|I’d Call It That||3.0||10.01||2||(dario13,heelsplitter)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
|I’d Call It That||3.0||5.58||1||(Tstou10)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
I’ve got lots in mind for you— looking for someone with micromorphological chops, as I can handle the phylogenetic systematics aspects, including data collection/analyses. I’m wrapping up grading for my mushroom class this week, but I’ll be in touch!
Yes, thank you, I would love to collaborate! Though I am not sure, what exactly you have in mind for me, given that I am just a citizen scientist of mycology with a penchant for Boletales. :-) In any event, I would be delighted to help you with your project(s) in any way I can.
According to my herbarium listings from a separate spreadsheet that contains exclusively accessions of vouchers from VA and NC, I actually have Geoff Balme’s obs 255922. It’s yours if you want it! Also, I will check with NJMA’s herbarium to see if our club has recent accessions of chromapes from NJ.
If only reviewer #3 at NSF had agreed, maybe I’d have more data/answers at this point. Moving across the country, and a newborn, have sidetracked me a bit. Perhaps I’ll submit another NSF proposal in 2019 (care to collaborate? I’ll do the writing!). They seemed generally enthusiastic about my tiered sampling approach for stabilizing taxonomy of Boletaceae and Zangioideae, while addressing species limits questions in Harrya, but they were considerably less enthused about my plans to use elliptical Fourier to test utility of cap shape for identification. Preliminary data suggests it’s quite useful at the family level, I need to get more data across boletales to see how it does at genus level…
I have just taken a look at the 2012 Halling et al. H. chromapes paper, which I haven’t read since several years ago, i.e., before I started paying a closer attention to DNA and phylogenetic trees.
In the paper, the “chromapes clade” tree topology indeed seems to display (in the absence of any additional info provided) 3 different groups comprised of 9 accessions, all labeled as a single species. Interestingly, the paper doesn’t address this aspect directly or indirectly, nor does it compare any of the physical attributes of these vouchers. All it says is that (a) Nuhn’s three collections came from locations within ~16 km of the chomapes type locality and (b) T. cartagoensis from Costa Rica has to be a clinal variant of H. chromapes by morphology because its DNA makes it conspecific with the sequenced chromapes. The authors also write “The Harrya clade contains Boletus chromapes s.s. …”, perhaps implying that as far as they are concerned, the 9 sequenced vouchers represent a single taxon, H. chromapes.
Mapping the geography from voucher data in the table onto the accessions in the tree yielded the same grouping you had mentioned in your comment:
Group 1 “multinational” (top): MB 03-019 (MA, USA), HKAS59217 (VT, USA), HKAS49416 (China), TWO996 (Costa Rica)
Group 2 (middle): HKAS59218, MEN11-034B, MEN11-057, MEN11-034 — all from NH, USA; same as Frost’s type?
Group 3 (bottom): ND4 (NC, USA)
Next, I checked what TEF-1 sequences labeled as chromapes are available in GenBank. There was a total of 11 accessions, including the 9 accessions used in Halling et al. I used the shortest TEF-1 sequence (HKAS49416) to run a BLASTn because running longer sequences would not bring out all accessions of H. chromapes (a strange behavior by BLASTn I had noticed many times before). The derived tree recovered what seems like a monophyletic group, but the topology is rather complicated to indicate a single taxon. The groupings seen in Halling et al. are not reproduced in exactly the same way. In particular, HKAS59218 & MEN11-034B sit together on a separate branch from the rest of the accessions.
I agree, Thomas, you are onto something here, but, as you suggest, a much large sampling of vouchers and a more thorough analysis of data are required to build your case.
If you look at the data from Halling’s paper on Harrya [Halling et al 2012. Affinities of the Boletus chromapes group to Royoungia and the description of two new genera, Harrya and Australopilus. Australian Systematic Botany 25(6): 418–431.] there are at least two clades in New England, one all NH collections (HKAS59218, MEN11-034B, MEN11-057, and MEN11-034) and the other with collections from Vermont (HKAS59217), China (HKAS49416), Massachusetts (MB03-019), and Costa Rica (TWO0996). Another sample from the southeast (North Carolina, ND4) is separate from these. That being said, these clades are not well resolved and sampling is still sparse (in my opinion). Not all of these samples were included in the 2016 paper in which four new species of Harrya were described from China [Wu et al. 2016. One hundred noteworthy boletes from China. Fungal Diversity 81]. The few that were included make me think there’s more than meets the eye here.
Combining these datasets (and picking up any stragglers on GenBank) is on my to do list!
…and what’s up with Tylopilus aff. chromapes from Zambia?!
…for your thorough response.
Could you please cite a reference or references (unless they are GenBank accessions, e.g. existing nrLSU data) you allude to in the following statement of yours:
“Based on existing, published data, there appears to be a few geographic variants including some unique genotypes in the east…”
…as it implies the existence of more than one “chromapes”-like entity in the east.
I haven’t yet begun to sequence as I’m trying to scrounge money together for a genomic dataset (rather than Sanger sequencing). If I do do Sanger sequencing, it’ll probably be nuc-lsu and tef1 so as to combine my dataset with the largest number of existing sequences of Harrya, including the new species from China. ITS would probably be sequenced too, out of ease and due to its perceived variability. It’ll be a time/money cost analysis, so loci are TBD at the moment (aside from nuc-lsu and tef1). Based on existing, published data, there appears to be a few geographic variants including some unique genotypes in the east, but I haven’t combined data from the new Chinese species with those from Halling et al. in which Harrya was described. I was working on this for a post-doc with Roy Halling that NSF didn’t fund, before the Chinese species were described. :(
At least two morphotypes exist in this area, one with a pink cap and one with a more gray-pink cap… I will be making more serious observations along with collecting tissues for sequencing this coming summer. Perhaps one or more of the Chinese taxa occur here! I suspect the populations in AZ are pretty distinct. Will keep you posted, and I’d greatly appreciate any help you can provide re: tissues/specimens. I’ll return the favor!
Fistulinella jamaicensis, which appears sporadically along the Gulf Coast (a GSMS member found it this past summer in Mississippi), also looks a lot like chromapes. It’s smaller, I think, but it still looks pretty close.
So, you are saying there are good reasons to believe (unpublished DNA data) we have more than one Harrya species in the northeast? That’s interesting, but perhaps not entirely surprising. However, at this time I only know of one H. chromapes lookalike in the USA – Terri Clemmens’ obsie from AZ – with a very different ITS sequence, but then I am likely behind the times and unaware of the most recent developments in this genus. Any details you can share in terms of what loci you’ve sequenced and how much of a genetic distance in the ITS region exists between your H. chromapes samples (mean and max)? Does the morphology (both macro and micro) support the existence of anything other than chromapes in the northeast?
I see chromapes very infrequently in my area and, unfortunately, I don’t have any vouchers in my own herbarium at this time. Curiously, most of the collections I’ve encountered in NJ came from the Pine Barrens. I will be on a lookout for it come next season and will try to save material for you.
All I know is that Harrya needs work and in this general area there are a few genotypes in play based on existing data (presumably including also that attributed to the type). It probably is H. chromapes sensu stricto but I’m trying to be conservative for the time being with my observations of Harrya. I’m beginning sequencing this year on the species complex if you care to trade boletes with me!
Created: 2017-07-10 05:54:16 CDT (-0500)
Last modified: 2018-12-18 08:46:30 CST (-0600)
Viewed: 120 times, last viewed: 2019-03-18 10:16:02 CST (-0600)