>>2181885Don't use shroomify or those other garbage apps
Audubon guide or Michael's kuo book; plus a good local guide are much better.
Shroomify is garbage because it's no better than using a guidebook, and it presents the most popular mushrooms first so you run into a bias of trying to match your mushroom to the picture, rather than finding a picture that matches your mushroom.
If you really have no clue what something is,
https://fungusid.com/ is a good website to get a starting idea, then look it up in the audubon book or Michael Kuo's website after that.
The algo and machine learning inputs on fugusid is much better than those other garbage apps that source input data from google images pictures. People mislabel and misidentify shit all the time on dedicated apps lke inaturalist, so i wouldn't trust an algorithm that farms inputs from google image searches.
>Do you guys have a process for testing if you aren't 100% sure on species before waffling down a mouthfull?yeah read the OP and lurk moar on /myco/
>pictures of the underside>where they were found (part of the country, on wood/ground, what kind of tree)>a cross section with the color of the flesh>spore printis enough to identify 90% of *common* edible mushrooms.
I would add smell as a test for chanterelles (apricot) and oysters (fish or aniseed) if your goal is edible mushrooms.
There's also taste test for certain species (bitter vs bay bolete; lactarius) but aren't beginner mushrooms, and the taste test is for finer identification between exact species that have have other ID features to go off first.
The last 10% is for advanced cases (boletes needing Iron salts/ Potassium hydroxied / checmical tests test; Meixner test for amatoxins) and you shouldn't be eating those mushrooms anyways if you don't know what you're doing.
