CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Quatsinoporites

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 revisionAug 12, 2026
Entity authorityQ21078852 ↗
Source-derived summary

Quatsinoporites is an extinct monotypic genus of agaricomycete fungus in the Agaricomycetes family Hymenochaetaceae. At present it contains the single species Quatsinoporites cranhamii.

The genus is solely known from the Barremian aged, Apple Bay deposits of northwestern Vancouver Island. Quatsinoporites is one of only three known fossil fungus species found on Vancouver Island and the only to be described from the Apple Bay strata. The agaricomycete Appianoporites vancouverensis was described from an Eocene fossil at the same time as Quatsinoporites , while a third fungus, Margaretbarromyces dictyosporus, was described three years later.

History and classification

The genus is known only from the single holotype, a partial bracket fungus fruiting body, or "conk." The specimen, P13021 E, is currently residing in the paleobotanical collections housed by the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. The specimen was collected in Apple Bay, near Quatsino Sound on the northwestern shore of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. The partial conk was preserved in a calcareous nodule recovered from a Greywacke sandstone matrix equivalent in age to the Longarm Formation. The nodules formed in a shallow marine environment along with abundant plant material.

It was first studied by a group of researchers consisting of Selena Smith, Randolph Currah and Ruth Stockey, all from the University of Alberta.

Editorial summary

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

Editorial reviewUseful for establishing the present vocabulary of the subject while preserving a route back to the evidence on which that vocabulary rests. The current 211-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 Quatsinoporites, 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 “Quatsinoporites”, 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 Aug 12, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q21078852. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

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 “Quatsinoporites”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Quatsinoporites primary sources, Quatsinoporites archive and Quatsinoporites 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 “Quatsinoporites”?
  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 “Quatsinoporites” 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.