Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

False chanterelle
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Fungi
Division: Basidiomycota
Class: Agaricomycetes
Order: Boletales
Family: Hygrophoropsidaceae
Genus: Hygrophoropsis
Species:
H. aurantiaca
Binomial name
Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca
(
Wulfen) Maire
(1921)
Synonyms[1]
  • Agaricus aurantiacus Wulfen (1781)
  • Merulius aurantiacus (Wulfen) J.F.Gmel. (1792)
  • Cantharellus aurantiacus Krombh. (1841)
  • Clitocybe aurantiaca (Wulfen) Stud.-Steinh. (1900)
Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca
View the Mycomorphbox template that generates the following list
Gills on hymenium
Cap is depressed or infundibuliform
Hymenium is decurrent
Stipe is bare
Spore print is white to cream
Ecology is
saprotrophic
Edibility is not recommended

Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca, commonly known as the false chanterelle, is a species of fungus in the family Hygrophoropsidaceae. It is found across several continents, growing in woodland and

heathland, and sometimes on woodchips used in gardening and landscaping. Fruit bodies (mushrooms) are yellow–orange, with a funnel-shaped cap up to 8 cm (3+18 in) across that has a felt-like surface. The thin, often forked gills on the underside of the cap run partway down the length of the otherwise smooth stipe. Reports on the mushroom's edibility vary – it is considered poisonous
, but has historically been eaten in parts of Europe and the Americas.

Austrian naturalist

dextrinoid spores indicated a relationship to Paxillus. Genetic analysis has confirmed that it belongs to the order Boletales and is more closely related to boletes
.

Taxonomy

Austrian naturalist Franz Xaver von Wulfen described the false chanterelle as Agaricus aurantiacus in 1781, reporting that it appeared in the

Elias Fries in 1821.[6] Bernhard Studer-Steinhäuslin concluded it could only be classified in the genus Clitocybe in 1900, based on its white spores, decurrent gills and lack of a ring.[7] It was elevated to the status of genus in Emile Martin-Sans' 1929 publication L'Empoisonnement par les champignons et particulièrement les intoxications dues aux Agaricacées du groupe des Clitocybe et du groupe des Cortinarius, with authorship attributed to René Maire. Martin-Sans concurred with Maire's assessment of Hygrophoropsis, suggesting that it represented a form intermediate between Cantharellus and Clitocybe, and was thus worthy of generic ranking.[8] The genus name refers to a resemblance to the genus Hygrophorus.[3] It is commonly known as the false chanterelle.[9]

James Sowerby's 1809 illustration of Agaricus subcantharellus

Two varieties described by Derek Reid in 1972, H. aurantiaca var. macrospora and H. aurantiaca var. rufa,[10] have since been promoted to distinct species status as H. macrospora (1996)[11] and H. rufa (2008).[12] Two other varieties of the fungus have been described, but they are not considered to have independent taxonomic significance by Index Fungorum:[13] var. nana (Singer 1946), characterized by a small fruit body;[14] and var. robusta (Antonín 2000), characterized by a robust fruit body and an odour similar to Maggi seasoning sauce.[15] Pale forms of the fungus are sometimes referred to as var. pallida. This taxon was first published by Robert Kühner and Henri Romagnesi in 1953,[16] but later considered invalid as it did not conform to nomenclatural rules.[17] Variety nigripes, a taxon with a black-brown stipe, is invalid for similar reasons.[18] H. aurantiaca var. pallida was published validly in 1995.[19]

In 1979, Egon Horak suggested that H. aurantiaca and the New Zealand taxon H. coacta were the same species,[20] but neither Index Fungorum nor MycoBank accept this synonymy. According to MycoBank, H. aurantiaca has several heterotypic synonyms, i.e. different types but considered the same species:[1]

Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca has been confused with the true chanterelles (genus Cantharellus) because of overall similarities in appearance.

Molecular phylogenetic analysis confirmed its affinity lay in the order Boletales in 1997,[29] though later research showed it is not closely related to Paxillus or other gilled members of the order.[30]

Description

Underside of cap showing orange, forked gills and inrolled rim

The false chanterelle has a golden-orange

sclerotia (compact masses of hardened fungal mycelium) has been documented for H. aurantiaca in laboratory studies. These structures contain glycogen and protein that may be used as food reserves during spore germination.[35]

The soft, thin

cap cuticle is in the form of a trichoderm, where the outermost hyphae are roughly parallel, like hairs, perpendicular to the cap surface. These hyphae are 4–15 µm in diameter,[33] and contain intracellular pigments that impart an orange-brown to yellow-brown colouring to the cells. Clamp connections are present in the hyphae.[38]

Teratological (developmentally abnormal) forms of H. aurantiaca have been reported to occur in the United Kingdom. The fruit bodies of these specimens were club-shaped with a wrinkled upper surface of convoluted gill tissue. The overall morphology of these forms somewhat resembles species of Clavariadelphus. Although the cause of this abnormal development is not known with certainty, environmental pollutants or virus infection have been suggested as contributing factors.[40]

Similar species

Aphroditeola olida, Chrysomphalina chrysophylla
.

Characteristics typically used in the field to distinguish Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca from lookalike species include: the soft, dry consistency of its cap; the crowded, decurrent, and forked gills that are saffron to orange coloured; and the lack of any distinctive taste or odour.[38] The false chanterelle can be distinguished from the true chanterelle (Cantharellus cibarius) by its deeper orange colour, brown base to the stipe, velvety cap surface, forked gills rather than gill-like ridges, softer (and thinner) flesh, and lack of the characteristic apricot-smell.[41] The cap surface of Hygrophoropsis fuscosquamula, found in Britain, has fine brown scales overlaying a dull orange background.[33] H. rufa has velvety brown fur covering its cap, while H. macrospora has cream gills and stipe. Microscopically, these three species have larger spores than H. aurantiaca.[32] H. tapinia, found in a range extending from southern Florida to Central America,[42] is set apart from H. aurantiaca by its growth on or under deciduous trees (never conifers), and smaller spores, which measure 3.3–4.8 by 2.5–3.3 µm.[14]

Formerly a member of Hygrophoropsis,

Haasiella splendidissima,[nb 1] sometimes confused with H. aurantiaca, is most readily distinguished from the latter by its pink spore print and gills that do not fork.[36]

Distribution, habitat, and ecology

Collection from Pennsylvania

Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca is a widely distributed species. In Europe and North America, it is found in both

sensu lato.[37]

A

saprophytic fungus, H. aurantiaca obtains nutrients from forest litter and decomposing wood,[44] causing a brown rot on the wood upon which it grows.[50]

H. aurantiaca secretes large amounts of

strong acid. This stimulates weathering of the humus layer of forest soil, and influences the solubility and turnover of nutrients (particularly phosphorus and nitrogen), which in turn affects their availability for use by forest trees.[50]

Edibility

The false chanterelle is considered

Tepehuán people of northwestern Mexico also occasionally eat the mushroom, which they refer to in their native language as guin'xacan ("delightful") or kia's gio' ("iguana lard"); there, it is commonly prepared by roasting over charcoal, or boiling and garnishing with cheese.[56]

Notes

  1. ^ This taxon is given in the original source as Haasiella venustissima; molecular analysis published in 2012 indicates that this is the same species as H. splendidissima.[46]

References

  1. ^ a b "Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca (Wulfen) Maire, Empois. Champ.: 99 (1921)". MycoBank. International Mycological Association. Retrieved 11 November 2015.
  2. ^ a b Jacquin NJ. (1781). Miscellanea Austriaca ad Botanicum, Chemiam et Historiam Naturalem Spectantia (in Latin). Vol. 2. Vienna: J.P. Kraus. p. 101; plate 14:3.
  3. ^ .
  4. ^ a b Sowerby J. (1809). Coloured Figures of English Fungi. Vol. 4. London, United Kingdom: J. Davis. p. 413; plate 413.
  5. ^ Gmelin JF. (1792). Systema Naturae (in Latin). Vol. 2 (13 ed.). Leipzig, Germany: G.E. Beer. p. 1430.
  6. ^ a b Fries EM. (1821). Systema Mycologicum (in Latin). Vol. 1. Lund, Sweden. p. 318.
  7. ^ Studer B. (1900). "Cantharellus aurantiacus Wulf". Hedwigia (in German). 39: 6–7.
  8. OCLC 633752563
    .
  9. ^ Holden L. (July 2014). "English names for fungi 2014". British Mycological Society. Archived from the original on 23 September 2015. Retrieved 11 November 2015.
  10. ^ Reid DA. (1972). Fungorum Rariorum Icones Coloratae. Vol. 6. J. Cramer. pp. 5–6.
  11. ^ Boekhout T, Kuyper TW (1996). "Notulae ad Floram agaricinam neerlandicam XXIV–XXVIII. Some taxonomic and nomenclatural changes in the Tricholomataceae, tribus Clitocybeae". Persoonia. 16 (2): 225–32.
  12. .
  13. ^ "GSD Species Synonymy: Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca (Wulfen) Maire". Species Fungorum. CAB International. Retrieved 11 November 2015.
  14. ^ a b c Singer R. (1946). "The Boletineae of Florida with notes on extralimital species . IV. The lamellate families (Gomphidiaceae, Paxillaceae, and Jugasporaceae)" (PDF). Farlowia. 2: 527–67 (see pp. 544–47).
  15. ^ Antonín V, Skubla P (2000). Interesting macromycetes found in the Czech and Slovak Republics. Fungi non Delineati. Vol. 11. Alassio, Italy: Libreria Mykoflora. pp. 1–48 (see p. 22).
  16. OCLC 799790482
    .
  17. ^ "Record Details: Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca var. pallida (Cooke) Kühner & Romagn". Index Fungorum. CAB International. Retrieved 11 November 2015.
  18. .
  19. ^ Heykoop M. (1995). "Notas nomenclaturales y taxonómicas en Agaricales. II" [Nomenclatural and taxonomic notes on Agaricales. II]. Boletín de la Sociedad Micológica de Madrid (in Spanish). 20: 157–66.
  20. ^ Horak E. (1979). "Paxilloid Agaricales in Australasia" (PDF). Sydowia. 32 (1–5): 154–66.
  21. ^ Schaeffer JC. (1774). Fungorum qui in Bavaria et Palatinatu circa Ratisbonam nascuntur Icones (in Latin). Vol. 4. Regensburg, Germany. p. 46; plate 206.
  22. ^ Chevallier FF. (1826). Flore Générale des Environs de Paris (in French). Vol. 1. Paris, France: Ferra Jeune. p. 240; plate 7:5.
  23. .
  24. ^ Kuntze O. (1891). Revisio Generum Plantarum (in Latin). Vol. 2. Leipzig, Germany: A. Felix. p. 862.
  25. ^ .
  26. .
  27. ^ Nelson SF. (2010). "Bluing components and other pigments of boletes" (PDF). Fungi. 3 (4): 11–14.
  28. ^ Binder M, Besl H, Bresinsky A (1997). "Agaricales oder Boletales? Molekularbiologische Befunde zur Zuordnung einiger umstrittener Taxa" [Agaricales or Boletales? Molecular evidence towards the classification of some controversial taxa] (PDF). Zeitschrift für Mykologie (in German). 63 (2): 189–96. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-11-17. Retrieved 2015-11-15.
  29. PMID 17486973
    .
  30. ^ .
  31. ^ .
  32. ^ .
  33. ^ .
  34. .
  35. ^ .
  36. ^ .
  37. ^ .
  38. .
  39. .
  40. .
  41. ^ Gómez-Pignataro LD. (1992). "Los Basidiomicetes de Costa Rica: V. Paxillaceae (Agaricales, Boletineae)" [Basidiomycetes from Costa Rica: V. Paxillaceae (Agaricales, Boletineae)]. Brenesia (in Spanish). 38: 105–13.
  42. ^ .
  43. ^ .
  44. .
  45. .
  46. ^ .
  47. .
  48. .
  49. ^ .
  50. .
  51. ^ Lindgren J. (May 2003). "Theory for why "edible" mushrooms make some people sick" (PDF). Bulletin of the Puget Sound Mycological Society (392): 1.
  52. .
  53. ^ Sitta, Nicola (2021). "Guida Ragionata Alla Commestibilità dei Funghi" (PDF). Regione Piemonte. Retrieved 6 November 2023.
  54. PMID 17217539. Open access icon
  55. ^ Elizondo MG. (1991). "Ethnobotany of the southern Tepehuan of Durango, Mexico: I. Edible mushrooms". Journal of Ethnobotany. 11 (2): 165–73 (see p. 170).

External links