Neolentinus lepideus is a basidiomycete mushroom of the genus Neolentinus, until recently also widely known as Lentinus lepideus. Common names for it include scaly sawgill, scaly lentinus and train wrecker.
No narrative description available for this taxon yet.
Compounds documented for Neolentinus lepideus 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 Neolentinus lepideus has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens17
Marker genes2
GenBank sequences10
eDNA detections20
Countries6
The DNA barcodea real sequence read deposited for this species
★ 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.
★ITS10★ITS1
fungal barcode
06Genome at a glanceNCBI
The complete instruction manualNeolentinus lepideus carries — its genome. We read it from three angles — how big it is, how the DNA is packed into chromosomes, and how completely it has been sequenced — and explain how to read each value as you go.
Genome sizehow big the whole instruction manual is
Genome size35 640 000 bp
Measured in base pairs (bp) — the individual letters of DNA (human ≈ 3.2 Gb, a bacterium a few million). The chart places this genome on a logarithmic scale — each step to the right is ten times bigger — among reference organisms. Across species a bigger genome loosely tracks with larger cells, slower growth and lower-energy lifestyles (powered flight favours small genomes) — yet it does not imply more genes or a more advanced organism (the long-standing C-value paradox).
BACTERIUM Carsonella ruddii0.00016 Gb
THIS GENOME Neolentinus lepideus0.04 Gb
FUNGUS0.04 Gb
INSECT0.25 Gb
HUMAN3.2 Gb
WHEAT17 Gb
FERN Tmesipteris160.45 Gb
Sequencing statusassembly quality — how far to trust these numbers
Assembly level tells you how finished the sequence is — from fragmented contigs, through scaffolds, up to a full chromosome-level assembly. BUSCO % estimates completeness: the share of genes expected to be present that were actually found. These describe the data quality, not the organism.
How far back this lineage goes — and how we know. Everything here is measured in Ma, short for “mega-annum”: millions of years ago. The chart reads left to right like a calendar of the Earth, from the deep past on the left to today at the right edgetop to bottom like a core drilled through the Earth, from the deep past at the top down to today at the bottom.
At a glance
DNA clock origin12.3 Ma TimeTree
When this lineage existed
How to read this: the coloured strip along the bottomdown the left is the geological calendar — the standard epochs (Pliocene, Pleistocene…) every museum uses, shown so you can see which chapter of Earth's history this lineage lived in. This lineage is a young one, so the strip is zoomed in to epochs — the finer subdivisions inside a period. The orange marker is the DNA clock: DNA accumulates mutations at a roughly steady rate, so comparing this species' DNA with its relatives estimates when the lineage split off — independently of any fossil.
DNA clock origin
08Occurrence & distribution
Record type6 670 records
Wild obs. + sensor5 942
Museum / vouchered715
Other13
Origin
Native1
Range
Area of Occupancy AOO19 552 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 2 759≤1 km 928≤10 km 830>10 km 194
4 711 georeferenced · 1 231 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor5 942
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 accuracy64% within 1 km
≤100 m 62≤1 km 122≤10 km 74>10 km 28
286 georeferenced · 429 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence715
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 institutions34 of 67 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
Bronx, US
97
Olocation not on record
91
Helsinki, FI
42
Chiba, JP
39
Joensuu, FI
37
Görlitz, DE
26
Copenhagen, DK
24
Kuopio, FI
21
TENN-Flocation not on record
17
SLU Artdatabankenlocation not on record
14
Université de Montréal Biodiversity Centrelocation not on record
12
WTUlocation not on record
12
TROMlocation not on record
10
Salzburg, AT
9
LDlocation not on record
8
Göteborg, SE
8
Tartu, EE
8
Kew, GB
8
Denver, US
7
San Sebastián, ES
7
Zürich, CH
7
Philadelphia, US
7
BDBClocation not on record
7
Kensington, AU
6
National Mushroom Centre, Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, Bhutanlocation not on record
6
Museum Ludovicae Ulricae, Zoology Institute of the University of Uppsalalocation not on record
6
FLASlocation not on record
5
Karlsruhe, DE
5
IB FRC Komi SC UB RASlocation not on record
5
Museo civico di Storia naturale Giacomo Doria di Genova | Giacomo Doria Natural History Museum in Genoalocation not on record
4
4
WU-MYClocation not on record
4
Chicago, US
4
CA
3
Oulu, FI
3
Helsinki, FI
3
nsnflocation not on record
3
Uniwersytet Łódzkilocation not on record
3
Mlocation not on record
3
Bando, JP
3
National Institute of Biological Resourceslocation not on record
3
Trondheim, NO
3
Warsaw, PL
3
Auckland, NZ
2
Ann Arbor, US
2
Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung: Senckenberg Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuseumlocation not on record
2
Valdosta State Universitylocation not on record
2
Vitoria, ES
2
St. Paul, US
2
Cincinnati, US
2
V. N. Karazin National Universitylocation not on record
2
Natural History Museum Rotterdamlocation not on record
2
University of Oslo, Natural History Museumlocation not on record
2
Tomioka, JP
2
ILLSlocation not on record
2
Department of Plant Resources, National Herbarium and Plant Laboratorieslocation not on record
1
Valdosta State University Herbarium (VSC)location not on record
1
UNINE:NEUlocation not on record
1
Durango, MX
1
Lincoln, US
1
Bernard Price Institute for Palaeontological Researchlocation not on record
1
European Distributed Institute of Taxonomy (EDIT)location not on record
1
Baton Rouge, US
1
Catholic University of Pekinglocation not on record
1
Acadia Universitylocation not on record
1
CJBGlocation not on record
1
Personal Collection of Troy Howardlocation not on record
1
67 institutions · 633 of 715 vouchered records shown · 81 without an institution code
09Environmental DNA20 detections
Where the DNA of Neolentinus lepideus 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 found20
Studies independent surveys3
Countries5
Signal confidence: moderateweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
DNA read depthRead counts were not reported for this species — the map shows presence only, not how strong each trace was.
Modelled climatemodelled
−15°Ctemperature across detection sites+40°C
Temperature median17.9 °C 10.5–19.3
Seasonal swing summer↔winter18.1 °C
Max temp (day)22.8 °C 13.5–24.7
Min temp (night)13.1 °C 5.80–14.6
Precipitation94.9 mm/mo 70.5–196
Air humidity58.8 % 57.8–62.6
Moisture balance-11.9 mm/mo -60.4–95.9
Vapour deficit850 Pa 504–967
Wind speed2.50 m/s 2.40–3.80
Cloud cover42.7 % 36.1–46.3
CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 8 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.