Agaricus sp.

• Add to collection

What features would help identify species? Or does that require microscopic examination?

There’s a bit of personal bias here and a confession: I could never get greatly enthused about the genus. Years ago I did read what I could find and had a go at identifying specimens I’d collected. I found that, often enough, I’d come to a conclusion such as “well, it looks much like species X, but it doesn’t seem quite right”. Various overseas species’ names have long been in use in Australia and some introduced or naturally cosmopolitan species are probably here but it’s also likely that we have native species that are macroscopically similar to some overseas species. It’s happened with other genera. So I gave up bothering to identify an Agaricus to species. I’d collect them at times, make the necessary notes and lodge the specimens in the herbarium, waiting until Agaricus in Australia was researched. Then I’d look at those collections again – and it’s why I just say Agaricus sp. on Canberra Nature Map. Amelia-Grace Boxshall in Adelaide has been doing that research and I highly recommend an interim product, the well-illustrated fold-out chart titled “South Eastern Australian field mushrooms : a glimpse at Agaricus” by Teresa Lebel and Amelia-Grace Boxshall, published in 2024. The chart shows some formal species but, pending formal naming, you can also see a temporary name such as Agaricus sp. ‘funky white’ or ‘Agaricus arvensis group’ (which suggests that there are two or more arvensis-like species, not necessarily easy to tell apart). When everything is finalised it will be interesting to see which Agaricus species are easy to identify and which demand a microscopic look.

Thanks @Heinol for your reply. I will continue recording fungi that are new to me or in new places, and hope they make a useful contribution. I wonder about the identification skills of some of the foragers in the local pine forest though they probably stick to a couple of tried and true species.