[Reprint from Yearbook of Department of Agriculture for 1897.] 



SOME EDIBLE AND POISONOUS FIINOI. 



By Dr. W. G. Farlow, 

 Professor of CryiAogamic Botany, Harvard University. 



INTRODUCTION. 



In the i:)resent paper an attemi)t is made to present, in as simple a 

 manner as the subject permits, the characteristics of a few of our 

 most common fungi, together with notes on poisonous species which 

 might be mistaken for the edible by those who have not studied fungi. 

 It may be called a first lesson in distinguishing edible and poisonous 

 fungi, and is not intended as a guide to those who are to a certain 

 extent already familiar with the subject, but merely as a primer for 

 those who do not recognize even our commonest species, but who 

 desire to enroll themselves among the increasing ranks of fungus eat- 

 ers, or, to use a rather high-sounding word, mycophagists. 



The question which everyone asks first is, How can you tell a mush- 

 room from a toadstool ? This is one of the questions which no one 

 can answer, unless an explanation of why the question should never 

 be asked may be considered an answer. You can not tell a mush- 

 room from a toadstool because mushrooms are toadstools. The 

 reason wh}^ the question is so frequently asked is because the belief 

 is well-nigh universal in this countrj^ that the fleshy umbrella-shaped 

 fungi are divided into two classes — mushrooms, which are edible, and 

 toadstools, which are poisonous. This assumed diiference does not in 

 fact exist. All the fleshy umbrella-shaped fungi are toadstools, and 

 to a small number of the best-known edible forms the name mushroom 

 is applied popularly and in commerce ; but not a small number of the 

 other toadstools are edible, and a great many of them, probably the 

 most of them, are not poisonous. 



The question that people really wish to have answered is not how 

 can you tell a mushroom from a toadstool, but how can you tell an 

 edible fungus from a poisonous fungus. Our knowledge on this point 

 is empirical. We know that certain species are edible and others are 

 poisonous, because people have eaten the former and found them to 

 be good, while the latter have produced unxjleasant symptoms and 

 even death. But the number of species which have been eaten or 

 experimented with is small compared with the whole number of spe- 

 cies of toadstools, and with regard to the species which have not been 

 tried exiieriinentally or accidentally we can only say that they are 

 probably edible or poisonous, judging by their resemblance to other 

 species known to be such. Although, in the absence of experience, 

 analogy is the only guide, it is not a sure guide, and unpleasant sur- 

 prises may arise. 



453 



