Talk:Hydnum repandum

Amino Acid Profile
I corrected the amino acid profile, based on the reference but this was reverted with no comment by Sasata who disliked the "bulky table" and then reintroduced one of my corrections partially, and in his own format.

The table makes it easier to see the values for each amino acid. In contrast, separating them with a mixture of commas and semicolons is harder to read making it easier for errors to go overlooked.

But when dealing with data, it is very important to get the correct numbers. Read the actual study tables; don't just delete the corrections I made and revert to the old, wrong values. Do we really need an edit war here? I think you should undo your last commit and instead bring the issue on this talk page. Thank you. Xkit (talk) 21:23, 22 September 2015 (UTC) Comment moved from Talk:Hydnum repandum/GA1. Josh Milburn (talk) 22:30, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Does this clarify things? Sasata (talk) 22:47, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * According to table 3, H. repandum's lysine content is 4.2%; the article says 4.3%.


 * But intraspecies protein variability can occur for mushrooms. "Crude protein variability within a species can be seen not only in Table 2, but also in values of Table 1 reported by different laboratories…" [Kalač]. Thank you.Xkit (talk) 06:20, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

initials
The author initials in the references are not treated consistently as they should be in an FA. Spicemix (talk) 09:02, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Found in North America
I have reinstated the content which states this fungus is found in North and Central America. The following sources all state that this fungus is commonly found in North America.


 * Yes agreed. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:56, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Not found in North America
Hydnum repandum does not occur in North America. Of the four references above which say that it does, all rely on outdated information. The first is current as of 2016, and cites the following evidence that Hydnum repandum occurs in North America: "However, evidence from root tips of Pinus muricata (Fig. 1, GU180269) indicated that H. repandum occurs in western North America."

Niskanen et. al. 2018 (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00275514.2018.1477004) published this species as Hydnum neorepandum, citing GU180269 as one of the studied sequences. This paper also designated an epitype for Hydnum repandum, NR_164553. This sequence does not match GU180269.

The species referenced by GU180269 is now known as Hydnum washingtonianum, per http://mathenylab.utk.edu/Site/Publications_files/Swenie_Hydnum_easternNA_taxonomy.2018.pdf.

Regarding the distribution of the real H. repandum, the most recent and reliable source, Niskanen 2018 says "Ecology and distribution: In Picea abies–dominated forests mixed with Betula, Pinus, Populus, Corylus, and/ or Quercus. Also in Abies and Fagus forests. Producing basidiomata late summer to late autumn. Europe. One sequence (JQ063050) from an ectomycorrhizal root tip of Pakaraimaea dipterocarpacea in Venezuela deposited in GenBank requires further confirmation given its extralimital distribution and host plant data."

The phylogenetic tree on page 4 of Niskanen 2018 shows the true distribution of Hydnum repandum.

All available DNA evidence in Genbank agrees with Nisnanen's 2018 conclusions about the distribution of Hydnum repandum.

See also https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30215579/

Alan Rockefeller (Talk - contribs) 06:38, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * We will need to review the other sources and if this is accurate, identify the mushrooms being sold in Canada as this new species. This one is a tough call, but you have convinced me.  Please feel free to rework those sections of the article to reflect these new studies.  Thanks. Octoberwoodland (talk) 20:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)