Scientific communication is facilitated by a data-driven, scientifically sound taxonomy that considers the end-user’s needs and established successful practice. In 2013, the Fusarium community voiced near unanimous support for a concept of Fusarium that represented a clade comprising all agriculturally and clinically important Fusarium species, including the F. solani species complex (FSSC). Subsequently, this concept was challenged in 2015 by one research group who proposed dividing the genus Fusarium into seven genera, including the FSSC described as members of the genus Neocosmospora, with subsequent justification in 2018 based on claims that the 2013 concept of Fusarium is polyphyletic. Here, we test this claim and provide a phylogeny based on exonic nucleotide sequences of 19 orthologous protein-coding genes that strongly support the monophyly of Fusarium including the FSSC. We reassert the practical and scientific argument in support of a genus Fusarium that includes the FSSC and several other basal lineages, consistent with the longstanding use of this name among plant pathologists, medical mycologists, quarantine officials, regulatory agencies, students, and researchers with a stake in its taxonomy. In recognition of this monophyly, 40 species described as genus Neocosmospora were recombined in genus Fusarium, and nine others were renamed Fusarium. Here the global Fusarium community voices strong support for the inclusion of the FSSC in Fusarium, as it remains the best scientific, nomenclatural, and practical taxonomic option available.

Nocardia species identification is difficult due to a complex and rapidly changing taxonomy, the failure of 16S rRNA and cellular fatty acid analysis to discriminate many species, and the unreliability of biochemical testing. Here, Nocardia species identification was achieved through multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA) of gyrase B of the β subunit of DNA topoisomerase ( gyrB ), 16S rRNA (16S), subunit A of SecA preprotein translocase ( secA1 ), the 65-kDa heat shock protein ( hsp65 ), and RNA polymerase ( rpoB ) applied to 190 clinical, 36 type, and 11 reference strains. Phylogenetic analysis resolved 30 sequence clusters with high (>85%) bootstrap support. Since most clusters contained a single type strain and the analysis corroborated current knowledge of Nocardia taxonomy, the sequence clusters were equated with species clusters and MLSA was deemed appropriate for species identification. By comparison, single-locus analysis was inadequate because it failed to resolve species clusters, partly due to the presence of foreign alleles in 22.1% of isolates. While MLSA identified the species of the majority (71.3%) of strains, it also identified clusters that may correspond to new species. The correlation of the identities by MLSA with those determined on the basis of microscopic examination, biochemical testing, and fatty acid analysis was 95%; however, MLSA was more discriminatory. Nocardia cyriacigeorgica (21.58%) and N. farcinica (14.74%) were the most frequently encountered species among clinical isolates. In summary, five-locus MLSA is a reliable method of elucidating taxonomic data to inform Nocardia species identification; however, three-locus ( gyrB -16S- secA1 ) or four-locus ( gyrB -16S- secA1 - hsp65 ) MLSA was nearly as reliable, correctly identifying 98.5% and 99.5% of isolates, respectively, and would be more feasible for routine use in a clinical reference microbiology laboratory.

This article is to alert medical mycologists and infectious disease specialists of recent name changes of medically important species of the filamentous mold Fusarium . Fusarium species can cause localized and life-threating infections in humans. Of the 70 Fusarium species that have been reported to cause infections, close to one-third are members of the Fusarium solani species complex (FSSC), and they collectively account for approximately two-thirds of all reported Fusarium infections.

The rapid pace of name changes of medically important fungi is creating challenges for clinical laboratories and clinicians involved in patient care. We describe two sources of name change which have different drivers, at the species versus the genus level. Some suggestions are made here to reduce the number of name changes. We urge taxonomists to provide diagnostic markers of taxonomic novelties. Given the instability of phylogenetic trees due to variable taxon sampling, we advocate to maintain genera at the largest possible size. Reporting of identified species in complexes or series should where possible comprise both the name of the overarching species and that of the molecular sibling, often cryptic species. Because the use of different names for the same species will be unavoidable for many years to come, an open access online database of the names of all medically important fungi, with proper nomenclatural designation and synonymy, is essential. We further recommend that while taxonomic discovery continues, the adaptation of new name changes by clinical laboratories and clinicians be reviewed routinely by a standing committee for validation and stability over time, with reference to an open access database, wherein reasons for changes are listed in a transparent way.

Fungal infections are a rising threat to our immunocompromised patient population as well as other non-immunocompromised patients with various medical conditions. However, little progress has been made in the past decade to improve fungal diagnostics. To jointly address this diagnostic challenge, the Fungal Diagnostics Laboratory Consortium (FDLC) was recently created. The FDLC consists of 26 laboratories from the United States and Canada that routinely provide fungal diagnostic services for patient care. A survey of fungal diagnostic capacity among the 26 members of the FDLC was recently completed, identifying the following diagnostic gaps: lack of molecular detection of mucormycosis; lack of an optimal diagnostic algorithm incorporating fungal biomarkers and molecular tools for early and accurate diagnosis of Pneumocystis pneumonia, aspergillosis, candidemia, and endemic mycoses; lack of a standardized molecular approach to identify fungal pathogens directly in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues; lack of robust databases to enhance mold identification with matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry; suboptimal diagnostic approaches for mold blood cultures, tissue culture processing for Mucorales, and fungal respiratory cultures for cystic fibrosis patients; inadequate capacity for fungal point-of-care testing, to detect and identify new, emerging or under-recognized, rare or uncommon fungal pathogens, and performance of antifungal susceptibility testing. In this commentary, the FDLC delineates the most pressing unmet diagnostic needs and provides expert opinion on how to fulfill them. Most importantly, the FDLC provides a robust laboratory network to tackle these diagnostic gaps and ultimately to improve and enhance the clinical laboratory’s capability to rapidly and accurately diagnose fungal infections.