S. Lorena Ament-Velásquez 1 , Hanna Johannesson 1 , Tatiana Giraud 2 , Robert Debuchy 3 , Sven J. Saupe 4 , Alfons J.M. Debets 5 , Eric Bastiaans 5 , Fabienne Malagnac 3 , Pierre Grognet 3 , Leonardo Peraza-Reyes 6 , Pierre Gladieux 7 , Åsa Kruys 8 , Philippe Silar 9 , Sabine M. Huhndorf 10 , Andrew N. Miller 11 , Aaron A. Vogan , 1
25 November 2020
The filamentous fungus Podospora anserina has been used as a model organism for more than 100 years and has proved to be an invaluable resource in numerous areas of research. Throughout this period, P. anserina has been embroiled in a number of taxonomic controversies regarding the proper name under which it should be called. The most recent taxonomic treatment proposed to change the name of this important species to Triangularia anserina . The results of past name changes of this species indicate that the broader research community is unlikely to accept this change, which will lead to nomenclatural instability and confusion in literature. Here, we review the phylogeny of the species closely related to P. anserina and provide evidence that currently available marker information is insufficient to resolve the relationships amongst many of the lineages. We argue that it is not only premature to propose a new name for P. anserina based on current data, but also that every effort should be made to retain P. anserina as the current name to ensure stability and to minimise confusion in scientific literature. Therefore, we synonymise Triangularia with Podospora and suggest that either the type species of Podospora be moved to P. anserina from P. fimiseda or that all species within the Podosporaceae be placed in the genus Podospora .