See also:

FunKey is an interactive key and information resource for the genera and selected species of Australian agarics. The agarics, also known as mushrooms and toadstools, are not a taxonomic unit, but rather a group of convenience for lamellate macrofungi. In modern classifications, fungi of quite different macroscopic appearance are often placed together in the same genus, because information from DNA sequences shows them to be closely related. Some families and genera traditionally reserved for lamellate taxa now contain fungi of quite different form, such as with a tubular-poroid hymenium or a truffle-like habit. Conversely, fungi with lamellae occur in a variety of families and orders. Nevertheless, agarics are readily recognisable in the field, and it is practical to deal with them together for the purposes of identification. Further interactive keys are in preparation for other macroscopically distinctive groups of macrofungi, such as polypores, puffballs and truffles.

FunKey includes the 112 agaric genera that are confirmed from Australia. About half the genera are keyed out directly, some are split into Identification Units, and in genera with one or a few closely related species, the species or species group is keyed out directly.

Where a genus contains only one Australian agaric species, the taxon name is the name of the particular species, because keying to the genus provides a direct identification of that species. There are 26 genera that contain a single species; examples are Asterophora and Omphalotus, both of which have a single species known from Australia (Asterophora mirabilis and Omphalotus nidiformis), and also Trametes elegans (which is the only agaric in the genus Trametes, which is otherwise poroid). For 11 taxa, the name of the species is followed by the term ‘group’, as in the Leucoagaricus leucothites group. Such groups contain a few species of very similar appearance.

There are 52 genera that contain more than one Australian species that are keyed out directly, such as Agaricus, Laccaria and Tricholoma. Some 25 other genera have been split into 71 smaller Identification Units, and the names of these units are nested within index headings for the relevant genera (such as AMANITA: index). If names of identification units under index headings are not visible within the Entities Remaining panel, use the Expand selected list button (third from the left in the toolbar).

Furthermore, for Coprinus there is an index heading for COPRINUS broad sense, under which are the recent segregates Coprinellus, Coprinopsis and Parasola as well as Coprinus in the strict sense (i.e. the Coprinus comatus group) and the the Coprinus cordisporus group for some species unable to be placed into one of the segregate genera. It is convenient to place these genera together, but it does mean that Parasola is not in the correct alphabetical order in the Entities Remaining window.

In the Lucid key window at the start of an identification session, there are are 185 Entities Remaining. These entities comprise 25 index entries for taxa with identification units as well as an index entry for COPRINUS broad sense along with 159 taxa. Among the taxa there are 52 genera that have more than one species; 26 single species; and five species groups. Nested within the 26 index entries are a further three genera, 24 single species, six species groups and 43 other Identification Units, such as morphogroups, subgenera or the remaining portions of genera designated as 'other'.

The combination of genera and individual species as the terminal identification entities is a practical approach to allow identification of material to all known Australian agaric genera, but also to selected species where possible. It is premature to provide a key to all known species for three reasons. Firstly, in some of the larger genera, such as Amanita, Galerina, Gymnopilus and Mycena, there are groups of known species of very similar appearance that are extremely difficult to tell apart. Secondly, some species, even though formally described, are very poorly known, with data missing on important diagnostic characters. Thirdly, providing genera as the identification entities allows for the possibility of correctly keying out to genus material of species yet to be formally named. On the whole, where genera with single species are keyed out, it is considered unlikely that there are further species yet to be described in those genera.

In this and other introductory and instructional pages, the taxon names as used in the key are presented in bold.

All 159 taxa that are keyed out separately (whether genera, species, species groups or units within genera) are linked to taxon fact sheets that can be accessed from the Index to taxa, or from within the key by clicking on the small page icon preceding the taxon name.

Taxa are either whole genera (55), individual species (50), species groups (11), or subdivisions of genera (43) (see Identification Units).

Where a genus is split into Identification Units in the key, there is a concise index page for the genus as a whole (e.g. CLITOCYBE: index) as well as detailed fact sheets for each identification unit (in this case, Clitocybe other and Clitocybe semiocculta). All Identification Units can be accessed via the index page for their genus. Occasionaly, as for Amanita, the fact sheet for one identification unit [Amanita (no volva)] refers to fuller information on the fact sheet for another identification unit [(Amanita (other)].

Each taxon fact sheet provides:

The list of Australian species is a reasonably comprehensive selection based on species that are confirmed from Australia by voucher material that has been examined in recent revisions, mostly since 1950. Thus, many names of species described in the 19th century are omitted when these are known only from the type collection, unless they are particularly distinctive. In addition, Australian records of Northern Hemisphere species are excluded if they lack vouchers or where insufficient information is available to confirm their identity. Recently used synonyms are provided. For a full listing of synonyms and records of each species, along with full citation details, see the Interactive Catalogue of Australian Fungi. In the list of species, brief notes on distinctive characters are sometimes provided, or the species may be arranged under formal or informal infrageneric groups.

The descriptions of the diagnostic characters of each taxon are based on the character states as coded for FunKey. These character states are compiled primarily from the listed Australian species. Where there is additional variation represented by extra-Australian species, this is sometimes noted in the descriptions. Information on how we coded up the data matrix for the Key is provided under Data capture for FunKey.

The nutritional mode (also called the trophic status) refers to whether the taxon is parasitic, saprotrophic (decomposing dead organic matter) or ectomycorrhizal (forming mutualistic relationships with living plants). The nutritional mode is usually uniform within a genus, and most agarics are saptrotrophs or ectomycorrhizal. Singer (1986), Agerer (2006) and Tedersoo et al. (2010) were the main sources of information on the nutritional mode.

Distribution information is derived from the references listed under each taxon (and otherwise from references in the Interactive Catalogue of Australian Fungi) and from specimen information in Australian herbaria accessed via Australia’s Virtual Herbarium and the Atlas of Living Australia. The following works were particularly useful for establishing distribution: Bougher & Syme (1998) and Hilton (1982; 1988) for Western Australia, Grgurinovic (1997a) and various unpublished reports by Pam and David Catcheside for South Australia, Gates et al. (2005) and Ratkowsky & Gates (2002; 2005) for Tasmania, newsletters of the Sydney Fungal Studies Club for New South Wales; Aberdeen et al. (1989), Aberdeen (1979), Young (1997c) and Young et al. (2002) for Queensland; and Young (2005b) for various states especially Queensland. For the purposes of indicating distribution, the Australian Capital Territory is included within New South Wales. Where a taxon is not currently known from a region, but is present in adjacent regions, then distribution for the intervening region is coded as possible ('uncertain'). Distribution of taxa was also coded as ‘uncertain’ when they are currently unknown for the region, but are known to occur in similar habitats in adjacent regions. Current distribution information for the Northern Territory is much poorer than that for other states, and many genera are coded as ‘uncertain’ for occurrence in that region.

References listed in the taxon fact sheets include field guides, monographs and floras. Where works contain an Illustration of fruit-bodies, a Description of macrocharacters, a distribution Map or a Key, this is indicated in bold. Illustrations are in colour unless otherwise indicated (B&W Illustration). Where there are descriptions of Microcharacters, this is also indicated in bold. Works that have descriptions of microcharacters usually also include at least some illustrations of microcharacters, especially spores. The listed illustrations and descriptions are of Australian material unless otherwise noted (except for a few works, such as those by Cunningham covering Australasia, where many Australian collections are listed, although the basis of illustrations is not specified). All references are additionally listed in the main list of References. Specialist literature on generic classification is cited in the section on Taxon circumscription, and also listed in the main list of References.

Identification units are used within 25 genera to facilitate identification because the 71 units are more uniform as far as the characters used in FunKey. In some genera, one species is keyed out separately from the rest of the genus, as for Hebeloma victoriense and Hebeloma (other). Species that are keyed out in this way are discordant within the genus (and if combined with the rest of the genus would retain the genus in the identification process un-necessarily as far as the characters of most members) or have unique characters (that allow the individual species to be keyed out more readily than the bulk of the species in the particular genus). In other genera, the genus is split into one or more larger units that can be formal taxonomic units such as subgenera (as in Mycena), or else informal infrageneric groups (as for some groups within Cortinarius), again with less variation within each of the units than there would be if the genus was keyed out as a whole.

Where identification units are used within a genus, they are all initially nested under an index entry (indicated by a capitalised genus name), and each unit begins with the name of the genus, followed either by (1) the name of a species or a species group, (2) the name of a formal subdivision of a genus, such as a subgenus or section, (3) an informal subdivision of a genus or a descriptive phrase, or (4) the term '(other)'. Where the ‘other’ unit is used, it is the largest unit of the genus and contains all the species that do not belong in the remaining identification units of the particular genus.

Informal names derived from generic names (now known not to be monophyletic) are written without italics, as in Cortinarius morphogroup Cuphocybe. Descriptive phrases are also written without italics, such as in Inocybe (rounded spores).

Cortinarius provides a good example of identification units, with 10 units under the CORTINARIUS: index entry as follows:

Cortinarius australiensis is keyed out separately because it is massive, and has a membranous annulus, so is very distinctive.

Cortinarius canarius is keyed out separately because it has very finely verrucose spores that can appear smooth. It also has distinctive, bright yellow pigmentation and the pileus reacts deep red to KOH and is not viscid.

Cortinarius fibrillosus is keyed out separately because it also has very finely verrucose spores that can appear smooth. The spore characters have led to it being placed in Inocybe, and the coarsely radially fibrillose pileus texture is concordant with this, but molecular evidence confirms its placement in Cortinarius.

Cortinarius mariae is keyed out separately because it has smooth spores, which are highly unusual within Cortinarius. This species was originally described as the sole species of the genus Rapacea, but molecular data show that the morphological difference in spore ornamentation is not significant as far as relationships, and Rapacea is now treated as a synonym of Cortinarius.

If the characters of Cortinarius had been coded up inclusive of C. canarius, C. fibrillosus and C. mariae, then spore ornamentation would be coded as smooth or warty, meaning that Cortinarius would be retained when keying out a sample with either smooth or with warty spores, when only three species of the very many in the genus had smooth spores. The benefit of segregating the smooth-spored members of Cortinarius into separate units will occur when keying out material of the many genera with a brown spore print and smooth spores, when Cortinarius (other) will be eliminated straight away. Cortinarius canarius, C. fibrillosus and C. mariae are kept separate (rather than combined as Cortinarius ‘smooth spored’) because they are very different in macroscopic appearance.

The Cortinarius violaceus group is keyed out separately because some authors report a plage on the spores of some members of this group. A plage is otherwise not known for Cortinarius, but is an important character in recognition of many species of Galerina.

Considered at generic rank until recently, Cortinarius subgenus Dermocybe is keyed out separately because this group remains distinctive within Cortinarius. The pileus is often brightly coloured (red, yellow or orange) and reacts strongly to KOH, while the lower stipe is often banded.

The subgenus Myxacium is keyed out separately because the presence of glutinous stipe and pileus makes material of this unit key out readily, while material of Cortinarius (other) may be quite difficult to differentiate from a number of similar genera such as Gymnopilus and Galerina (species of which do not combine a glutinous stipe and pileus).

Two taxa formerly regarded as distinct genera, Cuphocybe and Rozites, are also keyed out separately within Cortinarius as Cortinarius morphogroup Cuphocybe and Cortinarius morphogroup Rozites respectively. Species formerly placed in these genera are macroscopically quite distinctive, with characters different from other species of Cortinarius (the membranous veil remnants on the pileus of Cuphocybe and the annulus of Rozites). However, on molecular grounds, species of both genera fall within Cortinarius, but not as distinct clades that merit retaining their former genera as formal infrageneric names.

All other species of Cortinarius that do not belong to one of the seven identification units separated out from the genus are included under Cortinarus (other). This identification unit covers the majority of species in the genus.

Other examples of units chosen to facilitate identification are (1) the separation of Galerina nana from Galerina (other) because it is the only member of the genus with metuloids, (2) the separation of Entoloma section Claudopus from Entoloma (other) because members of the section have a lateral or absent stipe, and (3) the split of Inocybe into Inocybe (rounded spores) and Inocybe (nodulose spores) on the basis of spore outline.

The use of identification units is often a response to the integration of molecular data into the system of classification of agarics. The necessary alterations to generic circumscriptions have made genera more natural in the sense of representing monophyletic groups, but more difficult to identify on morphology alone. Some of the identification units utilised in the key continue to recognise old generic boundaries that were established on purely morphological grounds, other units are divisions that have never been formally recognised, but all units improve the ability to identify material to genus.

For 26 genera, identifying material to genus will also provide a species name, because there is only one known Australian species, and there are five other genera where only a small cluster of closely related species occurs in Australia. An additional 24 individual species and six species groups are also keyed out separately in other genera where Identification Units are used. For all genera, the information provided in the Taxon Fact Sheets will assist, as far as is possible, with identification to species. There are lists of Australian species, and lists of references containing keys to and descriptions and illustrations of Australian species.

Few genera have been the subject of comprehensive treatments (including keys) of the Australian species. An exception is the four genera covered by Young (2005a) in his Fungi of Australia treatment of the Hygrophoraceae (Camarophyllopsis, Humidicutis, Hygrocybe and Hygrophorus). World monographs usually do not include a good sampling of Australian material: exceptions are the monographs of Lentinellus (Petersen & Hughes, 2004), Panaeolus and Panaeolina (Gerhardt, 1996) and members of the Xerula/Oudemansiella complex (Petersen & Hughes, 2011). Wood (1997; 2001) provides comprehensive treatments of Amanita and Galerina predominantly from New South Wales, and also provides keys to species. Nordeloos & Gates (2012) provide detailed coverage of the genera Clitopilus and Entoloma from Tasmania, including keys to species. Grgurinovic (1997a) deals with numerous genera of agarics from South Australia and provides keys for all species covered within each genus. For genera that contain many cosmopolitan species, such as Agaricus, Coprinellus and Coprinopsis, keys to species from other regions, such as in Flora Agaricina Neerlandica or British Fungus Flora are a useful starting point.

An effective method of identifying to species is comparison against colour illustrations. The selection of species in Fuhrer (2005) is the most comprehensive for this purpose. Other useful sources of colour illustrations include Bougher & Syme (1998), Fungimap (2001), Grey & Grey (2005), McCann (2003) and Young (2005b).

In attempting to identify material to species using the sources listed, it should be kept in mind that it is not unusual to encounter species that are yet to be formally described. Some genera, such as Armillaria, Panus and Lentinus, do appear to be relatively well-known, and there are unlikely to be too many undescribed species. However, other genera, especially Cortinarius and Entoloma, almost certainly have numerous species awaiting formal description. Keep in mind also that Australian material has often been assigned Northern Hemisphere names that, on closer examination, can turn out to be misapplied, and the Australian material then needs to be provided with a new name. Among the known species, further work is required in many genera to clarify the limits of variation within and between species. Nevertheless, there are several hundred species that are distinctive enough to be named with a reasonable degree of certainty. The targets for the Fungimap scheme are good examples of distinctive species (Grey & Grey, 2005).

The most species-rich Australian genera are Amanita, Cortinarius, Entoloma, Hygrocybe, Galerina, Gymnopilus, Lepiota, Marasmius, Mycena and Russula.

In the early part of the nineteenth century Swedish mycologist Elias Fries developed a system for classification of agarics based on macroscopic characters (Fries, 1821). He placed most agarics in the genus Agaricus, within which there were numerous infrageneric taxa, many of which are familiar as generic names in use today, such as Amanita, Armillaria, Clitocybe, Collybia, Lepiota, Mycena, Russula and Tricholoma. These infrageneric taxa were differentiated by readily observable characters such as spore print colour, stipe position, lamellae attachment and the presence or absence of an annulus. Gradually, during the nineteenth century, the infrageneric groups of Fries were raised to generic rank, and Agaricus was restricted to species with an annulus, dark brown spores and free lamellae (and for a time called Psalliota).

Towards the end of the nineteenth century microscopic characters were introduced into the classification of agarics, particularly by mycologists Vincent Fayod (Swiss) and Narcisse Patouillard (French). Fayod (1889) and Patouillard (1900) utilised characters such as the shape and ornamentation of spores, the presence and shape of cystidia and pellis structure. Some of the Friesian groups were found to have correlated microscopic characters, as for example Russula, with ornamented spores. New genera were also introduced, as for example Melanoleuca, for species formerly in Tricholoma, but differing in having ornamented spores. In the twentieth century, German-born mycologist Rolf Singer produced a ‘modern’ classification of the agarics which evolved over several editions, the first published in 1951, the fourth in 1986 (Singer, 1986). He utilised further micromorphological data, such as the reaction of spores in Melzer’s reagent, and made extensive use of lamellar trama and pellis characters, as well as integrating cytological, chemical and ecological characters (such as whether saprotrophic or mycorrhiza-forming). Singer (1986) recognised 16 families and 230 genera within the order Agaricales. French mycologist Robert Kühner also elaborated a system of classification for agarics (Kühner, 1980; 1984). This differed in some respects from that of Singer, but according to Singer (1986), most of the differences relate to the rank of taxa, with Kühner in general adopting a broader generic concept. In recent years, some families have been segregated from the Agaricales in orders such as Boletales, Cortinariales and Russulales. These orders, and the families within, often also contain non-lamellate fungi of various fruit-body forms (from stipitate-pileate to resupinate).

There is a certain nostalgia for the ‘Friesian’ classification, which seems to assume that by a simple combination of spore print colour, lamellae attachment and a few other characters, all agaric genera can be readily differentiated. It must be emphasised that on closer inspection the species included by Fries under names of genera in use today are often a mixture of species that in subsequent treatments were already considered completely unrelated on morphology, even before the introduction of molecular data. This is apparent from Stuntz et al. (1977), who provided keys within each of the Friesian genera to the modern genera that they encompass, with as many as 21 such genera being included, as under Pleurotus.

In the last decade data from DNA and RNA nucleotide sequences have been increasingly used to investigate the relationships of organisms, including agarics. Whereas information on morphology had been previously synthesised into classifications largely without the use of numerical techniques, molecular data are being analysed by cladistic methods (Hillis et al., 1996). These methods do not group by overall similarity, but rather seek to infer relationships by the least amount of evolutionary steps (‘parsimony’). Relationships inferred by parsimony are depicted as a cladogram, and groups of related species are called a clade. Genera whose species form a single uniform clade are referred to as monophyletic. When the species of a genus fall within several clades, along with species from other genera, the genus is polyphyletic. Derived characters shared by species in a monophyletic clade are called synapomorphies.

Parsimony analysis of molecular data has confirmed generic limits as elaborated on morphology by Singer (1986) for some genera, but for many others great changes in classification are required. For example, genera such as Agaricus, Amanita, Laccaria, Melanoleuca, Phaeocollybia and Pluteus are monophyletic (at least among their lamellate members, see also truffles). However, as defined by Singer (1986), genera such as Collybia, Coprinus, Galerina, Omphalina and Pholiota are clearly polyphyletic (Moncalvo et al., 2002). The morphological limits of genera such as these had already been the subject of considerable discussion. Molecular data sometimes reveal that species which proved problematic to place on morphology have unexpected relationships far removed from the genera for which their morphology had the best fit in the system of Singer (1986). In Pholiota, for example, molecular data (Moncalvo et al., 2002) demonstrate that seven species do not cluster with the main Pholiota clade. There is a clade for three species formerly in Pholiota subgenus Hemipholiota, and a further four species placed by Singer (1986) in Pholiota, including Pholiota oedipus (from Pholiota section Sordidae), appear in other clades. This latter taxon was problematic for Singer (1986) in the differentiation of Pholiota from Kuehneromyces, and its removal from Pholiota makes the genus more uniform in terms of morphological characters. There are also quite unexpected suggestions of polyphyletic genera from the molecular analysis of Moncalvo et al. (2002); an example is the clade of psilocybin-containing species of Psilocybe which is separate from the remaining species.

Some new classifications have already been proposed in the light of polyphyletic genera revealed by molecular analysis, such as for Coprinus (Redhead et al., 2001) and Omphalina (Redhead et al., 2002a; 2002b). However, the correct taxonomy and nomenlature for other polyphyletic genera is yet to be resolved. Re-classifications proposed on the basis of initial molecular data, often from only one nucleotide region, have not always been confirmed by subsequent analyses, using additional regions or including additional taxa. For example, the type of Coprinus and allied species clearly are quite separate from the numerous other species formerly placed in that genus. However, the three segregate coprinoid genera introduced in the Psathyrellaceae by Redhead et al. (2001), on the basis of sequences from the nuclear large ribosomal subunit gene (nLSU), are not entirely supported by later analyses that include additional species of Psathyrella (e.g. Padamsee et al., 2008) and other DNA region (e.g. Vasutová et al., 2008).

As the dust settles from the molecular revolution, it is clear that many morphological characters thought to carry great weight in the classification of agarics cannot be relied upon as evidence of evolutionary relationships. Morphological characters do form synapomorphies for some clades, but a particular character may be uniform in one clade while being variable within another. In the Agaricaceae, all species of Agaricus have a dark brown spore print, whereas in Chlorophyllum the spore print may be white or green. Some morphological characters, such as stipe position, which may be obvious in the field and widely used to differentiate genera, now seem to be weak indications of relationships. Much work remains to carefully assess the monophyletic groups that are suggested by molecular data and to look for correlated morphological and ecological characters.

Against this background of rapid and dramatic changes to the circumscriptions of agaric genera, it has been necessary to make pragmatic decisions as to the limits of genera, and the way in which genera are split to facilitate identification. Because FunKey relies heavily on morphology, the Identification Units utilised integrate current knowledge of phylogenetic relationships, while taking into account those morphological characters that are diagnostic for natural groups. Further explanations and justifications for the generic circumscriptions are provided in the section on Taxon Circumscription.

A key to genera is a stepping stone to the identification of species and, under each genus, we list the Australian representatives. If alternative generic classifications are developed in future, the key as it stands will still succeed in taking users to the particular set of species assigned to each genus as it has been circumscribed here.

Truffle-like fungi are common in Australia (Bougher & Lebel, 2001). The fruit-body is similar to the true truffles (the genus Tuber and allies in the Ascomycota) in that these fungi have an enclosed (‘sequestrate’) hymenium (spore-bearing surface). In basidiomycete truffle-like fungi the hymenium is often convoluted, forming labyrinthine chambers, or sometimes the interior is solid. A rudimentary stipe may be present. A number of genera traditionally reserved for species with lamellate fruit-bodies are now considered to also contain truffle-like species. Microcharacters and molecular data strongly support these revised classifications, indicating that the truffle-like fruit-body form has evolved more than once in various lineages of agarics. Examples of truffle-like genera being synonymised with genera originally erected for agarics include the sinking of Macowanites into Russula, Richoniella into Entoloma and Thaxterogaster into Cortinarius. Some other pairs of truffle-like and agaric genera (such as Hydnangium and Laccaria) are certainly closely related and future analyses may well result in further merging of truffle-like and agaric genera.

The truffle-like species in genera such as Entoloma, Cortinarius and Russula are not included in the agaric key. In addition, truffle-like genera that are known relatives of agarics are not listed in the List of taxa or included in the list of genera arranged under families.

FunKey covers agaric genera reliably confirmed from Australia, including Tasmania and the five mainland states as well as the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. It does not cover any additional genera that might be present on islands a long way offshore such as Christmas Is., Macquarie Is., Lord Howe Is. and Norfolk Is.

On the whole, macrofungal genera are widely distributed. There are no agaric genera endemic to Australia, and most of the more diverse genera have representatives in Australia. Thus FunKey should be of use for identifying agarics from other continents. However, the key has been constructed specifically to work for Australian representatives of each genus, and therefore the range of variation coded may be less than that occurring in members of the same genus elsewhere.

Distribution maps for most Australian fungal genera and species are not available in printed form, but there are several sources of on-line maps, including Australia's Virtual Herbarium and the Atlas of Living Australia. When using maps, remember that many areas of Australia are poorly collected for fungi, and there are significant gaps in existing maps, particularly for northern and central Australia.

Australia’s Virtual Herbarium (AVH) is a project to link the specimen databases of the major Australian botanical herbaria. The AVH allows the user to map one or several taxa (genera or species) on a single map and includes an advanced search function. Maps reflect the current herbarium holdings across a range of herbaria, in real-time. However, remember that the AVH includes only databased specimens, and some significant holdings of fungi in some herbaria are not yet databased.

The Atlas of Living Australia (ALA) brings together information about the biodiversity of Australia. The ALA includes species pages that aggregate available descriptions and images. There is a powerful mapping facility, which can map individual species or groups of species, and which has numerous environmental and other layers that allow sophisticated data analysis. You can also find lists of species from particular localities or regions. Distribution data in the ALA includes specimen-based records from Australia's Virtual Herbarium along with observational records from Fungimap.

Fungimap is a mapping scheme for Australian fungi which currently targets 131 species (although not all are agarics). There is a Fungimap Newsletter. The scheme has been useful in rapidly improving knowledge of the distribution of the target species, with common species now represented by hundreds of records in the Fungimap database.

Fungimap data is regularly exported to the Atlas of Living Australia. Maps are also published in two guides to the target species: the book Fungi Down Under (Grey & Grey, 2005) and the Fungimap CD-Rom. For more information on Fungimap see the website.

The Interactive Catalogue of Australian Fungi is a comprehensive listing of species and literature, at present covering all groups of basidiomycete macrofungi. It is based on two printed catalogue volumes of the Fungi of Australia series (2A and 2B; May & Wood, 1997, May et al., 2001), and was last comprehensively updated around 2004 (May et al. 2004).

For each species, the accepted name is provided, along with any synonyms. All names are provided with full author and publication details. There is an option to explore the classification hierarchy from division through class and family to genus.

When you have arrived at a genus from FunKey, you can obtain a full list of Australian species using the Interactive Catalogue (use the search form and type in the name of the genus). Note that the Catalogue is not a critical checklist, and it includes all published records. Many records are likely to be incorrect, particularly those of species originally described from the Northern Hemisphere. The list of species included in FunKey on each taxon fact sheet is a subset of those recorded in the Interactive Catalogue, including only species that are reliably recorded from Australia.

For each species in the Interactive Catalogue there is a comprehensive list of references, including lists of references with illustrations. These can be consulted to supplement the references provided on the taxon fact sheets.