See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349123180 Reviewing the World's Edible Mushroom Species: A New Evidence- Based Classification System Preprint in Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety · February 2021 DOI: 10.1111/1541-4337.12708 CITATIONS READS 10 3,017 24 authors, including: Huili Li Nelson Menolli Jr. Mae Fah Luang University Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of São Paulo 17 PUBLICATIONS 149 CITATIONS 42 PUBLICATIONS 653 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Samantha C. Karunarathna Jesus Perez Centre for Mountain Futures (CMF), Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academ… Colegio de Postgraduados 307 PUBLICATIONS 4,878 CITATIONS 119 PUBLICATIONS 2,810 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Special Issue "The Hidden Fungal Diversity in Asia" https://www.mdpi.com/journal/diversity/special_issues/Fun_Asia View project Taxonomic systematics and biogeography of microfungi in Yunnan View project All content following this page was uploaded by Eric Boa on 19 February 2021. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Authors’ note This is an independently produced facsimile of a peer-reviewed journal article. Tables and figures appear after the main text. The facsimile has been formatted by Eric Boa and contains the same text, tables and references as the journal version. The facsimile includes colour photographs absent from the journal paper. The photograph below is from a market stall at the main railway station in Tallin, Estonia. COMPREHENSIVE REVIEWS IN FOOD SCIENCE AND FOOD SAFETY (2021) Reviewing the World’s Edible Mushroom Species: A New Evidence- Based Classification System COMPREHENSIVE REVIEWS IN FOOD SCIENCE AND FOOD SAFETY (2021) Reviewing the world’s edible mushroom species: A new evidence-based classification system Reviewing the world’s edible mushroom species: A new evidence-based classification system Huili Li 1,2,3 Yang Tian 4 Nelson Menolli Jr 5,6 Lei Ye 1,2,3 Samantha C. Karunarathna 1,2,3 Jesus Pérez-Moreno 7 Mohammad Mahmudur Rahman 8 Md Harunur Rashid 8 Pheng Phengsintham 9 Leela Rizal 10 Taiga Kasuya 11 Young Woon Lim 12 Arun Kumar Dutta 13 Abdul Nasir Khalid 14 Le Thanh Huyen 15 Marilen Parungao Balolong 16 Gautam Baruah 17 H.M.S.P. Madawala 18 Naritsada Thongklang 19,20 Kevin D. Hyde 19,20,21 Paul M. Kirk 22 Jianchu Xu 1,2,3 Jun Sheng 23 Eric Boa 24 Peter E. Mortimer 1,3 1 CAS Key Laboratory for Plant Diversity and Biogeography of East 12 School of Biological Sciences and Institute of Microbiology, Seoul Asia, Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, National University, Seoul, Korea Kunming, Yunnan, China 13 Department of Botany, West Bengal State University, Barasat, 2 East and Central Asia Regional Office, World Agroforestry Centre West Bengal, India (ICRAF), Kunming, Yunnan, China 14 Department of Botany, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan 3 Centre for Mountain Futures, Kunming Institute of Botany, 15 Department of Toxicology and Environmental Monitoring, Kunming, Yunnan, China Faculty of Environment, Hanoi University of Natural Resources and 4 College of Food Science and Technology, Yunnan Agricultural Environment, Tu Liem North District, Hanoi, Vietnam University, Kunming, Yunnan, China 16 Department of Biology, College of Arts and Sciences, University 5 Núcleo de Pesquisa em Micologia, Instituto de Botanica, Sao of the Philippines, Manila, the Philippines Paulo, Brazil 17 Balipara Tract and Frontier Foundation, Guwahati, Assam, India 6 Departamento de Ciencias da Natureza e Matematica (DCM), 18 Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, University of Subarea de Biologia (SAB), Instituto Federal de Educaçao, Ciencia e Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka Tecnologia de Sao Paulo (IFSP), Sao Paulo, Brazil 19 Center of Excellence in Fungal Research, Mae Fah Luang 7 Colegio de Postgraduados, Campus Montecillo, Texcoco, México University, Chiang Rai, Thailand 8 Global Centre for Environmental Remediation (GCER), Faculty of 20 School of Science, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, Science, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Thailand Australia 21 Mushroom Research Foundation, Chiang Mai, Thailand 9 Biology Department, National University of Laos, Lao PDR 22 Biodiversity Informatics and Spatial Analysis, Jodrell Laboratory, 10 The University of Queensland School of Biological Sciences, Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Surrey, UK Brisbane, Queensland, Australia 23 Key Laboratory for Agro-biodiversity and Pest Control of Ministry 11 Department of Biology, Keio University, Yokohama, Kanagawa, of Education, Yunnan Agricultural University, Kunming, China Japan 24 Institute of Biology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK Correspondence Peter E. Mortimer, Centre for Mountain Futures, Kunming Institute of Botany, Kunming 650201,Yunnan, China Email: [email protected] Received: 5 September 2020 Revised: 4 December 2020 Accepted: 21 December 2020 How to cite this article: Li H, Tian Y, Menolli N, et al. Reviewing the world’s edible mushroom species: A new evidence-based classification system. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety. 2021; xx -xx. COMPREHENSIVE REVIEWS IN FOOD SCIENCE AND FOOD SAFETY (2021) Reviewing the world’s edible mushroom species: A new evidence-based classification system Abstract Wild mushrooms are a vital source of income and nutrition for many poor communities and of value to recreational foragers. Literature relating to the edibility of mushroom species continues to expand, driven by an increasing demand for wild mushrooms, a wider interest in foraging, and the study of traditional foods. Although numerous case reports have been published on edible mushrooms, doubt and confusion persist regarding which species are safe and suitable to consume. Case reports often differ, and the evidence supporting the stated properties of mushrooms can be incomplete or ambiguous. The need for greater clarity on edible species is further underlined by increases in mushroom-related poisonings. We propose a system for categorizing mushroom species and assigning a final edibility status. Using this system, we reviewed 2,786 mushroom species from 99 countries, accessing 9,783 case reports, from over 1,100 sources. We identified 2,189 edible species, of which 2,006 can be consumed safely, and a further 183 species which required some form of pretreatment prior to safe consumption or were associated with allergic reactions by some. We identified 471 species of uncertain edibility because of missing or incomplete evidence of consumption, and 76 unconfirmed species because of unresolved, differing opinions on edibility and toxicity. This is the most comprehensive list of edible mushrooms available to date, demonstrating the huge number of mushrooms species consumed. Our review highlights the need for further information on uncertain and clash species, and the need to present evidence in a clear, unambiguous, and consistent manner. KEYWORDS edibility, foraging, mycology, poisonous mushrooms, wild foods 1 INTRODUCTION continue to document which species are considered edible and poisonous. Notable examples by region The earliest reports of mushroom consumption are include Africa (Buyck, 2008; Buyck & Nzigidahera, from Spain (18,700 years ago), China (5,000 to 6,000 1995; Degreef et al. 1997; Morris, 1984; Pegler & years ago), and Egypt (4,600 years ago) (Chang, 2006; Piearce, 1980), Asia (Brown, 2019; Chamberlain, Power et al., 2015; Straus et al., 2015; Zhang, et al., 1996; Fui et al., 2018; Kang et al., 2016; Kumar et al. 2015). The exact process by which early humans 2017), Europe (Cai et al., 2011; Kasper-Pakosz, et al., identified edible mushroom species—those that were 2016; Łuczaj et al., 2015; Pieroni et al., 2005), safe and suitable to eat—is unclear, but there is little Australia (Kalotas, 1997), North America (Álvarez- doubt it was by trial and error, a common approach Farias et al., 2016; de Avila et al., 1980; Garibay-Orijel used for wild plants and other living things that were et al., 2020; Ruan- Soto, 2018), Central America hunted or gathered for food. Small amounts were (Guzmán, 2001b; Morales et al., 2010), and South tentatively tasted, before smell, texture, and lack of any America (Fidalgo & Prance, 1976; Gamboa-Trujillo et adverse reaction decided which mushrooms could be al., 2019; Sanuma et al., 2016; Vasco-Palacios et al., eaten. Other species were either ignored because they 2008). An increasing knowledge of how mushrooms lacked taste or were difficult to digest, or actively grow has led to the cultivation of over 90 species (Boa, avoided because they were toxic. The “Universal 2004), of which around 30 are grown commercially for Edibility Test” published in the US Army Survival food and consumed widely (Chang & Miles, 2004). Manual FM 21–76 is a modern version of this process (Survival Use of Plants, 2020). The introduction of The remaining cultivated species are grown for cooking (Yang et al. 2019) expanded what plants and medicinal purposes (Lu et al., 2020; Ma et al., 2018; mushrooms were “safe and suitable” to consume, Roncero-Ramos & Delgado-Andrade, 2017; Yang et through softening of tissues and detoxification. As al., 2019), as functional foods (Jabłońska-Ryś et al., Arora (1986) points out: “The only way to determine 2019; Reis et al., 2017) and extracts used as food the edibility of a mushroom is to eat it.” additives (Hadar & Dosoretz,