Fungal Nomenclature: Managing Change is the Name of the Game

Abstract

Fungal species have undergone and continue to undergo significant nomenclatural change, primarily due to the abandonment of dual species nomenclature in 2013 and the widespread application of molecular technologies in taxonomy allowing correction of past classification errors. These have effected numerous name changes concerning medically important species, but by far the group causing most concern are the Candida yeasts. Among common species, Candida krusei, Candida glabrata, Candida guilliermondii, Candida lusitaniae, and Candida rugosa have been changed to Pichia kudriavzevii, Nakaseomyces glabrata, Meyerozyma guilliermondii, Clavispora lusitaniae, and Diutina rugosa, respectively. There are currently no guidelines for microbiology laboratories on implementing changes, and there is ongoing concern that clinicians will dismiss or misinterpret laboratory reports using unfamiliar species names. Here, we have outlined the rationale for name changes across the major groups of clinically important fungi and have provided practical recommendations for managing change.

Keywords: Candida; clinical fungi; nomenclature; taxonomy.

Figure 1.

Phylogenetic analysis showing the genetic and antifungal susceptibility relationships between 76 Saccharomycotina yeasts within the 14 recognized clades. The tree was based on ribosomal DNA data (18S, ITS1, 5.8S, ITS2, and D1/D2) and constructed using maximum likelihood analysis. Species names in bold indicate those commonly reported in a clinical setting. General antifungal susceptibility properties have been indicated on the tree. Reproduced from Stavrou et al, FEMS Yeast Research 19(4):foz037 [10], with permission from Oxford University Press.