Talk:Infundibulicybe geotropa

A fact from Infundibulicybe geotropa appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 June 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that a fairy ring of the mushroom Clitocybe geotropa (pictured) in France is over half a mile (0.8 km) in diameter and 800 years old?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/June.

Wikipedia

Food and drink

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Fungi Mid‑importance

	Fungi portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

1. Title: Evaluation of metal concentration and antioxidant activity of three edible mushrooms from Mugla, Turkey Author(s): Sarikurkcu C, Tepe B, Semiz DK, et al. Source: FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY Volume: 48 Issue: 5 Pages: 1230-1233 Published: MAY 2010 Times Cited: 0

2. Title: Antimicrobial activity of extracts of edible wild and cultivated mushrooms against foodborne bacterial strains Author(s): Venturini ME, Rivera CS, Gonzalez C, et al. Source: JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION Volume: 71 Issue: 8 Pages: 1701-1706 Published: AUG 2008 Times Cited: 1

3. Title: Minor element and heavy metal content of edible wild mushrooms native to Bolu, North-West Turkey Author(s): Yakiz D, Konuk M, Afyon A, et al. Source: FRESENIUS ENVIRONMENTAL BULLETIN Volume: 17 Issue: 2 Pages: 249-252 Published: 2008 Times Cited: 1

4. Title: Antimicrobial activities of fruit bodies and/or mycelial cultures of some mushroom isolates Author(s): Yamac M, Bilgili F Source: PHARMACEUTICAL BIOLOGY Volume: 44 Issue: 9 Pages: 660-667 Published: DEC 2006 Times Cited: 6

5. Title: Heavy metals in edible mushrooms in Italy Author(s): Cocchi L, Vescovi L, Petrini LE, et al. Source: FOOD CHEMISTRY Volume: 98 Issue: 2 Pages: 277-284 Published: 2006 Times Cited: 31

6. Title: Mercury in wild mushrooms and underlying soil substrate from Koszalin, North-central Poland Author(s): Falandysz J, Jedrusiak A, Lipka K, et al. Source: CHEMOSPHERE Volume: 54 Issue: 4 Pages: 461-466 Published: JAN 2004 Times Cited: 26

7. Title: CLITOCYBE-GEOTROPA IN CULTURE Author(s): HUDSON HJ Source: TRANSACTIONS OF THE BRITISH MYCOLOGICAL SOCIETY Volume: 66 Issue: FEB Pages: 174-175 Published: 1976 Times Cited: 0

8. Title: RHIZOMORPH FORMATION IN CULTURE BY CLITOCYBE GEOTROPA Author(s): BILLEHAN.E Source: BOTANISK TIDSSKRIFT Volume: 67 Issue: 4 Pages: 329-332 Published: 1973 Times Cited: 1

9. Title: RHIZOMORPH FORMATION IN FUNGI .2. EFFECT OF 12 DIFFERENT ALCOHOLS ON GROWTH AND RHIZOMORPH FORMATION IN ARMILLARIA-MELLEA AND CLITOCYBE-GEOTROPA Author(s): ALLERMAN.K, SORTKJAE.O Source: PHYSIOLOGIA PLANTARUM Volume: 28 Issue: 1 Pages: 51-55 Published: 1973 Times Cited: 5

Infundibulicybe

SHouldn't tis be at Infundibulicybe geotropa since we are currently accepting the genus? Circéus (talk) 16:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See my talk page, but I do wonder why mycobank and Index Fungorum haven't made the big move. I ummed and aahed about that. I was pondering why the move hadn't been adopted wholesale, and my only conclusion is that geotropa wasn't included in the mega- 117 clade study, hence there is a wait for molecular confirmation (???) I don't mind changing it. Might be worth looking into more...Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Except geotropa is the type species! We can't have an article for Infundibulicybe while simulataneously placing it's type in another genus! Circéus (talk) 22:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Look I can live with either (why oh why did they have to pick such a long and unpronounceable genus name?), if you and Sasata are for it then a move is prudent. The data thus far make sense, which other sources use the new combination? mushroomexpert is happy with new combo, who else....Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:16, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In that 117 clades paper, the Clitocybes they included were dealbata, clavipes, connata, glacialis, lateritia, and odorata —none of which are in Harmaja's Infundibulicybe. At least one well-respected group has adopted the new naming (and used molecular data to justify naming a new species). There's only a few recent reports of the taxon in the literature: this group is interested in chemical analysis (PMID 20167240) rather than taxonomy; in this paper, they refer to the species as Infundibulicybe; in this Persian paper, the old name is used. I think we should use the new name and help the rest of them catch up :) (p.s. Fungorum does say Infundibulicybe is the current name; it's hard to tell with MycoBank.) Sasata (talk) 23:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]