Welcome to Polypore project

If you have got to this post, you are hopefully interested in learning more about polypore fungi, and contributing to the knowledge on this fascinating but difficult group of organisms. It is my intention that this project can be a central source for methods on photographing, collecting and identifying Australian polypores.

Unfortunately data on Australian polypores lags behind the rest of the world. The only whole-sale treatment is that of Gordon Cunningham from 1965, more than 50 years ago! And even then the Australian species were treated more as background information for New Zealand species. Most of the collections he studied were housed in Kew, UK, from 19th-century collectors. Very few tropical species were included, and no field-work was conducted.

Since the work of Cunningham, there have been scattered revisions of some groups, a range of type studies by Peter Buchanan (NZ) and Leif Ryvarden (the Norwegian polypore guru), and some localised all-taxa surveys (e.g. Genevieve Gates and David Ratkowsky in Tasmania, and Neale Bougher in Perth) that resulted in records of new species, or collaborations with overseas taxonomists to describe new polypores. A recent (and ongoing) flurry of work by Chinese polyporologists (especially Yucheng Dai, Li-Wei Zhou and others) has improved our knowledge for certain groups.

However, none of these are long-term systematics projects evaluating polypores Australia-wide. After 25 years of accumulating data on Australian polypores, and making >1000 collections, I have concluded that the Australian polypore 'flora' consists of well over 500 species, probably 700-1000 species. Numerous species known from south-east Asia also occur in northern Australia. Many of the names previously reported from Australia are incorrectly identified, or part of species complexes that ultimately mean the Australian species is not as reported. So nothing less than a systematic revision can clear up the innumerable problems of polypore taxonomy in Australia.

In order to make progress, it is necessary to validate each name in turn, based on:
-Permanent reference specimens housed in a herbarium, that have associated:
--Photographs of all parts
--Microscopic description
--DNA sequence(s)
Once all this data is accumulated (ideally from multiple collections to assess within-species diversity), it requires careful comparison with the world literature to ensure that the correct name is applied (or a new species described). This data needs to be published in a peer-reviewed journal to ensure there is a permanent record and (taxonomic) community consensus.
Only when we have done this for a significant proportion of our species can we be reasonably sure of how many species we have, and what are the diagnostic characters we need to distinguish them.

In spite of these knowledge limitations, iNaturalist is a perfect place to collect image galleries for identification, either now, or later update when we know more. However, I strongly advise following a simple procedure of photographing specimens to maximise the likelihood that the specimen can be identified. That includes images from above (cap) and below (pores), flesh (section), attachment to the substrate, host plant (if identifiable, much dead wood is not recognisable), and habitat. In handling the fruit body you can often notice other diagnostic characters, such as bruising colour changes, colour of spore deposits below the pores, smells, or variation between fruit-bodies.

There are some weird and wonderful fungi out there, and some amazing discoveries to be made, even in urban parks. Happy exploring, and I hope this project is a useful resource for you.

Matt Barrett
Australian Tropical Herbarium, Cairns, Queensland

Posted on August 10, 2020 04:09 PM by mattbarrett mattbarrett

Comments

No comments yet.

Add a Comment

Sign In or Sign Up to add comments