The pursuit of fungal biocontrol agents is a complex process but there can be no doubt that the process of finding an optimal isolate for a particular target needs to draw on a large-scale program to assess many candidate cultures. The supply of such cultures is facilitated by the existence of so enormous, comprehensive and accessible source of germplasm as exists in the USDA-ARS Collection of Entomopathogenic Fungal Cultures (ARSEF). This collection includes more than 13,000 isolates of more than 710 fungal taxa from 1,300 hosts and substrates from 2,440 locations. The global dependence on very few entomopathogenic fungal species–most notably, species of Beauveria and Metarhizium–is understandable within regulatory and commercial constraints, but might actually represent an undesirable and unhealthy degree of stability in the realm of fungal biocontrol of insect pests. deserves to be reconsidered by broadening the spectrum of highly specific pathogens and the means by which they might be applied. Unfortunately, a recent change in the rules of nomenclature applicable to such pleomorphic fungi as Beauveria, Metarhizium, Isaria, and the numerous other entomopathogens of the ascomycete order Hypocreales have not contributed to stability or certainty in how–and, indeed, which–names of fungal genera are to be applied. Some of the effects of the changes that became effective on 1 January 2012 will be discussed. Many familiar names of entomopathogenic fungi are necessarily changing under these new rules, but the choices of which names much be used and which must be discontinued may not be definitively stabilized until 2023 (at the next International Botanical Congress after the 2017 Congress in Shenzhen, China).

• Richard A. Humber(USDA-ARS Emerging Pests and Pathogens Research, Robert W. Holley Center for Agriculture and Health)