Entoloma sinuatum

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Entoloma sinuatum
A group of six whitish mushrooms arises from the forest floor among leaf litter. One is upturned so its gills are visible.
E. sinuatum, Piacenza's Appennino, Italy
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Fungi
Division: Basidiomycota
Class: Agaricomycetes
Order: Agaricales
Family: Entolomataceae
Genus: Entoloma
Species:
E. sinuatum
Binomial name
Entoloma sinuatum
Synonyms[1]
  • Pers.
    (1801)
  • Entoloma eulividum Noordel. (1985)
  • Entoloma lividum (Bull.) Quél. (1872)
  • Rhodophyllus
    lividus     (Bull.) Quél. (1886)
  • Rhodophyllus sinuatus (Bull.) Quél. (1888)
Entoloma sinuatum
mycorrhizal
Edibility is poisonous

Entoloma sinuatum (

gills are pale and often yellowish, becoming pink as the spores develop. The thick whitish stem has no ring
.

When young, it may be mistaken for the

gastrointestinal problems that, though not generally life-threatening, have been described as highly unpleasant. Delirium and depression are uncommon sequelae. It is generally not considered to be lethal, although one source has reported deaths from the consumption of this mushroom.[5]

Name and relationships

an old line drawing of the various parts of a mushroom fruit body
Bulliard's original illustration of Agaricus lividus from his 1788 Champignon de la France, which has been found to be a depiction of Pluteus cervinus.[6]

The saga of this species' name begins in 1788 with the publication of part 8 of

Christian Persoon in his Synopsis Methodica Fungorum.[10] He based that name on another plate (number 579) published in the last part of Bulliard's work, and which the latter had labelled "agaric sinué".[note 1] German mycologist Paul Kummer reclassified it as Entoloma sinuatum in 1871.[11]

For many years Quélet's name and description were treated as valid because Bulliard's name antedated Persoon's. However, in 1950, a change in the

International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (termed the Stockholm Code, after the city where the International Botanical Congress was being held) caused only names on fungi published after 1801 or 1821 (depending on their type) to be valid.[12] This meant that suddenly Bulliard's name was no longer a valid name, and now it was Persoon's name that had priority. Nonetheless, it was a well-known name, and the already chaotic situation caused by a change to a famous Latin name was further complicated by another of Quélet's suggestions. He had in 1886 proposed a new, broader genus that included all pink-gilled fungi with adnate or sinuate gills and angular spores: Rhodophyllus.[13] These two approach to genus placement, using either Rhodophyllus or Entoloma, coexisted for many decades, with mycologists and guidebooks following either;[14] Henri Romagnesi, who studied the genus for over forty years, favoured Rhodophyllus, as initially did Rolf Singer.[14] However, most other authorities have tended to favor Entoloma,[15] and Singer conceded the name was far more widely used and adopted it for his Agaricales in Modern Taxonomy text in 1986.[16]

In the meantime, it had been widely accepted that the 1950 change to the Stockholm Code caused more problems than they solved, and in 1981, the Sydney Code reinstated the validity of pre-1801 names, but created the status of

illegitimate (and thus not available for use) because William Hudson had already used it ten years earlier for a different species, but Bulliard's illustration was clearly not an Entoloma, but a species of Pluteus,[note 2] a genus that is only distantly related to Entoloma.[9] As this made Quélet's name definitely unusable for the Entoloma, and because at the time he and Romagnesi[18] believed there were ground to treat Quélet's "E. lividum" and Persoon's E. sinuatum as separate species, he had to coin a third name for Quélet's species: Entoloma eulividum.[9][19] He however later changed his mind on this issue, combining again his own Entoloma eulividum and E. sinuatum, so that Persoon's name is now universally recognised.[15][20] Because it was previously widely used and Quélet had provided a good description and illustration (which, the proposer argued, was better considered as a new species rather than a mere placement of Bulliard's name in another genus),[9] a proposal was made in 1999 to conserve Entoloma lividum and thus restore its use.[6] However, it failed because E. sinuatum had already been in use (if not universally) for many years and was thus a well-known name for the species.[21]

phylogenetic relationships of E. sinuatum and closely related fungi in the Rhodopolioid clade.[22]

The

specific epithet sinuatum is the Latin for "wavy", referring to the shape of the cap, while the generic name is derived from the Ancient Greek words entos/ἐντός "inner" and lóma/λῶμα "fringe" or "hem" from the inrolled margin.[23] The specific epithet lividum was derived from the Latin word līvǐdus "lead-coloured".[24] The various common names include livid entoloma, livid agaric, livid pinkgill, leaden entoloma, lead poisoner,[25] and grey pinkgill.[26] In the Dijon region of France it was known as le grand empoisonneur de la Côte-d'Or ("the great poisoner of Côte d'Or").[27] Quélet himself, who was poisoned by the fungus, called it the miller's purge, akin to another common name of false miller.[28]

Within the large genus Entoloma, which contains around 1500 species, E. sinuatum has been classically placed in the

DNA sequences and spore morphology found it to lie in a rhodopolioid clade with (among other species) E. sordidulum, E. politum and E. rhodopolium, and most closely related to E. sp. 1.[note 3] This rhodopolioid clade lay within a crown Entoloma clade.[22]

Description

A whitish mushroom with pink gills occupies the foreground of a photo taken at ground level. In the background is a forest on a sunny day.
The gills of mature mushrooms darken to pink and then red.

The largest member of its genus,

fruiting body (basidiocarp), bearing a cap 6–20 cm (2+1⁄2–6 in) wide, though diameters of 30 cm (12 in) have been recorded.[30] It is convex to flat, often with a blunt umbo in its centre and wavy margins, ivory white to light grey-brown in color, and darkening with age. The distant gills are sinuate (notched at their point of attachment to the stipe) to almost free, generally (but not always) yellowish white before darkening to pink and then red. Interspersed between the gills are lamellulae (short gills that do not extend completely from the cap margin to the stipe).[31] When viewed from beneath, a characteristic groove colloquially known as a "moat" can be seen in the gill pattern circumnavigating the stalk.[30] The form lacking yellow color on the gills is rare but widespread, and has been recorded from Austria, France and the Netherlands.[32]

The stout white stipe lacks a

cystidia are absent.[33]

Similar species

Lookalike species include Clitopilus prunulus (left) and Calocybe gambosa (right)

Confusion with the highly regarded miller or sweetbread mushroom (Clitopilus prunulus) is a common cause of poisoning in France; the latter fungus has a greyish -white downy cap and whitish decurrent gills which turn pink with maturity.[28] Young fruit bodies of Entoloma sinuatum can also be confused with St George's mushroom (Calocybe gambosa),[23] although the gills of the latter are crowded and cream in color, and the clouded agaric (Clitocybe nebularis), which has whitish decurrent gills and an unusual, starchy, rancid or rancid starch odor.[30] To complicate matters, it often grows near these edible species.[34] Its overall size and shape resemble members of the genus Tricholoma, although the spore color (white in Tricholoma, pinkish in Entoloma) and shape (angular in Entoloma) help distinguish it.[35] The rare and edible all-white dovelike tricholoma (T. columbetta) has a satiny cap and stem and a faint, not mealy, odor.[28] E. sinuatum may be confused with Clitocybe multiceps in the Pacific Northwest of North America, although the latter has white spores and generally grows in clumps.[35] A casual observer may mistake it for an edible field mushroom (Agaricus campestris),[27] but this species has a ring on the stipe, pink gills that become chocolate-brown in maturity, and a dark brown spore print.[36] The poorly known North American species E. albidum resembles E. sinuatum but is likewise poisonous.[35]

Distribution and habitat

Entoloma sinuatum is fairly common and widespread across North America[35] as far south as Arizona.[37] It also occurs throughout Europe and including Ireland and Britain,[38] though it is more common in southern and central parts of Europe than the northwest.[33] In Asia, it has been recorded in the Black Sea region,[39] the Adıyaman Province in Turkey,[40] Iran,[41] and northern Yunnan in China.[42]

The fruit bodies of E. sinuatum grow solitarily or in groups,

Salix).[44]

Toxicity

This fungus has been cited as being responsible for 10% of all

chemical analysis has established that there are alkaloids present in the mushroom.[52]

A study of trace elements in mushrooms in the eastern Black Sea Region of Turkey found E. sinuatum to have the highest levels of copper (64.8 ± 5.9 μg/g dried material—insufficient to be toxic) and zinc (198 μg/g) recorded.[53] Caps and stalks tested in an area with high levels of mercury in southeastern Poland showed it to bioaccumulate much higher levels of mercury than other fungi. The element was also found in high levels in the humus-rich substrate.[54] Entoloma sinuatum also accumulates arsenic-containing compounds. Of the roughly 40 μg of arsenic present per gram of fresh mushroom tissue, about 8% was arsenite and the other 92% was arsenate.[55]

See also

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Entoloma sinuatum.

Footnotes

  1. ^ Which means that under the modern principles of nomenclature, Persoon, not Bulliard, is the first to have used the name, since only names in Latin can be considered.
  2. ^ It is now generally accepted the species in question is Pluteus cervinus.
  3. ^ a b Initially presumed to be Entoloma prunuloides but later found to be distinct from that taxon.[22]

References

  1. ^ "Entoloma sinuatum (Bull.) P. Kumm". Species Fungorum. CAB International. Retrieved 2010-12-18.
  2. ^ "Entoloma sinuatum · livid pinkgill". The British Mycological Society. Archived from the original on 2022-02-05. Retrieved 2021-05-21.
  3. ^ "Entoloma sinuatum · livid pinkgill". NBN Atlas. Retrieved 2021-05-21.
  4. ^ "Entoloma sinuatum (Pers.) P. Kumm. - Livid Pinkgill". First Nature. Retrieved 2021-05-21.
  5. ISBN 9780816614073
    .
  6. ^
    JSTOR 1224635
    .
  7. ^ Bulliard, Pierre (1782). Herbier de la France (in French). Vol. 8. Paris: Chez l'auteur, Didot, Debure, Belin. p. plate 382.
  8. ^ (in Latin)Quélet, Lucien (1872). "Les Champignons du Jura et des Vosges". Mémoires de la Société d'Émulation de Montbéliard. 2 (in French). 5: 116.
  9. ^ a b c d e Redeuilh, Guy (1995). "Etude préliminaire en vue de la conservation d'Entoloma lividum Quél". Bulletin de la Société Mycologique de France (in French). 111 (3): 155–68.
  10. ^ Persoon, Christian H. (1801). Synopsis Methodica Fungorum (in Latin). Gottingen, Sweden: Apud H. Dieterich. p. 329.
  11. ^ Kummer, Paul (1871). Der Führer in die Pilzkunde (in German) (1st ed.). Zerbst, Germany: Luppe. p. 98.
  12. ^
    JSTOR 3792891
    .
  13. ^ Quélet L. (1886). Enchiridion Fungorum in Europa media et praesertim in Gallia Vigentium. p. 57.
  14. ^
    ISBN 3-7682-0143-0
    .
  15. ^ a b Noordeloos, Fungi Europaei, p. 13.
  16. ^
    ISBN 3-87429-254-1
    .
  17. ^ Fries, Elias Magnus (1821). Systema Mycologicum, volume 1. Lund: Officina Berlingiana. p. 197.
  18. ^ Romagnesi, Henri (1978). "Quelques Espèces Méconnues ou Nouvelles de Macromycètes. IV". Bulletin de la Société Mycologique de France (in French). 94 (2): 97–108.
  19. ^ Noordeloos, Machiel E. (1985). "Notulae ad floram Agaricinam Neerlandicam X-XI. Entoloma". Persoonia. 12 (4): 457–62.
  20. ISBN 3-85604-240-7
    .
  21. JSTOR 1224527
    .
  22. ^
    PMID 20198166. Archived from the original
    (PDF) on 2011-07-24.
  23. ^
    ISBN 0-14-063006-6
    .
  24. ISBN 0-304-52257-0
    .
  25. ISBN 0-395-93608-X
    .
  26. ISBN 0-395-91090-0
    .
  27. ^
    ISBN 1-870630-09-2
    .
  28. ^
    ISBN 3-8331-1239-5
    .
  29. ^ Noordeloos, Fungi Europaei, p. 72.
  30. ^
    ISBN 0-222-79409-7
    .
  31. ISBN 0-7234-1576-5
    .
  32. ^ Noordeloos, Fungi Europaei, p. 114.
  33. ^ a b c d Noordeloos, Fungi Europaei, pp. 111–13.
  34. ^
    ISBN 0-584-10324-7
    .
  35. ^
    ISBN 0-8166-1407-5
    .
  36. ISBN 0-7627-3109-5
    .
  37. ^ Bates, Scott T. (2006). "A preliminary checklist of Arizona macrofungi" (PDF). Canotia. 2 (2): 47–78. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-04-19. Retrieved 2011-01-03.
  38. ^ "Northern Ireland's Herbarium Specimens". Northern Ireland Fungus Group. 2007. Archived from the original on 2019-02-07. Retrieved 2008-02-01.
  39. ^ Sesli, Ertuğrul (2007). "Preliminary checklist of macromycetes of the East and Middle Black Sea Regions of Turkey" (PDF). Mycotaxon. 99: 71–74.
  40. doi:10.5248/110.43
    .
  41. ISBN 978-964-2725-29-8
    .
  42. ISSN 0029-0289
    .
  43. ^ Noordeloos, Fungi Europaei, p. 38.
  44. ISBN 3-921703-77-8
    .
  45. S2CID 259999146
    .
  46. ^ Chapuis, J.-R. (1984). "Jahresbericht des Verbandstoxikologen für das Jahr 1983 [Annual Report of the SUSM Toxicologist for 1983]". Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Pilzkunde (in German). 62: 196–97.
  47. ISSN 0393-4802
    .
  48. ^ Benjamin, pp. 361–62.
  49. ^ Benedict, Robert G. (1972). "Mushroom toxins other than Amanita". In Kadis, S.; Ciegler, Alex; Ajl, S.J. (eds.). Microbial Toxins: A Comprehensive Treatise. Volume VIII. Fungal Toxins. New York, New York: Academic Press. pp. 281–320.
  50. ^ Benjamin, Mushrooms: Poisons and Panaceas, pp. 354–55.
  51. ^ Benjamin, Mushrooms: Poisons and Panaceas, p. 188.
  52. doi:10.3109/13880208709060915
    .
  53. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2006.04.003
    .
  54. S2CID 24124204
    .
  55. doi:10.1002/aoc.590090403
    .

Cited texts

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Entoloma_sinuatum&oldid=1214811557"