top of page

Family Level Phylogeny

Below are phylogenies of the family Clavariaceae based on sequences from portions of the the nuclear ribosomal large subunit (nrLSU) and RNA polymerase II gene (rpb2). As such, it does not necessarily recapitulate perfectly the evolutionary history of the family but it does depict the relationships between the genera/subgenera/clades pretty well in the Clavariaceae. While the backbone is a bit poorly supported in the individual trees, the groups themselves are typically consistently recovered with good support. A concatenated, multigene phylogeny will probably Click on the genus, subgeneric taxon/clade name to explore that group further.

This tree should not be used to compare species level relationships per se as the finer scale, refined datasets  for each group in the Taxonomic Group pages are going to be more suited for this. It does do a good job, however, of showing genus and subgenus/clade level relationships. For a great primer on reading and interpreting phylogenies the Understanding Evolution section on Phylogenetic Systematics from UC Berkeley is a wonderful primer. Throughout this page I refer to nodes with bootstrap values ≥75 as "good support", while anything less than 60 I mentally collapse (pretend like I do not see because the results are unreliable). Everything between 60 and 75 I conceptualize as more likely than a coin flip but not by too much. Boot strap values are not "p-values" but is roughly put a quantification of how much the topology is support by the entire dataset where inconclusively is penalized. This is definitely playing fast and loose with statistics here but it often seems to work in general.

Coming soon!

Most of the major clades are recapitualted in the LSU tree below but this one definitely needs work. There are some poorly aligned regions which are likely adding quite a bit of noise and the backbone has almost no support. I do plan on updating this as well as making a concatenated dataset with the rpb2 alignment and the alienable regions of the ITS. Also be aware this tree is mid-point rooted and thus not directionally polarized. While similarity between clades and branch lengths are real, the bottom clade is not necessarily the most early diverging lineage. The branch labels give percent bootstrap.


Clavaria pullei clade

(pullei, atroumbrina, etc.)

Clavaria incarnata clade

Clavaria subgenus Holocoryne sensu stricto (falcata et al.)

Clavaria subgenus Holocoryne p. p. "yellow" (argillacea, flavipes  et al.)



Clavaria atrofusca/asperulispora clade

Clavaria subgenus Clavaria s.s.

(fragilis, rosea, etc.)


Clavaria clade FAZ (fumosa, amoenoides, zollingeri, etc.)

Clavaria incarnata clade p.p.? (includes greletii clade)

These clades are showing up in a residual placement but typically cluster with the other incarnata group

Clavulinopsis subgenus Acularia



Ceratellopsis and Hirticlavula (Paraphyletic)


Hyphodontiella s.s.

The phylogeny below based on rpb2 shows many of the same clades as above but you can easily see that the dataset is over-represented with agaricoid members and very under-represented in the other groups, especially Clavulinopsis and Ramariopsis relative to apparent diversity.

bottom of page