Regarding the genus
Xanthomendoza:
Several phylogenetic analyses have shown that the
X.
fallax group (sometimes together with representatives from other genera of Teloschistaceae) cluster on a branch not related to
Xanthoria s. str. (including the type species,
X.
parietina).
See references in Lindblom (2006) where I discuss
Xanthomendoza in the Introduction:
"The redefined
Xanthoria fallax group was characterized by presence of soredia as well as oblong or bacilliform conidia and presence of true rhizines (Søchting & Lutzoni 2003), thus excluding
X.
candelaria, which has ellipsoid conidia and hapters instead of true rhizines.
Species belonging to the
Xanthoria fallax group form a strongly supported major clade in molecular phylogenetic studies either alone or together with non-sorediate species (Arup & Grube 1999; Gaya et al. 2004; Søchting et al. 2002; Søchting & Lutzoni 2003 [lineage A])."
In the table (Tab 3) in the original paper by Søchting et al. 2002), morphological characters are provided. Note that there is an error in the table heading: The third (fourth) column says "
Xanthoria ulophyllodes group", but lists the characters of
Xanthoria sensu stricto!!! The first (2nd) column has the correct heading of "
Xanthoria ulophyllodes group", which were combined into the genus
Xanthomendoza.