New and revised nomina generica conservanda proposed for Basidiomycetes (Fungi). Nomina generica conservanda and confusa for Basidiomycetes (Fungi). )ĭisease Note: Commercially harvested edible fungus.ĭonk, M.A. The synonyms Auricula judae Kuntze 1891 and Auricula ampla Kuntze 1891 are invalid names, in an invalid genus (Art. 1753, this misapplication does not alter the type, which remains that of Tremella auricula (Art. Because Fries did not explicitly exclude the type of the basionym Tremella auricula L. 161), Fries assigned this fungus to the genus Exidia based on examination of fresh specimens of an Exidia sp., later recognizing his error. 1753, but auricula-judae has priority due to its sanctioning by Fries (Art. 1789 is a superfluous name for Tremella auricula L. In fact, Bulliard was the first to validly publish the epithet, as Tremella auricula-judae Bull. Later authors followed Fries, erroneously attributing the epithet auricula-judae to Linnaeus (e.g. This is apparently an error, as no record of publication of auricula-judae by Linnaeus could be located. The nomenclatural history of this name was complicated by Fries, who sanctioned Exidia auricula-judae in 1823, citing Tremella Auricula Judae Linn. The first valid description of Auricularia auricula-judae was by Linnaeus as Tremella auricula L. to be the type of the genus, but this was not among the species originally described in Auricularia by Bulliard (1791) (see Donk 1958). Persoon (1818) and Brongniart (1822) considered Peziza auricula L. = Auricularia mesenterica as type from among the species originally described by Bulliard in the genus. Donk selected Auricularia tremelloides Bull. ex Marat 1821) against several other homonyms were later found to be unnecessary and were withdrawn by the author (Donk 1958). Donk's proposals to conserve Auricularia Bull. Notes: The nomenclature of the generic name Auricularia is controversial (see Donk 1941, 1949, 1958). Martin 1943 Note: (Gray) Donk 1949 is an erroneous author citation for this fungus. According to Donk, misapplied based on specimens of an Exidia sp., but Fries did not explicitly exclude the type. but adopted the epithet auricula-judae published by Bulliard. , but Fries published only the name Exidia auricula-judae. 1833 Note: Wallroth erroneously cited Exidia auricula Fr. 1789 Note: Superfluous replacement name (nom. 43.1) (see Donk 1958).Īuricularia auricula-judae (Bull. Persoon (1818) and Brongniart (1822) considered Auricularia auricula-judae (as Peziza auricula L.) to be the type of the genus, but this was not among the species originally described in Auricularia by Bulliard (1791) (see Donk 1958). The nomenclature of the generic name Auricularia is controversial (see Donk 1941, 1949, 1958). Because Fries did not explicitly exclude the type of the basionym Tremella auricula-judae, this misapplication does not alter the type, which remains that of Tremella auricula-judae (Art. 161), Fries assigned Tremella auricula-judae to the genus Exidia based on examination of fresh specimens of an Exidia sp., later recognizing his error. The nomenclatural history of this name was complicated by Fries, who sanctioned the name Exidia auricula-judae in 1823, citing Tremella Auricula Judae Linn.This is apparently an error, as no record of publication of auricula-judae by Linnaeus could be located. The first valid description of this species was by Linnaeus as Tremella auricula L. Auricularia auricula-judae (Bull.:Fr.) Wettst.