Mycopathologia 155: 179–180, 2002.
179
Book Review
Dictionary of the Fungi, ninth edition, by P.M. Kirk,
P.F. Cannon, J.C. David, and J.A. Stalpers, 2001, CAB
International, Oxford University Press, Cary NC; 655
pp., $90.00
Continuing a tradition initiated with the appearance of
the first edition of Ainsworth & Bisby’s Dictionary of
the Fungi in September 1943, the editors of the new
volume have introduced important modifications to the
dictionary. The changes, which reflect current views in
the ever-expanding field of mycology and related eu-
karyotes, propel this work to a new level. This vision
enhances the value of the dictionary, and maintains the
prestige of its previous editions. The most noticeable
change is on its title. On the cover of all previous
editions, the name always used was “Ainsworth &
Bisby’s Dictionary of the Fungi”. However in this edi-
tion the names Ainsworth & Bisby’s have been deleted
from the cover. Interestingly, inside the first two pages,
the title of the book appears unchanged as in previous
editions. Is the title on the cover an honest omission?
We do not think so and would like to believe that it
forecasts a transition to a new title on future editions.
Originally this dictionary was planned as an aid for
university students interested in fungi. It has become
a means for communicating the vocabulary, methods,
classification and knowledge related to fungi, and the
updating of this information for a wider mycological
audience. The origins of the dictionary were described
in detail in the 7th edition in 1983. Ainsworth and
Bisby’s goals were to provide short accounts of the
chief Families, Orders and Classes of fungi and of
the bacteria and lichens, but only the generic names
of the fungi indicating synonyms. Warning was given
to the user that there may be uncertainty in the no-
menclature and that further study was needed. In the
second edition in 1945 new genera and notes from
fifty mycologists were added. In the 1961 fifth edi-
tion, Ainsworth (Bisby passed away in 1958) provided
more than five thousand corrections or alterations and
new illustrations were added to the previous edition
(1954). Also, places where one can find more in-
formation on the genera were included. Ainsworth’s
previous comment on the inadequacy of the four main
Classes was addressed with many more in the fifth
edition.
In 1971 lichens, including figures, were incorpor-
ated into the sixth edition when D.L. Hawksworth and
P.W. James collaborated with Ainsworth. Four hun-
dred more fungal metabolites, names derived from
their scientific name, were listed. Thousands of new
generic names of fungi and modifications of previous
ones were added, while those of bacteria were deleted,
as was G.W. Martin’s “Key to Families of Fungi”
found in previous editions. A new key to accepted
Families was found in the eighth (1995) edition, the
last one involving Ainsworth who passed away in
1998. In all volumes the suggestions for corrections
to be made in subsequent editions were welcomed.
The central goal of the ninth edition was to re-
vise the classification of the Ascomycota and Basi-
diomycota using the traditional morphological system
combined with the state of the art in phylogenetic ana-
lysis. In this volume, since the 1971 sixth edition, six
classes, 55 orders and 291 families of Ascomycota
are recognized. Perhaps the most dramatic change in
this volume is the reduction of the Basidiomycota or-
ders from 32 in the eighth edition, to 16 in the ninth
edition. Another significant change in this phylum
is the reclassification of the basidiomycetous yeasts
by dividing them into three separate groups. More
importantly, using data generated in molecular phylo-
geny of the past ten years, the initial steps to place the
fungi lacking known sexual spores (anamorphs) in a
more cohesive group, are for the first time described.
All anamorphic fungi whose sequences have been
used in phylogenetic analysis and previously linked to
telomorphic fungi, now appear with their telomorphic
homologs. Although the editors recognize that in the
short-term this placement could be of “limited bene-
fit”, they hope that this initial effort will encourage
further research on the subject.
180
A distinctive feature of this and previous editions
of Ainsworth & Bisby’s Dictionary of the Fungi has
been the inclusion of fungal-like protozoans. Good
examples of this group of eukaryote microbes are the
Myxomycota (Myxomycetes, slime moulds), Oomy-
cota (Chromista = Straminopila: Pythium, Phytoph-
thora, Saprolegnia, etc.) long known as “aquatic
fungi”, the algae (Prototheca), the Mesomycetozoeans
(Amoebidium, Anurofeca, Dermocystidium, Ichthy-
ophonus, Rhinosporidium, etc.), and other no less
important eukaryotes. As in the case of fungi, the
current classification of most of these fungal-like or-
ganisms is derived from current data on molecular
phylogenetic analysis. For instance, members of the
phylum Oomycota were usually included within the
fungi. However, molecular analyses have indicated
that they are not fungi but Protists. Correspondingly,
molecular analyses of the new class Mesomycetozoea
(formerly Ichthyosporea) indicates that they are not
only protistant microbes, but are located at the site
where the animals first diverged from the fungi, mak-
ing them a good target for future studies on the origin
of multicellular organisms. The ninth edition presents
well-organized updated information related to these
groups of fungal-like eukaryotes.
In summary, Ainsworth & Bisby’s Dictionary of
the Fungi has evolved to meet the needs of those in-
terested in fungi and related prokaryotes. At times the
changes have been gradual. However, the molecular
data generated in the past ten years that have dramat-
ically increased our understanding of the phylogenetic
relationships of the fungi and related eukaryotes, have
acted as a catalytic element for the changes proposed
in this new volume. Thus, the fundamental change was
a switch from a more traditional nomenclature system,
toward a more dynamic approach based on a hybrid of
molecular and morphological information. In addition,
the format of this edition is different. However, this
modification of the appearance is not new to the dic-
tionary since it was initiated in the 1995 eighth edition.
The dictionary also presents a historical shift from a
publication of the Imperial Mycological Institute in its
first 1943 edition, to the Commonwealth Institute in
later editions, to the International Mycological Insti-
tute in the new 2001 edition. We strongly believe that
this new edition will be of tremendous value for the
traditional readers of the dictionary and very useful to
those in other areas.
Leonel Mendoza
Medical Technology Program,
Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics,
Michigan State University,
East Lansing, MI 48824-1031
Dorothy McMeekin
Department of Botany and Plant pathology,
Michigan State University,
East Lansing, MI 48924-1031