When: 2006-11-25

Collection location: Novato, Marin Co., California, USA [Click for map]

Who: John Kirkpatrick (natashadak)

No specimen available


Proposed Names

-28% (1)
Recognized by sight
83% (1)
Used references: This was finally published in late 2008 as a separate species in the journal of Economic Botany in the article “California Porcini: Three New Taxa, Observations on Their Harvest, and the Tragedy of No Commons” by Arora and Simonini.

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
By: Nathan Wilson (nathan)
2006-12-23 08:35:50 CST (-0500)

Personally, I consider habitat, color and stature to be more important features than the ‘bloom’. I have seen the bloom, but I’ve also seen mushrooms from the same site with and without it that were otherwise identical. I have seen what I would really consider B. edulis from under live oaks (reddish-brown cap, long clavate stipe), but only very rarely. Of course the porcini of California are a mixed bag anyway. In my experience there are at least 7 distinct porcini populations in California (spring Sierran, fall Sierran, coastal pine B. eduils, coastal pine B. fibrillosus, coastal spruce, mixed woods B. aereus, and live oak B. barrowsii). It’s also possible that there is a distinct mixed woods B. edulis, but until that is shown in some clear way I avoid applying the name B. edulis to collections that are not growing under pine and don’t look like the classic coastal pine B. eduils.

By: John Kirkpatrick (natashadak)
2006-12-23 02:05:22 CST (-0500)

I did consider aereus but ruled it out because there was no evidence of a “white bloom” on the cap; the weather had been dry for several days precluding it having been washed off. That is what made me go with edulis (which Arora says will grow with oak — this specimen was under live oak). Any further thoughts?

B. aereus?
By: Administrator (admin)
2006-12-22 01:43:40 CST (-0500)

I just looked closely at this image for the first time and noticed that there are no pines in evidence and the stature and cap color would lead me to call this B. aereus. Did you consider this name and reject it for some reason?