Stachybotrys chartarum
species of fungus
Stachybotrys chartarum ( STAK-ih-BOT-ris char-TAIR-əm), commonly named black mold, is a species of fungus that produces conidia.
Taxonomy
The fungus was originally described scientifically in 1818 by Christian Gottfried Ehrenberg as a member of the genus Stilbospora. His diagnosis emphasized the form of the spores, which he described as minute, sub-opaque, ovate, and agglomerated into subconcentric, water-soluble irregular clusters. He noted that the fungus adheres to paper, sometimes forming circles dotted with black. Stanley Hughes transferred the taxon to Stachybotrys in 1958. This genus was circumscribed in 1832 by Czech mycologist August Carl Joseph Corda, with Stachybotrys atra assigned as its type species. The species concept of Stachybotrys chartarum has been controversial, as several studies showed that there were several closely related species and cryptic species all under this name.
There are two chemotypes known of S. chartarum, one that produces satratoxin H and one that produces atranones.
Habitat
S. chartarum is a slow-growing mold that does not compete well with other molds. It is only rarely found in nature, sometimes being found in soil and grain, but is most often detected in cellulose-rich building materials, such as gypsum-based drywall and wallpaper from damp or water-damaged buildings.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Stachybotrys chartarum” as species of fungus. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of fungus. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 10, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2069249. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1818, 1958 and 1832.
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.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Stachybotrys chartarum”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Stachybotrys chartarum primary sources, Stachybotrys chartarum archive and Stachybotrys research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Stachybotrys chartarum”?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Stachybotrys chartarum” 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.