Global database of alien macrofungi

Descrição

Registros de Dados

Os dados deste recurso de checklist foram publicados como um Darwin Core Archive (DwC-A), que é o formato padronizado para compartilhamento de dados de biodiversidade como um conjunto de uma ou mais tabelas de dados. A tabela de dados do núcleo contém 679 registros.

Também existem 1 tabelas de dados de extensão. Um registro de extensão fornece informações adicionais sobre um registro do núcleo. O número de registros em cada tabela de dados de extensão é ilustrado abaixo.

This IPT archives the data and thus serves as the data repository. The data and resource metadata are available for download in the downloads section. The versions table lists other versions of the resource that have been made publicly available and allows tracking changes made to the resource over time.

Versões

A tabela abaixo mostra apenas versões de recursos que são publicamente acessíveis.

Como citar

Pesquisadores deveriam citar esta obra da seguinte maneira:

Monteiro M, Reino L, Schertler A, Essl F, Ferreira M T, Figueira R, Capinha C (2019): Global database of alien macrofungi. v1.2. CIBIO (Research Center in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources) Portugal. Dataset/Checklist. http://ipt.gbif.pt/ipt/resource?r=global_database_alien_macrofungi&v=1.2

Direitos

Pesquisadores devem respeitar a seguinte declaração de direitos:

O editor e o detentor dos direitos deste trabalho é CIBIO (Research Center in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources) Portugal. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY 4.0) License.

GBIF Registration

Este recurso foi registrado no GBIF e atribuído ao seguinte GBIF UUID: da3542b4-9a73-4054-b9a3-2d762e172199.  CIBIO (Research Center in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources) Portugal publica este recurso, e está registrado no GBIF como um publicador de dados aprovado por GBIF Portugal.

Palavras-chave

Introduced species; biological invasions; fungal biogeography; species occurrence data; Checklist; Globalspeciesdataset

Contatos

Cobertura Geográfica

Countries and the first-order administrative divisions of the six largest countries in the world (Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Russia and United States). Antarctica is not included

Cobertura Taxonômica

All macromycetes were identified to species level. There are also some inclusions of records reporting varieties, forms or subspecies. All mispellings have been corrected. Nomenclatural updates are maintained based on the indexfungorum database (http://www.indexfungorum.org) and mycobank (http://www.mycobank.org).

Cobertura Temporal

Dados Sobre o Projeto

In this publication we present the recently completed Global Alien Macrofungi Database, a database of distribution records of alien macrofungi aggregated from all relevant sources we could identify, namely publications, reports, databases on invasive alien species and citizen science observations. In total, the dataset contains occurrences for nearly 650 alien species, registered in more than 140 countries and sub-national administrative divisions. This represents an increase of nearly 2.5 times the number of alien records and 3.2 times the number of alien species found in the most comprehensive distribution database for alien ectomycorrhizal fungi available prior to our work (Velinga et al., 2009). The presented database is expected to provide a valuable contribution towards the increasing understanding of the spatial and temporal dynamics of biological invasions worldwide.

O pessoal envolvido no projeto:

Miguel Monteiro

• Autor

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2804-4166

Luís Reino

• Autor

Anna Schertler

• Autor

Franz Essl

• Autor

Maria Teresa Ferreira

• Autor

Rui Figueira

• Autor

César Capinha

• Autor

Métodos de Amostragem

The data collection process consisted of three different procedures, as it is explained below. 1)Identifying and obtaining relevant records from publications During the search process, we initially looked up for records in broader introduced taxa databases such as the ones from Delivering Alien Invasive Species Inventories for Europe (Hulme et al. 2019), Global Register of Introduced and Invasive Species (Pagadad et al. 2019) and European Alien Species Information Network (European Commission 2019). In a next step we used general-purpose search engines (i.e., Google) and scientific search engines (Google Scholar, Science Direct and jstore.online) to gather more information from relevant literature. We entered key terms related to fungal invasion in different languages including English, German, French, Spanish and Portuguese. The terms used were ‘introduced´, ’invasive’, ‘established’, ‘alien’ and ‘exotic’, which were combined with fungal taxonomic terms ranging from a generic and higher denomination (e.g. ‘fungi’, ‘macromycetes’, ‘basidiomycota’) to a more specific designation such as the scientific name (e.g. Amanita muscaria (L.) Lam., Amanita phalloides Secr.) or a common name (e.g. Fly agaric, Death cap). For each combination, we repeated the searches by adding the name of one continent or country, until all continents and countries were being considered. As examples, final search terms would be like ‘European alien fungi ‘, ‘introduced basidomycota in United States’ or ‘introduced Amanita muscaria + South America’. 2)Cross-checking of alien status For each record we assessed the reliability of the alien status given by the original data sources. Records collected from sources explicitly dealing with alien taxa (e.g., Vellinga et al., 2009), retained the nativity status given by the data. These statuses corresponded either to ‘alien’ or to ‘cryptogenic’ (sensu Essl et al., 2018). Records collected from non-specialized sources (e.g., species checklists not considering nativity, grey literature and citizen-science data) were cross-checked against biogeographical information available in the scientific literature or with mycologists. Cases where the records referred to regions outside known native ranges were coded as ‘alien’. Cases in clear biogeographical conflict with known native ranges were not considered for inclusion in our database. Finally, cases where the native or alien status was not possible to identify unambiguously were also not considered. 3)Occurrence data entry To be included in our database records had to meet specific criteria regarding taxonomy and locality description. First, a record must describe a macrofungal species which, that means it should have sporocarps at least 2 mm in size irrespective of phylogenetic placement (Senn-Irlet 2007). As this was not always clear, we had to double-check our data with relevant fungal literature to be sure that the families or even the orders of the referred species were cited as part of the macroscopic fungi checklists. We also had to be certain that the records were identified at least to the species level, as a way of knowing that all contemplated species were in fact alien organisms in the non-native places. Furthermore, the records had to be accompanied by geospatial coordinates or, at minimum, an unambiguous textual designation of location level reference (e.g., region, country, and locality). Finally, the record had to represent a fungal species introduced by human activity on a non-native region because it is the easiest way to be sure that the species was not native. These tasks were accomplished by the main author Miguel Monteiro during the years 2017-2019 with the supervision of experts in fungal ecology and biogeography. These experts were also consulted and asked if they were aware of records of alien macrofungi or of data resources other than the ones we identified through online searches.

Descrição dos passos do método:

1. The creation of the “Global Alien Macrofungi Database” followed a two-step approach. In the first step, we performed an exhaustive search for data sources supplying occurrence records of macrofungi. In the second step, we harmonized the collected data and entered it into a standardized database. Our search and collation of alien macrofungi records was carried out during the years 2017-2019. For the first step, we analysed the database made available by Vellinga et al. (2009), who collected a total of 770 distribution records of ectomycorrhizal fungi from more than 190 publications. However, given the exclusive focus of the database on ectomycorrhizal fungi and consequential absence of data on saprotroph species, it can hardly be assumed that the patterns represented in Vellinga at el. (2009) provide a precise portrayal of the global biogeography of alien macrofungi. Hence, we built up on their database and additionally performed a complementary search for alien saprotroph fungi as well as any new records of alien ectomycorrizhal fungi. For the second step, all collected records were entered into two different data sets. First, we compiled a taxonomic checklist that accounts for all macrofungi taxa we found to be introduced outside their native range. Secondly, we described the according alien occurrences of those taxa including additional important data, such as dates of introduction, host information and occurrence remarks related to the population status in the invaded regions. Here, each entry corresponded to a single record described as alien taxon in a specific location. If a taxon in a given locality was reported multiple times by different sources, we merged the information into a single database entry and cited the earliest reference in time reporting the record. Data entry management and publication were carried out using the Darwin Core Archive format.

Citações bibliográficas

1. Desprez-Loustau ML (2009) The alien fungi of Europe. In: Hulme, Philip E., (eds.) Handbook of Alien Species in Europe. Springer, Dordrecht, 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.2007.01619.x
2. Essl F, Bacher S, Genovesi P, Hulme, PE, Jeschke JM, Katsanevakis S, Kowarik I, Kuhn I, Pysek P, Rabitsch W, Schindler S, van Kleunen M, Vilà M, Wilson JRU and Richardson DM (2018). Which taxa are alien? Criteria, applications, and uncertainties. BioScience, 68: 496-509. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy057 https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy057
3. European Commission (2019) European Alien Species Information Network- EASIN. https://easin.jrc.ec.europa.eu/easin [Accessed on: 18/09/2017] https://easin.jrc.ec.europa.eu/easin
4. Hulme PE, Nentwig, W, Pyšek, P, and Vilà, M (2019). DAISIE: Delivering Alien Invasive Species Inventories for Europe. http://www.europe-aliens.org/ [Acessed: 20 September 2017] http://www.europe-aliens.org/
5. Index Fungorum (2019). CABI Database. http://www. indexfungorum. org [Acessed: 20 January 2019]. http://www. indexfungorum. org
6. IUCN (2019) Global Invasive Species Database GISD. Invasive Species Specialist Group ISSG. http://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/ [Accessed on: 20/09/2017] http://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/
7. Katsanevakis S, Deriu I, D’Amico F, Nunes AL, Sanchez SP, Crocetta F, Arianoutsou M, Bazos I, Christopoulou A, Curto G, Delipetrou P, Kokkoris Y, Panov V, Rabitsch W, Roques A, Scalera R, Shirley SM, Tricarino E, Vannini A, Zenetos A, Zervou S, Zikos A, Cardoso AC (2015) European Alien Species Information Network (EASIN): supporting European policies and scientific research. https://easin.jrc.ec.europa.eu/easin [Acessed: 18 September 2017] https://easin.jrc.ec.europa.eu/easin
8. iNaturalist (2019) iNaturalist research‐grade observations. https://www.inaturalist.org/ [Acessed: 18 January 2018] https://www.inaturalist.org/
9. Troudet J, Grandcolas P, Blin, A, Vignes-Lebbe, R, and Legendre F (2017). Taxonomic bias in biodiversity data and societal preferences. Scientific Reports, 7: 9132. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09084-6 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09084-6
10. Vellinga EC, Wolfe BE, and Pringle A (2009) Global patterns of ectomycorrhizal introductions. New Phytologist, 181: 960-973. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02728.x https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02728.x
11. Vizzini A, Zotti M, and Mello A (2009) Alien fungal species distribution: the study case of Favolaschia calocera. Biological invasions, 11: 417-429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-008-9259-5 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-008-9259-5
12. Wilson N, and Hollinger J (2019) Mushroom observer https://mushroomobserver.org/ [Accessed on: 18 December 2017] https://mushroomobserver.org/
13. CABI (2019) Invasive Species Compendium. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. https://www.cabi.org/ [Accessed on: 10 October 2018] https://www.cabi.org/

Metadados Adicionais