Talk:Agaricales

Fungi: Lichens High‑importance

	Fungi portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Lichen task force (assessed as High-importance).

Untitled

Removed several families from the list:

Auriscalpiaceae Favolaschiaceae Hericiaceae Meruliaceae Stereaceae

These are families of corticioid, polypore, jelly fungi, etc and have never been treated as members of the Agaricales. I also removed these two:

Omphalotaceae Russulaceae

Recent molecular work places these in the Boletales and Russulales, respectively.

Peter Werner - June 20, 2005

My mistake concerning the Omphalotaceae. I've replaced it in the taxobox, along with some other Tricholomataceae segregates. Peter G Werner 22:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agaric

I just created the article Agaric, not realizing that this article already existed. Agaric should be merged to here, or removed and replaced with a redirect to here, by someone who knows more about it than I do. -- Dominus 04:41, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It also looks like someone should do the same for agaricus. -- Dominus 04:44, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly if Agaric is intended to cover the genus, then it should be merged into Agaricus, but merging the genus into the order seems a bit radical. — Pekinensis 22:59, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RJFJR has merged Agaric and Agaricus. I have removed the merge tags from this article. — Pekinensis 21:02, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy

Which is right classification, this article or http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Agaricales? Neither have any sources. — linnea (talk) 13:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revision of entire page

I will be doing a total revision some time in the near future.Heliocybe 14:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still intend to return here to rewrite all of this. Much of the information is incorrect because it is outdated. However, time commitments have only permitted me to touch it up for now. Heliocybe 14:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. I'll help if I can cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lycoperdaceae

These are the "true" puffballs, but they no longer stand alone as a family. The group is embedded within the family Agaricaceae. Heliocybe 11:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy reference

A good reference for taxonomy of this order is Jacob Kalichman's agaric.us website available here https://agaric.us/

It has a lot of information on family placements, incertae sedis genera, and taxonomic literature. This is continuously updated and could be used to improve this page. Dgrootmyers (talk) 20:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]