Skip to main content
NCBI home page
MycoKeys logoLink to MycoKeys
. 2026 Oct 9;141:315–336. doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.141.210190

Morphological and molecular identification of two new wood-inhabiting species of Hyphoderma (Basidiomycota) from Qinghai, northwestern China

Xin Li 1, Yujin Cui 1, Rui Xing 2, Yucheng Dai 1, Yuan Yuan 1, Yingda Wu 1,3,✉
PMCID: PMC13675723  PMID: 42892976

Abstract

Wood-inhabiting fungi serve as primary decomposers of lignocellulose in forest ecosystems, facilitating carbon release and nutrient turnover. These processes are essential for sustaining material cycling, energy flow, and soil health. The genus Hyphoderma, within the Basidiomycota, is a notable group among wood-inhabiting fungi. This study introduces two new resupinate, adnate, wood-inhabiting fungal taxa, Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum and H. tabuliformis, based on morphological and molecular phylogenetic analyses. Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum is distinguished by light vinaceous gray fresh basidiomata with a smooth hymenophore, a monomitic hyphal system with clamp connections on generative hyphae, cylindrical cystidia, the presence of fusoid cystidioles, and subcylindrical to cylindrical basidiospores measuring 10.4–14.9 × 5.2–7.1 µm. In contrast, H. tabuliformis exhibits white to cream fresh basidiomata with an arachnoid hymenophore, encrusted generative hyphae, clavate cystidia, and subcylindrical basidiospores measuring 8.7–12.2 × 3.6–4.2 µm. The discovery of two new species in Qinghai enriches the diversity of Hyphoderma and provides additional morphological and molecular data for the genus.

Key words: Hyphodermataceae , phylogeny, taxonomy, wood-rotting fungi

Introduction

Wood-inhabiting fungi grow on various woody materials and constitute an important group of microorganisms (Yuan et al. 2020, 2026; Wu et al. 2022; Liu et al. 2025; Guan et al. 2026). Some of these fungi can decompose and utilize wood, thereby facilitating nutrient cycling in forest ecosystems, and are vital components of these ecosystems (Si et al. 2011; Wang et al. 2023). In addition, certain species, such as medicinal fungi and forest pathogens, have significant economic value (Wu et al. 2019; Yuan et al. 2021; Bhunjun et al. 2024). Although several wood-inhabiting fungi have been described from western China (Dai et al. 2004a; Wu et al. 2017; Yuan et al. 2021), the diversity of this group remains poorly known. Hyphoderma Wallr., a member of the family Hyphodermataceae Jülich (Polyporales, Basidiomycota), was established by Wallroth (1833) and typified by H. setigerum (Fr.) Donk. The genus is characterized by resupinate to effuse-reflexed, adnate, whitish to yellowish basidiomata of ceraceous consistency, a smooth to tuberculate or hydnoid hymenophore, a monomitic (rarely dimitic) hyphal system with clamp connections, the presence or absence of cystidia, suburniform to subcylindrical basidia, and ellipsoid to subglobose, smooth, thin-walled basidiospores (Bernicchia and Gorjón 2010).

The genus Hyphoderma was first introduced by Wallroth (1833) with eight species based on a broad concept that included both resupinate and thelephoroid (clavarioid) forms. After its establishment, the genus was largely neglected until the mid-20th century, when the Dutch mycologist M.A. Donk undertook extensive revisions (Donk 1949, 1957). Donk (1949) selected Hyphoderma spiculosum (syn. Thelephora setigera) as the type, arguing that it was the most prominent element among the taxa listed by Wallroth and also the one most in accordance with the genus description. Subsequently, Donk (1957) provided a more thorough revision of the genus, recognizing 25 species and formally adopting the combination H. setigerum (Fr.) Donk for the type species, thereby confirming H. spiculosum as a later synonym of H. setigerum. Following Donk’s revisions, several taxonomists attempted to subdivide the genus at the sectional level (Parmasto 1968; Eriksson and Ryvarden 1975).

Parmasto (1968) divided Hyphoderma into three sections, namely Hyphoderma, Mutatoderma, and Stephanocystis. Eriksson and Ryvarden (1975) considered the genus to be unclearly delimited and, anticipating a future subdivision, proposed 12 possible natural species groups as a basis for future taxonomic revision. In the 21st century, molecular phylogenetic studies have profoundly reshaped the traditional classification of Hyphoderma (Larsson 2007). As a result, species possessing distinctive structures such as echinocysts were segregated and transferred to a reinstated older genus, Peniophorella. This changed the concept of Hyphoderma to a narrower circumscription.

To date, 137 species of Hyphoderma have been discovered worldwide, among which 45 have been reported from China (Guan and Zhao 2021; Li et al. 2026). During investigations of the diversity of wood-rotting fungi in China, four Hyphoderma-like samples were collected. Phylogenetic analyses based on nuclear ribosomal ITS and nLSU sequences were carried out to confirm their taxonomic status. Morphological and molecular evidence confirmed that the four examined specimens belong to two new Hyphoderma species.

Materials and methods

Morphological studies

The examined specimens are deposited in the Fungarium of the Institute of Microbiology, Beijing Forestry University (BJFC), Beijing, China. Macromorphological characteristics, including the color and thickness of the basidiomata, hymenophoral surface, and sterile margin, were examined under a stereomicroscope (Nikon SMZ 1000, Tokyo, Japan) at 4× magnification. Colors used follow Anonymous (1969) and Petersen (1996). Samples for microscopic examination were stained in Cotton Blue, Melzer’s reagent, 5% potassium hydroxide, and distilled water, and sections or tissues of basidiomata were studied in Cotton Blue at 1000× magnification using a Nikon E80i microscope with phase-contrast illumination (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan). Line drawings were made with the aid of a drawing tube. To show variation in spore sizes, 30 basidiospores were measured from each specimen. Stalks were excluded from basidia measurements, and the hilar appendage was excluded from basidiospore measurements (Yuan and Zhao 2024). Basidiospore measurements are presented as follows: (c) d–e (f) × (g) h–i (j) µm, where c and f represent the extreme minimum and maximum values of basidiospore length, each accounting for 5% of the measurements; d and e represent the minimum and maximum values within the 90% range; basidiospore width values (g–j) are given in the same manner. The following abbreviations were used: L = mean spore length (arithmetical average of all spores), W = mean spore width (arithmetical average of all spores), Q = values of the length/width ratios among the studied specimens, n = a/b (number of spores (a) measured from a given number (b) of specimens), IKI = Melzer’s reagent, IKI− = negative in Melzer’s reagent, KOH = 5% potassium hydroxide, CB = Cotton Blue, CB− = acyanophilous.

DNA extraction, polymerase chain reaction amplification, and sequencing

A CTAB plant genome rapid extraction kit-DN14 (Aidlab Biotechnologies Co., Ltd.) was used for DNA extraction and PCR amplification from dried specimens according to the manufacturer’s instructions, with some modifications (Liu et al. 2023). The ITS region was amplified with the primers ITS5 (5'-GGAAGTAAAAGTCGTAACAAGG-3') and ITS4 (5'-TCCTCCGCTTATTGATATGC-3') (White et al. 1990). The nLSU gene was amplified with the primers LR0R (5'-ACCCGCTGAACTTAAGC-3') and LR7 (5'-TACTACCACCAAGATCT-3') (Vilgalys and Hester 1990). The PCR procedure for ITS was as follows: initial denaturation at 95 °C for 3 min, followed by 35 cycles at 94 °C for 40 s, 58 °C for 45 s, and 72 °C for 1 min, and a final extension at 72 °C for 10 min. The PCR procedure for nLSU was as follows: initial denaturation at 94 °C for 1 min, followed by 35 cycles at 94 °C for 30 s, 48 °C for 1 min, and 72 °C for 1.5 min, and a final extension at 72 °C for 10 min. The PCR products were purified and sequenced bidirectionally by Sanger sequencing using the same primers at the Beijing Genomics Institute, Beijing, China. The newly generated sequences were deposited in GenBank. All sequences analyzed in this study are listed in Table 1.

Table 1.

Information on specimens and GenBank accessions used in this study. New sequences are given in bold. Type specimens are indicated with an asterisk, and “-” indicates unavailable data.

Species Specimen no. Locality GenBank accession no.
ITS nLSU
Climacocystis borealis FD-31 USA KP135308 KP135210
Diplomitoporus crustulinus FD-137 USA KP135299 KP135211
Hyphoderma alboarachnum CLZhao 30488* China PV470563 –
H. amoenum USO 286622 Canada HE577030 –
H. asianum CLZhao 18091* China OR141726 PP826262
H. assimile CBS:125852 New Zealand MH863808 MH875272
H. australosetigerum MA Fungi 92235* Chile MN963764 –
H. australosetigerum MA Fungi 92240 Chile MN963760 –
H. bambusinum CLZhao 29903* China PV469674 PV819428
H. cinereofuscum CLZhao 30341* China PQ492371 PQ511128
H. cinereofuscum CLZhao 30283 China PQ492372 PQ511129
H. cremeoalbum NH 11538 (GB) Sweden DQ677492 DQ677492
H. crystallinum CLZhao 9338* China MW917161 MW913414
H. crystallinum CLZhao 9374 China MW917162 MW913415
H. definitum NH 12266 (GB) China DQ677493 DQ677493
H. fissuratum CLZhao 6731 China MT791331 –
H. fissuratum CLZhao 6726* China MT791330 MT791334
H. floccosum CLZhao 17129* China MW301683 MW293733
H. floccosum CLZhao 17215 China MW301687 MW293735
H. fulgens CLZhao 37429* China PV829544 PV810095
H. fulgens CLZhao 39474 China PV829547 PV810098
H. granuliferum 5273 Canada JN710545 JN710545
H. grandineum CLZhao 30046* China PV470561 PV819429
H. grandineum CLZhao 43328 China PV470562 PV819430
H. guangdongense CLZhao 12657* China PP235513 PP235514
H. laceratum CLZhao 34242* China PV829552 PV810101
H. laceratum CLZhao 34672 China PV829553 PV810103
H. litschaueri NH 7603 (GB) Sweden DQ677496 DQ677496
H. litschaueri FP-101740-Sp USA KP135295 KP135219
H. macaronesicum MA Fungi 90388 USA KC984327 –
H. macaronesicum TFC Mic 15115 China HE577011 –
H. marginatum CLZhao 3404 China OM985717 OM985754
H. medioburiense NH 10950 (GB) Spain DQ677497 DQ677497
H. membranaceum CLZhao 5844* China MW917167 MW913420
H. membranaceum CLZhao 6971 China MW917168 MW913421
H. microporoides CLZhao 6857* China MW917169 MW913422
H. microporoides CLZhao 8695 China MW917170 MW913423
H. moniliforme Wu 0211-42* China KC928282 –
H. moniliforme Wu 0211-46 China KC928284 –
H. mopanshanense CLZhao 6498* China MT791329 MT791333
H. mopanshanense CLZhao 6449 China OM985720 OM985759
H. nemorale TNM F3931 China KJ885183 KJ885184
H. nemorale Wu 9508-14* China KC928280 KC928281
H. niveomarginatum CLZhao 25078* China OR141728 OR506179
H. nudicephalum Wu9307_29 China AJ534269 –
H. nudicephalum CLZhao 17839 China OM985721 OM985760
H. obtusiforme KHL1464 Spain JN572909 –
H. obtusiforme KHL11105 Spain JN572910 –
H. occidentale KHL 8477 (GB) China DQ677499 DQ677499
H. paramacaronesicum MA Fungi 87736* USA KC984399 –
H. paramacaronesicum MA Fungi 87737 China KC984405 –
H. pinicola Wu 0108-32 China KJ885181 KJ885182
H. pinicola Wu 0108-36 China KC928278 KC928279
H. prosopidis ARIZ HHB 8479 China HE577029 –
H. puerense CLZhao 9476* China MW443045 –
H. puerense CLZhao 9583 China MW443046 MW443051
H. qujingense CLZhao 26018* China OR141729 PP826263
H. setigerum FCUG 1200 Sweden AJ534273 –
H. setigerum FCUG 1688 Sweden AJ534272 –
H. sinense CLZhao 7963 China MW301679 MW293730
H. sinense CLZhao 17811* China MW301682 MW293732
H. sordidum CLZhao 27379 China OR141731 –
H. sordidum CLZhao 27390* China OR141732 OR506180
H. tabuliformis Dai 35238* China PZ745286 PZ745283
H. tabuliformis Dai 35239 China PZ745287 –
H. tenuicystidiatum Dai 31215 China PZ745288 PZ745284
H. tenuicystidiatum Dai 29223* China PZ745289 PZ745285
H. tenuissimum CLZhao 7221* China MW443049 MW443054
H. tenuissimum CLZhao 16210 China MW443050 MW443055
H. tongbiguanense CLZhao 39574 China PV470531 –
H. tongbiguanense CLZhao 39575 China PV470532 –
H. transiens NH 12304 Sweden DQ677504 DQ677504
H. tropicum CLZhao 17308* China OM985727 OM985768
H. variolosum CBS 734.91 China MH862320 MH873992
H. variolosum CBS 735.91 China MH862321 MH873993
H. weishanense CLZhao 22403* China OR141727 OR506181
H. yingjiangense CLZhao 37195 China PV470533 –
H. yingjiangense CLZhao 37232 China PV470534 –
H. yunnanense CLZhao 8845* China OM985728 OM985769
Open in a new tab

Phylogenetic analyses

The phylogenetic relationships of Hyphoderma were analyzed based on the ITS + nLSU sequences. Climacocystis borealis (Fr.) Kotl. & Pouzar and Diplomitoporus crustulinus (Bres.) Domański were used as the outgroups. To determine the phylogenetic affinities of the new species, the ITS sequences of the holotype specimens were used as queries in BLAST searches against the GenBank nucleotide database (Sayers et al. 2024), and the top hits with the highest similarity scores were retrieved for comparative analysis. The DNA sequences were aligned using MAFFT v. 7 with the G-INS-i option (Katoh and Standley 2013). Alignments were optimized manually in BioEdit v. 7.0.9 (Hall 1999) and concatenated in Mesquite v. 3.2 (Maddison and Maddison 2017). The partition homogeneity test (PHT; Farris et al. 1994) for the dataset was conducted in PAUP v. 4.0b10 (Swofford 2002) using 1,000 homogeneity replicates. The combined dataset was initially divided into four data blocks (ITS1, 5.8S, ITS2, and nLSU). The optimal partition scheme and substitution models for Bayesian inference (BI) were selected using PartitionFinder (Lanfear et al. 2017; Zhang et al. 2020) under the Akaike information criterion (AIC) within PhyloSuite v. 1.2.3. For maximum likelihood (ML) analysis, the optimal substitution models were automatically determined by ModelFinder (Kalyaanamoorthy et al. 2017), as implemented in IQ-TREE v. 2.2.0 (Minh et al. 2020).

The ML analyses were performed using IQ-TREE v. 2.2.0 (Minh et al. 2020) with the optimal substitution models determined by ModelFinder (Kalyaanamoorthy et al. 2017). Branch support was assessed using ultrafast bootstrap analysis with 5,000 replicates (Hoang et al. 2018). The BI analysis with MrBayes v. 3.2.7 (Ronquist et al. 2012) implemented the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) technique. Four Markov chains were run in two runs from random starting trees for 6 million generations for ITS + nLSU (Fig. 1), with one tree retained every 100th generation until the average standard deviation of split frequencies was below 0.01. The first 25% of the sampled trees were discarded as burn-in, and the remaining trees were used to reconstruct a majority-rule consensus and to calculate Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP) for the clades. The sequence alignments and the retrieved topologies were deposited in TreeBASE (http://www.treebase.org), under accession ID 32742. Phylogenetic trees were visualized with FigTree v. 1.4.2 (http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree), and additional layout was carried out using Adobe Illustrator CS v. 5. Branches that received ML bootstrap support ≥ 50% and BPP ≥ 0.90 were considered significantly supported. ML bootstrap support ≥ 50% and BPP ≥ 0.90 are presented on the topologies from the ML analysis.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

ML analysis of Hyphoderma based on the ITS + nLSU dataset. ML bootstrap values equal to or higher than 50% and Bayesian posterior probability values equal to or greater than 0.90 are shown. New taxa are given in bold.

Results

Phylogenetic analyses

In this study, 134 sequences from 79 fungal samples representing 50 taxa were used to reconstruct phylogenetic trees, including 79 ITS sequences and 55 nLSU sequences. The dataset had an aligned length of 2,040 characters, of which 1,397 (68%) were constant, 116 (6%) were variable and parsimony-uninformative, and 527 (26%) were parsimony-informative. For the BI analysis, the combined dataset was partitioned into three subsets (ITS1 + ITS2, 5.8S, and nLSU) based on the PartitionFinder results. The best-fit models selected under the Akaike information criterion (AIC) were GTR+I+G for ITS1 + ITS2, K80+I+G for 5.8S, and GTR+I+G for nLSU. For the ML analysis in IQ-TREE, the dataset was partitioned into three subsets (ITS1, 5.8S, and ITS2 + nLSU), with the best-fit models being GTR+I+G for ITS1, K80+I+G for 5.8S, and GTR+I+G for ITS2 + nLSU. The phylogenetic tree topology from the Bayesian analysis was similar to that from the ML analysis, so only the ML tree is provided (Fig. 1).

Taxonomy

Hyphoderma tabuliformis

X. Li, Yuan Yuan & Y.C. Dai sp. nov.

27FBFE96-920F-5F97-9B39-E574A4C72B34

864738

Figs 2, 3, 4

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Basidiomata of Hyphoderma tabuliformis (holotype, Dai 35238). Scale bars: 1 cm (A); 1 mm (B).

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Sections of the hymenium of Hyphoderma tabuliformis (holotype, Dai 35238). A–D. Basidiospores; E, F. Basidia; G, J. Basidioles; H, I. Cystidia; K. Generative hyphae. Scale bars: 10 µm (A–K).

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Open in a new tab

Microscopic structures of Hyphoderma tabuliformis (drawn from the holotype). a. Basidiospores; b. Basidia; c. Basidioles; d. Cystidia; e. Section of basidioma.

Diagnosis.

Hyphoderma tabuliformis is distinguished by membranaceous to ceraceous basidiomata when fresh, arachnoid hymenial surface, clavate cystidia, hyphae encrusted with crystals, and usually with oil drops inside basidiospores.

Holotype.

China • Qinghai Province, Huzhu County, Beishan Forest Park, Langshidang, GPS coordinates 36°53'N, 102°21'E, altitude 2,900 m asl., on a fallen branch of Pinus tabuliformis, 10 August 2025, Dai 35238 (holotype BJFC056499).

Etymology.

Tabuliformis (Lat.): refers to the species growing on Pinus tabuliformis.

Description.

Basidiomata. Annual, resupinate, adnate, without odor and taste, membranaceous to ceraceous when fresh, and up to 7 cm long, 1.6 cm wide, and 100 µm thick at the center. Hymenial surface arachnoid, white to cream when fresh, and pinkish buff when dry. Sterile margin indeterminate, white to cream.

Subicular hyphae. Monomitic, generative hyphae with clamp connections, thin-walled, more or less interwoven, encrusted with crystals, 3.0–4.5 µm in diam., IKI–, CB–; tissues unchanged in KOH.

Cystidia. Clavate, smooth, thin-walled, 48–68 × 4.8–6.6 µm.

Basidia. Clavate, thin-walled, more or less constricted in the middle, usually with oil drops inside, with four sterigmata and a basal clamp connection, 28–40 × 4.0–5.8 µm; basidioles similar to basidia in shape, but smaller.

Basidiospores. Subcylindrical to cylindrical, thin-walled, smooth, usually with oil drops inside, IKI–, CB–, (8.4–)8.7–12.2(–11.9) × (3.5–)3.6–4.2(–4.3) µm, L = 10.24 µm, W = 3.93 µm, Q = 2.57–2.64 (n = 60/2).

Type of rot. White rot.

Additional specimen (paratype) examined.

China • Qinghai Province, Huzhu County, Beishan Forest Park, Langshidang, GPS coordinates 36°53'N, 102°21'E, altitude 2,900 m asl., on a fallen branch of Pinus tabuliformis, 10 August 2025, Dai 35239 (BJFC056500).

Note.

In the phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1), Hyphoderma tabuliformis is closely related to H. medioburiense, although the ITS region of H. tabuliformis differs from that of H. medioburiense by 5.8%. Hyphoderma medioburiense differs from H. tabuliformis by its wider basidia (7–8.5 vs. 4.0–5.8 µm), longer cystidia (70–105 vs. 48–68 µm), and wider basidiospores (4.5–5 vs. 3.6–4.2 µm; Donk 1957). Morphologically, H. tabuliformis is similar to H. alboarachnum and H. prosopidis in sharing an arachnoid hymenial surface and similar hyphal structure. However, H. alboarachnum is distinguished from H. tabuliformis by having smaller basidiospores (5–6 × 2–3 vs. 8.7–12.2 × 3.6–4.2 µm) and lacking cystidia (Li et al. 2026). Hyphoderma prosopidis differs from H. tabuliformis by having wider basidia (8.0–11.0 vs. 4.0–5.8 µm) and wider basidiospores (5.5–8.5 vs. 3.6–4.2 µm; Telleria et al. 2012).

Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum

X. Li, Yuan Yuan & Y.C. Dai sp. nov.

93473390-34CF-5F37-B745-A29C6E83DD4A

864739

Figs 5, 6, 7

Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Open in a new tab

Basidiomata of Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum (holotype, Dai 29223). Scale bars: 1 cm (A); 1 mm (B).

Figure 6.

Figure 6.

Open in a new tab

Sections of the hymenium of Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum (holotype, Dai 29223). A–D. Basidiospores; E, F. Basidia; G, J. Basidioles; H, I. Cystidia; K. Generative hyphae. Scale bars: 10 µm (A–K).

Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Open in a new tab

Microscopic structures of Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum (drawn from the holotype). a. Basidiospores; b. Basidia; c. Basidioles; d. Cystidia; e. Section of basidioma.

Diagnosis.

Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum is distinguished by light vinaceous gray hymenial surface when fresh and cream when dry, cylindrical cystidia, fusoid cystidioles and oil drops inside basidiospores.

Holotype.

China • Qinghai Province, Tongren County, Shuangpengxi, GPS coordinates 35°56'N, 102°20'E, altitude 3,068 m asl., on rotten wood of Picea crassifolia, 24 July 2024, Dai 29223 (holotype BJFC049482).

Etymology.

Tenuicystidiatum (Lat.): refers to the species having thin cystidia.

Description.

Basidiomata. Annual, resupinate, adnate, without odor and taste when fresh, membranaceous, up to 5.0 cm long, 3.5 cm wide, and 100 µm thick. Hymenial surface smooth, light vinaceous gray when fresh, cream when dry. Sterile margin indeterminate, light vinaceous gray.

Subicular hyphae. Monomitic, generative hyphae with clamp connections, thin-walled, more or less interwoven, 2.5–3.5 µm diam., CB–, IKI–; tissues unchanged in KOH.

Cystidia. Cylindrical, smooth, thin-walled, occasionally with oil drops inside, 40–55 × 4.3–7.7 µm; cystidioles present, fusoid, smooth, thin-walled, 30–38 × 5.4–6.3 µm.

Basidia. Clavate, occasionally with oil drops inside, with four sterigmata and a basal clamp connection, 25–38 × 6.9–9.0 µm; basidioles similar to basidia in shape, but smaller.

Basidiospores. Subcylindrical to oblong ellipsoid, thin-walled, smooth, with oil drops inside, IKI–, CB–, (9.5–)10.4–14.9(–15.7) × (5.1–)5.2–7.1(–7.2) µm, L = 12.30 µm, W = 6.12 µm, Q = 1.89–2.04 (n = 60/2).

Type of rot. White rot.

Additional specimen (paratype) examined.

China • Qinghai Province, Xunhua County, Mengdatianchi Nature Reserve, GPS coordinates 35°51'N, 102°38'E, altitude 3,000 m asl., on a dead angiosperm tree, 12 October 2024, Dai 31215 (BJFC051474).

Notes.

In the phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1), Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum and H. tabuliformis formed two well-supported lineages (100% in ML and 1.00 BPP; 100% in ML and 1.00 BPP, respectively). The phylogenetic analyses revealed that H. tenuicystidiatum is related to H. obtusiforme, but the ITS region of H. tenuicystidiatum differs from that of H. obtusiforme by 4.4%. Hyphoderma obtusiforme is distinguished from H. tenuicystidiatum by having wider cystidia (8–10 vs. 4.3–7.7 µm; Eriksson and Ryvarden 1975). Morphologically, H. tenuicystidiatum is highly similar to H. microporoides, H. fissuratum, and H. transiens in having clavate basidia, similar hyphal structure, and a smooth hymenial surface. However, H. microporoides differs from H. tenuicystidiatum by having smaller basidiospores (8.5–10 × 2.5–3.5 vs. 10.4–14.9 × 5.2–7.1 µm) and capitate cystidia (Guan and Zhao 2021). Hyphoderma fissuratum is distinguished from H. tenuicystidiatum by having smaller basidiospores (8.5–10.3 × 3–4 vs. 10.4–14.9 × 5.2–7.1 µm) and lacking cystidia (Ma et al. 2021). Hyphoderma transiens differs from H. tenuicystidiatum by having narrower basidiospores (3.5–4 vs. 5.2–7.1 µm; Parmasto 1968).

Discussion

In this study, morphological and phylogenetic analyses were conducted on Hyphoderma specimens collected from Qinghai Province, and two new species were identified and described (Fig. 1; Table 1), raising the total number of Hyphoderma species known from China from 45 to 47 (Yang et al. 2023; Li et al. 2026). Because the molecular phylogenetic analyses included only a subset of the currently accepted species of Hyphoderma, phylogenetic placement alone cannot exclude the possibility that the newly collected specimens correspond to described species for which molecular data are unavailable. To address this issue, the two new species were compared with morphologically similar accepted species, especially those lacking molecular data, as well as those represented in the phylogenetic analyses (Table 2). The morphological characters compared included basidiomata morphology; cystidia type, shape, and size; basidia shape and size; and basidiospore shape and size. Therefore, although some accepted Hyphoderma species still lack molecular data, the recognition of the new species is supported by an integrated combination of molecular phylogenetic position, morphological diagnosis, comparison with the closest phylogenetic relatives, and comparison with morphologically similar species.

Table 2.

Morphological comparison of the new species with similar taxa of the genus Hyphoderma.

Species name Basidiomata Hyphal system Cystidia Basidia Basidiospores
Hyphoderma acutatum Hymenial surface smooth, whitish to ochraceous Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Subulate, thin-walled, 100–170 × 15–20 µm Suburniform, 25–30 × 5–6 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Ellipsoid, 7–7.5(–8–9) × 4–4.5(–5) µm
H. alboarachnum Hymenial surface arachnoid, white to cream Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Absent Cylindrical, 23.5–30 × 3.5–4.5 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Oblong–ellipsoid to cylindrical; 5–6 × 2–3 µm.
H. ayresii Hymenial surface smooth, whitish to pale pinkish buff Monomitic, thin- to slightly thick-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Subulate, thick-walled, encrusted, 60–160 × 15–30 µm Subutriform to subclavate, 37–47 × 10–12.5 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Ellipsoid, 11.5–13.5 × 7–8 μm
H. bicystidiatum Hymenial surface smooth, yellowish white to pale yellow Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections 1) tubular, thin-walled, 82.0–122.0 × 12.3–13.8 µm. 2) clavate to subclavate, thick-walled, 69.0–110.0 × 11.0–13.8 µm Clavate to subclavate, 13.6–22.3 × 6.2–7.5 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection subellipsoid to suballantoid, 6.2–8.8 × 3.0–4.1 µm
H. clavatum Hymenial surface smooth or slightly tuberculate, grayish clay Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Clavate or apically globose, thin-walled or apically slightly thick-walled, 30–60 µm long, 10–15 µm diam for the globose parts Subclavate, 30–40 × 6.5–8 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Cylindrical, 10–13 × 4.2–5.2 µm
H. fissuratum Hymenial surface smooth, cream Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Absent Narrowly clavate, 24–28 × 4–5.5 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Cylindrical, 8.5–10.2 × 3–4 µm
H. galactinum Hymenial surface smooth to tuberculate Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Cylindrical, often more or less moniliform with several constrictions, thin to slightly thick-walled, 40–80 × 6–10 µm. Subclavate to subventricose, 25–35 × 7–8 μm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Cylindrical to suballantoid, 13–16 × 4–4.5 μm
H. hjortstamii Hymenial surface smooth, yellowish white to pale yellow Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Subcylindrical, thin-walled, 40–55 × 5.6–6.8 µm Clavate, 17–26 × 5–6.8 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Suballantoid to allantoid, 8–11 × 3.1–4.4 µm
H. incrustatum Hymenial surface smooth to tuberculate, pale orange to greyish orange to greyish red Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections 1) tubular, thin-walled, encrusted, 76–90 × 7–8 µm. 2) capitate, encrusted, 33–43 × 4.6–11.7 µm Clavate, 27–39 × 6.2–8.7 μm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Ellipsoid to suballantoid, 10.8–16 × 4.3–5.2 μm
H. lunasporum Hymenial surface smooth, white to cream Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Cylindrical to subclavate, thin- to slightly thick-walled, 30–60 × 5–8 µm Subclavate to suburniform, 20–30 × 5–7 μm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Allantoid to lunate, 8–12 × 3–4.5 μm
H. malenconii Hymenial surface smooth to tuberculate, ivory yellow to light buff to pale olive–buff Monomitic, thin- to slightly thick-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Cylindrical, thin-walled, 35–90 × 7–12 µm Utriform to subutriform, 30–50 × 7–9 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Cylindrical, 12–15.5 × 5–6 μm
H. microcystidium Hymenial surface smooth, whitish Monomitic, thin- to slightly thick-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections 1) Lamprocystidia, slightly thick-walled, encrusted, 17–32 × 7–10.5 µm. 2) Leptocystidia, cylindrical, 20–65 × 8–13 µm Subutriform, 18–25 × 6.5–7.5 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Narrowly ellipsoid, 10–12.5 × 4–4.8 μm
H. microporoides Hymenial surface smooth, cream to pale buff Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Capitate halocystidia, thin-walled, 18–51 × 4.5–7 µm Clavate, 18.5–29.5 × 5–7 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Cylindrical to allantoid, 8.5–10 × 2.5–3.5 µm
H. rimulosum Hymenial surface smooth, white to ivory yellow Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Cylindrical, slightly thick-walled, usually encrusted throughout, 30–55 × 4–6 µm Subclavate, 22–32 × 4.5–6 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Ellipsoid, 6–7 × 3.9–4.1 μm
H. subclavatum Hymenial surface smooth, clay–yellow Monomitic, thin- to slightly thick-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Clavate, thin-walled, 40–70 × 8–11 µm, apically often with one to several secondary septa. Suburniform, 40–55 × 7–8 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Cylindrical, 10–12 × 4.2–5.3 µm
H. subglobosum Hymenial surface smooth, grayish yellow to grayish orange Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Clavate, thin-walled, 50.0–69.0 × 8.0–11.8 µm Clavate to subclavate, 22.0–34.0 × 6.8–10.0 µm with oily contents, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Subglobose to broadly ellipsoid, 11.8–13.1 × 8.0–10.0 µm
H. tabuliformis Hymenial surface arachnoid, white to cream Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Clavate, thin-walled, 48–68 × 4.8–6.6 µm Clavate, 28–40 × 4.0–5.8 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Subcylindrical to cylindrical, 8.7–12.2 × 3.6–4.2 µm
H. tenuicystidiatum Hymenial surface smooth, light vinaceous gray Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Cylindrical, thin-walled, 40–55 × 4.3–7.7 µm Clavate, 25–38 × 6.9–9.0 µm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Subcylindrical to oblong ellipsoid, 10.4–14.9 × 5.2–7.1 µm
H. transiens Hymenial surface odontioid, whitish, capucine buff to light ochraceous buff Monomitic, thin-walled, generative hyphae with clamp connections Subcylindrical to cylindrical, thin-walled, 63.0–76.0 × 9.4–11.8 μm Clavate to subclavate, 20.0–32.0 × 6.2–7.6 μm, four sterigmata, a basal clamp connection Ellipsoid to suballantoid, 9.6–10.6 × 3.4–4.2 μm
Open in a new tab

In terms of ecology and host associations, Hyphoderma is an important genus of wood-decaying fungi, widely distributed worldwide and playing a key role in forest carbon cycling (Dai et al. 2021; Zhou et al. 2023). Most Hyphoderma species grow on hardwoods, whereas a few occur on coniferous wood (Dai et al. 2004b). The two new species differ in host use: H. tenuicystidiatum was found on rotten wood of Picea and dead angiosperm trees, indicating a relatively broad host range, whereas H. tabuliformis was found only on fallen branches of Pinus tabuliformis, appearing to be more specialized. This suggests that different species within the genus may have distinct host preferences and ecological adaptation strategies, potentially reflecting differences in lignin-degrading capacity or niche partitioning, although most species are not strictly selective in their wood substrates (Dai 2010; Yurchenko and Wu 2015; He et al. 2019). Because sampling was restricted to a limited area in Qinghai, additional Hyphoderma species may remain to be discovered in under-surveyed areas, such as the margins of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau and the boreal coniferous forest zones of northeastern China. In addition, the present study relied solely on ITS and nLSU sequences, mainly because the vast majority of Hyphoderma species currently lack RPB1, RPB2, and TEF1 sequences in public databases, and incorporating these genes would substantially reduce taxonomic coverage. Therefore, future studies should expand sampling across broader geographic and habitat ranges, generate and deposit multilocus sequences of Hyphoderma in public databases, and incorporate these data into future analyses to further investigate the diversity, taxonomy, and evolution of Hyphoderma.

Key to species of Hyphoderma from China

1 Cystidia absent 2
– Cystidia present 5
2 Hymenial surface arachnoid H. alboarachnum
– Hymenial surface smooth 3
3 Hymenial surface cream when fresh H. fissuratum
– Hymenial surface white when fresh 4
4 Generative hyphae with clamp connection H. weishanense
– Generative hyphae simple with simple-septa H. yingjiangense
5 One type of cystidia present 6
– Two types of cystidia present 28
6 Cystidia encrusted with crystals 7
– Cystidia not encrusted with crystals 12
7 Basidiospores > 7.5 µm long 8
– Basidiospores < 7.5 µm long 11
8 Cystidia > 60 µm long 9
– Cystidia < 60 µm long H. fulgens
9 Cystidia thick-walled 10
– Cystidia thin-walled H. yunnanense
10 Cystidia subulate H. macrosporum
– Cystidia fusiform H. mopanshanense
11 Cystidia cylindrical H. rimulosum
– Cystidia tubular H. puerense
12 Basidiospores > 6.5 µm long 13
– Basidiospores < 6.5 µm long 27
13 Basidia 2-sterigmata H. fragilissimum
– Basidia 4-sterigmata 14
14 Halocystidia absent 15
– Halocystidia present 25
15 Septate cystidia absent 16
– Septate cystidia present 24
16 Cheilocystidia absent 17
– Cheilocystidia present H. marginatum
17 Hymenial surface grandinioid H. grandineum
– Hymenial surface smooth 18
18 Basidia > 40 µm long H. subclavatum
– Basidia < 40 µm long 19
19 Basidiospores > 6 µm wide 20
– Basidiospores < 6 µm wide H. tabuliformis
20 Basidiospores > 10 µm long 21
– Basidiospores < 10 µm long 23
21 Basidiomata membranaceous 22
– Basidiomata subceraceous H. hjortstamii
22 Basidiospores cylindrical H. clavatum
– Basidiospores subcylindrical to oblong ellipsoid H. tenuicystidiatum
23 Cystidia cylindrical H. litschaueri
– Cystidia moniliform H. asianum
24 Hymenial surface cracked H. subsetigerum
– Hymenial surface not cracked H. subpraetermissum
25 Basidia clavate 26
– Basidia barrelled H. qujingense
26 Basidiospores > 8.5 µm long H. microporoides
– Basidiospores < 8.5 µm long H. punctatum
27 Basidia clamped at base H. sordidum
– Basidia simple-septate at base H. bambusinum
28 Septate cystidia absent 29
– Septate cystidia present 32
29 Basidiospores > 9 µm long 30
– Basidiospores < 9 µm long H. laceratum
30 Basidia clamped at base 31
– Basidia simple-septate at base H. cinereofuscum
31 Basidiospores allantoid H. crystallinum
– Basidiospores cylindrical H. nitidum
32 Basidia 2-sterigmata H. pinicola
– Basidia 4-sterigmata 33
33 Hymenial surface grandinioid H. setigerum
– Hymenial surface smooth H. guangdongense
Open in a new tab

Supplementary Material

XML Treatment for Hyphoderma tabuliformis
XML Treatment for Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum

Funding Statement

This study was financed by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project Nos. 32370013, 32300013, 32161143013) and the macrofungal diversity of Qinghai Province (Project GHMB-2024-18).

Additional information

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Ethical statement

No ethical statement was reported.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) use

The authors accept full responsibility for the content of the manuscript, including the disclosure of any use of AI.

No AI tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript.

Funding

This study was financed by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project Nos. 32370013, 32300013, and 32161143013) and the macrofungal diversity of Qinghai Province (Project GHMB-2024-18).

Author contributions

The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: conception and design of the study: Li X, Cui YJ; data collection: Li X, Cui YJ, Xing R, Dai YC, Yuan Y, Wu YD; analysis and interpretation of results: Li X, Yuan Y; draft manuscript preparation: Li X. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Author ORCIDs

X. Li https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1625-8589

Y. Cui https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8706-6771

Y. Dai https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6523-0320

Y. Yuan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6674-9848

Y. Wu https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1295-4015

Data availability

All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text.

References

  1. Anonymous (1969) Flora of British Fungi. Colour identification chart. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, 1–3.
  2. Bernicchia A, Gorjón SP (2010) Fungi Europaei 12: Corticiaceae s.l.; Edizioni Candusso: Alassio, Italy.
  3. Bhunjun CS, Chen YJ, Phukhamsakda C, Boekhout T, Groenewald JZ, McKenzie EHC, Francisco EC, Frisvad JC, Groenewald M, Hurdeal VG, Luangsa-ard J, Perrone G, Visagie CM, Bai FY, Błaszkowski J, Braun U, Souza de FA, Queiroz de MB, Dutta AK, Gonkhom D, Goto BT, Guarnaccia V, Hagen F, Houbraken J, Lachance MA, Li JJ, Luo KY, Magurno F, Mongkolsamrit S, Robert V, Roy N, Tibpromma S, Wanasinghe DN, Wang DQ, Wei DP, Zhao CL, Aiphuk W, Ajayi-Oyetunde O, Arantes TD, Araujo JC, Begerow D, Bakhshi M, Barbosa RN, Behrens FH, Bensch K, Bezerra JDP, Bilanński P, Bradley CA, Bubner B, Burgess TI, Buyck B, Čadež N, Cai L, Calaça FJS, Campbell LJ, Chaverri P, Chen YY, Chethana KWT, Coetzee B, Costa MM, Chen Q, Custódio FA, Dai YC, Damm U, Santiago ALCMA, Miccolis Angelini De RM, Dijksterhuis J, Dissanayake AJ, Doilom M, Dong W, Álvarez-Duarte E, Fischer M, Gajanayake AJ, Gené J, Gomdola D, Gomes AAM, Hausner G, He MQ, Hou L, Iturrieta-González I, Jami F, Jankowiak R, Jayawardena RS, Kandemir H, Kiss L, Kobmoo N, Kowalski T, Landi L, Lin CG, Liu JK, Liu XB, Loizides M, Luangharn T, Maharachchikumbura SSN, Makhathinni Mkhwanazi GJ, Manawasinghe IS, Marin-Felix Y, McTaggart AR, Moreau PA, Morozova OV, Mostert L, Osiewacz HD, Pem D, Phookamsak R, Pollastro S, Pordel A, Poyntner C, Phillips AJL, Phonemany M, Promputtha I, Rathnayaka AR, Rodrigues AM, Romanazzi G, Rothmann L, Salgado-Salazar C, Sandoval-Denis M, Saupe SJ, Scholler M, Scott P, Shivas RG, Silar P, Silva-Filho AGS, Souza-Motta CM, Spies CFJ, Stchigel AM, Sterflinger K, Summerbell RC, Svetasheva TY, Takamatsu S, Theelen B, Theodoro RC, Thines M, Thongklang N, Torres R, Turchetti B, Brule den van T, Wang XW, Wartchow F, Welti S, Wijesinghe SN, Wu F, Xu R, Yang ZL, Yilmaz N, Yurkov A, Zhao L, Zhao RL, Zhou N, Hyde KD, Crous PW (2024) What are the 100 most cited fungal genera? Studies in Mycology 108: 1–411. 10.3114/sim.2024.108.01 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  4. Dai YC (2010) Hymenochaetaceae (Basidiomycota) in China. Fungal Diversity 45: 131–343. 10.1007/s13225-010-0066-9 [DOI]
  5. Dai YC, Wei YL, Wang Z (2004a) Wood-inhabiting fungi in southern China 2. Polypores from Sichuan Province. Annales Botanicci Fennici 41: 319–329.
  6. Dai YC, Wei YL, Zhang XQ (2004b) An annotated checklist of non-poroid Aphyllophorales in China. Annales Botanicci Fennici 41: 233–247.
  7. Dai YC, Yang ZL, Cui BK, Wu G, Yuan HS, Zhou LW, He SH, Ge ZW, Wu F, Wei YL, Yuan Y, Si J (2021) Diversity and systematics of the important macrofungi in Chinese forests. Mycosystema 40: 770–805. [in Chinese] 10.13346/j.mycosystema.210036 [DOI]
  8. Donk MA (1949) New and revised nomina generica conservanda proposed for Basidiomycetes (Fungi). Bulletin du Jardin Botanique de Buitenzorg 18: 83–168.
  9. Donk MA (1957) Notes on resupinate Hymenomycetes IV. Fungus 27: 1–29.
  10. Eriksson J, Ryvarden L (1975) The Corticiaceae of North Europe, vol 3. Coronicium – Hyphoderma. Fungiflora, Oslo.
  11. Farris JS, Källersjö M, Kluge AG, Bult C (1994) Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10(3): 315–319. 10.1111/j.1096-0031.1994.tb00181.x [DOI]
  12. Guan QX, Zhao CL (2021) Two new corticioid species: Hyphoderma sinense and H. floccosum sp. nov. (Hyphodermataceae, Polyporales) from southern China. Mycosystema 40: 447–461. 10.13346/j.mycosystema.200382 [DOI]
  13. Guan QX, Tohtirjap A, Fan LF, Dai YC, Li WY, Zhao H, Zhou HM, Alvarenga RLM, Gibertoni TB, Gates G, Liu HG, Tian XM, Li ZH, Deng CY, Zeng GY, Wu F (2026) Diversity and phylogeny of jelly fungi with longitudinally septate basidia in Auriculariales and Tremellales. Fungal Diversity 136: 136014. 10.65390/fdiv.2026.136014 [DOI]
  14. Hall TA (1999) BioEdit: A User-Friendly Biological Sequence Alignment Editor and Analysis Program for Windows 95/98/NT. Symposium Proceeding: Nucleic Acids Symposium Series, Oxford, vol. 41, 95–98.
  15. He MQ, Zhao RL, Hyde KD, Begerow D, Kemler M, Yurkov A (2019) Notes, outline and divergence times of Basidiomycota. Fungal Diversity 99: 105–367.
  16. Hoang DT, Chernomor O, Haeseler A, Minh BQ, Vinh LS (2018) UFBoot2: Improving the Ultrafast Bootstrap Approximation. Molecular Biology and Evolution 35(2): 518–522. 10.1093/molbev/msx281 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  17. Kalyaanamoorthy S, Minh BQ, Wong TKF, Haeseler A, Jermiin LS (2017) ModelFinder: Fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates. Nature Methods 14(6): 587–589. 10.1038/nmeth.4285 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  18. Katoh K, Standley DM (2013) MAFFT Multiple Sequence Alignment Software Version 7: Improvements in Performance and Usability. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30(4): 772–780. 10.1093/molbev/mst010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  19. Lanfear R, Frandsen PB, Wright AM, Senfeld T, Calcott B (2017) PartitionFinder 2: new methods for selecting partitioned models of evolution for molecular and morphological phylogenetic Analyses. Molecular Biology and Evolution 34: 772–773. 10.1093/molbev/msw260 [DOI] [PubMed]
  20. Larsson KH (2007) Molecular phylogeny of Hyphoderma and the reinstatement of Peniophorella. Mycological Research 111: 186–195. 10.1016/j.mycres.2006.10.002 [DOI] [PubMed]
  21. Li W, Wang H, Wang X, Liao X, Wang K, Subodini Nuwanthika WA, Zhao C (2026) Phylogeny, divergence time and historical biogeography of Hyphoderma (Hyphodermataceae, Polyporales): Introducing five new species from China. MycoKeys 129: 43–80. 10.3897/mycokeys.129.183371 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  22. Liu S, Chen YY, Sun YF, He XL, Song CG, Si J, Liu DM, Gates G, Cui BK (2023) Systematic classification and phylogenetic relationships of the brown-rot fungi within the Polyporales. Fungal Diversity 118: 1–94. 10.1007/s13225-022-00511-2 [DOI]
  23. Liu ZB, Yuan Y, Dai YC, Liu HG, Vlasák J, Zeng GY, He SH, Wu F (2025) Global diversity and systematics of Hymenochaetaceae with non-poroid hymenophore. Fungal Diversity 131: 1–97. 10.1007/s13225-025-00552-3 [DOI]
  24. Maddison WP, Maddison DR (2017) Mesquite: A modular system for evolutionary analysis, Version 3.2.
  25. Minh BQ, Schmidt HA, Chernomor O, Schrempf D, Woodhams MD, Haeseler A, Lanfear R (2020) IQ-TREE 2: New Models and Efficient Methods for Phylogenetic Inference in the Genomic Era. Molecular Biology and Evolution 37(5): 1530–1534. 10.1093/molbev/msaa015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  26. Parmasto E (1968) Conspectus Systematis Corticiacearum; Institutum Zoologicum et Botanicum Academiae Scientiarum RPSS Estonicae: Tartu, Estonia.
  27. Petersen JH (1996) The Danish Mycological Society’s colour-chart. Foreningen til Svampekundskabens Fremme, Greve, 1–6.
  28. Ronquist F, Teslenko M, van derMark P, Ayres DL, Darling A, Höhna S, Larget B, Liu L, Suchard MA, Huelsenbeck JP (2012) MrBayes 3.2: efficient bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Systematic Biology 61(3): 539–542. 10.1093/sysbio/sys029 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  29. Sayers EW, Cavanaugh M, Clark K, Pruitt KD, Sherry ST, Yankie L, Karsch-Mizrachi I (2024) GenBank 2024 Update. Nucleic Acids Research 52(D1): D134–D137. 10.1093/nar/gkad903 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  30. Si J, Li W, Cui BK, Dai YC (2011) Advances of research on characteristic, molecular biology and applications of laccase from fungi. Biotechnology Bulletin 223: 48–55. 10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2011.02.018 [DOI]
  31. Swofford DL (2002) PAUP*: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4.0b 10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
  32. Telleria MT, Dueñas M, Beltrán-Tejera E, Rodríguez-Armas JL, Martin MP (2012) A new species of Hyphoderma (Meruliaceae, Polyporales) and its discrimination from closely-related taxa. Mycologia 104(5): 1121–1132. 10.3852/11-344 [DOI] [PubMed]
  33. Thines M, Aoki T, Crous PW, Hyde KD, Lücking R, Malosso E, May TW, Miller AN, Redhead SA, Yurkov AM, Hawksworth DL (2020) Setting scientific names at all taxonomic ranks in italics facilitates their quick recognition in scientific papers. IMA Fungus 11: 25. 10.1186/s43008-020-00048-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  34. Vilgalys R, Hester M (1990) Rapid genetic identification and mapping of enzymatically amplified ribosomal DNA from several Cryptococcus species. Journal of Bacteriology 172: 4238–4246. 10.1128/jb.172.8.4238-4246.1990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  35. Wallroth CFW (1833) Flora Cryptogamica Germaniae; Nabu Press, Nürnberg, Germany, Volume 2, 1–923.
  36. Wang CG, Zhao H, Liu HG, Zeng GY, Yuan Y, Dai YC (2023) A multi-gene phylogeny clarifies species diversity, taxonomy, and divergence times of Ceriporia and other related genera in Irpicaceae (Polyporales, Basidiomycota). Mycosphere 14(1): 1665–1729. 10.5943/mycosphere/14/1/19 [DOI]
  37. White TJ, Bruns T, Lee S, Taylor J (1990) Amplification and Direct Sequencing of Fungal Ribosomal RNA Genes for Phylogenetics. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ (Eds) PCR Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications. Academic Press, New York, 315–322. 10.1016/B978-0-12-372180-8.50042-1 [DOI]
  38. Wu F, Chen JJ, Ji XH, Vlasák J, Dai YC (2017) Phylogeny and diversity of the morphologically similar polypore genera Rigidoporus, Physisporinus, Oxyporus, and Leucophellinus, Mycologia 109: 749–765. 10.1080/00275514.2017.1405215 [DOI] [PubMed]
  39. Wu F, Zhou LW, Yang ZL, Bau T, Li TH, Dai YC (2019) Resource diversity of Chinese macrofungi: Edible, medicinal and poisonous species. Fungal Diversity 98: 1–76. 10.1007/s13225-019-00432-7 [DOI]
  40. Wu F, Man XW, Tohtirjap A, Dai YC (2022) A comparison of polypore funga and species composition in forest ecosystems of China, North America, and Europe. Forest Ecosystems 9: 100051. 10.1016/j.fecs.2022.100051 [DOI]
  41. Wu SH (1997) New species of Hyphoderma from Taiwan. Mycologia 89: 132–140. 10.1080/00275514.1997.12026764 [DOI]
  42. Yang Y, Jiang QQ, Li Q, Yang JW, Cha L, Cheng LJ, Yang SQ, Zhao CL, Zhou HM (2023) Molecular systematics and taxonomic analyses of three new wood-inhabiting fungi of Hyphoderma (Hyphodermataceae, Basidiomycota). Journal of Fungi 9: 1044. 10.3390/jof9111044 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  43. Yuan HS, Lu X, Dai YC, Hyde KD, Kan Y-H, Kušan I, He S-H, Liu N-G, Sarma VV, Zhao CL, Cui BK, Yousaf N, Sun G, Liu SY, Wu F, Lin CG, Dayarathne MC, Gibertoni TB, Conceição LB, Garibay-Orijel R, Villegas-Ríos M, Salas-Lizana R, Wei TZ, Qiu JZ, Yu ZF, Phookamsak R, Zeng M, Paloi S, Bao D-F, Abeywickrama PD, Wei D-P, Yang J, Manawasinghe IS, Harishchandra D, Brahmanage RS, de Silva NI, Tennakoon DS, Karunarathna A, Gafforov Y, Pem D, Zhang S-N, de Azevedo Santiago ALCM, Bezerra JDP, Dima B, Acharya K, Alvarez-Manjarrez J, Bahkali AH, Bhatt VK, Brandrud TE, Bulgakov TS, Camporesi E, Cao T, Chen Y-X, Chen Y-Y, Devadatha B, Elgorban AM, Fan L-F, Du X, Gao L, Gonçalves CM, Gusmão LFP, Huanraluek N, Jadan M, Jayawardena RS, Khalid AN, Langer E, Lima DX, de Lima-Júnior NC, de Lira CRS, Liu J-K, Liu S, Lumyong S, Luo Z-L, Matočec N, Niranjan M, Oliveira-Filho JRC, Papp V, Pérez-Pazos E, Phillips AJL, Qiu P-L, Ren Y, Ruiz RFC, Semwal KC, Soop K, de Souza CAF, Souza-Motta CM, Sun L-H, Xie M-L, Yao Y-J, Zhao Q, Zhou L-W (2020) Fungal diversity notes 1277–1386: taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions to fungal taxa. Fungal Diversity 104: 1–266. 10.1007/s13225-020-00461-7 [DOI]
  44. Yuan HS, Zhou LJ, Zhu YQ, Wei YL, Zhang XJ, Zhao CL, Zhao H (2026) Species diversity of corticioid and hydnoid fungi in China and their medicinal, environmental, agricultural and industrial values. Mycosphere 17. 10.48130/mycosphere-0026-0004 [DOI]
  45. Yuan Y, Chen JJ, Korhonen K, Martin F, Dai YC (2021) An updated global species diversity and phylogeny in the forest pathogenic genus Heterobasidion (Basidiomycota, Russulales). Frontiers in Microbiology 11: 596393. 10.3389/fmicb.2020.596393 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  46. Yuan Y, Bian LS, Wu YD, Chen JJ, Wu F, Liu HG, Zeng GY, Dai YC (2023) Species diversity of pathogenic wood-rotting fungi (Agaricomycetes, Basidiomycota) in China. Mycology 14: 204–226. 10.1080/21501203.2023.2238779 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  47. Yurchenko E, Wu SH (2014) Hyphoderma pinicola sp. nov. of H. setigerum complex (Basidiomycota) from Yunnan, China. Botanical Studies 55: 1–8. 10.1186/s40529-014-0071-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  48. Yurchenko E, Wu SH (2015) Hyphoderma moniliforme and H. nemorale (Basidiomycota) newly recorded from China. Mycosphere 6: 113–121. 10.5943/mycosphere/6/1/11 [DOI]
  49. Zhang D, Gao F, Jakovlić I, Zou H, Zhang J, Li WX, Wang GT (2020) PhyloSuite: An integrated and scalable desktop platform for streamlined molecular sequence data management and evolutionary phylogenetics studies. Molecular Ecology Resources 20: 348–355. 10.1111/1755-0998.13096 [DOI] [PubMed]
  50. Zhang QY, Liu HG, Papp V, Zhou M, Dai YC, Yuan Y (2023) New insights into the classification and evolution of Favolaschia (Agaricales, Basidiomycota) and its potential distribution, with descriptions of eight new species. Mycosphere 14: 777–814. 10.5943/mycosphere/14/1/10 [DOI]
  51. Zhou M, Dai YC, Vlasák J, Liu HG, Yuan Y (2023) Updated systematics of Trichaptum s.l. (Hymenochaetales, Basidiomycota). Mycosphere 14: 815–917. 10.5943/mycosphere/14/1/11 [DOI]

Associated Data

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

Supplementary Materials

XML Treatment for Hyphoderma tabuliformis
mycokeys.141.210190-treatment1.xml (17.8KB, xml)
XML Treatment for Hyphoderma tenuicystidiatum
mycokeys.141.210190-treatment2.xml (19.2KB, xml)

Data Availability Statement

All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text.

Articles from MycoKeys are provided here courtesy of Pensoft Publishers

RESOURCES