Edit: that's right folks, keep those downvotes coming for suggesting actually conserving something instead of exploiting it.
Edit: that's right folks, keep those downvotes coming for suggesting actually conserving something instead of exploiting it.
That sounds kind of like the opposite of how you'd want to slowly end up domesticating a lifeform, doesn't it?
A hundred years ago, there was enormous production of truffles (fungi with underground fruiting bodies) in Europe, but all of that production was lost when they fell out of favor. They are not the most nutritious use of the land, but lost none the less.
[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00063...
Digging them out and leaving the mycel exposed for examole, is bad. Cover them up again please.
And mushrooms need a lot of spores, because for a new mushroom, 2 spores have to come together by chance.
I honestly don’t know if harvesting them change much. ( bare of methodically harvesting everything over a season )
"In the wild, many trees depend on fire as a successful way to clear out the competition and release their seeds. In particular, the giant sequoia depends on fire to reproduce: the cones of the tree open after a fire releases their seeds, the fire having cleared all competing vegetation... Eucalyptus regnans or mountain ash of Australia also depends on fire but in a different fashion. They carry their seeds in capsules which can deposit at any time of the year. Being flammable, during a fire the capsules drop nearly all of their seeds and the fire consumes the eucalypt adults, but most of the seeds survive using the ash as a source of nutrients; at their rate of growth, they quickly dominate the land and a new eucalyptus forest grows."