Can anyone identify these mushrooms?

Can anyone identify these mushrooms?

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Found in the Dolomites, Italy

  1. in a wooden fence:

The first one is dyer's polypore or rusty gilled polypore.

The second one looks a bit like orange peel fungus, although it could be something different.

Psilocybin mushroom

Psilocybin mushrooms, commonly known as magic mushrooms, mushrooms or shrooms, are a polyphyletic, informal group of fungi that contain psilocybin which turns into psilocin upon ingestion. [1] [2] Biological genera containing psilocybin mushrooms include Copelandia, Gymnopilus, Inocybe, Panaeolus, Pholiotina, Pluteus, and Psilocybe. Psilocybin mushrooms have been and continue to be used in indigenous New World cultures in religious, divinatory, or spiritual contexts. [3] They may be depicted in Stone Age rock art in Africa and Europe, but are most famously represented in the Pre-Columbian sculptures and glyphs seen throughout North, Central and South America.


The terms "mushroom" and "toadstool" go back centuries and were never precisely defined, nor was there consensus on application. During the 15th and 16th centuries, the terms mushrom, mushrum, muscheron, mousheroms, mussheron, or musserouns were used. [2]

The term "mushroom" and its variations may have been derived from the French word mousseron in reference to moss (mousse). Delineation between edible and poisonous fungi is not clear-cut, so a "mushroom" may be edible, poisonous, or unpalatable. [3] [4] The word toadstool appeared first in 14th century England as a reference for a "stool" for toads, possibly inferring an inedible poisonous fungus. [5]

Identifying mushrooms requires a basic understanding of their macroscopic structure. Most are Basidiomycetes and gilled. Their spores, called basidiospores, are produced on the gills and fall in a fine rain of powder from under the caps as a result. At the microscopic level, the basidiospores are shot off basidia and then fall between the gills in the dead air space. As a result, for most mushrooms, if the cap is cut off and placed gill-side-down overnight, a powdery impression reflecting the shape of the gills (or pores, or spines, etc.) is formed (when the fruit body is sporulating). The color of the powdery print, called a spore print, is used to help classify mushrooms and can help to identify them. Spore print colors include white (most common), brown, black, purple-brown, pink, yellow, and creamy, but almost never blue, green, or red. [6]

While modern identification of mushrooms is quickly becoming molecular, the standard methods for identification are still used by most and have developed into a fine art harking back to medieval times and the Victorian era, combined with microscopic examination. The presence of juices upon breaking, bruising reactions, odors, tastes, shades of color, habitat, habit, and season are all considered by both amateur and professional mycologists. Tasting and smelling mushrooms carries its own hazards because of poisons and allergens. Chemical tests are also used for some genera. [7]

In general, identification to genus can often be accomplished in the field using a local mushroom guide. Identification to species, however, requires more effort one must remember that a mushroom develops from a button stage into a mature structure, and only the latter can provide certain characteristics needed for the identification of the species. However, over-mature specimens lose features and cease producing spores. Many novices have mistaken humid water marks on paper for white spore prints, or discolored paper from oozing liquids on lamella edges for colored spored prints.

Typical mushrooms are the fruit bodies of members of the order Agaricales, whose type genus is Agaricus and type species is the field mushroom, Agaricus campestris. However, in modern molecularly defined classifications, not all members of the order Agaricales produce mushroom fruit bodies, and many other gilled fungi, collectively called mushrooms, occur in other orders of the class Agaricomycetes. For example, chanterelles are in the Cantharellales, false chanterelles such as Gomphus are in the Gomphales, milk-cap mushrooms (Lactarius, Lactifluus) and russulas (Russula), as well as Lentinellus, are in the Russulales, while the tough, leathery genera Lentinus and Panus are among the Polyporales, but Neolentinus is in the Gloeophyllales, and the little pin-mushroom genus, Rickenella, along with similar genera, are in the Hymenochaetales.

Within the main body of mushrooms, in the Agaricales, are common fungi like the common fairy-ring mushroom, shiitake, enoki, oyster mushrooms, fly agarics and other Amanitas, magic mushrooms like species of Psilocybe, paddy straw mushrooms, shaggy manes, etc.

An atypical mushroom is the lobster mushroom, which is a deformed, cooked-lobster-colored parasitized fruitbody of a Russula or Lactarius, colored and deformed by the mycoparasitic Ascomycete Hypomyces lactifluorum. [8]

Other mushrooms are not gilled, so the term "mushroom" is loosely used, and giving a full account of their classifications is difficult. Some have pores underneath (and are usually called boletes), others have spines, such as the hedgehog mushroom and other tooth fungi, and so on. "Mushroom" has been used for polypores, puffballs, jelly fungi, coral fungi, bracket fungi, stinkhorns, and cup fungi. Thus, the term is more one of common application to macroscopic fungal fruiting bodies than one having precise taxonomic meaning. Approximately 14,000 species of mushrooms are described. [9]

A mushroom develops from a nodule, or pinhead, less than two millimeters in diameter, called a primordium, which is typically found on or near the surface of the substrate. It is formed within the mycelium, the mass of threadlike hyphae that make up the fungus. The primordium enlarges into a roundish structure of interwoven hyphae roughly resembling an egg, called a "button". The button has a cottony roll of mycelium, the universal veil, that surrounds the developing fruit body. As the egg expands, the universal veil ruptures and may remain as a cup, or volva, at the base of the stalk, or as warts or volval patches on the cap. Many mushrooms lack a universal veil, therefore they do not have either a volva or volval patches. Often, a second layer of tissue, the partial veil, covers the bladelike gills that bear spores. As the cap expands, the veil breaks, and remnants of the partial veil may remain as a ring, or annulus, around the middle of the stalk or as fragments hanging from the margin of the cap. The ring may be skirt-like as in some species of Amanita, collar-like as in many species of Lepiota, or merely the faint remnants of a cortina (a partial veil composed of filaments resembling a spiderweb), which is typical of the genus Cortinarius. Mushrooms lacking partial veils do not form an annulus. [10]

The stalk (also called the stipe, or stem) may be central and support the cap in the middle, or it may be off-center and/or lateral, as in species of Pleurotus and Panus. In other mushrooms, a stalk may be absent, as in the polypores that form shelf-like brackets. Puffballs lack a stalk, but may have a supporting base. Other mushrooms, such as truffles, jellies, earthstars, and bird's nests, usually do not have stalks, and a specialized mycological vocabulary exists to describe their parts.

The way the gills attach to the top of the stalk is an important feature of mushroom morphology. Mushrooms in the genera Agaricus, Amanita, Lepiota and Pluteus, among others, have free gills that do not extend to the top of the stalk. Others have decurrent gills that extend down the stalk, as in the genera Omphalotus and Pleurotus. There are a great number of variations between the extremes of free and decurrent, collectively called attached gills. Finer distinctions are often made to distinguish the types of attached gills: adnate gills, which adjoin squarely to the stalk notched gills, which are notched where they join the top of the stalk adnexed gills, which curve upward to meet the stalk, and so on. These distinctions between attached gills are sometimes difficult to interpret, since gill attachment may change as the mushroom matures, or with different environmental conditions. [11]

Microscopic features

A hymenium is a layer of microscopic spore-bearing cells that covers the surface of gills. In the nongilled mushrooms, the hymenium lines the inner surfaces of the tubes of boletes and polypores, or covers the teeth of spine fungi and the branches of corals. In the Ascomycota, spores develop within microscopic elongated, sac-like cells called asci, which typically contain eight spores in each ascus. The Discomycetes, which contain the cup, sponge, brain, and some club-like fungi, develop an exposed layer of asci, as on the inner surfaces of cup fungi or within the pits of morels. The Pyrenomycetes, tiny dark-colored fungi that live on a wide range of substrates including soil, dung, leaf litter, and decaying wood, as well as other fungi, produce minute, flask-shaped structures called perithecia, within which the asci develop. [12]

In the Basidiomycetes, usually four spores develop on the tips of thin projections called sterigmata, which extend from club-shaped cells called a basidia. The fertile portion of the Gasteromycetes, called a gleba, may become powdery as in the puffballs or slimy as in the stinkhorns. Interspersed among the asci are threadlike sterile cells called paraphyses. Similar structures called cystidia often occur within the hymenium of the Basidiomycota. Many types of cystidia exist, and assessing their presence, shape, and size is often used to verify the identification of a mushroom. [12]

The most important microscopic feature for identification of mushrooms is the spores. Their color, shape, size, attachment, ornamentation, and reaction to chemical tests often can be the crux of an identification. A spore often has a protrusion at one end, called an apiculus, which is the point of attachment to the basidium, termed the apical germ pore, from which the hypha emerges when the spore germinates. [12]

Many species of mushrooms seemingly appear overnight, growing or expanding rapidly. This phenomenon is the source of several common expressions in the English language including "to mushroom" or "mushrooming" (expanding rapidly in size or scope) and "to pop up like a mushroom" (to appear unexpectedly and quickly). In reality, all species of mushrooms take several days to form primordial mushroom fruit bodies, though they do expand rapidly by the absorption of fluids. [ citation needed ]

The cultivated mushroom, as well as the common field mushroom, initially form a minute fruiting body, referred to as the pin stage because of their small size. Slightly expanded, they are called buttons, once again because of the relative size and shape. Once such stages are formed, the mushroom can rapidly pull in water from its mycelium and expand, mainly by inflating preformed cells that took several days to form in the primordia. [ citation needed ]

Similarly, there are other mushrooms, like Parasola plicatilis (formerly Coprinus plicatlis), that grow rapidly overnight and may disappear by late afternoon on a hot day after rainfall. [13] The primordia form at ground level in lawns in humid spaces under the thatch and after heavy rainfall or in dewy conditions balloon to full size in a few hours, release spores, and then collapse. They "mushroom" to full size. [ citation needed ]

Not all mushrooms expand overnight some grow very slowly and add tissue to their fruiting bodies by growing from the edges of the colony or by inserting hyphae. For example, Pleurotus nebrodensis grows slowly, and because of this combined with human collection, it is now critically endangered. [14]

Though mushroom fruiting bodies are short-lived, the underlying mycelium can itself be long-lived and massive. A colony of Armillaria solidipes (formerly known as Armillaria ostoyae) in Malheur National Forest in the United States is estimated to be 2,400 years old, possibly older, and spans an estimated 2,200 acres (8.9 km 2 ). [15] Most of the fungus is underground and in decaying wood or dying tree roots in the form of white mycelia combined with black shoelace-like rhizomorphs that bridge colonized separated woody substrates. [16]

Five Different Examples

Below are five different mushroom examples. Follow along and apply this type of analysis to your own finds!

The book I referenced for some of these is the National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mushrooms (National Audubon Society Field Guides (Hardcover)) . Pick up a highly rated guidebook for your region if you don't already have one.

I found all of these mushrooms in New Hampshire or Vermont.

Old Man of the Woods (Strobilomyces floccopus)

No, it's not that weird guy who lives in the forest behind your local bike path. This is a good beginner mushroom.

Gills: None. A spongy layer of pores was on the underside of the cap instead.

Cap/stem: Distinct from each other, with white and gray coloring. The cap is convex, with a layer of woolly scales on the top.

Spore color: Unknown

Bruising: Reddish at first, then slowly turning to black.

Habitat: I picked this just off a trail in a mixed hardwood forest. It was growing alone on the ground, not on a tree.

Time of year: Late August

Smell/taste: Unknown

Easy to identify due to its unique cap and the presence of pores, this is a great example of a bolete. Boletes are defined as having a separate cap and stem with a spongy surface of pores. To be sure, I checked for the appropriate colors after bruising.

Chanterelle (Cantharellus sp.)

It's definitely worth knowing how to identify the delicious chanterelle. See this page on chanterelle mushroom identification for a more in-depth article.

Gills: None. Instead there were wrinkled folds known as "false gills". This is very important to look for with chanterelle identification. The pic to the right is a good example.

Cap/stem: The caps were slightly vase shaped. The stems had no bulb or ring and were not hollow. Both were an orange-yellow color.

Spore color: Unknown

Bruising: Unkown

Habitat: On the ground at the edge of a trail in a mixed hardwood forest. I found more than one, but they did not grow in clusters.

Time of year: August

Smell/taste: They smelled slightly fruity/flowery.

The false gills, and the fact that they weren't growing in clusters, led me to believe these were chanterelles and not poisonous jack o'lanterns. I did eat these, and they tasted great!

Northern Tooth (Climacodon septentrionale)

This was a fun surprise. When I saw it from the road it looked like an oyster mushroom. A closer examination revealed something else!

Gills: None. Instead there were small "teeth", or spines, hanging from the underside of the cap. This made identification fairly easy.

Cap/stem: No stem. The caps were a series of overlapping, shelf-like fruiting bodies. They were whitish and very tough.

Spore color: Unknown

Bruising: Unknown

Habitat: Found growing on a dying maple tree.

Time of year: September

Smell/taste: Unknown

There aren't as many mushrooms with teeth as there are with gills, and fewer still that grow on trees. The other clue here is habitat, as I found it growing on a dying maple. The northern tooth is a parasite that rots the heartwood of maple trees.

Below is a close-up of the tiny teeth.

Russula (Russula emetica?)

Gills: Gills were white and attached to the stem.

Cap/stem: Cap was red on top and slightly upturned. The stem was white with no ring.

Spore color: Spore print was whitish.

Bruising: Unknown

Habitat: Found growing on the ground among leaf litter in a mixed hardwood forest.

Time of year: September

Smell/taste: Smelled fruity but the taste was very bitter.

The spore print, white gills, and red/white color combination indicates a mushroom in the Russula genus. Yet which one? Russula mushroom identification is very difficult, with microscopic information sometimes needed. I decided on one of the more common species that fit the description, Russula emetica.

Honey Fungus (probably Armillaria mellea)

My apologies for the washed out picture.

Gills: Brownish and attached to the stem.

Cap/stem: The caps were slightly convex with a lightish brown color. The stems had a ring around them and were brown-white.

Spore color: White

Bruising: Unknown

Habitat: Growing in a thick cluster on the roots of an overturned oak tree.

Time of year: July

Smell/taste: Unknown

Although these mushrooms matched all the characteristics of a honey fungus, I still took a spore print. A white spore print is an essential part of honey fungus identification.

I didn't want to bore you with too much detail, but you can see the kinds of observations that you need for mushroom identification. Try to note all that you can when in the woods. Now go out there and start observing your own mushrooms. Let me know how it goes!

Cell Biology: Asexual and Sexual Reproduction

During ________, a new plant grows from parts of the parent plant.

During _______, a cell divides to produce a new, genetically identical cell.

_____ is a form of asexual reproduction used by mushrooms and molds.

During ____, the offspring grows from the body of the parent.

____ is a form of asexual reproduction that must be followed by regeneration.

What is the main method of reproduction for these flatworms?

What statement would they most likely make about the new species?

- Asexual reproduction requires two parents and produces non-identical offspring, while sexual reproduction requires only one parent and produces identical offspring.

- Asexual reproduction requires two parents and produces identical offspring, while sexual reproduction requires only one parent and produces non-identical offspring.

- Asexual reproduction requires only one parent and produces identical offspring, while sexual reproduction requires two parents and produces non-identical offspring.

Three tips on how to distinguish an edible mushroom from a poisonous one

The Shaggy Mane mushroom is one of the many edible mushrooms that grow in Alberta. Credit: Paul Swanson

Served fresh or fried, lots of wild mushrooms go from forest to the table—but know which ones are safe when harvesting this summertime delicacy.

"There are 10 to 20 deadly mushroom species in Alberta, so don't start picking them for eating until you know for sure which ones are safe," said ecologist Michael Schulz, who leads spring, summer and fall fungi workshops at the University of Alberta Botanic Garden.

"There's a tendency for the average person to use colour or shape to figure out whether a mushroom is edible or not, but those are the two most variable factors," Schulz warned. "Colour varies and can fade with time, and size and shape will be in a certain range, but not one of the first things you should use as identifiers."

Big and small, mushrooms pop up "anywhere you've got soil, wood or plants growing," he said, including on lawns and pastures, in forests and bogs, even in planters. On the prairies, almost 2,000 large species have been identified, with countless more still unknown.

Schulz has sampled more than 80 edible species from Alberta alone.

Although the idea of eating fungus has a certain yuck factor—after all, fungi are the culprits behind infections like athlete's foot and plant diseases like powdery mildew and canola blackleg—there are nutritional pluses, too. Various kinds offer health benefits like protein and antioxidants.

"You'd never be able to take a piece of wood and get the beneficial plant compounds out of it, but you can take a mushroom from that piece of wood and get the chemicals out by making a tea or cooking them in a stew," Schulz said.

Mushrooms fall into three categories—edible, poisonous and inedible. Fungi generally known to be edible include puffball mushrooms, some (but not all) types found in lawn fairy rings, button mushrooms, portobellos and creminis—a round-capped variety that has wild cousins in Alberta, Schulz noted.

Safe-to-eat fungi offer different flavours from mild to earthy and are best cooked in stews, casseroles or the frying pan.

"Many do a great job soaking up whatever flavours are added to the dish."

Inedible mushrooms won't cause illness but are still unappetizing with their leathery, tough textures or unpleasant peppery or bland taste. "It would be like eating wood or a leaf," noted Schulz. Some, like the crusty Chaga mushroom found growing on birch trees, can be made into tea and herbal extracts.

Poisonous fungi contain toxins to protect against hungry wildlife. Commonly mistaken as edible is the Amanita, a large, showy, often wart-capped group of mushrooms ranging in colour from pure white to dark brown. In Alberta, the Fly agaric, a yellowy-orange member of the Amanita family, can be found during the fall.

"People will eat Amanitas because they don't taste bad and they look edible but even if they taste good, or you see insects eating them, it doesn't mean the mushroom is safe to eat," said Schulz.

When picking mushrooms, follow these dos and don'ts:

Do I eat it or not? Don't guess

"Don't go on instinct," Schulz warns. "Don't eat anything you're not absolutely positive about. There's no universal rule for telling a poisonous mushroom from an edible one, because there's so much diversity out there."

Narrow your fungi focus

Get to know just one or two edible species at a time and look for them only. "For instance, I'll learn about morel mushrooms and all the lookalikes, so I can pick them safely. Then I'll start adding to my repertoire. Otherwise it becomes overwhelming."

After choosing your mushrooms, find a knowledgeable expert. "Try to spend time with people who know what they're doing before you start picking for the table." Schulz suggests connecting with groups like the Alberta Mycological Society. An expert can help you get to know the physical attributes like odour, shape, colour and other characteristics important in correct identification.

Can anyone identify these mushrooms? - Biology

Mushroom Taxonomy: The Big Picture

I frequently receive e-mails from frantic biology students who have been asked to discover the kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species of a certain mushroom. Here, with the student's typo included, is the most entertaining example I've received so far:

Aside from recommending that the student might want to find a new professor, I replied that the taxonomical hierarchy for Armillaria ostoyae is:

. . . in the traditional, and now probably outdated, system. Armillaria has been reconceived within the past few years, resulting in the elimination of what the student called " Armillariella ," and placing the genus in the Marasmiaceae rather than the Tricholomataceae also, there is debate about whether or not the kingdom and phylum distinctions should be made at some other level in the hierarchy.

    Note, 2011: This text was originally written in 2003. As a further demonstration of some of my points in this essay, the genus Armillaria has now been placed in the Physalacriaceae, and the species "Armillaria ostoyae" no longer exists, since it has been synonymized with an older species ( Armillaria solidipes )!

But uncertainty is not what professors want on homework assignments. The problem is that there is no "correct" answer to the professor's question. Or, better said, the answer to the question changes constantly, and has been changing ever since Linnaeus started using Latin names to arrange organisms.

Though it is a fact usually unobserved in introductory biology classes, taxonomy does not represent organisms. Rather, taxonomy represents how we perceive and organize organisms. This is a very important difference. It is the difference, for example, between what happened at the scene of the crime, and what the witness saw happen at the scene of the crime--and anyone who has ever watched a courtroom drama knows how different these two things can be.

In my field (I am an English teacher), the rules of grammar and punctuation are seen by most teachers as unchanging and universal. Students are "wrong" if they omit the apostrophe from don't , or write "Everyday someone gets their lunch." Yet there was a time--not that long ago, from a historical perspective--when dont was perfectly correct, and the time is coming (or is already here) when this use of everyday and their is correct. People of my mother's generation physically cringe when they hear "their" used like this. People of my generation notice a problem, but use it anyway as a substitute for the sexist "his." My students don't even notice. Within my lifetime, the language has changed, as a result of a change in our culture: we became more aware of sexism, and less comfortable using masculine pronouns as universal pronouns.

With grammar and punctuation, however, the rule makers usually lag far behind the general population. This is because the rule makers (the authors and publishers of dictionaries and grammar handbooks) are conservative by nature, and often see themselves as corrective agents, holding back the masses and saving them from their mistakes. But with taxonomy, things are reversed. It is the mycologists, in the case of mushrooms, who are constantly changing things, and the general population that lags behind. Thus, I must provide the biology student above with an answer I know to be incorrect, knowing that her professor is likely working from outdated information.

Once, mushroom taxonomy was an arrangement of mushrooms based on their physical appearance. This one had gills, so it belonged in a group with other gilled mushrooms, while another mushroom, this one with pores, belonged in a different group. For well over a hundred years, advances in mushroom taxonomy simply represented more careful attention to the physical features of the mushrooms--and, importantly, the fact that more and more mushrooms from around the world were being sent to scientists in northern Europe. These scientists began to discover that closer examination revealed other groupings. Some of the gilled mushrooms had white spore prints, for example, and gills that were attached to the stem. New families and genera were named species were placed in the hierarchy accordingly.

Then, roughly a hundred years ago, scientists began looking at mushrooms with microscopes. Some mycologists had been doing so earlier, but the hegemony of microscope mycology didn't take hold until the 20th century. As a result, new groupings emerged. These mushrooms, for example, had ornamented spores, indicating that they formed a group separate from other mushrooms that looked more or less the same to the naked eye, but had smooth spores. As microscopes got better and better, more taxonomical changes were made.

It is important to recall that the mushrooms themselves did not change during this brief history what changed was the way we examined them. New technologies and methods of analysis--like studies of chemical composition, mating studies, and (especially) DNA analysis--are hegemonic these days, and they are resulting in radical changes in mushroom taxonomy. Groups that we once thought were related, based on physical appearance or microscopic features, are turning out to be unrelated. But it is likely--I would say it is a certainty--that future mycologists will decide our contemporary taxonomic arrangements are inaccurate.

I offer these comments by way of introducing the table below, which represents how mycologists currently see taxonomical relationships between mushrooms. I have culled the information from Ainsworth & Bisby's 2008 Dictionary of the Fungi (see the notes below for a complete citation), and I have included only "mushroom" taxonomy--omitting the details on rusts, yeasts, lichens, molds, and so on. The editors of the Dictionary , of course, compiled information from peer-reviewed papers published in scientific journals it should come as no surprise that editing such a compilation involves attempting to "standardize" things that have not yet become standards, resolving taxonomical conflicts that are often hotly debated, and so on. Yet Ainsworth & Bisby's Dictionary has become more or less the definitive standard for mushroom taxonomy for better or worse, the biology student must consult this source to get the "best" current answer to a taxonomy question.

The Taxonomic Hierarchy of Kingdom Fungi

. . . based on Ainsworth & Bisby's 2008 Dictionary of the Fungi (10th. edition)

Only genera treated at MushroomExpert.Com are included. See the notes at the bottom of the page for additional information and suggestions.

Family: Tubariaceae -->
Phylum: Ascomycota
Subphyllum: Pezizomycotina
Class: Arthoniomycetes (lichens . . .)
Class: Dothideomycetes
Order: Venturiales
Family: Venturiaceae
Genera treated: Apiosporina (see A. morbosa )
Class: Geoglossomycetes
Order: Geoglossales
Family: Geoglossaceae
Genera treated: Geoglossum (see G. umbratile ), Hemileucoglossum (see H. alveolatum )
Class: Eurotiomycetes (includes Penicillium . . . )
Class: Laboulbeniomycetes (insect parasites and others . . . )
Class: Lecanoromycetes (lichens . . . )
Class: Leotiomycetes (inoperculate Discomycetes + powdery mildews)
Order: Cyttariales
Order: Erysiphales (powdery mildews)
Order: Helotiales
Family: Ascocorticiaceae
Family: Dermateaceae
Genera treated: Chlorosplenium (see C. chlora )
Family: Heliotiaceae
Genera treated: Hymenoscyphus (see H. fructigenus ) possibly also Ascocoryne (see A. sarcoides ), Bisporella (see B. citrina ), Chlorociboria (see C. aeruginascens ), and Ionomidotis (see I. irregularis )
Family: Hemiphacidiaceae
Genera treated: Chlorencoelia (see C. torta )
Family: Hyaloscyphaceae
Genera treated: Lachnellula (see L. subtilissima )
Family: Loramycetaceae
Family: Phacidiaceae
Family: Rustroemiaceae
Family: Sclerotiniaceae
Family: Vibrisseaceae
Order: Leotiales
Family: Bulgariaceae
Genera treated: Bulgaria (see B. inquinans )
Family: Leotiaceae
Genera treated: Leotia (see L. lubrica ), Microglossum (see M. viride )
Order: Rhytismatales
Family: Ascodichaenaceae
Family: Cudoniaceae
Genera treated: Cudonia (see C. circinans), Spathularia (see S. flavida), Spathulariopsis (see S. velutipes)
Family: Rhytismataceae
Genera treated: Colpoma (see C. quercinum)
Class: Pezizomycetes
Order: Pezizales
Family: Ascobolaceae
Family: Ascodesmidaceae
Family: Caloscyphaceae
Genera treated: Caloscypha (see C. fulgens)
Family: Carbomycetaceae
Family: Chorioactidaceae
Genera treated: Chorioactis (see C. geaster) , Wolfina (see W. aurantiopsis)
Family: Discinaceae
Genera treated: Gyromitra
Family: Glaziellaceae
Family: Helvellaceae
Genera treated: Helvella
Family: Karstenellaceae
Family: Morchellaceae
Genera treated: Disciotis (see D. venosa), Morchella, Verpa (see V. bohemica )
Family: Pezizaceae
Genera treated: Pachyella (see P. clypeata), Peziza (see P. repanda), Sarcosphaera (see S. coronaria )
Family: Pyronemataceae
Genera treated: Aleuria (see A. aurantia), Cheilymenia (see C. stercorea), Geopora (see G. cooperi), Geopyxis (see G. carbonaria), Humaria (see H. hemisphaerica), Jafnea (see J. semitosta), Otidea (see O. onotica), Scutellinia (see S. scutellata), Sowerbyella (see S. rhenana), Sphaerosporella (see S. brunnea), Tarzetta (see T. bronca )
Family: Rhizinaceae
Family: Sarcoscyphaceae
Genera treated: Microstoma (see M. floccosum), Sarcoscypha
Family: Sarcosomataceae
Genera treated: Galiella (see G. rufa), Urnula (see U. craterium )
Family: Tuberaceae
Genera treated: Tuber (see T. lyonii )
Class: Sordariomycetes
[Most " Pyrenomycetes ," in 15 orders, 64 families, and over 1000 genera. Genera treated: Akanthomyces (see A. aculeatus ), Biscogniauxia (see B. atropunctata ), Camarops (see C. petersii ), Cordyceps (see C. militaris ), Daldinia (see D. childiae ), Hypomyces , Kretzschmaria (see K. deusta ), Trichoderma (see T. peltatum ), Xylaria . . . ]
Class: Uncertain
Order: Uncertain
Family: Geoglossaceae
Genera treated: Geoglossum (see G. umbratile )
Subphyllum: Saccharomycotina (yeasts . . . )
Subphyllum: Taphrinomycotina (galls, witches' brooms, Neolecta . . . )

Phylum: Basidiomycota
Subphyllum: Agaricomycotina
Class: Dacrymycetes
Order: Dacrymycetales
Family: Dacrymycetaceae
Genera treated: Calocera (see C. cornea ), Dacrymyces (see D. stillatus ), Dacryopinax (see D. elegans ), Femsjonia (see F. peziziformis ), Guepiniopsis (see G. alpina )
Class: Tremellomycetes
Order: Cystofilobasidiales
Family: Cystofilobasidiaceae
Order: Filobasidiales
Family: Filobasidiaceae
Order: Tremellales
Family: Carcinomycetaceae
Genera treated: Syzygospora (see S. mycetophila )
Family: Cuniculitremaceae
Family: Hyaloriaceae
Family: Phaeotremellaceae
Genera treated: Phaeotremella (see P. frondosa )
Family: Phragmoxenidiaceae
Family: Rhynchogastremataceae
Family: Sirobasidiaceae
Family: Tetragoniomycetaceae
Family: Tremellaceae
Genera treated: Tremella (see T. mesenterica )
Class: Agaricomycetes
Order: Agaricales
Family: Agaricaceae
Genera treated: Agaricus, Arachnion (see A. album), Battarrea (see B. phalloides), Bovista (see B. longispora), Calvatia (see C. craniiformis), Chlorophyllum (see C. molybdites), Coprinus (see C. comatus), Crucibulum (see C. laeve), Cyathus (see C. striatus), Cystoderma, Cystolepiota (see C. seminuda ), Floccularia, Lepiota (see L. cristata), Leucoagaricus (see L. naucinus), Leucocoprinus (see L. birnbaumii), Lycoperdon (see L. pulcherrimum), Macrolepiota (see M. procera), Morganella (see M. pyriformis), Mycenastrum (see M. corium ), Nidularia (see N. pulvinata), Podaxis (see P. longii), Ripartitella (see R. brasiliensis), Tulostoma (see T. lloydii ), Vascellum (see V. curtisii )
Family: Amanitaceae
Genera treated: Amanita, Limacella
Family: Amylocorticiaceae
Family: Bolbitiaceae
Genera treated: Bolbitius (see B. titubans), Conocybe (see C. apala), Pholiotina (see P. rugosa)
Family: Broomeiaceae
Family: Clavariaceae
Genera treated: Clavaria (see C. vermicularis), Clavulinopsis (see C. laeticolor) , Ramariopsis (see R. kunzei )
Family: Cortinariaceae
Genera treated: Cortinarius
Family: Cyphellaceae
Family: Cystostereaceae
Family: Entolomataceae
Genera treated: Clitopilus (see C. prunulus), Entoloma, Rhodocybe (see R. mundula)
Family: Fistulinaceae
Genera treated: Fistulina (see F. hepatica ), Pseudofistulina (see P. radicata )
Family: Gigaspermaceae
Family: Hemigasteraceae
Family: Hydnangiaceae
Genera treated: Laccaria
Family: Hygrophoraceae
Genera treated: Ampulloclitocybe (see A. clavipes), Chrysomphalina (see C. chrysophylla), Cuphophyllus (see C. pratensis), Gliophorus (see G. psittacinus), Hygrocybe (see H. conica), Hygrophorus ( see H. russula), Lichenomphalia ( see L. umbellifera), Neohygrocybe ( see N. ovina)
Family: Inocybaceae
Genera treated: Crepidotus, Flammulaster (see F. erinaceella), Inocybe, Simocybe (see S. centunculus) possibly Panaeolus
Family: Limnoperdaceae
Family: Lyophyllaceae
Genera treated: Asterophora (see A. lycoperdoides), Calocybe (see C. carnea), Hypsizygus (see H. tessulatus), Lyophyllum (see L. decastes) , Rugosomyces (see R. onychinus )
Family: Marasmiaceae
Genera treated: Baeospora (see B. myosura ), Clitocybula (see C. abundans), Connopus (see C. acervatus), Crinipellis (see C. zonata), Gerronema (see G. strombodes), Gymnopus (see G. dryophilus), Macrocystidia (see M. cucumis), Marasmiellus (see M. candidus), Marasmius (see M. rotula), Megacollybia, Micromphale (see M. perforans), Mycetinis (see M. scorodonius), Omphalotus (see O. illudens), Tetrapyrgos (see T. nigripes)
Family: Mycenaceae
Genera treated: Mycena, Panellus (see P. stipticus ) possibly Xeromphalina (see X. kauffmanii )
Family: Niaceae
Family: Omphalotaceae
Genera treated: Rhodocollybia (see R. maculata).
Family: Phelloriniaceae
Family: Physalacriaceae
Genera treated: Armillaria, Cyptotrama (see C. asprata), Flammulina, Rhizomarasmius , Rhodotus (see R. palmatus), Xeruloid Mushrooms (including Hymenopellis and Paraxerula )
Family: Pleurotaceae
Genera treated: Hohenbuehelia, Pleurotus (see P. ostreatus )
Family: Pluteaceae
Genera treated: Pluteus, Volvariella, Volvopluteus
Family: Psathyrellaceae
Genera treated: Coprinellus (see C. disseminatus ), Coprinopsis (see C. atramentaria ), Lacrymaria (see L. velutina), Parasola (see P. plicatilis ), Psathyrella possibly Panaeolus
Family: Pterulaceae
Family: Radulomycetaceae
Genera treated: Radulomyces (see R. copelandii )
Family: Schizophyllaceae
Genera treated: Schizophyllum (see S. commune )
Family: Stephanosporaceae
Family: Strophariaceae
Genera treated: Agrocybe, Cyclocybe (see C. erebia), Deconica (see D. argentina), Galerina (see G. marginata), Hebeloma, Hemipholiota ( see H. populnea), Hypholoma, Kuehneromyces ( see K. mutabilis ), Leratiomyces ( see L. ceres), Pholiota, Psilocybe Stropharia ( see S. rugosoannulata) possibly Gymnopilus
Family: Tapinellaceae
Genera treated: Tapinella (see T. panuoides )
Family: Tricholomataceae
Genera treated: Callistosporium (see C. luteo-olivaceum), Catathelasma, Caulorhiza (see C. umbonata), Clitocybe, Collybia (see C. cirrhata), Dermoloma (see D. cuneifolium), Infundibulicybe, Leucopaxillus, Leucopholiota, Macrocybe (see M. titans), Melanoleuca, Omphalina (see O. epichysium), Pogonoloma (see P. spinulosum), Pseudoclitocybe (see P. cyathiformis), Resupinatus (see R. alboniger), Tricholoma
Genera treated: Cyclocybe (see C. erebia).
Family: Typhulaceae
Genera treated: Macrotyphula (see M. juncea).
Family: Uncertain
Genera treated: Phyllotopsis (see P. nidulans), Rickenella (see R. fibula also possibly in Hymenochaetales) Tricholomopsis (see T. decora )
Order: Atheliales
Family: Atheliaceae
Order: Auriculariales
Family: Auriculariaceae
Genera treated: Auricularia (see A. auricula)
Family: Exidiaceae
Genera treated: Exidia (see E. glandulosa ), Guepinia (see G. helvelloides )
Family: Uncertain
Genera treated: Ductifera (see D. pululahuana), Pseudohydnum (see P. gelatinosum )
Order: Boletales
Family: Boletaceae
Genera treated: Aureoboletus (see A. mirabilis) , Austroboletus (see A. subflavidus) , Boletellus , Boletus (see B. edulis), Bothia (see B. castanella) , Buchwaldoboletus (see B. hemichrysus) , Butyriboletus (see B. frostii) , Caloboletus (see C. inedulis) , Chalciporus (see C. piperatus) , Harrya (see H. chromapes ), Heimioporus, Hemileccinum (see H. subglabripes), Imleria (see I. badia), Leccinum, Phylloporus, Pseudoboletus (see P. parasiticus), Pulveroboletus (see P. ravenelii), Retiboletus (see R. ornatipes), Rubroboletus (see R. dupainii), Strobilomyces, Tylopilus, Xanthoconium (see X. purpureum ), Xerocomellus (see X. chrysenteron ), Xerocomus (see X. subtomentosus )
Family: Boletinellaceae
Genera treated: Boletinellus (see B. merulioides )
Family: Coniophoraceae
Family: Diplocystidiaceae
Genera treated: Astraeus (see A. hygrometricus)
Family: Gastrosporiaceae
Family: Gomphidiaceae
Genera treated: Chroogomphus, Gomphidius
Family: Gyroporaceae
Genera treated: Gyroporus
Family: Hygrophoropsidaceae
Genera treated: Hygrophoropsis (see H. aurantiaca )
Family: Paxillaceae
Genera treated: Paragyrodon (see P. sphaerosporus), Paxillus (see P. vernalis )
Family: Protogastraceae
Family: Rhizopogonaceae
Family: Sclerodermataceae
Genera treated: Calostoma (see C. cinnabarinum), Pisolithus (see P. arenarius), Scleroderma
Family: Serpulaceae
Family: Suillaceae
Genera treated: Suillus
Order: Cantharellales
Family: Aphelariaceae
Family: Botryobasidiaceae
Family: Cantharellaceae
Genera treated: Cantharellus (see C. cibarius), Craterellus (see C. fallax )
Family: Ceratobasidiaceae
Family: Clavulinaceae
Genera treated: Clavulina (see C. cristata )
Family: Hydnaceae
Genera treated: Hydnum (see H. repandum )
Family: Tulasnellaceae
Order: Corticiales
Family: Corticiaceae
Order: Geastrales
Family: Geastraceae
Genera treated: Geastrum (see G. saccatum )
Order: Gloeophyllales
Family: Gloeophyllaceae
Genera treated: Gloeophyllum (see G. sepiarium ), Neolentinus (see N. lepideus )
Order: Gomphales
Family: Clavariadelphaceae
Genera treated: Clavariadelphus (see C. unicolor )
Family: Gomphaceae
Genera treated: Gomphus (see G. clavatus ), Ramaria (see R. botrytis ), Turbinellus (see T. floccosus )
Family: Lentariaceae
Genera treated: Lentaria (see L. micheneri )
Order: Hymenochaetales
Family: Hymenochaetaceae
Genera treated: Coltricia (see C. cinnamomea), Inonotus (see I. radiatus), Phellinus (see P. gilvus ), Porodaedalea (see P. pini )
Family: Schizoporaceae
Family: Uncertain
Genera treated: Rickenella (see R. fibula also possibly in Agaricales)
Order: Hysterangiales
Family: Gallaceaceae
Family: Hysterangiaceae
Family: Mesophelliaceae
Family: Phallogastraceae
Family: Trappeaceae
Order: Phallales
Family: Clastulaceae
Family: Clathraceae
Genera treated: Aseröe (see A. rubra), Blumenavia (see B. angolensis), Clathrus (see C. ruber), Colus (see C. hirudinosus), Ileodictyon (see I. cibarium), Laternea (see L. pusilla), Pseudocolus (see P. fusiformis)
Family: Phallaceae
Genera treated: Lysurus (see L. mokusin), Mutinus (see M. elegans), Phallus (see P. impudicus), Staheliomyces (see S. cinctus )
Order: Polyporales
Family: Cerrenaceae
Genera treated: Cerrena (see C. unicolor), "Spongipellis" (see S. unicolor )
Family: Cystostereaceae
Family: Fomitopsidaceae
Genera treated: Antrodia (see A. juniperina ), Daedalea (see D. quercina), Fomitopsis (see F. pinicola), Ischnoderma (see I. resinosum), Osteina (see O. obducta), Piptoporus (see P. betulinus), Pycnoporellus (see P. alboluteus )
Family: Grammotheleaceae
Family: Grifolaceae
Genera treated: Grifola (see G. frondosa )
Family: Laetiporaceae
Genera treated: Laetiporus , Phaeolus (see P. schweinitzii )
Family: Limnoperdaceae
Family: Meripilaceae
Genera treated: Meripilus (see M. giganteus )
Family: Meruliaceae
Genera treated: Bjerkandera (see B. adusta), Gloeoporus (see G. dichrous), Irpex (see I. lacteus), Mycorrhaphium (see M. adustum), Phlebia (see P. incarnata), Podoscypha (see P. aculeata), Steccherinum (see S. ochraceum )
Family: Panaceae
Genera treated: Panus (see P. conchatus )
Family: Phanerochaetaceae
Genera treated: Climacodon (see C. septentrionale ), Hapalopilus (see H. nidulans), Phlebiopsis (see P. crassa)
Family: Podoscyphaceae
Genera treated: Abortiporus (see A. biennis )
Family: Polyporaceae
Genera treated: Coriolopsis (see C. gallica), Cryptoporus (see C. volvatus), Daedaleopsis (see D. confragosa), Fomes (see F. fomentarius), Ganoderma (see G. sessile ), Globifomes (see G. graveolens ), Hexagonia (see H. hydnoides), Lentinus (see L. tigrinus), Lenzites (see L. betulina), Microporellus (see M. dealbatus), Neofavolus (see N. alveolaris), Nigroporus (see N. vinosus), Perenniporia (see P. ohiensis), Polyporus (see P. squamosus), Poronidulus, Pycnoporus (see P. cinnabarinus), Pyrofomes (see P. juniperinus), Trametes (see T. versicolor), Trichaptum (see T. biforme), Tyromyces (see T. chioneus )
Family: Sparassidaceae
Genera treated: Sparassis (see S. crispa )
Family: Tubulicrinaceae
Family: Xenasmataceae
Order: Russulales
Family: Albatrellaceae
Genera treated: Albatrellus (see A. cristatus )
Family: Amylostereaceae
Family: Auriscalpiaceae
Genera treated: Artomyces (see Artomyces pyxidatus), Auriscalpium (see A. vulgare), Lentinellus
Family: Bondarzewiaceae
Genera treated: Bondarzewia (see B. berkeleyi), Heterobasidion (see H. annosum )
Family: Echinodontiaceae
Family: Hericiaceae
Genera treated: Hericium
Family: Hybogasteraceae
Family: Lachnocladiaceae
Family: Peniophoraceae
Genera treated: Peniophora (see P. rufa )
Family: Russulaceae
Genera treated: Arcangeliella (see A. desjardinii), Lactarius, Lactifluus, Russula, Zelleromyces (see Z. cinnabarinus)
Family: Stereaceae
Genera treated: Aleurodiscus (see A. oakesii), Stereum (see S. ostrea), Xylobolus (see X. frustulatus )
Order: Sebacinales
Family: Sebacinaceae
Genera treated: Helvellosebacina (see H. concrescens ), Sebacina (see S. incrustans ), Tremellodendron (see T. schweinitzii )
Order: Thelephorales
Family: Bankeraceae
Genera treated: Boletopsis (see B. leucomelaena ), Hydnellum, Phellodon (see P. confluens), Sarcodon (see S. imbricatus )
Family: Thelephoraceae
Genera treated: Polyozellus (see P. multiplex ), Thelephora (see T. multipartita )
Order: Trechisporales
Family: Hydnodontaceae
Order: Tremellodendropsidales
Family: Tremellodendropsidaceae
Genera treated: Tremellodendropsis (see T. tuberosa )

Subphyllum: Pucciniomycotina (rusts . . . see Gymnosporangium juniperi-virginianae )
Subphyllum: Ustilaginomycotina (smuts . . . )

Phylum: Chytridiomycota (aquatic fungi . . . )
Phylum: Glomeromycota (endomycorrhizal fungi . . . )
Phylum: Microsporidia (spore-forming parasites that lack flagellae . . . )
Phylum: Zygomycota (various saprobes, parasites, and others . . . )

I have done my best to avoid typing mistakes in the table above, but I ask you to imagine typing " Hypsizygus, Syzygospora , Rhynchogastremataceae," and the like for hours on end with no recourse to a spell-checker. If you find a mistake, please drop me a line I will appreciate knowing it.

Large Amanita Mushroom?

This showed up in my yard earlier this year. It was a single mushroom. Today I have a horseshoe of them in the same location, at least 18 of them. I believe they are Amanitas. please correct me if I have not identified them correctly.

Comments for Large Amanita Mushroom?

Probably Chlorophyllum molybdites (green spore print, quite toxic).

Other lepiotas (L. procera, L. rachodes) would have a white spore print, as would an amanita.

Lepiotas are distinguished from amanitas by having no universal veil, i.e. no cup at the base of the stalk and scales rather than warts on the cap.

Don't try to distinguish them based on this post, get a good field guide. I recommend "Mushrooms Demystified" by David Arora.

L. procera and L. rachodes are both delicious (very strong flavor, don't saute, discard tough stems, brush the caps with oil and maybe soy sauce and grill or broil).

Great pictures! While it's not always easy to identify mushrooms over the Internet, these certainly look like Amanitas to me. There's a lot of confusion over Amanitas, so your submission is a great opportunity to learn more about them!

First off, the term "Amanita" refers to the genus of the mushroom, not the species. If you remember your high school biology (okay, so I don't either!), a genus is just a taxonomic rank of classification above species, but below family. As we fallible humans created these terms, they're not always set in stone and are subject to change as science continually learns more.

When identifying mushrooms, your first goal should be to identify to the genus. Determining the genus of a mushroom is often pretty doable yet determining the species is frequently a lot harder. For example, according to Wikipedia there are about 600 species in the genus Amanita!

This is a famous genus because it's responsible for most of the world's mushroom poisonings. Although there are edible species, it also contains the deadly Death Cap (A. phalloides). So while it's fun to try to determine if the mushroom in your yard is an Amanita, it's not recommended to eat them. In fact, unless you're an expert it's wildly discouraged. (And even if you're an expert it's often not a good idea. Anyone can make a mistake).

So what are some common Amanita identification features?

-An umbrella shaped cap with warts or scales on the top. Your second picture is concave rather than convex, but these caps can turn up as the mushroom nears the end of its life.

-A sac or bulbous cap around the base. This sac is the remnant of the universal veil that enveloped the mushroom when it was in its young, button stage. It's usually not readily apparent unless you gently dig the mushroom up.

-A white spore print, meaning if you place the cap face down on a piece of dark colored paper, the resulting dropped spores will obviously be white.

-The underside of the cap will have gills that are thin and white.

-There's a ring around the stem. This ring is a remnant of the partial veil, a thin layer of tissue that protected the gills as they were developing. It's quite apparent in the pictures you sent.

Please know that having a single one of these features does not necessarily an Amanita make! Added to that, sometimes a veil can tear off and no longer be there, or the warts on the top may be absent. Mushroom identification isn't an exact science, which is another reason why one wants to be careful with Amanitas.

You mentioned that now you have a large half-ring, horseshoe shape growth of them. This is another clue, as Amanitas often grow in these rings (called "fairy rings").

Biologists identify pathways that extend lifespan by 500%

Jarod A. Rollins of the MDI Biological Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine, is a lead author of a recent scientific paper that identifies synergistic cellular pathways for longevity that amplify lifespan fivefold in C. elegans, a nematode worm used as a model in aging research. The increase in lifespan would be the equivalent of a human living for 400 or 500 years. The discovery of the synergistic effect opens the door to new, more effective anti-aging therapies. Credit: MDI Biological Laboratory

Scientists at the MDI Biological Laboratory, in collaboration with scientists from the Buck Institute for Research on Aging in Novato, Calif., and Nanjing University in China, have identified synergistic cellular pathways for longevity that amplify lifespan fivefold in C. elegans, a nematode worm used as a model in aging research.

The increase in lifespan would be the equivalent of a human living for 400 or 500 years, according to one of the scientists.

The research draws on the discovery of two major pathways governing aging in C. elegans, which is a popular model in aging research because it shares many of its genes with humans and because its short lifespan of only three to four weeks allows scientists to quickly assess the effects of genetic and environmental interventions to extend healthy lifespan.

Because these pathways are "conserved," meaning that they have been passed down to humans through evolution, they have been the subject of intensive research. A number of drugs that extend healthy lifespan by altering these pathways are now under development. The discovery of the synergistic effect opens the door to even more effective anti-aging therapies.

The new research uses a double mutant in which the insulin signaling (IIS) and TOR pathways have been genetically altered. Because alteration of the IIS pathways yields a 100 percent increase in lifespan and alteration of the TOR pathway yields a 30 percent increase, the double mutant would be expected to live 130 percent longer. But instead, its lifespan was amplified by 500 percent.

"Despite the discovery in C. elegans of cellular pathways that govern aging, it hasn't been clear how these pathways interact," said Hermann Haller, M.D., president of the MDI Biological Laboratory. "By helping to characterize these interactions, our scientists are paving the way for much-needed therapies to increase healthy lifespan for a rapidly aging population."

The elucidation of the cellular mechanisms controlling the synergistic response is the subject of a recent paper in the online journal Cell Reports entitled "Translational Regulation of Non-autonomous Mitochondrial Stress Response Promotes Longevity." The authors include Jarod A. Rollins, Ph.D., and Aric N. Rogers, Ph.D., of the MDI Biological Laboratory.

"The synergistic extension is really wild," said Rollins, who is the lead author with Jianfeng Lan, Ph.D., of Nanjing University. "The effect isn't one plus one equals two, it's one plus one equals five. Our findings demonstrate that nothing in nature exists in a vacuum in order to develop the most effective anti-aging treatments we have to look at longevity networks rather than individual pathways."

The discovery of the synergistic interaction could lead to the use of combination therapies, each affecting a different pathway, to extend healthy human lifespan in the same way that combination therapies are used to treat cancer and HIV, Pankaj Kapahi, Ph.D., of the Buck Institute, has said. Kapahi is a corresponding author of the paper with Rogers and Di Chen, Ph.D., of Nanjing University.

The synergistic interaction may also may explain why scientists have been unable to identify a single gene responsible for the ability of some people to live to extraordinary old ages free of major age-related diseases until shortly before their deaths.

The paper focuses on how longevity is regulated in the mitochondria, which are the organelles in the cell responsible for energy homeostasis. Over the last decade, accumulating evidence has suggested a causative link between mitochondrial dysregulation and aging. Rollins' future research will focus on the further elucidation of the role of mitochondria in aging, he said.

Can anyone identify these mushrooms? - Biology

Цели и задачи: Предназначение этого сайта – хранение информации о наблюдениях грибов, помощь в опознании незнакомых грибов и расширение сообщества людей, которым интересно научное изучение грибов (микология). Многие спрашивают – что считать грибом? На этом сайте грибы рассматриваются в широком смысле. Основной упор, конечно, делается на крупные грибы (макромицеты), но приветствуются и другие грибы и грибоподобные организмы: лишайники, ржавчинные грибы, плесени, слизевики (миксомицеты) и т.д. Я надеюсь, что в конечном итоге этот сайт станет ценным подспорьем и для любителей, и для микологов-профессионалов. В моем представлении это что-то вроде живого полевого определителя или общественного полевого дневника о грибах.

Если вы еще не знакомы с микологией, то можете не знать, что на данном этапе развития этой науки все еще необходимо провести огромные объемы базовых исследований. По некоторым оценкам, современной науке известно не более 5% всех видов грибов. Конечно, с крупными грибами дела обстоят немного лучше, но до сих пор не редкость встретить гриб, который не получается легко определить с помощью существующей литературы, или который не подходит полностью к описаниям известных грибов. Задача этого сайта – сократить этот разрыв, создав место, где мы бы могли обсуждать и документировать наши находки, а также привязывать их к существующей литературе о грибах. Пожалуйста, не пугайтесь наукообразием сайта. Здесь рады всем: любой человек может добавлять свои наблюдения, загружать фотографии грибов и оставлять комментарии к наблюдениям других пользователей.

Image Sharing: This site follows the principles of cooperative sharing pioneered by the Free Software Foundation, further expressed by the Open Source software movement, and expanded to other creative efforts by the Creative Commons. Consequently all images are made available under one of the Creative Commons licenses or are in the public domain. In short this means that when anyone uploads one of their images to the site, they are giving others explicit permission to use those images under certain conditions in perpetuity. This type of permission is very important for basic research. It allows future researchers to freely use these data to expand our understanding of mushrooms. It also significantly increases the likelihood that the data will continue to be available into the distant future.

If you upload your own images, this license does not mean you are giving up your copyright or your ability to make money off your images. Depending on which license you choose, you can still require that anyone who wishes to use any of these images for commercial purposes get in touch with the copyright holder and work out the conditions for that use. The site includes special links on the image pages to help create those relationships.

Source Code: Source code for the site is available at: and is licensed under the Open Source MIT License. Source code contributions are welcome (README). Here’s a list of planned features. All suggestions and comments are welcome. If you would like to contribute, please send mail to webmaster @ so we can coordinate our efforts.

Governance: This site is owned and operated by Mushroom Observer, Inc..

Примечание: администрация сайта оставляет за собой право удалять любые материалы, которые могут быть сочтены неподобающими или не соответствующими целям и задачам этого сайта.

About This Article

There are thousands of mushrooms species, some poisonous and some edible. Certain poisonous and edible mushrooms look very similar, so you should never eat a mushroom unless you’re 100 percent certain what kind it is. In general, you should avoid mushrooms that have white gills. You should also steer clear of mushrooms that have a ring around the stem and/or a bulbous base, which may be above or below ground. Mushrooms with red on the stem or cap are also likely to be poisonous. Poisonous mushrooms typically have an unpleasant smell, but not always. Keep in mind that there are many poisonous mushrooms without these characteristics. Never eat a wild mushroom before having an expert correctly identify it.

Watch the video: Can you identify these mushrooms? (September 2022).

  1. Beathan

    How to paraphrase this?

  2. Mezibar

    I'm sorry, but, in my opinion, they were wrong. I am able to prove it. Write to me in PM.

  3. Duman

    You are not right. Enter we'll discuss. Write to me in PM, we'll talk.

  4. Roosevelt

    Details are very important in this, since without them you can immediately come up with unnecessary nonsense

  5. Larnell

    What a lovely response

  6. Sanders

    I congratulate, this brilliant idea is necessary just by the way

Write a message