Talk:Tylopilus felleus

Eating Tylopilus felleus

Although it is not poisonous, it is not considered edible, due to its overwhelming bitterness. It may be so in the rest of the world but Tylopilus felleus is eaten in Viet Nam and considered a delicacy by people who can stand its bitterness. Some people eagerly wait for the rains in May and August to harvest the mushroom or to buy it from the market. There are specialty dishes combining T. felleus and meat or seafood. I suggest the readers to open the article in Vietnamese and use Google Translate to read up. --Mirrordor 17:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirrordor (talk • contribs)

Wow, that is amazing! I will see what we can find.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:00, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Mirrordor, if you can figure which of those are reliable sources we'd be really grateful - this is fascinating....Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:12, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tylopilus felleus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 11:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this review. Initial comments to follow in the next 1-5 days. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't see anything on first pass that seems to require further action. It's well written, well sourced, and appears comprehensive. As a bonus, the quotation about the mushroom "depressing" mushroom hunters is quite funny. I did make a few tweaks for grammar and linking; please doublecheck that I haven't inadvertently introduced any errors.

I also italicized Index Fungorum, which appears to be the common approach on articles found through Google Scholar ([1], [2], [3], [4], etc.). The template at the bottom remains unitalicized, but I left a note at the template page asking about this issue. (The Index Fungorum article itself was half-and-half between the two approaches.) I don't consider this to be important for Good Article status, however; this is simply me being OCD. Will start the checklist after I've grabbed some coffee. -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:39, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is excellent. Spotchecks against English-language sources show no copyright issues.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Question below
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass

The Healing-mushrooms.net link provides links to peer-reviewed medical studies done with T. felleus. What do you think--are any of these worth including here? -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

The very last article looks interesting, and there are a cluster on the same topic - it hasn't made much of an impact but i had seen it obliquely written about. I am guessing it didn't progress as it hasn't been referenced much since - will look into it. Nice find. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds to me like we don't need to worry about it as a "main aspect", then. I'll take a last glance and presumably pass this later on this afternoon. Thanks for the quick response! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:37, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I added a bit from the last article, which is good - essentially these researchers isolated a β-glucan which they called tylopilan and investigated for antitumor activity in the late 1970s. Nothing much has come from it since, and I recall a mention in a guidebook which I will chase. Thiking of the most accurate way of adding this info . I'll run it by Sasata (talk · contribs) too. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I've added a couple of sentences about other research studies cited to a secondary source. Am planning to add more details (and probably a couple additional studies) for FAC, but I don't have immediate access to the Acta Societatis Botanicorum Poloniae article that discusses anti-tumor activity. Thanks for the review, Khazar2! Sasata (talk) 14:55, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure! I swapped out "distinctness" for "distinction" in the new text, which appears to me more correct, but revert me if this is field-specific jargon or if I'm just plain wrong. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:30, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Right, judging by this page's summary, the antiinflammatory testing yielded indifferent results, and doesn't appear to have been followed up upon, so I don't feel unhappy if we don't get the fulltext of that one. The others predate the 1994 study included by the same author...Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:21, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

FAC prep

• need a page# for Laessoe T. (1998)
• Cas, if you have Phillips (2006), could you check to see if it confirms the odour is pleasant; then we could eliminate the use of Phillips (2005) (I imagine they say pretty much the same thing). If not, I think J Milburn has a copy.
• Alessio's bolete book (1986) covers this species in some detail. I'll add any missing details as I translate from Italian. Sasata (talk) 08:57, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Phillips 2006 says odour "slightly unpleasant" - p. 287. This book also likens the bitter taste to bile. I will check teh other guidebooks I have on smell - interesting......Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:10, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Lamaison (p.27) - says "faintly disagreeable odor" and likens taste to "gall" Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:13, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Persson says smell pleasant. Haas (p. 34) does not mention smell - says white cut flesh "looks very appetising". Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:16, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Zeitlmayr (p. 98) says skin off cap does not peel - says little smell. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Zeitlmayr also says taste "extremely bitter" and even licking cut surface enough to taste it. eewww

Carluccio does not mention smell.

I just found Simon and Shusters Guide to Mushrooms (N.Am) - odor insignificant Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:33, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Based on the above, I've added some bits and pieces. I can add the Simon and Schuster ref though that bit is somewhat densely cited now.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:45, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I am feeling pretty good about giving this a run at FAC now....I can't imagine there is much left out.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:08, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Good luck! -- Khazar2 (talk) 10:27, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm feeling pretty good about the article now too! Perhaps a slightly fatter lead and final copyedit/prose massage and we'll be good to go? Sasata (talk) 19:48, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Okay - have been made aware of a discussion at Talk:Artemisia_absinthium#WP:MEDRS_used_to_suppress_all_mention_of_ongoing_research and have added a secondary source to the research bit at the bottom. I'd probably not mention any of that in the lead as it seems to have come to a dead end..Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:10, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't think these instances are directly analogous. A. absinthium has been the subject of extensive research and there are 100's of primary research papers that discuss bioactive properties of isolated compounds found in it, and for this reason one shouldn't really discuss any metabolites in that article unless covered in a secondary source (otherwise would violate wp:weight). We don't have that situation here, as the few papers discussing secondary metabolites represent a far greater proportion of the available literature. That said, I think what's in the lead already adequately summarizes the research section. Sasata (talk) 01:33, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Cas, do you have Watling and Li's (1999) Australian Boletes. A Preliminary Survey? It would be good to mention Tylopilus brevisporus in "Similar species" with spore measurements (which I assume is the only reliable distinguishing feature?) Sasata (talk) 17:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Yup I do - gimme a sec. added Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:45, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

• Our coverage of European distribution is somewhat lacking; only France is currently mentioned (although Romania and E. Germany are mentioned in the Edibility section) ... will have a look around. Sasata (talk) 20:15, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
• Hmmm, the German article has some nice pics we should definitely "borrow"! Sasata (talk) 20:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

distributions are frustrating. I was also pondering southern Europe and beyond....agree about photos. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:21, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Thankfully, I was able to replace the French distribution with a similar statement about European distriburtion using the Alessio source. Sasata (talk) 19:48, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• this source claims there is a trace amount of muscimol in the fruit bodies, which would be good to add, but I don't recall seeing this written elsewhere. Keep on the lookout for confirmation. Sasata (talk) 08:10, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I've never seen anything on this....a few journals pop up on scholar when you use all the search terms. Have you chekced them yet or shall I....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:52, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I checked them, but didn't find find anything confirmatory. Sasata (talk) 19:48, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• Just heard of Tylopilus neofelleus, a Korean species. There's info available here if we can find someone to translate Korean. Sasata (talk) 08:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

• Found another source for this. Sasata (talk) 09:28, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

• Cas, do you have ref#30 (Laessoe 1998) – we need a page# Sasata (talk) 02:19, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't think I have that book - I think that fact should be in something else we do have with a page #. Will check in a few hours. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:16, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Damn - none of my books say "good drainage" or acid soils, though gravelly soil is almost by definition well drained - sigh. Need to sleep on this.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:07, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Let's not let this hold us up; I've just ordered this book from Amazon (well, the 2002 edition) and will be able to confirm the text & add the page number during the FAC. Sasata (talk) 06:22, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Done. Sasata (talk) 20:00, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

• Fruiting season: Can we simplify this to something like "Although the fruiting season extends from June to November, most fruit bodies are found from September to October."? Please check Zeitlmayr and see if this accurately reflects what he writes. Bessette et al. (2000) give "July to October"; Phillips (2010) says "June to October"; McKnight (1987) says "Common in summer and fall" as does Miller & Miller (2006). Maybe even just "The fruiting season extends from June to November. would be sufficient to cover the bases. Sasata (talk) 05:25, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry - been out all day and busy with houseguests into the wee hours last night. Will get onto this in a bit. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:27, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Exact wording from Zeitlmayr is - "It appears in the autumn, though sometimes earlier from (June) August to October (November), especially in wet years,..."

Distribution

Can the distribution be checked, please? The lead section says it grows in Northern Europe, but in fact it is much more spread. It is very common in the Czech Republic, which is definitely not in Northern Europe. Jan Kameníček (talk) 07:35, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the note; I have remove "Northern" from the lead. Sasata (talk) 16:15, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Last paragraph of "Taxonomy" section

I've noticed that the last paragraph of the "Taxonomy" section has no application to the taxonomy of the fungi species. I think it should either be incorporated into the lead or made into an "Etymology" section, since the first sentence is about etymology of the scientific name and the next sentence talks about the common names the species has. Gug01 (talk) 15:17, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Taxonomy is being used as an all-encompassing term for "Systematics, nomenclature, etymology". You might want to see previous discussion on this here. Sasata (talk) 16:05, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tylopilus felleus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402135450/http://tai2.ntu.edu.tw/taiwania/pdf/tai.2004.49.2.109.pdf to http://tai2.ntu.edu.tw/taiwania/pdf/tai.2004.49.2.109.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 20 May 2017 (UTC)