Talk:Agaricus bisporus

Name

Shouldn't this article be moved to Table mushroom? Supermarkets almost always label them as "table mushrooms". — Stevey7788 (talk) 20:58, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

"Table mushroom" seems somewhat ambiguous, conceivably taken to include edible mushrooms in general, and gets substantially fewer google hits than "button mushroom". — Pekinensis 01:29, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Merging

Portobello mushrooms are actually considerably larger than the common small white mushrooms you see in supermarkets. The Portobellos I've seen are generally 4" to 6" and brownish in colour. They also are much more flavorful than the standard "button" mushrooms you seem to be referring to... Kris Wood 08:37, 1 August 2005

Hmmm that's odd, the link I clicked for discuss was on the Portobello mushroom article, and was referring the merging of that article with button mushroom. While it may be a subspecies, it does have distinct differences and that's what I was referring to above, just didn't want anyone wondering why I was rambling about portobellos in the button discussion. :) Kris Wood 08:42, 1 August 2005

Yes, the {{mergeto}} and {{mergefrom}} templates are set up to concentrate discussion on the page of the target article. When I put the tag there, I probably should have started the discussion here to avoid confusion. Sorry about that.

My feeling is that vegetable varieties usually don't need separate articles, unless and until there is a lot of material on the variety. The wiki is plastic enough that this is not a decision for all time, and can be made on the basis of how much material there is now, rather than how much material there may be in the future. For example, broccoli, cabbage, kale, and so on get their own articles, while pinto bean, kidney bean, navy bean, and so on are treated in subsections of common bean.

— Pekinensis 16:00, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, perhaps something like the german version of this article. It seems to discuss the different varieties of button mushrooms with images to further illustrate the differences. Kris Wood 15:12, 2 August 2005

I've done the merge. Pictures would be nice, although I believe that de:Champignons treats the whole genus, and the large brown mushrooms shown there are A. silvaticus. I've moved the interwiki link to Agaricus. — Pekinensis 22:47, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

carcinogenic ?

just heard from mycologist Paul Stamets that a lot of the worlds experts think that button (and portobello) mushrooms are highly carcinogenic while being digested. This would be big news to me, but i'm no expert so i thought i'd bring it up in the discussions first before posting it on the real page.

— Tom Schuring 22 November 2006 09:16(+10)

Um.. I do you mean anti-carcinogenic? [[1]]

Would be good to see a reference for this. It is a pretty big claim to put on the page without some backup cheers,Cas Liber 22:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

i'm sure he says carcinogenic (i fixed the spelling :) in this interview: http://www.dhlovelife.com/video/Vlog_24_FunGuy.mov with paul at 6:30 he says: "button mushrooms are thought, by many experts, to be highly carcinogenic when they are digested, which can cause tumors and abnormal cell-divisions. it's a unique chemical that is in button mushrooms and portobellos. they are very much analogous to smoking a cigarette, except the 'accarotene's (?) cause tumors all over your body as opposed to just in your lungs.

— Tom Schuring 22 November 2006 03:17(UTC)

Wow - watched the vid and then followed a few google links. Found a lively discussion here half way down the page.

[[2]]

Ultimately it is tricky to convert in vitro evidence to real life but it is worth a mention. Just a question over how to phrase it.......Cas Liber 04:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

How about something like ? :

Toxicity

Button Mushrooms as all Mushrooms of the Genus Agaricus have been found to contain levels of Agaritine which will metabolize into Hydrazine, a well known Carcinogen. [[3]][[4]]

or should it be placed in Agaricus then ? I'm just worried that nobody will see it there. most people actually eat button-mushrooms.

— Tom Schuring 22 November 2006 22:44(UTC)

True - I think the best place is on the button mushroom page - I'd use a heading 'agaritine' and emphasise that the levels of compound are very low - have to be careful how this is worded. cheers Cas Liber 09:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Proposed move to Cultivated mushroom

When I was a kid we always called A. bisporus the Cultivated mushroom. It is also the recommended common name on the British Mycological Society site here:

[5]

thus I feel the page should be moved there as Button mushroom and Portobello mushroom are names for two different stages of growth they are sold at. Cas Liber 12:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I tried a google test, and "button mushroom" has more than twice as many hits as "cultivated mushroom" (91,300 vs. 41,700). Per WP:COMMONNAME, this would seem to indicate against the proposed move. -GTBacchus^(talk) 06:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Problem is the term 'Button mushroom' is only the term for the little immature forms sold in shops. Thus, a portobello mushroom is not a button mushroom nor vice versa, yet both are different stages of Cultivated mushroom. cheers Cas Liber 06:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

An analogy is lamb i.e. immature sheep meat, which redirects to domestic sheep. cheers Cas Liber 06:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thank you for explaining that. Now I agree with the move request. -GTBacchus^(talk) 07:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose move to a regional, and more importantly, highly ambiguous name. Good grief, the article itself says (emphasis added), that this is "one of the most widely cultivated mushrooms in the world.". A move to Agaricus bisporus would be a much more sensible one, and include all growth stages there. The ambiguity of the proposed name is especially important in light of the initial capitalization being turned on in Wikipedia. Gene Nygaard 01:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd actually prefer it on Agaricus bisporus myself. I didn't nominate that as it is widely cultivated. Cas Liber 06:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The shiitake is also a "cultivated mushroom", as opposed to that same species for which "some documents record the uncultivated mushroom being eaten as early as 199 A.D". And Volvariella: "Mushrooms of the genus Volvariella account for 16% of total production of cultivated mushrooms in the world." And Enokitake: "There is a significant difference in appearance between the wild and the cultivated mushrooms." Gene Nygaard 15:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, shall we move it to Agaricus bisporus instead then? We could withdraw this move request and set up another one, or we could just be bold and do it. Opinions? -GTBacchus^(talk) 19:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Since it is on requested moves, let it sit for about five days, in case anybody has a better idea. Then that would be fine with me, and apparently the two of you as well, so if nothing changes do it then.

If that move to the scientific name is done, it is important for at least Category:Edible mushrooms that the main redirects from common names (Button, Portobello, etc.) be categorized as well. If nothing has changed recently, when categorizing redirects it is important to put the categories on the same logical line as the redirect itself (otherwise it can cause some problems; IIRC, it might mess up the categorization of the main article if they are put on separate lines). Gene Nygaard 19:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose also. "Cultivated mushroom" is way too ambiguous – there are a number of "cultivated mushroom" species. The title should either remain "Button mushroom" or be moved to "Agaricus bisporus" (of course, that brings up the whole kettle of fish as to whether Agaricus bisporus or Agaricus brunnescens takes priority as the name of this species). This article is about a single species, hence, making its scientific name the title might be warranted. On the other hand, its an agricultural crop, and Wikipedia puts article titles about crops under common names. Then again, is there a widely agreed upon common name for this crop other than "mushroom"? Ultimately, Agaricus bisporus might be the least ambiguous. Peter G Werner 05:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Champignon is the other likely possibility, much more common in American English at least when referring to this specific species. Why in the world is that name relegated to the third paragraph in the article as it stands now? It isn't called "champignon de Paris" in English, and that's in the opening paragraph. They should be flipped. Who cares if it might be more ambiguous in French; so is tonne, the French word for a short ton or a long ton as well as a metric ton, distinguished in French with French adjectives if necessary. Gene Nygaard 08:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

that word I'd associate more with Marasmius oreades though...Cas Liber 09:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose the proposed move, per reasons stated above. The phrase "button mushroom" is in far wider use. Johnashby 15:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

OK - I'm pulling the plug on this move and proposing a move to the scientific name instead Cas Liber 21:56, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus^(talk) 02:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Button mushroom → Agaricus bisporus — Button mushroom is the name of an immature stage and theoretically can be applied to any immature mushroom. In shops, Button mushroom, Portobello and Crimini (all mutually exclusive) all apply to this species. It otherwise has no universally accepted common name. Cas Liber 22:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

Survey - Support votes

1. Cas Liber 22:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Peter G Werner 08:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Support It sounds like this is a more appropriate name for the article.Zeus1234 04:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Survey - Oppose votes

Discussion

Add any additional comments:

Assuming this move passes, should button mushroom, portobello mushroom, &c. have their own sub-articles (at least for culinary reasons) or is this content forking? —  AjaxSmack  00:06, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I would think that all could be discussed on the one article really under subheadings. We can always make links ot the subheaings directly where mentioned on other pages Cas Liber 06:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

In spite of the fact that its an agricultural crop, I think its best titled under its scientific name, Agaricus bisporus, since it really doesn't have a clearly established, unambiguous common name. (Note that there has been some debate in the past as to whether Agaricus brunnescens was the name that took priority – in theory it does, if it really refers to the same mushroom. The type specimen of A. brunnescens is in a poor state of preservation, hence, it hasn't been widely accepted that the name demonstrably refers to the same mushroom, so A. bisporus is by far the most commonly used name.) Peter G Werner 08:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.