← Ingredients

Substrates

Cantharellus tomentosus

Loading ratings…

A miombo-woodland chanterelle described from Tanzania and called Wipatwe in the Southern Highlands. Food classifications conflict, including within a 2015 community study.

Name, form and habitat

Cantharellus tomentosus Eyssart. & Buyck was described from Tanzania's Morogoro district. Taxonomic sources continue to use the name, and later molecular work lists sequenced Tanzanian vouchers under it. The species account describes a small chanterelle with a depressed, funnel-like cap, dense brown to olive-brown woolly surface, pale decurrent folds and a pale stem; the cap margin may be lobed. These details are a source-based description, not a field identification key. Other chanterelles can be difficult to distinguish, and local names do not by themselves confirm a scientific identification. [Meise Botanic Garden, Edible Fungi of Tropical Africa](https://www.efta-online.org/esp%C3%A8ces-species/cantharellus-tomentosus/); [Buyck, Eyssartier & Kivaisi 2000](https://doi.org/10.1127/nova/71/2000/491); [Tibuhwa et al. 2012](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3399100/).

Sources for this section

Range and observed season

The documented range is sparse. The species was described from miombo woodland in Morogoro District, Tanzania. Museum records identify a holotype collected on 30 April 1998 and a paratype collected on 28 April 1998 from a hill slope near a university campus at 350–400 m; a later study identifies another voucher from Morogoro's SUA Forest. A 2015 field study in Iringa and Njombe, in Tanzania's Southern Highlands, collected mushrooms in January 2014 and includes C. tomentosus in its species account. These are collection observations, not a measured fruiting season. The available evidence spans January and late April at different sites and years; it does not support a reliable seasonal calendar. A published coordinate for the SUA Forest specimen is malformed (37°67′29″ E), so no point coordinate is carried over. [MNHN holotype record](https://science.mnhn.fr/institution/mnhn/collection/pc/item/pc0084732); [MNHN paratype record](https://science.mnhn.fr/institution/mnhn/collection/pc/item/pc0084121); [Tibuhwa 2014](https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperDownload.aspx?paperID=42185); [Chelela, Chacha & Matemu 2015](https://doi.org/10.5943/cream/5/4/2).

Sources for this section

Food record and disagreement

Tanzanian sources report the chanterelle as food, but the evidence is mixed. A 2018 Tanzanian market-focused study includes a C. tomentosus voucher in its table of edible mushrooms. A 2023 review cited by the Global Fungal Red List likewise describes it as thought edible. The 2015 study of Iringa and Njombe contains an internal mismatch: its results narrative includes Wipatwe among locally edible mushrooms, while Table 1 marks C. tomentosus as folk-inedible and scientifically edible. The IUCN assessment summarizes that some local communities may consider it inedible. The disagreement is part of the record; a checklist label is not a consensus food practice or proof that an unidentified specimen is safe. [Tibuhwa 2018](https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=rjf.2018.1.14); [Chelela, Chacha & Matemu 2015](https://doi.org/10.5943/cream/5/4/2); [Global Fungal Red List assessment](https://redlist.info/iucn/species_view/474510/).

Sources for this section

Use, handling and safety limits

Research on Tanzanian chanterelles describes fresh and sun-dried forms at genus level, and one study analyzed fresh and dried C. tomentosus fruitbodies for laboratory antioxidant measurements. Those experiments do not establish a home preparation, dose, health benefit, or safe preservation procedure for this species. No species-specific recipe or validated handling guidance was found. Because local edibility judgments conflict and identification requires more than a vernacular name or colour description, this account makes no recommendation to collect or eat wild material. The IUCN assessment lists miombo woodland loss from agriculture and charcoal-related logging as a threat; it assesses the species as Least Concern but notes that the documented range remains poorly known. [Tibuhwa 2014](https://doi.org/10.4236/fns.2014.52026); [Global Fungal Red List assessment](https://redlist.info/iucn/species_view/474510/).

Sources for this section

Places

Tanzania

Historical attestation · Country evidence

Country-level record only; it does not imply continuous occurrence or uniform food use.

Morogoro District

Historical attestation · Region evidence

The type label says a hill slope near a university campus; a later study names SUA Forest. A published SUA Forest coordinate has invalid minutes, so no specimen point is shown.

Southern Highlands

Historical attestation · Region evidence

The study reports the local name Wipatwe and includes C. tomentosus in its Southern Highlands species account. Its narrative and table conflict about folk edibility; the table's scientific classification is edible. This row is an attestation of the study area, not a local preparation recommendation.

Related

Community

No community contributions have been published for this entry yet.

Share what you made

Sign in to contribute. Published comments and photos are free to read.

Sources