence analysis. Mycologia. 1997;89:48–65. doi: 10.1080/00275514.1997.12026754. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Morehouse E.A., James T.Y., Ganley A.R.D., Vilgalys R., Berger L., Murphy P.J., Longcore J.E. Multilocus sequence typing suggests the chytrid pathogen of amphibians is a recently emerged clone. Mol. Ecol. 2003;12:395–403. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-294X.2003.01732.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Matheny P.B., Wang Z., Binder M., Curtis J.M., Lim Y.W., Nilsson R.H., Hughes K.W., Hofstetter V., Ammirati J.F., Schoch C.L., et al. Contributions of rpb2 and tef1 to the phylogeny of mushrooms and allies (Basidiomycota, Fungi) Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2007;43:430–451. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2006.08.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Matheny P.B., Liu Y.J., Ammirati J.F., Hall B.D. Using RPB1 sequences to improve phylogenetic inference among mushrooms (Inocybe, Agaricales) Am. J. Bot. 2002;89:688–698. doi: 10.3732/ajb.89.4.688. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Zhao R., Karunarathna S., Raspé O., Parra L.A., Guinberteau J., Moinard M., De Kesel A., Barroso G., Courtecuisse R., Hyde K.D., et al. Major clades in tropical Agaricus. Fungal Divers. 2011;51:279–296. doi: 10.1007/s13225-011-0136-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Holec J., Borovička J., Peintner U., Kolařík M. Towards consolidation of Gymnopilus taxonomy: The case of G. stabilis, G. sapineus, and G. penetrans. Mycol. Prog. 2022;21:327–343. doi: 10.1007/s11557-021-01745-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Kasuya T., Kobayashi T., Kurokawa E., Pham H.N., Hosaka K., Terashima Y. Three species of Gymnopilus newly recorded in Japan. Jpn. J. Mycol. 2016;57:31–45. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Edgar R.C. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:1792–1797. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh340. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hall T.A. BioEdit: A user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucl. Acids Symp. Ser. 1999;41:95–98. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Zhang D., Gao F., Jakovlić I., Zhou H., Zhang J., Li W.X., Wang G.T. PhyloSuite: An integrated and scalable desktop platform for streamlined molecular sequence data management and evolutionary phylogenetics studies. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2020;20:348–355. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.13096. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Silvestro D., Michalak I. raxmlGUI: A graphical front-end for RAxML. Org. Divers. Evol. 2012;12:335–337. doi: 10.1007/s13127-011-0056-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Ronquist F., Huelsenbeck J.P. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics. 2003;19:1572–1574. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Rambaut A. Free Figure Drawing Tool Version 1.2.2. Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh [J]. URL. 2006. [(accessed on 30 December 2023)]. Available online: http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk.
  • 40.Letunic I., Bork P. Interactive Tree of Life (iTOL) v5: An online tool for phylogenetic tree display and annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49:W293–W296. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkab301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Rees B., Strid Å. Relationships between Australian and Northern hemisphere Gymnopilus species 1: New species and common misconceptions regarding earlier names. Australas. Mycol. 2001;20:30–49. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Suwannarach N., Kumla J., Sri-Ngernyuang K., Lumyong S. Gymnopilus dilepis, a new record in Thailand. Mycotaxon. 2017;132:337–341. doi: 10.5248/132.337. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Cho H.J., Lee H., Park J.Y., Park M.S., Kim N.K., Eimes J.A., Kim C., Han S.-K., Lim Y.W. Seven New Recorded Species in Five Genera of the Strophariaceae in Korea. Mycobiology. 2016;44:137–145. doi: 10.5941/MYCO.2016.44.3.137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Rees B.J. Ph.D. Thesis. School of Biological Science, University of New South Wales; Sydney, Australia: 1996. A Taxonomic Study of the Genera Gymnopilus, Pyrrhoglossum and Phaeocollybia in Southern Australia; pp. 238–240. Volume 4. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Guzman-Davalos L. New records of the genus Gymnopilus (Agaricales, Cortinariaceae) from Mexico. Mycotaxon. 1996;67:61–78. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Rees B., Marchant A., Zuccarello G., Heslewood M., Bartlett J. A southern hemisphere contribution to the phylogenetic study of the agarics. Australas. Mycol. 2003;21:102–110. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Høiland K. The genus Gymnopilus in Norway. Mycotax. 1990;39:257–279. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

All sequence data are available in NCBI GenBank following the accession numbers in the manuscript.


Articles from Journal of Fungi are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES