Lichens of Mexico—The Parmeliaceae is a valuable resource that will
soon be consulted even outside of its intended region. The fact that
20% of the world’s Parmeliaceae (including the vast majority known
from North America) occur in Mexico make this volume helpful in keying
out lichens outside of the country, particularly in adjacent Central
America, Caribbean, and United States. Its use of the recent
realignment of species into phylogenetically supported groups and
genera is a particular benefit.
Thick, dense, but compact, the book is held easily in one hand. Its
sturdy hardcover appears rain- and incidental spillage-proof, and its
firmly bound pages of ‘permanent paper conforming to ISO 9706-1994” do
not crackle when splayed to prepare for heavy use. The text is crisp
and legible, although the spacing is a bit tight for my aging eyes and
the margins are far too narrow, forcing one’s eye to jump occasionally
from one long line to another—all trade offs needed to keep the book
affordable and under 800 pages long. This economy of space has the
unfortunate result that even when opened firmly, text on inside
margins tends to trail off into the crease. The semi-glossy photos are
sharp and clear but amazingly few: As its title clearly indicates, the
volume focuses on keys and descriptions. Nonetheless, readers who do
read the text should be able to check most of their determinations
easily against the excellent photos in Brodo et al. (2001).
Three introductory chapters set the framework for the 450 species to
follow. The first, covering Mexico’s geology, topography, vegetation,
and diversity, provides four maps, two colored to distinguish the
different climates and biomes. The country’s 2 million km2 surface
area and varied landscape, climate, and ecosystems accommodate ~12% of
the world’s species. Herrera-Campos et al. note that it has been
historically difficult to classify Mexico’s biological landscape due
the convergence of the Holarctic and Neotropical realms in the Tropic
of Cancer, leading to the recognition of (if not agreement on) 10–32
vegetation types within the five biomes.
The second chapter — Phylogenetic structure of metacommunities in
Mexican Parmeliaceae — presents the first lichen community
phylogenetic analysis for Mexico based on the
Parmeliaceae. Lücking et al. note that the relatively young
community phylogenetics field tries to characterize the phylogenetic
structure of ecological communities, thereby ‘providing insights into
evolutionary process’ based on the theory ‘that closely related
species do not usually co-occur in the same community.’ The few fungal
and micro-organismal studies published before 2006 make these 29 pages
the first to apply community phylogenetics to lichens. The 12½- page
table shows the presence/absence of the 450 species in Mexico’s five
major biomes—tropical humid forest, humid mountain forest, temperate
forest, seasonally dry forest, and dry shrubland. Species richness and
phylogenetic diversity is highest in the temperate forest and lowest
in the humid mountain and tropical humid forests, supporting the
temperate forest as a center of diversity for Mexican
Parmeliaceae while less diverse and more clade-specific
composition of the seasonally dry forest and dry shrubland favor
lineages of the parmotremoid/xanthopermelioid clade and
Oropogon.
The third introductory chapter presents a molecular-based synopsis of
generic classification of Parmeliaceae: since 2000, the
‘increased availability of DNA sequence data has led to a second
revolution of generic delimitations in Parmeliaceae based on molecular
phylogenetic studies addressing the circumscription of genera.’ Crespo
et al. briefly evaluate currently accepted genera, recapitulating
recent changes in their circumscription and dividing the family into 7
phylogenetic groups:
Alectorioid — Circumscriptions of Alectoria, Bryoria, and
Pseudephebe remain relatively unchanged. The 2009 separation of
Gowardia from Alectoria is not currently supported, while
Nodobryoria, segregated previously from Bryoria, appears
not closely related to Bryoria.
Cetrarioid — Cetraria, Kaernefeltia, Melanelia, Tuckermanella,
Tuckermannopsis [sic], Vulpicida represent a usually
well-supported monophyletic clade, although current circumscriptions
are needed in some instances. “Genetic distances among many currently
accepted genera are remarkably low.... Thus at least some of the
genera should most likely be merged.” In this chapter Crespo & Barrano
propose the new Kaernefeltia iberica comb. nov. for
extralimital Spanish specimens previously referred to
K. merrillii, a North American endemic.
Hypogymnioid — The first sentence reads: “this group consists of four
foliose genera”, but only three are named (probably because the
authors counted Cavernula, whose species were transferred to
Hypogymnia in 2011). Brodoa [not found in Mexico] and
Pseudevernia are the other two hypogymnioid genera cited here.
Letharioid — Segregation of Letharia (found in Mexico) and
Lethariella awaits further research.
Parmelioid — This largest group accommodates over 1800 accepted
species. Of the 21 accepted genera, 5 (Bulbothrix, Parmelia,
Parmelinella, Parmotremopsis, Pseudoparmelia) are currently
polyphyletic, in a state of flux, or lack molecular data; three
(Canoparmelia, Hypotrachyna, Xanthoparmelia) were recently
trimmed for monophyly, and three (Melanelixia, Melanohalea,
Remotrachyna) are recent segregates. The remaining 10 well-supported
monophyletic genera include Cetrelia, Flavoparmelia, Montanelia,
Myelochroa, Parmelina, Parmeliopsis, Parmotrema, Phacopsis,
Punctelia, and Relicina.
Protoparmelioid — confined to the polyphyletic Protoparmelia.
Usneoid — limited to one genus (Usnea) with 350 species and the
most highly diverse in tropical areas. Usnea now includes
previous segregates (e.g., Dolichousnea, Eumitria, Neuropogon)
phylogenetically nested within it.
Genera with uncertain affinities — Anzia, characterised by
multispored asci with small curved ascospores and a spongiostratum, is
centered in eastern Asia. Imshaugia is distinguished by
Parmeliopsis-like species with emergent laminal/marginal
pycnidia and bacilliform/bifusiform conidia. Menegazzia,
diagnosed by a perforated upper thallus surface, occurs primarily in
the southern hemisphere. The morphological segregation of
Nodobryoria from Bryoria is molecularly
supported. Oropogon a fruticose lichen of the Neotropics with a
currently unresolved phylogeny.
A key to the identification of genera representing Parmeliaceae in
Mexico concludes the introduction.
A formidable array of Parmeliaceae experts have written
chapters for this volume, with Editors Herrera-Campos (5), Pérez-Pérez
(9), and Nash (24) and authors R.S. Egan (5), T.L. Esslinger (10),
J.A. Elix (4) each contributing to more than two chapters while
J.W. Bjerke, A. Crespo, P.K. Divakar, S.D. Leavitt, James Lendemer,
Robert Lücking, H.T. Lumbsch, Bruce McCune, I.KK. Tronstad,
J.L. Vilmaseñor, and A. Zambrano Garcia each contributed to at least
one.
Thirty-nine generic chapters covering 450 species comprise the bulk
(and the goal) of The Parmeliaceae. The note added in proof at
the bottom of the section’s title page hints at editorial headaches
suffered over collating over 40 papers, with many undoubtedly arriving
only shortly before press time:
“Herein Dr. Egan proposes treating everniastrum subplanum Sipman as a
synonym of Parmotrema paramoreliense whereas the former species was
treated as Hypotrachyna subplanum in the Hypotrachyna treatment as
proposed by Divakar et al. (2013a). The correct placement must await
molecular investigations of all relevant material.”
Genera are presented in alphabetical order and entitled with the genus
name + in Mexico (except for “Menegazzia in Mexico and the
Caribbean islands”). The chapters range in length from one page
(Cetraria, Phacopsis) to 103 pages (Hypotrachyna,
Parmotrema), depending on the number of species. Formatting is
consistent: Title and author information are followed by abstract,
short genus characterization, and species key (for genera with more
than one species covered). Each species treatment begins with the
taxonomic heading and nomenclator followed by morphological
description, chemical composition, distribution data, and important
notes and concludes with a list (often extensive) of specimens
examined. Alphabetical presentation —a necessity in such a large
volume with no index—and running titles enable rapid location of a
particular genus. Eight species new to science are proposed in the
Alectoria (2), Hypotrachyna (1), Parmotrema (2),
Pseudevernia (2), and Tuckermanella (1) chapters.
There are a few deviations, perhaps the most startling being that only
the species key, taxonomic headings, illustration references, and
distributional data appear are provided for Canoparmelia; I
regret the absence of the rest of the material but suspect that the
fact this chapter was written by two already overcommitted editors,
Pérez-Pérez & Nash, may have something to do with the decision to
withhold the morphological and chemical features [referenced in the
abstract as “Descriptions were provided previously”] and final
discussions for the 13 species. Still, it will be a bit of a hassle
for some readers to find the correct ‘previous’ paper for the missing
information.
I also greatly mourn the lack of a concluding comprehensive species
index that would allow easy tracking of new taxonomic realignments,
always helpful to those wondering what name a favored species has recently
adopted. The information can be ferreted out of the nomenclators, although
the reader must know the new name to find out what happened to the old
one. This does, however, have the benefit of persuading the user to consult
the keys, the whole purpose of the volume!
Finally, given the focus on phylogenetic analysis of biomes, groups,
and genera in this volume, I was exasperated by the lack of
information regarding which DNA regions were sequenced to generate the
phylogenies. A time-consuming scan of the 31-page bibliography proved
somewhat helpful, although I found only three titles naming the DNA
regions: mitochondrial DNA (Crespo & al. 2001), ITS & ß-tubulin
(Crespo & al. 2002), and ribosomal markers + RPB1 (Crespo &
al. 2007). Inspection of the multilocus sequences analyzed by
Altermann et al. (2014), however explains why modern titles do not
enumerate all DNA regions used: citing their 15 different loci (even
in the abstract) would have needlessly lengthened the paper and the
authors cited the needed information in their Materials & methods
table. Nonetheless, the nuclear ITS, LSU and mitochondrial SSU rDNA
sequences cited in the abstract for “DNA barcoding in the
Hypotrachyna clade” abstract (Divakar et al. 2015) is
information that should have been shared under Hypotrachyna in
the third chapter. Likewise identifying the DNA barcode used to
identify hidden diversity in Parmelia sensu stricto (Divakar et
al. 2015) as derived from the ITS region should have been noted for
that genus.
The rapid change in the complex molecular landscape is perhaps one
reason why most authors use vague terms such as ‘molecular analyses’,
‘DNA sequence based’, or ‘phylogenetic analyses’ in their titles
(saving the lengthier specifics for the abstracts). If a second
edition is anticipated, a brief list of the DNA regions sequenced used
to generate the phylogenetic support and their utility (even if just
in table form) would be welcome.
The objections raised above are minor and should in no way discourage
anyone from purchasing such a useful book that does precisely what it
sets out to do: key and describe 450 lichens representing Parmeliaceae
from Mexico. As noted above, its use will not (nor should) be
restricted to Mexico and the reference will prove a reliable resource
for all those who use it. I am very happy to have Lichens of Mexico:
The Parmeliaceae on my lab library shelves.
Lorelei Norvell, Pacific Northwest Mycology Service
MYCOTAXON October–December 2017—Volume 132, pp. 995-1001