fungal conservation
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

38
(FIVE YEARS 6)

H-INDEX

9
(FIVE YEARS 1)

Oryx ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-13
Author(s):  
Diogo H. Costa-Rezende ◽  
Thiago Kossmann ◽  
Mahatmã Titton ◽  
Elisandro Ricardo Drechsler-Santos

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-34
Author(s):  
Teroj Mohamed ◽  
Rabab Abed ◽  
Milad Mezher ◽  
Hebatallah Abo Nahas ◽  
Wassima Lakhdari ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 132 (4) ◽  
pp. 407-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris R.J. Hay ◽  
R. Greg Thorn ◽  
Clinton R. Jacobs

The fungal composition of North America’s grasslands is poorly known, but an important area of study due to grassland conservation concerns and their close relation to agricultural lands. This study is a survey of Agaricomcyetes from fifteen diverse tallgrass prairies across southwestern Ontario, determined through fruiting body surveys (above-ground) and next-generation sequencing of soil ribosomal DNA (below-ground), and compares the results of these two techniques. The most species rich taxa were the Clavariaceae, Hygrophoraceae, and Entolomataceae, each detected by both techniques, with the addition of the Sebacinaceae and Polyporaceae sensu lato below-ground, and Hymenogastraceae (Hebeloma spp.) and Mycenaceae above-ground. Many of the most abundant species belonged to these species-rich taxa and were highly abundant by either technique. The above-ground surveys found at least 73 species and the below-ground technique 238 operatonal taxonomic units. Although many fine-scale taxa (species and approximate families) were unique to one technique or the other (only eight genetic species were shared between both), the below-ground technique uncovered a greater breadth of higher taxa (mostly equivalent to orders), including ones undetected by the above-ground technique. A review of grassland fungi surveys around the world shows many similarities and the potential for grassland fungal conservation in North America. Given current technological advancements and grassland conservation concerns, it is prudent to further study North America’s grassland fungi.


2018 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
pp. 79-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asko Lõhmus ◽  
Eike Vunk ◽  
Kadri Runnel

Conservation management for fungi has lagged behind animal and plant conservation, and remains largely restricted to protecting known locations of few conspicuous threatened species. We used Estonian polypores as an example of how conservation options can be systematically screened, based on the Red List of threatened species and in co-operation with practitioners. For a total of 61 species, we identified a broad range of management options representing diverse approaches (site protection; prescriptions of land use; protection of individuals; special management; protection via umbrella species). The results demonstrated the merits of systematic and multi-disciplinary assessments for fungal conservation and setting related research priorities. Our assessment also supported a theoretical expectation that some ecosystem conservation strategies should be explicitly designed based on functionally important groups of fungi. The advancement of fungal conservation appears largely dependent on co-operation between mycologists, conservationists and managers.   Eesti metsade seenestiku looduskaitsevõtted torikseente näitel Seenestiku looduskaitseks kasutatav võttestik on märksa halvemini välja arendatud kui loomade ja taimede puhul ning hõlmab peamiselt silmatorkavate ohustatud liikide leiukohtade kaitset. Töös kirjeldatakse Eesti torikseente näitel, kuidas sobivaid looduskaitsevõtteid saab süstemaatiliselt valida – lähtuvalt ohustatud liikide nimestikust ja koostöös looduskaitsepraktikutega. Kokku eristati 61 ohustatud torikseeneliigi kaitseks lai valik võtteid, mis hõlmasid erinevaid võimalusi alade kaitseks, üldisi maakasutusjuhiseid, isendite kaitset, intensiivseid kaitsevõtteid ja kaitset teiste liikide (katusliikide) kaudu.Tulemused näitavad süstemaatilise ja multidistsiplinaarse analüüsi efektiivsust seente kaitse ja sellega seotud uuringute planeerimisel. Analüüs kinnitas ka teoreetilist, torikseente funktsionaalsest tähtsusest lähtuvat eeldust, et mõned ökosüsteemide kaitse võttestikud tuleks kujundada just seente ökoloogiast lähtuvalt. Seenestiku looduskaitse peamine edenemistingimus paistab niisiis olevat koostöö mükoloogide, looduskaitseteadlaste ja -praktikute vahel.


Author(s):  
Susana C. Gonçalves ◽  
David Minter ◽  
Beatrice Senn-Irlet ◽  
Jacob Heilmann-Clausen ◽  
Panu Halme

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document