Cood question ..interested

Hello Researcher

The modern way for fungal taxonomy is the molecular method,The morphological and the microscopic method will not give a good result therefore sequencing and phylogeny is the best.

Hello.

From a nomenclatural point of view, a new family must be defined according to rules of Art. 18 of ICN (https://www.iapt-taxon.org/nomen/pages/main/art_18.html).

It is important to provide a description of the main characters shared by all members of this family, and I strongly suggest to not base this description only on molecular data.

@Fatimi

“The morphological and the microscopic method will not give a good result…”, what a curious statement!

Fungal taxonomy is based on these methods since more than 250 years and its evolution reflects the evolutions of descriptive techniques. Molecular data represent a new step to better understand the affinities between taxa, but a good taxonomic approach cannot be based only on DNA. Describing the morphology of organisms is still a good practice for 95% of them.

This is very interesting question. I really do not understand the reason to "the morphological and the microscopic method will not give a good result" since morphological has being (together with molecular phylogeny) a very useful and powerful tool to describe and characterize distinct ranking of taxa. There are distinct situation about family ranking in fungi. Families based in several genera (and species) and monospecific genus, generally strongly based on molecular (phylogenetic) distance. Description of a new family should be based on strong phylogenetic (with independent genes) and morphological data set at least.

There is a new paper about Modern taxonomy

"Fungal taxonomy and sequence-based nomenclature"

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-021-00888-x

I agree with all who said that morphology together with molecular data should be used.

Not a true statement that morphology does not has it use , it has and should not be ignored but used in a wise way.