Talk:Russula firmula

Species type

@Quisqualis: I had changed the nature of the species from "fungus" to "mushroom" to match the other Russula spp. pages, but I noticed you changed it to "mushroom-producing fungus." Is there something unique about this species that it cannot be called a mushroom?Would appreciate any clarity.Cheers -10:26, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I myself often hunt mushrooms, seldom thinking about the fact that a mushroom is just the ephemeral reproductive organ of the species underground. I prefer not to promote the ignorant point of view that a mushroom is the fungus, or is somehow independent of it, when the fungal species is a vast network of (often) subterranean mycelium which can live for years and organizes to produce fruiting bodies when conditions permit. Being a picky editor, I feel the urge to change those other Russula species articles to match the lead of R. firmula, but I don't expect you to do so. By the way, I copied that wording from some other Basidiomycete article; I don't remember which one.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:57, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Quisqualis: Ah I see where you are coming from. Is is strictly necessary to refer to a species of Russula as "mushroom-producing fungus" though? Like, can "mushroom" just be used to mean the same thing? I worry that it makes things unnecessarily confusing, especially to a lay reader, and just a quick glance at the reference list for the page on Russula shows academic papers that simply use "mushroom":

Takahashi A, Agatsuma T, Matsuda M, Ohta T, Nunozawa T, Endo T, Nozoe S (1992). "Russuphelin A, a new cytotoxic substance from the mushroom Russula subnigricans Hongo"

Zhang G, Sun, J, Wang H, Ng TB. (2010). "First isolation and characterization of a novel lectin with potent antitumor activity from a Russula mushroom".

Let me know what you think. - Cheers, Fredlesaltique (talk) 11:09, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Feel free to have R. firmula be a species of mushroom.--Quisqualis (talk) 09:50, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@Quisqualis: Just saw this will do. Thanks by the way, I learned way more about mushrooms than I expected. If the page on Mushrooms doesn't mention the whole fungus-mushroom-toadstool thing might help to put a blurb in. Cheers, Fredlesaltique (talk) 02:04, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

How about we run it by WikiProject:Mycology as a proposal and set it in concrete? I don't find the usage you suggest to be objectionable.--Quisqualis (talk) 14:43, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I think that would be best before editing all the Russula articles. I'll try to include you, but if you don't get a notification let me know (still figuring out editing language). Fredlesaltique (talk) 08:35, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Clearly mushroom gets used both narrowly for the fruiting body and more broadly to refer to the species in both common English and scientific works (albeit the example is a chemical work rather than a biological one). The meaning is usually apparent from the context. I think it more encyclopaedic to use "mushroom-producing fungus" when stating what a Russula species is. This is more accurate and unambiguous, so I'd favour that in the lede. It might also get the reader to ask what a mushroom is and help inform. On the other hand we shouldn't proscribe using mushroom in the broader sense elsewhere in the article. —  Jts1882 | talk  10:25, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Definitely would "vote" for this.--Quisqualis (talk) 09:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)