Craterellus tubaeformis (formerly Cantharellus tubaeformis) is an edible fungus, also known as yellowfoot, winter mushroom, or funnel chanterelle. It is mycorrhizal, forming symbiotic associations with plants, making it very challenging to cultivate. It is smaller than the golden chanterelle (Cantharellus cibarius) and has a dark brown cap with paler gills and a hollow yellow stem. C. tubaeformis tastes stronger but less fruity than the golden chanterelle. It has a very distinctive smokey, peppery taste when raw. It grows in temperate and cold parts of Northern America and Europe, including Scandinavia, Finland, Russia, and the British Isles, as well as in the Himalayas in Asia, including Assam, in the central parts of the Indian subcontinent, and in Thailand. C. tubaeformis is a yellowish-brown and trumpet-shaped mushroom found in great numbers late in the mushroom season, thus earning the common name winter mushroom. The cap is convex and sometimes hollow down the middle. The gills are widely separated, and of lighter color than the cap. It grows on moss or rotten wood, and in Northern America it is found mostly in conifer bogs. It is an excellent food mushroom, especially fried or in soups, and is easily dried for preservation. Molecular phylogenetics has shown that C. tubaeformis deserves its reclassification from Cantharellus to Craterellus. Additionally, it appears that there are two distinct genetic populations that have traditionally been called tubaeformis: one in Europe and eastern North America, and another in western North America. If these two groups are defined as separate species, the "eastern" yellowfoot would retain the scientific epithet tubaeformis due to the origin of the type specimens in Sweden. The western North American C. tubaeformis has been shown to make ectomycorrhizal relationships with western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). It is also most common in forests with a large amount of well-rotted coarse woody debris.
No narrative description available for this taxon yet.
Compounds documented for Craterellus tubaeformis across natural-product and food-composition databases — not just the ~150 nutrients on a classic label ("nutritional dark matter").
A DNA barcode is a short, standardised stretch of genes that works like a fingerprint — enough to tell one species from another. Below is the molecular trace Craterellus tubaeformis has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens16
Marker genes2
eDNA detections1 897
Countries20
Marker genes sequenced
★ the standard DNA barcode for this group — the short region actually read to tell this species apart. The rest are extra genes sequenced along the way.
★ITS★ITS1
fungal barcode
08Occurrence & distribution
Record type29 376 records
Wild obs. + sensor27 840
Museum / vouchered1 463
Other73
Origin
Native9
Range
Area of Occupancy AOO56 852 km²
Wildobservation + sensor
Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.
Coordinate accuracy78% within 1 km
≤100 m 12 495≤1 km 6 899≤10 km 4 293>10 km 1 171
24 858 georeferenced · 2 982 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor27 840
Museum / Voucheredphysical evidence
Backed by a physical specimen — a herbarium sheet, sample or voucher held in a collection. “Vouchered” means supported by material evidence, not just an observation.
Coordinate accuracy63% within 1 km
≤100 m 68≤1 km 285≤10 km 187>10 km 16
556 georeferenced · 907 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence1 463
Wildobservation + sensor
Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.
10Collections & institutions
Holding institutions33 of 64 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
Helsinki, FI
242
Olocation not on record
103
Vancouver, CA
53
Toronto, CA
34
Oulu, FI
31
San Sebastián, ES
25
BDBClocation not on record
18
TROMlocation not on record
18
WTUlocation not on record
17
Chicago, US
17
Museo civico di Storia naturale Giacomo Doria di Genova | Giacomo Doria Natural History Museum in Genoalocation not on record
13
Université de Montréal Biodiversity Centrelocation not on record
12
University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)location not on record
12
Vitoria, ES
11
Kuopio, FI
11
SLU Artdatabankenlocation not on record
10
Copenhagen, DK
10
Philadelphia, US
9
Universidade de Lisboa, Museu Bocagelocation not on record
9
TENN-Flocation not on record
9
Göteborg, SE
8
Trondheim, NO
8
Salamanca, ES
8
Museum Ludovicae Ulricae, Zoology Institute of the University of Uppsalalocation not on record
6
Natural History Museum, Tribhuvan Universitylocation not on record
5
University of Oslo, Natural History Museumlocation not on record
5
Uppsala, SE
5
Museo Entomologico de Leonlocation not on record
5
UNINE:NEUlocation not on record
5
Salzburg, AT
4
Karlsruhe, DE
3
Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung: Senckenberg Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuseumlocation not on record
3
Kathmandu, NP
3
Cincinnati, US
3
Tartu, EE
3
Zürich, CH
3
Department of Plant Resources, National Herbarium and Plant Laboratorieslocation not on record
2
Bardejov, SK
2
Brisbane, AU
2
MAlocation not on record
2
Bronx, US
2
Acadia Universitylocation not on record
2
Canberra, AU
2
Southeastern Louisiana University, Vertebrate Museumlocation not on record
2
Catholic University of Pekinglocation not on record
2
WU-MYClocation not on record
2
Ann Arbor, US
2
CA
1
Turku, FI
1
LDlocation not on record
1
St. Paul, US
1
HabitatVisionlocation not on record
1
Kew, GB
1
Oskarshamn, SE
1
TUR-Alocation not on record
1
Tromso University Museumlocation not on record
1
Baton Rouge, US
1
Personal Herbarium of Steve Nesslocation not on record
1
WA<IH>location not on record
1
Stockholm, SE
1
Mlocation not on record
1
CJBGlocation not on record
1
JA-CAGPDS-CAMlocation not on record
1
Gijón, ES
1
64 institutions · 780 of 1 463 vouchered records shown · 683 without an institution code
09Environmental DNA1 897 detections
Where the DNA of Craterellus tubaeformis was picked up in samples of water, soil or air — nobody saw the organism, only its DNA left behind. A trace is a clue that the species was near, not a confirmed sighting.
Signal
Detections DNA found1 897
Studies independent surveys6
Countries20
Verifiable raw sequence linked2
Signal confidence: moderateweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 1 897 detections have coordinates
Open the map20 countries0
Coniferous forest with mosses, blueberries, …kalkfuruskogNearcticPalearctic
How strong is each trace?
DNA read depthRead counts were not reported for this species — the map shows presence only, not how strong each trace was.
Measured at samplingin-field
Temperature13.6 °C
pH5.40 3.30–9.50
Conductivity38.0 µS/cm 10.0–3,760
Organic carbon1.67 % 0.004–6.24
Water content18.8 % 0.381–109
Nitrate-N5.00 mg/kg 0.145–209
Phosphorus8.00 mg/kg 2.00–483
Clay13.7 % 0.93–52.3
Sand73.8 % 5.39–99.1
Depth0.2 m 0–1.02
SoilSodosolTenosolsKandosolDermosolLatLon out of rangeRudosol
341 samples with on-site data · median with range · describes the sample, not the organism
Modelled climatemodelled
−15°Ctemperature across detection sites+40°C
Temperature median12.0 °C 2.40–17.2
Seasonal swing summer↔winter19.2 °C
Max temp (day)15.8 °C 3.80–20.2
Min temp (night)8.00 °C -0.1–15.0
Precipitation83.6 mm/mo 38.7–296
Air humidity62.2 % 57.5–69.2
Moisture balance32.2 mm/mo -73.7–271
Vapour deficit534 Pa 226–766
Wind speed3.20 m/s 2.10–5.50
Cloud cover39.0 % 21.0–59.2
CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 1 880 detection points · median with p10–p90 · reflects where sampling happened, not only the true niche
How to read this: each dot is one detection of this species' DNA in an environmental sample. The confidence meter weighs how many independent studies and places back up the signal — one detection in one study is a hint; many across several studies is solid. Records dated before 2008 (when eDNA methods began) are treated as likely mislabeled and left off the map.