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

Podostroma

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 revisionDec 6, 2025
Entity authorityQ7207078 ↗
Source-derived summary

Podostroma is a genus of fungi in the family Hypocreaceae, circumscribed by the Finnish mycologist Petter Karsten in 1892 and containing eleven species (at least one being highly toxic) with a widespread distribution.

Species

P. africanum

P. alutaceum

P. brevipes

P. cordyceps

P. cornu-damae

P. daisenense

P. eperuae

P. giganteum

P. grossum

P. solmsii

P. zeylanicum

References

External links

Podostroma in Index Fungorum.

Editorial summary

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

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1892—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Podostroma, 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 “Podostroma”, the useful work is to connect “genus of fungi” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 6, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q7207078. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1892.

Critical limits

A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. 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 “Podostroma”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Podostroma primary sources, Podostroma archive and Podostroma 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 “Podostroma”?
  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 “Podostroma” 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.