Cryptic species and species pairs in lichens: A discussion on the relationship between molecular phylogenies and morphological characters

2009/12/31 by Ana Crespo, Sergio Pérez‐Ortega, Sergio Pérez-Ortega · 156 citations
Agricultural and Biological Sciences · #Biology #Botany and Plant Ecology Studies #Ecology #Evolutionary biology #Genetics #Geography #Lichen #Lichen and fungal ecology #Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions #Phylogenetic tree #Species complex #Zoology

paper · pdf · doi:10.3989/ajbm.2225

published in Anales del Jardín Botánico de Madrid 66(S1), 71-81 (Spanish National Research Council)

crossref issued 2009/12/31 · crossref published 2009/12/31 · crossref published-online 2009/12/31 · openalex publication_date 2009/12/31 · crossref created 2010/01/15 · crossref deposited 2025/02/13 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/15 · crossref indexed 2026/08/04

Abstract

As with most disciplines in biology, molecular genetics has revolutionized our understanding of lichenized fungi. Nowhere has this been more true than in systematics, especially in the delimitation of species. In many cases, molecular research has verified long-standing hypotheses, but in others, results appear to conflict with existing morphological species concepts. This work reports on recent progress regarding two main issues: (i) cryptic species, i.e., two or more independent lineages exhibiting similar morphology; and (ii) species pairs, two species with similar morphology but exhibiting different reproductive modes. Both concepts have in common a lack of correlation between phylogenetic and morphological data, at least for characters normally used in lichen systematics. We review the available literature on cryptic species and species pairs, focusing especially on the family Parmeliaceae (Lecanoromycetes, Ascomycota). Molecular data have repeatedly demonstrated the existence of cryptic species in lichenized fungi, although taxonomists have often been slow to recognize the resulting taxa. However, careful observation of fine-scale morphological, ecological and/or geographical features tends to provide support for the recognition of these species. In the case of species pairs, by contrast, few if any of the pairs studied to date have been confirmed to consist of independent lineages. Differences in reproductive mode alone appear not to be a sufficient reason to recognise new species.

Citations

• Reproductive strategies in lichens
• The fungal dimension of biodiversity: magnitude, significance, and conservation
• Phylogenetic relationships and species concepts in Parmelia s. str. (Parmeliaceae) inferred from nuclear ITS rDNA and β-tubulin sequences
• The magnitude of fungal diversity: the 1.5 million species estimate revisited
• The Limitations of Ancestral State Reconstruction and the Evolution of the Ascus in the Lecanorales (Lichenized Ascomycota)
• A Simple, Fast, and Accurate Algorithm to Estimate Large Phylogenies by Maximum Likelihood
• Phylogeography of Cavernularia hultenii: evidence of slow genetic drift in a widely disjunct lichen
• Parmelia barrenoae, a new lichen species related to Parmelia sulcata (Parmeliaceae) based on molecular and morphological data
• Trouble with lichen: the re-evaluation and re-interpretation of thallus form and fruit body types in the molecular era

Cited by

• A review of the lichen family Parmeliaceae – history, phylogeny and current taxonomy
• Lichen chemistry is concordant with multilocus gene genealogy in the genus Cetrelia (Parmeliaceae, Ascomycota)
• Past, present, and future research in bipolar lichen‐forming fungi and their photobionts