Dictionary of the Fungi (later published as Ainsworth & Bisby's Dictionary of the Fungi) is a multi-edition reference work in mycology. First published in 1943, it was compiled by Guy Richard Bisby and Geoffrey C. Ainsworth and revised through ten editions, with the tenth and most recent edition issued in 2008. The work compiles generic names and higher-level classification, defines terminology, and provides short entries on topics, people, and institutions in the study of fungi. Arranged alphabetically, it combines taxonomic entries with definitions, topical articles, and (from the sixth edition onwards) coverage of lichen-forming fungi. Later editions reflected advances in molecular phylogenetics, with the tenth edition adopting the consensus taxonomy from the Assembling the Fungal Tree of Life project; the editors also reorganised the volume into three internally defined sections, separating entries on the true fungi from those on chromistan and protozoan fungi-like organisms traditionally treated in mycology.
The Dictionary has been described by reviewers as an essential reference for working mycologists. Early reviews praised it as a practical, time-saving work suitable for both professional and amateur readers, and later assessments characterised it as a reference most mycologists needed to keep immediately accessible. At the same time, reviewers noted the difficulty of maintaining a compact reference work amid rapid taxonomic change, pointing to inconsistencies in treatment, rising costs, and the challenge of integrating new molecular evidence. The editors of the tenth edition suggested it might be the last printed version of the work.
Publication and contents
The Dictionary is arranged as an alphabetical reference work combining entries on taxonomic names with definitions and topical articles. According to the tenth edition's User's Guide, the longest series of entries comprises generic names (accepted names and synonyms), compiled to the end of Index of Fungi 7(15) (January 2008). Compared with its predecessor, the tenth edition added about 500 entries, bringing the total to more than 21,000. Every accepted generic name is referred to a higher rank (family, order, class or phylum), with brief descriptions provided for those higher taxa.
Reviewing the tenth edition, Pam Catcheside wrote that generic entries provide (for each genus) the authority and date of publication, systematic position, number of accepted species, distribution, and key references. She added that, in keeping with earlier editions, the work aimed to be more than a set of lists by combining nomenclatural information with broader explanatory entries and topical material. Supplementary entries include a glossary, some English common names, names of fungal antibiotics and toxins, topical entries on ecology and distribution and applied mycology, and notes on mycologists and collections. The guide cautions that estimates of species numbers and distributions are often approximate and that users should verify details independently, particularly for groups that have not been revised recently.
Authorship and editing
In an obituary notice, Geoffrey C. Ainsworth described Guy Richard Bisby as an energetic compiler who "put much work" into successive editions of the Dictionary of the Fungi. Ainsworth noted that Bisby served as Senior Assistant Mycologist at the Commonwealth Mycological Institute at Kew, supervising production of the Index of Fungi for more than a decade. Reviewing the fifth edition, J. Webster stated that it was revised by Ainsworth with the aid of notes prepared by Bisby before his death in 1958. By the tenth edition (2008), editorship had passed to Paul M. Kirk, Paul F. Cannon, David W. Minter and Joost A. Stalpers.
Edition history
First edition (1943) The first edition, published in 1943, included an alphabetical list of fungal genera up to 1939, giving the order for each genus and an approximate account of species numbers and distribution. The first edition emerged during the Second World War, when Ainsworth and Bisby undertook nightly fire-watching duties at the then Imperial Mycological Institute at Kew and used the time to compile the Dictionary. It also included a glossary of mycological terms and keys to families of fungi. In Mycologia, Fred J. Seaver described the volume (359 pages with 138 figures) as a "great time saver" and recommended it to both professional and amateur mycologists. In the American Midland Naturalist, Theo Just called it a long-needed reference for mycologists and other biologists, noting its adherence to the International Rules of Botanical Nomenclature and its use of Basic English for most of the text. In Botanical Gazette, J. M. Beal summarised the edition as providing (in addition to the alphabetical compilation of genera) longer entries on general, ecological, applied, historical and systematic topics in mycology, with cross-references, a glossary of terms, and illustrative plates. In Nature, the reviewer compared the book to Willis's Dictionary of Flowering Plants and Ferns and wrote that it combined generic names with references to family placement and brief habitat notes. The same review said that the Dictionary provided explanations of technical terms but generally omitted their derivations, which could leave readers without much Latin or Greek unsure how particular terms were formed. The reviewer also noted that the text (apart from the appendix) was written in Basic English, but argued that the sheer quantity of specialised terminology reduced the simplicity that this might imply. Although the reviewer considered unevenness unavoidable in a compact work, they pointed to a specific example: the entry for Pyronema referred to a trichogyne but did not explain the corresponding male structure (the antheridium). The review's main criticism was that the Dictionary might revive technical words that were otherwise falling out of use.
Second edition (1945) Reviewing the third edition, P. H. Gregory noted that a revised and greatly enlarged second edition followed the first edition in 1945. Leonel Mendoza and Dorothy McMeekin added that the second edition incorporated new genera and notes contributed by fifty mycologists.
Third edition (1950) Reviewing the third edition, P. H. Gregory wrote that most mycologists (apart from extreme specialists) needed to keep the Dictionary immediately accessible, and that it served equally well as a glossary and guide to fungal classification and literature. Gregory stated that the third edition brought the work up to date, with a large proportion of entries revised. He described the volume as comprising an alphabetical dictionary (about 10,000 entries over 360 pages), followed by a systematic list of genera arranged under higher ranks and George Willard Martin's revised "Key to the Families of Fungi" (16 pages). Gregory noted that the book concluded with figures illustrating structural types and terminology, though he suggested that the illustrations could have made better use of the available space. He also argued that some major genera were treated too briefly and expressed the hope that a future edition would include lichens in both the dictionary and key.
Fourth edition (1954) Reviewing the fourth edition in 1954, Martin wrote that earlier editions had already earned a place on the shelves of laboratories where fungi were seriously studied. He reported that remaining stock of the third edition (1950) had been destroyed in the winter floods of 1953 (a major flooding event affecting north-western Europe), prompting the publishers to update the work rather than reprint it from standing type. Martin wrote that the revision incorporated 525 additional generic names (including many the authors considered "doubtless unnecessary" but present in the literature) and brought nomenclature into line with changes arising from the International Code as adopted at Stockholm. He noted that the fourth edition ran to 475 pages (compared with 447 in the third edition). Martin concluded that there was no other work that could take its place for working mycologists.
Fifth edition (1961) In New Phytologist, John Webster wrote that the fifth edition was revised by Ainsworth with the aid of notes prepared by Bisby before his death in 1958. Webster described the Dictionary as the Commonwealth Mycological Institute's best seller and stated that the edition followed the established pattern of earlier editions while adding much new material. In Mycologia, Clark Thomas Rogerson reported that more than 5,000 corrections or alterations had been made to the text of the fourth edition (1954). Rogerson wrote that much new material had been added, including about 500 additional generic names. He also noted that Martin revised his "Key to the families of fungi". Webster wrote that the Dictionary had been likened to a "mirror" intended to reflect the current state of mycological knowledge and practice and judged it an extremely useful, compact reference work in constant use. Webster also criticised inconsistencies in treatment, including uneven citation of key literature and non-uniform nomenclatural revision, while praising the newly prepared illustrations as an improvement over earlier editions. In Kew Bulletin, R. W. G. Dennis commented on the handling of lichenised fungi, stating that many illegitimate names were compiled but not the corresponding legitimate names, which affected the treatment of some groups in the non-lichenised Lecanorales.
Sixth edition (1971)
Reviewing the sixth edition, Rogerson described its appearance as a landmark in mycology and wrote that it reflected the decade of progress since the fifth edition (1961). Rogerson stated that the edition was completely revised and incorporated lichens for the first time, with entries prepared by Peter James and David Hawksworth. He summarised the Dictionary's core as a list of fungal and lichen generic names: for each accepted genus, it gave a systematic position, year of publication, distribution, and number of species, alongside definitions of terminology, short accounts of higher taxa, and references to recent works. Rogerson added that line drawings illustrated morphological features and that an additional plate of drawings had been added for lichens. He noted that the sixth edition did not include the "Systematic Arrangement of the Genera of Fungi" or Martin's "Key to the Families of Fungi" present in the fifth edition. In a spot-check of completeness and spelling, Rogerson reported that almost all of roughly 400 generic names absent from the fifth edition but described before 1970 were included in the sixth edition. Rogerson wrote that he found very few errors or omissions given the scale of the compilation.
A review in Taxon noted that the sixth edition was substantially larger than its predecessor (about 20% more pages) and considerably more expensive. The review explained that earlier editions had been printed from standing type—a procedure that reduced costs but constrained revision—and that after the fifth edition the type was dispersed, enabling more extensive rewriting. It reported that the edition's "taxonomic framework" followed Ainsworth's 1966 general-purpose classification and stated that the lichens were included and names of fungal metabolites were added. The same review described the Dictionary's extensive general entries as making it more than a compendium of names and terms. It also stated that the Dictionary treated Fungi as a separate kingdom in a Whittaker-style five-kingdom system and excluded bacteria while including myxomycetes and cellular slime moulds. Discussing the "numbers of fungi" entry, the review summarised estimates including 45,000 described fungal species and roughly 18,000 lichen species.
Seventh edition (1983)