Cavechat.org

Hazel Barton tweets that the name for fungus that causes White Nose Syndrome is changing.

Very interesting!

Does anyone have a better explanation as to what this means and why it has been changed?

caverdan wrote:Does anyone have a better explanation as to what this means and why it has been changed?

yes, but I doubt it will clarify anything

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 4613001025

Thanks......That makes it clear as mud.

caverdan wrote:Does anyone have a better explanation as to what this means and why it has been changed?

It means the DNA was analyzed and compared with other fungal DNA. The DNA of the species destructans fits more closely with the genus Pseudogymnoascus than it does to the genus Geomyces.

Science is a process of gathering data and modifying interpretations based on data. You do the best job you can with the resources and background at the time. Then, as new data comes in, you modify your understanding based on that new data.

I am NOT a biologist and have NEVER done DNA analysis. But I don't expect it's a simple thing to track all the DNA of all organisms on earth and have instant answers to all questions within a year or two. With organisms that have been studied and documented for years, maybe a new specimen of DNA can be matched quickly. But then what's the point in that? Research is study into the unknown.

I was just reading the Wikipedia page on Cattle Egrets (I took a photograph of a lovely one at Wakulla Springs over Memorial Day). I posted the picture on Flickr and a co-worker ragged on me about my scientific name. We looked at the Wikipedia page and the name has changed several times over the centuries. Some places on the page they distinguish the Eastern and Western Cattle Egrets as different species, others as different subspecies. I presume DNA would help clarify these things, but it's not super straightforward.

I think name changes are the way taxonomy goes.


Cattle Egret by Squirrel Girl cbk, on Flickr

caverdan wrote:Thanks......That makes it clear as mud.

.......................

This wiki article may help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleomorp ... _holomorph

The name change seems to be about the method of asexual reproduction observed but it is also about an agreement to give a single name to groups of similar fungi based on characteristics other then reproduction. More mud.

The WNS fungi is an anamorph and gets the pseudogymnoascus name, rather than geomycies name, by default in the naming system.

I am not a biologist but acting like one may draw the attention of one and result in a simplified explanation. Hazel just revealed she is engaged to be married so she probably has other priorities.

Is that Sue Dough Jim No Ass Cuss? I've got to make sure before I start blurting it out in conversation...

It is common for the genus to be designated by it's first letter, a period and then the species. Like E. coli, P. destructans will do just fine.

GroundquestMSA wrote:Is that Sue Dough Jim No Ass Cuss? I've got to make sure before I start blurting it out in conversation...

That's it. The accent is on "Ass", too. (Isn't it always?)

Cavemud wrote:

caverdan wrote:Thanks......That makes it clear as mud.

.......................

I should have added........No mud was hurt, damaged or smeared during the making of my post.

Crockett wrote:This wiki article may help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleomorp ... _holomorph

The name change seems to be about the method of asexual reproduction observed but it is also about an agreement to give a single name to groups of similar fungi based on characteristics other then reproduction. More mud.

The WNS fungi is an anamorph and gets the pseudogymnoascus name, rather than geomycies name, by default in the naming system.

I am not a biologist but acting like one may draw the attention of one and result in a simplified explanation. Hazel just revealed she is engaged to be married so she probably has other priorities.

Squirrel Girl wrote:

caverdan wrote:Does anyone have a better explanation as to what this means and why it has been changed?

It means the DNA was analyzed and compared with other fungal DNA. The DNA of the species destructans fits more closely with the genus Pseudogymnoascus than it does to the genus Geomyces.

Science is a process of gathering data and modifying interpretations based on data. You do the best job you can with the resources and background at the time. Then, as new data comes in, you modify your understanding based on that new data.

I am NOT a biologist and have NEVER done DNA analysis. But I don't expect it's a simple thing to track all the DNA of all organisms on earth and have instant answers to all questions within a year or two. With organisms that have been studied and documented for years, maybe a new specimen of DNA can be matched quickly. But then what's the point in that? Research is study into the unknown.

Thanks for the explanations, Dr. B and Mike C.

Congradulations to Dr.H. on her engagement......this is why I bug you guys and gals and not her!

Excellent thread. Yep, it's now P. destructans, rather than G. destructans. Dr. David Blehert, the discoverer of the fungus, said it's just a technical change in the ever-moving field of taxonomy. From his perspective, he got to give the fungus the name "destructans," which it will keep.

Just for some context, at the 2012 WNS Symposium, the mycologists (fungi people) told us that they estimate that less than 5% of all the world's fungi have even been described, so this field is likely to continue changing for some time.

Still, as Hazel said (congrats!), let's get used to P. destructans now.