(2276) Proposal to conserve the family name Erysiphaceae against Oidiaceae ( Fungi: Ascomycota: Erysiphales )

As an additional step in a recent initiative (Braun in Taxon 62: 1328. 2013) to conserve teleomorph-typified names against competing anamorph-typified names at generic and species level in the economically and taxonomically important fungal group of powdery mildews (Ascomycota: Erysiphales: Erysiphaceae), a further formal proposal is advanced to provide conservation of a family name in current use, based on a teleomorph-typified name, against its competing and earlier validly published anamorph-typified family name. The XVIII International Botanical Congress in Melbourne in 2011 discontinued the use of dual nomenclature for pleomorphic fungi and ruled that in this fungal group an anamorph-typified name that has priority was not to displace a teleomorph-typified name in wide use unless and until a conservation or rejection proposal to protect the latter has been submitted and rejected (Art. 57.2 of the ICN, McNeill & al. in Regnum Veg. 154. 2012; Braun in IMA Fungus 3(1): 81–86. 2012). In this connection, the family name Erysiphaceae Sredinsky (in Zap. Novorossiisk. Obshch. Estestvoisp. 2: 106. Nov–Dec 1873), which is in current use being derived from the teleomorph-typified generic name Erysiphe DC. : Fr. (Gelyuta in Ukrayins’k. Bot. Zhurn. 50(2): 79–85. 1993; Braun & al. in Belanger & al., Powdery Mildews: 13–54. 2002; Takamatsu in Sharma & Sharma, Pl. Genome, Biodiv. & Evol. 2A: 77–97. 2004; Cannon & Kirk, Fungal Fam. World: 121. 2007; Braun & Cook, Tax. Man. Erysiphales: 86. 2012), is proposed for conservation against the earlier nearly forgotten family name Oidiaceae Link (in Abh. Phys. Kl. Konigl. Akad. Wiss. Berlin 1824: 165. 1826), which is based on the anamorph-typified generic name Oidium Link. The type of Oidium, O. monilioides (Nees : Fr.) Link, is now considered a heterotypic synonym of Blumeria graminis (DC.) Speer, the type of Blumeria Golovin ex Speer, which is unquestionably placed in Erysiphaceae according to modern treatises and molecular analyses. A distinct family name Blumeriaceae Gelyuta (in Biol. Zhurn. Armenii 41: 356. 1988) was once proposed, but its distinctness has not been confirmed in modern molecular analyses (Saenz & al. in Mycologia 86: 212–216. 1994; Saenz & Taylor in Canad. J. Bot. 77: 150–169. 1999 & in Mycol. Res. 103: 1049–1056. 1999; Takamatsu & al. in Mycoscience 39: 441–453. 1998 & l.c. 40: 259–268. 1999 & in Mycol. Res. 104: 1304–1311. 2000; Braun & al., l.c. 2002), and has therefore fallen into synonymy. The family name Oidiaceae had already fallen into oblivion in the 19th century when de Bary (Fruchtentw. Ascom. 1863 & Beitr. Morph. Physiol. Pilze 1(3): 1. 1870 & in Abh. Senckenberg. Naturf. Ges. 7: 361–455. 1870) demonstrated that the distinct genus Oidium might be no more than a stage in the life cycle of powdery mildews. In order to stabilize the current usage of Erysiphaceae with its available distinct ordinal name, Erysiphales Warming (Haandb. Syst. Bot.: 63. 1884 (‘Erysipheae’)) also derived from Erysiphe, it is proposed to conserve Erysiphaceae Sredinsky against Oidiaceae Link and hence to list it in Appendix IIA. It is worthy of mention that the family name Oidiaceae was almost simultaneously, but nevertheless later validly published by Chevallier (Fl. Gen. Env. Paris 1: 42. 2–5 Aug 1826 (‘Oidieae’)). The sequence of these two important contributions to systematic mycology was established from the dates of publication preserved in the records of the Archiv, Berlin-Brandenburg Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin) (for Link’s paper). The publication dates of Chevallier’s classic Flore were confirmed in the lists of newly published books in France from the weekly registration bulletin Bibliographie de la France (2–5 Aug 1826), the range of dates reflecting the interval between the issuance of consecutive weekly numbers of Bibliographie de la France. The family name Erysiphaceae has sometimes been erroneously credited to Leveille (in Ann. Sci. Nat., Bot. ser. 3, 15: 135. 1851 (‘Erysiphes’) [unranked suprageneric name with inadmissible non-Latin ending]) or Tulasne & Tulasne (Select. Fung. Carpol. 1: 191. 1861 (‘Erysiphei’) [unranked suprageneric entity]), but in none of these works was the family name validly published, and hence these citations should be disregarded. The precise date of the publication of Sredinsky (l.c.) in 1873 is unknown; archive records of the obligatory copy of printed materials were completely lost in fire in World War II; it is only known that the serial with his article was received by the Moscow Imperial Society of Naturalists by exchange on 20 Dec 1873 (vide Bull. Soc. Imp. Naturalistes Moscou 1873(4, Seances): 76. 1874).