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

Retiboletus

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 revisionJan 14, 2026
Entity authorityQ2065758 ↗
Source-derived summary

Retiboletus is a genus of fungi in the family Boletaceae. The genus, first described in 2002, contained six species distributed in north temperate regions.

Species

As of October 2023, Index Fungorum lists the following species:

References

External links

Retiboletus in Index Fungorum.

Editorial summary

“Retiboletus” enters the record as genus of fungi. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Retiboletus, genus and fungi can confirm, complicate or overturn.

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 lead gives the account dated anchors—2002, 2023—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Retiboletus, genus and fungi.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Retiboletus” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Retiboletus, genus and fungi provides the most credible route into that argument.

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 Jan 14, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2065758. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2002 and 2023.

Critical limits

Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. 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 “Retiboletus”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Retiboletus primary sources, Retiboletus archive and Retiboletus 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 “Retiboletus”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Retiboletus” 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.