Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Coprophilous myxomycetes: Recent advances and future research directions

  • Published:
Fungal Diversity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Species of myxomycetes are adapted to different ecological niches and occupy different microhabitats. The majority of species have a wide ecological amplitude and may be found on various kinds of substrata. Some species have narrower ecological niches and are restricted to or mainly found on one special kind of substratum. Coprophilous species grow on dung or on a substratum in close contact with dung. The vast majority of records stem from moist chamber cultures on dung from herbivorous mammals, but several species have also been recorded on droppings from birds. A limited number of species can be regarded as truly coprophilous in that they have predominantly or in some cases only been recorded on dung. Some of these species are known from very few collections and their dependence on dung may therefore be difficult to judge. No correlation is absolute and species regarded as coprophilous may sometimes, although rarely, turn up on other types of substrata. Dung is rich in bacteria and nutrients and is a favourable substratum for myxomycetes. Many species normally inhabiting other habitats are occasionally found on dung, and up to now about 114 species have been reported from this kind of substratum, a number that will continue to grow. At least three species, Licea alexopouli, Kelleromyxa fimicola and Trichia brunnea, have thick-walled spores, a possible adaptation to passing through the intestinal tract of a herbivore before germination can take place.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adamonyte G (2003) Trichia papillata, a new coprophilous myxomycete species. Mycotaxon 87:379–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Adamonyte G, Taraskevicius R, Matuleviciute D (2011) Occurrence of three rare myxomycete species in great cormorant colony in Lithuania.—In: Adamonyte G, Motiejunaite (eds.), Fungi and lichens in the Baltics and beyond. XVIII Symposium of the Baltic Mycologists and Lichenologists. Nordic Lichen Society Meeting, Lithuania, Dubingiai, 19–23 September 2011. Programme and Abstracts: 7

  • Angel SK, Wicklow DT (1975) Relationships between coprophilous fungi and fecal substrates in a Colorado grassland. Mycologia 67:63–74

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bezerra MFA, Silva WTM, Cavalcanti LH (2008) Coprophilous myxomycetes of Brazil: first report. Rev Mexic Micolog 27:29–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisby GR, Buller AHR, Dearness J (1929) The fungi of Manitoba. London

  • Blackwell M (1974) A new species of Licea. Proc Iowa Acad Sci 81:6

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung C-H, Liu C-H (1995) First report of fimicolous myxomycetes from Taiwan. Fung Sci 10:33–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung C-H, Liu C-H (1996) More fimicolous myxomycetes from Taiwan. Taiwania 41:259–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox JJ (1981) Notes on coprophilous myxomycetes from the western United States. Mycologia 73:741–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eliasson UH, Keller HW (1999) Coprophilous myxomycetes: updated summary, key to species, and taxonomic observations on Trichia brunnea, Arcyria elaterensis, and Arcyria stipata. Karstenia 39:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Eliasson U, Lundqvist N (1979) Fimicolous myxomycetes. Bot Not 132:551–568

    Google Scholar 

  • Eliasson UH, Keller HW, Schoknecht JD (1991) Kelleromyxa, a new generic name for Licea fimicola (Myxomycetes). Mycol Res 95:1201–1207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Everhart SE, Keller HW, Ely JS (2008) Influence of bark pH on the occurrence and distribution of tree canopy myxomycete species. Mycologia 100:191–204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • García-Zorrón N (1977) Mixomicetos coprofilos del Uruguay. Rev Biol Urug 5:47–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilert E (1990) On the identity of Perichaena liceoides (Myxomycetes). Mycol Res 94:698–704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilert E (1995) Taxonomic evaluation of the myxomycete Calonema luteolum. Mycol Res 99:311–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson HJ (1986) Fungal biology. Edward Arnold, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Ing B (1994) The phytosociology of myxomycetes. New Phytol 126:175–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jahn E (1916) Coprophilie bei Myxomyceten. Verh Bot Ver Prov Brandenb 57:207–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller HW, Anderson LL (1978) Some coprophilous species of Myxomycetes. The ASB Bull 25:67, abstract

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller HW, Everhart SE (2010) Importance of myxomycetes in biological research and teaching. Fungi 3:13–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller HW, Kilgore CM, Everhart SE, Carmack GJ, Crabtree CD, Scarborough AR (2008) Myxomycete plasmodia and fruiting bodies: unusual occurrences and user friendly techniques. Fungi 1:24–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski DT (1975) The Myxomycete taxa described by Charles Meylan. Mycologia 67:448–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krug JC, Benny GL, Keller HW (2004) In: Mueller GM, Bills GF, Foster MS (eds) Biodiversity of fungi. Inventory and monitoring methods. Elsevier Academic Press, Burlington, pp 467–499

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Krzemieniewska H (1960) Sluzowce Polski na tle flory sluzowcow europejskich. Polska Akademia Nauk, Instytut Botaniki, Warsaw

    Google Scholar 

  • Lado C (2001) Nomenmyx, a nomenclatural taxabase of Myxomycetes. Madrid

  • Liu C-H, Chang J-H, Yang F-H (2007) Myxomycetous genera Perichaena and Trichia in Taiwan. Bot Stud 48:91–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundqvist N (1972) Nordic Sordariaceae s. lat. Symb Bot Upsal 20

  • Marchal É (1895) Champignons coprophiles de Belgique. VII. Bull Soc Roy Bot Belg 34:125–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin GW, Alexopoulos CJ (1969) The Myxomycetes. The University of Iowa Press, Iowa City

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill RA (1969) A preliminary survey of the coprophilous myxomycetes of California. Master’s Thesis. California State Univ. Chico

  • Meylan C (1924) Recherches sur les Myxomycètes du Jura en 1921-22-23. Bull Soc Vaud Sci Nat 55:237–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Meylan C (1929) Recherches sur les Myxomycètes en 1927–28. Bull Soc Vaud Sci Nat 57:39–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell DW, Moreno G, Lizárraga M (2011) A new species of coprophilous Perichaena from New Mexico. Bol Soc Micol Madrid 35:103–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno G, Mitchell DW, Novozhilov YK (2011) A new species of Badhamia (Myxomycetes) confused with other species with similar morphology. Bol Soc Micol Madrid 35:95–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Novozhilov YK, Mitchell DW, Schnittler M (2003) Myxomycete biodiversity of the Colorado Plateau. Mycol Prog 2:243–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novozhilov YK, Zemlianskaia IV, Schnittler M, Stephenson SL (2006) Myxomycete diversity and ecology in the arid regions of the Lower Volga River Basin (Russia). Fungal Divers 23:193–241

    Google Scholar 

  • Novozhilov YK, Zemlyanskaya IV, Schnittler M, Stephenson SL (2008) Two new species of Perichaena (Myxomycetes) from arid areas of Russia and Kazakhstan. Mycologia 100:816–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schnittler M, Novozhilov YK, Carvajal E, Spiegel FW (2012) Myxomycete diversity in the Tarim basin and eastern Tian-Shan, Xinjiang Prov., China. Fungal Divers. doi:10.1007/s13225-012-0186-5

  • Stephenson SL (2011) From morphological to molecular: studies of myxomycetes since the publication of the Martin and Alexopoulos (1969) monograph. Fungal Divers 50:21–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson SL, Stempen H (1994) Myxomycetes. A handbook of slime molds. Timber press, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Tóth S (1965) Data to the knowledge of the coprophilous microscopic fungi in Hungary. II. Ann Hist-Nat Mus Nat Hung (Bot) 57:150–157

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank Prof. Harold Keller for constructive points of view on an earlier version of this manuscript. Financial support for this study was received from the Royal Society of Arts and Sciences in Gothenburg.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Box 461, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Uno Eliasson

Authors
  1. Uno Eliasson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Uno Eliasson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eliasson, U. Coprophilous myxomycetes: Recent advances and future research directions. Fungal Diversity 59, 85–90 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-012-0185-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-012-0185-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation