CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Mycogelidium

genus of fungi

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMay 18, 2026
Entity authorityQ6947132 ↗
Source-derived summary

Mycogelidium is a genus of fungi in the order Capnodiales. It contains the single species Mycogelidium sinense, described from China. The species was originally misinterpreted as a basidiomycete in the order Atractiellales and placed in its own family, the Mycogelidiaceae. Septate conidiophores were mistaken for auricularioid (laterally septate) basidia. The species is now considered to belong within the anamorphic Capnodiales (sooty moulds).

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Mycogelidium” as genus of fungi. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Mycogelidium, genus and fungi.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current 62-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Mycogelidium, genus and fungi providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Mycogelidium”, the useful work is to connect “genus of fungi” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 18, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q6947132. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Mycogelidium”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Mycogelidium primary sources, Mycogelidium archive and Mycogelidium research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Mycogelidium”?
  2. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Mycogelidium” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.