Exclusions from County Database

[SheffieldLass]

Originally Posted by fairplay

I guess I was trying to be too much of a 'purist', but I have relented and decided to add ALL reports, whilst making it clear if the source was from a - hmmm..... what word do I use here ? garden, man made habitat ? artificial conditions ? Ahhhhhhh.

Neil.

'Garden' is one of the habitats listed on the BMS MycoRec database, as is 'greenhouse'..... A garden is no more artifical than arable land, possibly less so, or a pile of Picea wood chips on forestry commission land.

I get Hygrocybe conica on my lawn. I record that. Also all the other fungi that appear in my lawn, from Entoloma and Agrocybe to Galerina and Conocybe. Part of my lawn dates back to 1950, the other parts are very recent, were a vegetable plot for nearly 60 years, then grass seeded about 4 years ago. They were dotted with grassland fungi for many months last year. How they got there, who knows. They weren't on the adjacent bit of grass common land, which sports Hygrocybe laeta in their thousands but which hasn't shown in my garden yet (I live in hope ...). Also the recent Mycena silvae-nigrae that turned up on a rotten bit of old compost bin timber, at the same time that it was showing up on Picea stumps in the adjacent woods. And the Helvella crispa in my flower bed. Plus various rusts that appear on my plants, including fruit bushes, vegetables. I'd also record any fungi that grew on my imported logs stored for my wood burning stove. I'd record any that turned up on my imported manure heap ...

Some interesting fungi turn up in greenhouses. And then start to turn up outside greenhouses, like Peziza megalochondra.

I think about the only ones that don't need to be recorded are the fungi found on the vegetable shelves in Tesco, Sainsbury etc .

Melanie

[fairplay]

With respect Melanie, I think the lawn fungi you list which probably appear year after year, are a bit different to Morels which, when in association with woodchips or raised borders, disturbed soil,etc , only seem to appear just the once when the organic matter reaches a certain point of breakdown/decay.

Looking at the FRDBI, quite a few records are from woodchips/artificial habitats, so if Paul Kirk & Jerry Cooper are not concerned, then I certainly shouldn't be - but I still do have reservations.

Neil.

[fairplay]

I'm not too certain as to the exact requirements of Morchella spp. but in the case of M.esculenta it seems to like clayish soils with Ash (I think Fungi John finds his on sandy soil) but where they appear in 'garden habitats' I guess it is important they are recorded as it will show changing patterns.

But it is extremely important these garden habitats are made very clear in the records and that there is always going to be people prepared to analyse these records for changes taking place.

Woodchips are a relatively new phenomenom, but now are available in garden centres everywhere, but to me this shows how mans use of coppiced Ash woodlands are changing - if we no longer continue with these traditional practices the habitat changes, Morels in the 'wild' (careful what I say here as how did Morels manage before man started cutting down trees ?) will become more and more scarce and could be totally reliant on garden centres.

Neil.

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by RoyW

Although I have no experience at all of recording fungi (and apart from a few very obvious species wouldn't have a clue what I was looking at), I would have thought that it would make sense to record all of the examples mentioned in county databases - but with full details of the circumstances included with the record.. . . . . .

I agree 100% with the above; providing all the supporting details are included - there are a lot of UK records which were recorded first in the hothouses at Kew for example and they're all on the Kew List (and UK list) some have then gone on to appear "in the wild" see: First Peziza (for me). for example - you could argue that it was still on a man-made substrate (woodchip) and therefore query whether it was worth recording; but then, when with climate change or other factors, it started turning up on rotten logs you wouldn't have the "paper trail" of its appearance in the UK, à la Oxford Ragwort / spread of the railways story, and many others.

I don't know if it's still the case but among the flowering plants there are "wool aliens" introduced as part of the Scottish, Yorkshire, Bedfordshire etc. woollen industries which were only known under such circumstances - they had never ever been seen in the wild! Bird recorders will include species - often wildfowl - in their lists "with the escape proviso".

Perhaps the most convincing argument comes from the way in which a number of countries - New Zealand for example - are very hot on tracking any "newcomers"; to return to fungi, familiar species like Amanita muscaria behave like myco-weeds there, forming promiscuous mycorrhizas with a wide variety of trees and perhaps ousting native fungi in the process; see for example:

Our research: Environmental Biosafety - Biodiversity and Conservation

Biocontrol and Ecology of Weeds. Landcare Research - Manaaki Whenua

note the "we lack local information on the distribution and abundance of naturalised weed species, crop escapes, and crop-weed hybrids" . . . . if botanists were to say "ignore it it's just an introduced weed" . . . . need I go on?

So yes include the record with supporting details then future workers can include it or exclude it as suits their particular purposes. I agree that sometimes it seems a little strange to do so - viz. Loreleia postii (prev omphalina)? but in my opinion it's always a good idea to include such. Also - be grateful you've been sent the record.

None of the above is to suggest that Fairplay's initial thread/question is a foolish or flippant one - it does raise important issues and I think the general agreement voiced by respondents is gratifying.

cheers

Chris