Talk:Psilocybe fagicola

Classification as Strophariaceae
According to the Wikipedia article "Psilocybe", as of 2010 all species considered to be part of the genus Psilocybe are now placed in the family Hymenogastraceae, not Strophariaceae as this species is listed. Therefore, unless I'm missing something, this species can not be considered both part of the Psilocybe genus and part of the Strophariaceae family; either it's no longer technically a Psilocybe (probably placing it in Deconica), or it's actually part of the Hymenogastraceae family.

I won't amend the article because I'm not sure which of these inconsistencies is the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salanc (talk • contribs) 05:48, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a true Psilocybe species. The inconsistency here is just due to the taxonomy of this group being a mess. This was formerly placed in the Strophariaceae but was found (not this specific Psilocybe but the genus Psilocybe under the current definition) to be more closely related to Hymenogaster, making it a member of the Hymenogastraceae. In order for Strophariaceae to be monophyletic it needed to exclude the Hymenogastraceae and all genera basal to Strophariaceae+Hymenogastraceae, so there are currently a few genera without a family due to this. Different cladisitic analyses have also produced very different results for this group so it's a bit of a mess there too. I changed the family here though. Dgrootmyers (talk) 07:29, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

"Psilocybe fagicola complex"
Various other articles refer to this article with "It is in the Psilocybe fagicola complex with Psilocybe fagicola, Psilocybe oaxacana, Psilocybe banderillensis, Psilocybe herrerae, Psilocybe keralensis, Psilocybe neoxalapensis, and Psilocybe teofiloi.<.ref name=Guzman2012 /. >" Problem is; that "complex" is not explained on this page and the given reference is not accessible. What does this "complex" mean and can it be included in this page or if it's big enough in a new article? Tisquesusa (talk) 05:31, 1 March 2017 (UTC)