

They sound absolutely fantastic:


They sound absolutely fantastic:
It’s more boreal in distribution, so you might be a tad too far south. Usually it grows in bogs and heathlands. You can check iNaturalist for a map and to see if it’s been reported near you:


Don’t all the big publishers do this though, or is Elsevier especially bad?
This is really bugging me. The article claims the fungus is an edible mushroom, but Pestalotiopsis (the spores on the right) is an endophytic, microscopic ascomycete. Not a mushroom and certainly not edible. So why is there a picture of Pluteus on the left? I can only imagine the author googled “Pestalotiopsis mushroom” and grabbed the first picture that came up.
Complaining about the neighbours maybe? They sure have a lot of them.