depends on whether you believe in Desarmillaria. Whether this name should be approved does not. Please read my previous comments here for an explanation of why that is the case.
No. The rank of subgenus is not preferred in this case. You should only use the lower rank if it is not superseded by a higher ranking based on current phylogeny.
Again, even if Desarmillaria is upheld and this this name covers the exact same species as genus Armillaria, it is a 100% valid, legitimate, acceptable, correct, approved name. All genera automatically get autonyms of this sort. For example, Desarmillaria subgenus Desarmillaria is also fine.
(And of course, for those of us who choose not to use Desarmillaria, this name has meaning beyond the genus name.)
They are synonyms, Armillaria mellea is the type species. The subgenus should be collapsed into Armillaria because it serves no useful purpose due to the raising of the rank of Armillaria subgenus Desarmillaria to genus. It would, however, be a good idea to use the group names, i.e. Armillaria mellea group (bright yellow color) since the most recent molecular information shows the existence of distinct “super-groups” that can perhaps be better separated morphologically in the future. Erlon
This is necessarily not a synonym of Armillaria, because it’s at a different rank: it’s a subgenus, not a genus. It has the same type species whether Desarmillaria is recognized or not.
and it’s a synonym of Armillaria since they are based on the same type species.
Even if Desarmillaria is considered a separate genus, Armillaria subgenus Armillaria still exists (all Armillaria s.s. species would be in it.)
Contains all annulate species of Armillaria. Autonyms should never be deprecated when their genus is accepted.
Created: 2016-10-22 23:05:32 CDT (-0400) by Erlon (Herbert Baker)
Last modified: 2018-11-23 19:09:05 CST (-0500) by Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
Viewed: 128 times, last viewed: 2018-11-24 12:24:16 CST (-0500)