Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 518

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phylogenetic Relationships of Agaric Fungi Based on Nuclear Large Subunit Ribosomal DNA Sequences

Moncalvo, Jean-Marc, Lutzoni, François M., Rehner, Stephen A., Johnson, Jacqui, Vilgalys, Rytas·2000·Systematic Biology

Abstract

Phylogenetic relationships of mushrooms and their relatives within the order Agaricales were addressed by using nuclear large subunit ribosomal DNA sequences. Approximately 900 bases of the 5' end of the nucleus-encoded large subunit RNA gene were sequenced for 154 selected taxa representing most families within the Agaricales. Several phylogenetic methods were used, including weighted and equally weighted parsimony (MP), maximum likelihood (ML), and distance methods (NJ). The starting tree for branch swapping in the ML analyses was the tree with the highest ML score among previously produced MP and NJ trees. A high degree of consensus was observed between phylogenetic estimates obtained through MP and ML. NJ trees differed according to the distance model that was used; however, all NJ trees still supported most of the same terminal groupings as the MP and ML trees did. NJ trees were always significantly suboptimal when evaluated against the best MP and ML trees, by both parsimony and likelihood tests. Our analyses suggest that weighted MP and ML provide the best estimates of Agaricales phylogeny. Similar support was observed between bootstrapping and jackknifing methods for evaluation of tree robustness. Phylogenetic analyses revealed many groups of agaricoid fungi that are supported by moderate to high bootstrap or jackknife values or are consistent with morphology-based classification schemes. Analyses also support separate placement of the boletes and russules, which are basal to the main core group of gilled mushrooms (the Agaricineae of Singer). Examples of monophyletic groups include the families Amanitaceae, Coprinaceae (excluding Coprinus comatus and subfamily Panaeolideae), Agaricaceae (excluding the Cystodermateae), and Strophariaceae pro parte (Stropharia, Pholiota, and Hypholoma); the mycorrhizal species of Tricholoma (including Leucopaxillus, also mycorrhizal); Mycena and Resinomycena; Termitomyces, Podabrella, and Lyophyllum; and Pleurotus with Hohenbuehelia. Several groups revealed by these data to be nonmonophyletic include the families Tricholomataceae, Cortinariaceae, and Hygrophoraceae and the genera Clitocybe, Omphalina, and Marasmius. This study provides a framework for future systematics studies in the Agaricales and suggestions for analyzing large molecular data sets.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/sysbio/49.2.278

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 518

Metadata

Authors
Moncalvo, J.-M., Lutzoni, F. M., Rehner, S. A., Johnson, J., & Vilgalys, R.
Venue
Systematic Biology
Published
2000-06
Volume
49
Issue
2
Pages
278-305
ISSN
  • 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
  • 1076-836X
OpenAlex
W2139165545
Cited by
518
References
6
FWCI
38.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Phylogenetic Relationships of Agaric Fungi Based on Nuclear Large Subunit Ribosomal DNA Sequences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/sysbio/49.2.278
The paper
Moncalvo, J.-M., Lutzoni, F. M., Rehner, S. A., Johnson, J., & Vilgalys, R. (2000). Phylogenetic Relationships of Agaric Fungi Based on Nuclear Large Subunit Ribosomal DNA Sequences. Systematic Biology. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/49.2.278

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.