Further clarification of Sporotrichum species.

When creating the genus Sporot(h)richum, Link (20) described it inadequately and failed to designate a type species. As a result, the genus until recently encompassed an obviously heterogeneous group of mostly unrelated species, no one of which seemed properly and unequivocally to typify the genus. Nees, for example, believed S. badium and S. fulvum best represented the taxon (13, p. 799); however Saccardo designated S. roseum and S. virescens as the most characteristic species (28). Because it was the first species described and the only one illustrated by Link, Dodge also selected S. badium as the type species (13, p. 798). Hughes, however, found S. badium to be a Basidiomycete, and S. virescens the Helicosporium state of Ophionectria cerea (Hypocreales). He designated S. aureum as lectotype for the genus and transferred the remaining species originally described by Link to other taxa (19). Subsequently, Carmichael (9) noted the marked differences between Sporotrichum and Sporothrix Hektoen & Perkins (18, 31), returned S. schenckii to its original position, and reduced several other hyalinespored Sporotrichum species to synonymy with species in Chrysosporium Corda. In an extensive monograph of the genus, Mueller (22-24) demonstrated further synonymies between species in Sporotrichum and in several other genera. He did not, however, accept Carmichael's interpretation of the genus Chrysosporium, or differentiate adequately the genera Sporotrichum and Sporothrix. The present investigation was undertaken to examine Sporotrichum species not included in the above reports, or not yet properly disposed.