Talk:Phlebopus marginatus

A fact from Phlebopus marginatus appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 October 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that a specimen of Australia's largest mushroom Phlebopus marginatus from Western Victoria weighed in at 29 kg, and caps can sometimes reach 1 metre across?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/October.

Wikipedia

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Fungi Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Phlebopus marginatus is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Relatedness

It is in fact not as closely related to typical boletes as previously thought

Where's the citation for this claim? Jer ome 00:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has been moved to a different genus (and family actually) having been originally placed in the genus Boletus, I hadn't seen that paper but I guess I can place it there. Cas Liber 01:05, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Phlebopus marginatus vs Phlebopus portentosus...

We've got papers using each and mycobank and index fungorum listing them as separate - [National http://www.anbg.gov.au/cgi-bin/apni?taxon_id=207117] and victorian botanic gardens regard them as synonyms.....might be good to see if there is anything stopping us just synonymising...and which name. Us Aussies use marginatus but portentosus used outside Oz....Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is an interesting question. If P. portentosus really is synonymous, there will be several additional interesting papers to use as sources for this article (it's cultivated as an edible in Asia). Will do some digging. BTW, do you have access to Watling & N.M.Greg (1988)? Sasata (talk) 23:39, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

... they sure look different ... Sasata (talk) 23:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Am ordering the Grgurinovic (1997) book, so hopefully that will shed more light on the subject. Sasata (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have the Watling and Li 1999 book (it's an orange ring-bound thing). I am keen to get the 1999 paper and will try to get on interlibrary loan - they were really helpful last time. This Sept 2012 paper on edible fungi clearly regards them as the same and uses the name portentosus and ignores marginatus (with no reason or mention given).

Regarding those pictures, you do see darkish specimens (some of the photos I took of older ones they were getting quite dark), but the small caps are weird (for the ones from china called portentosus on mushroomobserver), but the ones that are marginatus look quite wierd, funny-shaped and pale to me...anyway, maybe it is worth writing to Roy Watling. I did write to him some years ago....Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Update: - this paper also regards marginatus and portentosus as synonyms - it is a fascinating read....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have also just emailed Roy Watling to see if he has any further information. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Roy emailed back to say yes he would have said it was the same but this was years ago, and now research often shows widespread species to be are "NO such thing" (to quote him). Thus we have a bit of a dilemma - we can write about this as the broad taxon as currently assumed (which is how current writers are writing) until such time as it is carved up (and given the descriptions are from Sri Lanka and Western Australia respectively, I suspect each names will remain valid!) or just leave it. I note that the chinese authors of some recent papers have done some preliminary molecular work so I think I will write to them...fascinating stuff. Might be good to flesh out each description (Sri Lanka and WA) and name into the article....Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I figured he'd say something like that. I'm a bit hesitant to spend a lot of time fiddling to push to FAC knowing that major taxonomic changes are pending any moment (in fact, there's some current FAs I have yet to update in light of major, recent phylogenetic work). GA might be a better goal for this article. Will wait to see if you get any response from the Chinese. Sasata (talk) 22:35, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

damn - email to principal author just bounced :( Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the meantime (As I am interested and I can't help myself) I am trying to add material carefully so that we can easily dismantle the material if we have to carve up the article. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:34, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you will need to carve the whole thing up. Likely the single species would break down into a two or more very closely related species, all of which are highly similar. This is what happened with Sutorius eximius and Harrya chromapes. Also, another group has successfully grown fruiting bodies in culture. I don't have the time to do it, but here are refs-

Ji K-P, Cao Y, Zhang C-X, He M-X, Liu J, Wang W-B, Wang Y, 2011. Cultivation of Phlebopus portentosus in southern China. Mycological Progress 10: 293–300.

Sanmee R, Lumyong P, Dell B, Lumyong S, 2010. In vitro cultivation and fruit body formation of the black bolete, Phlebopus portentosus, a popular edible ectomycorrhizal fungus in Thailand. Mycoscience 51: 15–22.

M.E.Nuhn (talk) 19:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]