Talk:Heterobasidiomycetes

Potential additions
It would be nice if there was a figure comparing different basidial types (smuts, rusts, tremelloid, dacrymycetoid, auricularioid, ceratobasidioid, tulasnelloid, and homo-/holobasidium). I might make one some day (but will possibly need technical assistance in implementation). This would of course be a good addition to Basidium and a reduced version (excluding tulasnelloid and ceratobasidioid) to Basidiomycota as well.

I am also pondering adding an additional table about the adoption of systems in textbooks, most importantly Ainsbury&Bisby's 2008, 2001 and 1995, (10th, 9th and 8th editions) but also perhaps 1983 and 1973 (7th and 6th editions), possibly some other important textbooks. Unfortunately I have access to only 10th edition of A&B and perhaps 9th, and am not sure what those other important textbooks might be.

Further, the article on jelly fungi previously implied that the term "heterobasidiomycetes" is reserved to jelly fungi exclusively. While not exact throughout the 20th century, if it actually was true in say 80s and 90s that most textbooks used "heterobasidiomycetes" for jelly fungi exclusively, it certainly must be mentioned in the article. Unfortunately I'm not sure what the common usage was back then.

In the table of systems, Jülich 1981 would be a good addition. Unfortunately I don't think I have access, I will check the chair of mycology library but I suspect it might not be there.

That's it for now though, I think if these points are solved then the article is complete.

The clade that I created for the article could be included in Basidiomycota after slight modifications (remove shading, collapse Cantharellales, include Wallemiomycetes and IIRC one other such tiny unique group). I might do it myself one day.

VilmarVeldre (talk) 10:47, 26 May 2012 (UTC)