Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Forestales Vol. 17 (96)

Proyecto Estratégico Forestal (2026)

Fecha de recepción/Reception date: 23 de marzo de 2026.

Fecha de aceptación/Acceptance date: 15 de junio de 2026.

^{_______________________________}

¹Centro Nacional de Investigación Disciplinaria en Conservación y Mejoramiento de Ecosistemas Forestales, Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias. México.

²Prestadora independiente de servicios profesionales. México.

³Centro Nacional de Recursos Genéticos, Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias. México.

*Autor para correspondencia; correo-e: zamora.marisela@inifap.gob.mx

*Correponding author; e-mail: zamora.marisela@inifap.gob.mx

Abstract

In Mexico, around 6 500 taxa of macromycetes have been recorded; specifically in the state of Puebla, the number ranges between 97 and 131. This study documents the species identified in two sites in the Chignahuapan-Zacatlán region, whose forests are subject to forest management. Field sampling was conducted on 53 plots of 1 000 m² each, 30 in the Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila ejido, in Zacatlán de las Manzanas municipality, and 23 in the Emiliano Zapata ejido, in Chignahuapan municipality, Puebla; weekly field trips were conducted from July through November. A total of 114 species were identified, seven of which were classified in the division Ascomycota and 107 in Basidiomycota; there were 36 families and 56 genera. The order Agaricales was the best represented. Among the families, Russulaceae stood out with 20 species, followed by Amanitaceae with 13; the genera with the highest number of taxa were Amanita (13), Russula (12), and Lactarius (8). In terms of edibility, 59 species are listed as edible, and 15, as safe to eat with caution. A total of 34 species were identified that had not previously been recorded in the literature for the Sierra Norte de Puebla; this is significant, given the small area sampled (5.3 ha), which highlights the limited mycological exploration that has taken place in the region.

Keywords: Agaricales, Amanita, Basidiomycota, temperate forest, Lactarius, Russula.

Resumen

En México, se han registrado aproximadamente 6 500 taxones de macromicetos y específicamente para el estado de Puebla el número varía entre 97 y 131. En el presente estudio se documentan las especies identificadas en dos localidades de la región Chignahuapan-Zacatlán, cuyos bosques están sujetos a manejo forestal. Los muestreos de campo se hicieron en 53 parcelas de 1 000 m², 30 ubicadas en el ejido Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila, municipio Zacatlán de las Manzanas y 23 en el ejido Emiliano Zapata, municipio Chignahuapan, Puebla; los recorridos de campo fueron semanales durante los meses de julio-noviembre. Se reconocieron 114 especies, siete se agruparon en la división Ascomycota y 107 en Basidiomycota; con un total de 36 familias y 56 géneros. El orden Agaricales fue el mejor representado. En relación a las familias, destacaron Russulaceae con 20 especies, seguida por Amanitaceae con 13, cuyos géneros con mayor número de taxa fueron Amanita (13), Russula (12) y Lactarius (ocho). En cuanto a la comestibilidad, 59 especies son comestibles y 15 se citan de consumo con precaución. Se identificaron 34 especies sin registro previo en la literatura para la Sierra Norte de Puebla, lo cual es relevante dada la reducida superficie muestreada (5.3 ha) y evidencia la escasa exploración micológica existente en la región.

Palabras clave: Agaricales, Amanita, Basidiomycota, bosque templado, Lactarius, Russula.

Introduction

Mushrooms are one of the most diverse groups of organisms, with 2.2-3.8 million or, by a very conservative estimate, 1.5 million species (Hawksworth & Lücking, 2017). Approximately 200 000 of them are estimated to exist in Mexico (Guzmán, 1998); however, the understanding of fungal diversity is limited, as only around 6 500 taxa (3.5 %) have been recorded, most of which are macromycetes (Guzmán, 1998).

The Mexican states with the highest number of mycological records are Veracruz, Jalisco, the State of Mexico, Sonora, Michoacán, Querétaro, Durango, Chihuahua, Tamaulipas, Morelos, Quintana Roo, Aguascalientes, Puebla, Campeche and Yucatán (Aguirre-Acosta et al., 2014). In the case of Puebla, few studies have been carried out on mycological diversity; among them are those by Medel-Ortiz et al. (2011), who cite 97 species, while Aguirre-Acosta et al. (2014) record 181 taxa, although neither study mentions specific locations, while Pérez-López et al. (2015) document 25 taxa on Cerro El Pinal, in Acajete municipality, 19 of which are Basidiomycetes and six are Ascomycetes.

As for studies conducted in the Sierra Norte, Martínez-Alfaro et al. (1983) compiled an ethnomycological list of 84 species found in the Cuetzalan and Zacapoaxtla municipalities, in addition to those published by Vázquez-Mendoza and Valenzuela-Garza (2010), who described 130 species of wood-dwelling macromycetes; Vázquez-Mendoza (2012) conducted a review of herbarium specimens, identifying 131 taxa, 21 of which were medicinal; for their part, Vázquez et al. (2016) identified 95 species of lignicolous fungi. In a study conducted at the main market in Zaragoza, Puebla, Contreras-Cortés et al. (2018) identified 21 taxa of edible macromycetes.

Within this context, the objective of this study was to contribute to the understanding of fungi in Puebla, specifically those found in the Sierra Norte, by sampling sporomes during three rainy seasons in the Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila ejido, Zacatlán de Las Manzanas municipality (2015-2017), and Emiliano Zapata ejido, Chignahuapan municipality (2023-2025).

Materials and Methods

Study area

Sporomes were sampled from 53 sites, each 1 000 m² in size, located in two areas of the Sierra Norte de Puebla (Table 1; Figure 1): the Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila ejido (RN), in Zacatlán de Las Manzanas municipality (30), and the Emiliano Zapata ejido (EZ), in Chignahuapan municipality of (23). The total sampling area was 5.3 ha, and a quasi-systematic sampling design was used, with samples distributed across each of the silvicultural treatments applied in the ejidos (Table 1).

Table 1. Geographic and topographic characteristics and silvicultural practices at the sampling sites in the Chignahuapan-Zacatlán region, Puebla, Mexico.

Alt. I. = Altitude interval; RC = Regeneration cutting; LC = Cutting; T1 = Thinning 1; T2 = Thinning 2; T3 = Thinning 3; SL = Selective logging.

A = Emiliano Zapata ejido, Chignahuapan, Puebla; B = Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila ejido, Zacatlán de Las Manzanas, Puebla. Sampling sites = Red dots. Huauchinango = Huauchinango municipality; Tlaola = Tlaola municipality; Jopala = Jopala municipality; Coyutla = Coyutla municipality; Mecatlán = Mecatlán locality; Coxquihui = Coxquihui locality; Zozocolco de Hidalgo = Zozocolco de Hidalgo locality; Huehuetla = Huehuetla municipality; Olintla = Olintla municipality; Hermenegildo Galeana = Hermenegildo Galeana municipality; San Felipe Tepatlán = San Felipe Tepatlán municipality; Tlapacoya = Tlapacoya municipality; Chiconcuautla = Chiconcuautla municipality; Amixtlán = Amixtlán municipality; Ahuacatlán = Ahuacatlán locality; Hueytlalpan = Hueytlalpan municipality; Zacatlán = Zacatlán de las manzanas municipality; Tepetzintla = Tepetzintla municipality; Chignahuapan = Chignahuapan municipality; Aquixtla = Aquixtla municipality; Almoloya = Almoloya locality; Tlaxco = Tlaxco municipality; Ixtacamaxtitlán = Ixtacamaxtitlán municipality.

Figure 1. Location of the sampling sites in two areas of the Chignahuapan-Zacatlán region, Puebla, Mexico.

Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila ejido. The climate is classified as C(W"₂) (W) b(i), that is, a subhumid temperate climate with summer rainfall, an average temperature in the coldest month ranging from -3 °C to 18 °C, and an average temperature of up to 22 °C in the hottest month; annual precipitation ranges between 700 and 1 500 mm (Guizar-Nolasco et al., 2016). The forest is dominated by Pinus patula Schiede ex Schltdl. & Cham., with smaller stands of P. teocote Schiede ex Schltdl. & Cham., P. leiophylla Schiede ex Schltdl. & Cham., P. rudis Endl. (synonym of Pinus hartwegii Lindl.), P. pseudostrobus Lindl., Abies religiosa (Kunth) Schltdl. & Cham.,Quercus spp., and Arbutus xalapensis Kunth (Zamora-Morales et al., 2018). Their physical characteristics contrast due to different silvicultural treatments applied as part of forest management based on the Silvicultural Development Method (SDM), which is applied to an area of 283.13 ha and involves regeneration cutting, cutting (parent trees) and thinning. The permanent monitoring sites were distributed across stands subject to the aforementioned harvests and covered an area of 33×33 m, with a distance of 100 m between sites within each stand.

Emiliano Zapata ejido. The climate is temperate subhumid with summer rainfall (Cw) (García, 2004) and an average annual temperature of 13.4 °C. The vegetation consists of a pine forest dominated by Pinus patula and, to a lesser extent, Pinus ayacahuite Ehrenb. ex Schltdl.; Abies religiosa predominates in the higher elevations (2 919 masl), where selection cutting is carried out using the Mexican Method of Irregular Forest Management. The total area of the ejido under forest management is 249.65 ha, comprising 23 circular monitoring plots of 1 000 m² spaced 100 m apart within each stand.

Sporome collection and identification

Sampling was conducted weekly from July through November (the rainy season) during the years 2015-2017 (RN) and 2023-2025 (EZ). The fungal material was separated by species and stored in polyethylene bags or waxed paper; it was then mounted on herbarium sheets and identified by its macroscopic characteristics, using keys and texts with descriptions and images available in the specialized literature (Delgado-Fuentes et al., 2005; García-Rodríguez et al., 2012; Kong-Luz, 2003; Largent et al., 1986; Pérez-Moreno et al., 2009; Pérez-Silva & Herrera-Suárez, 1991; Phillips, 1991; Rodríguez-Alcalá et al., 2002). The taxonomic classification of the taxa is based on Cifuentes (2008) and Index Fungorum (2026). All specimens were deposited in the “Biól. Luciano Vela Gálvez” National Forest Herbarium (INIF) of the Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias, INIFAP (National Institute for Research on Forest, Agriculture and Livestock). Information on the uses of fungi was obtained from the sources cited in the bibliography (Contreras-Cortés et al., 2018; Dai et al., 2009; Hall et al., 2003; Montoya et al., 2007; Robles et al., 2007; Vázquez-Mendoza, 2012).

Results and Discussion

A total of 114 species were identified, seven of which belong to the Ascomycota division and 107 to Basidiomycota; they include five classes, 11 orders, 36 families, and 56 genera. The most well-represented family was Russulaceae, with 20 species, followed by Amanitaceae, with 13 (Table 2).

Table 2. Taxonomic classification of the species identified in the Chignahuapan-Zacatlán region, Puebla, Mexico.

ECM = Ectomycorrhizal fungus; P = Parasite; S = Saprobe; E = Edible; EC = Edible with caution; NE = Non edible; T = Toxic; AF = Abies forest; PF = Pinus forest; EZ = Emiliano Zapata ejido; RN = Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila ejido. Based on Cifuentes (2008) and Index Fungorum (2026).

The taxonomic composition showed a marked dominance of the family Russulaceae, which accounted for 20 taxa, followed by the family Amanitaceae, with 13 identified species. Within the first group, the genus Russula had the greatest species diversity, with 12 species. This is consistent with the findings of García-Valencia et al. (2025), who, using genetic barcodes (ITS) to investigate the diversity of rhizosphere and ectomycorrhizal fungal communities (ECM) associated with roots in Pinus stands in the Rancho Nuevo ejido, identified Russula as one of the most prevalent taxa. These findings suggest that both genera are significant components of the local mycobiota, consistently with previous studies conducted in the Sierra Norte de Puebla that highlight, in particular, the presence of Amanitaceae(Pérez-López et al., 2015).

In terms of functional structure, ectomycorrhizal macrofungi accounted for 67.5 % of the identified taxa; this proportion corresponds to 33.6 % of the total reported for Mexico (Garibay-Orijel et al., 2020). Their high frequency is likely related to the abundance of potential hosts—Pinus and Quercus species—with which they form mutualistic relationships essential for the exchange of nutrients and carbon (Garibay-Orijel et al., 2020; Smith & Read, 2008). Saprobic fungi accounted for 31.5 % of the total recorded species, including various taxa widely distributed in temperate forest ecosystems (Table 2). The register of both functional groups is based on the type of study being documented, which was conducted by collecting sporomes-structures characteristic of both ectomycorrhizal macromycetes and saprobes.

Also identified was Hypomyces lactifluorum (Schwein.) Tul. & C. Tul., a parasitic taxon with high culinary value (González-Rivadeneira & Argueta-Villamar, 2018; Robles-García et al., 2018), whose hosts are edible mushrooms of the genera Lactarius and Russula, especially R. brevipes s. l. Peck.

The abundance of edible macrofungi found in the study areas (58 species) reflects their ethnomycological importance. A total of 371 species of edible fungi were recorded for Mexico (Garibay-Orijel & Ruan-Soto, 2014); thus, the identified taxa add up to 30.7 % of the total cited for the country. The genera Amanita, Russula, Lactarius, and Suillus accounted for the largest number of taxa (Table 2). It should be noted that both the genera Amanita and Russula have been reported to include a large number of edible species—50 in the former and 143 in the latter (Li et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2015). In addition to the above, 15 species were identified that should be eaten with caution due to conflicting information regarding their consumption (Table 2).

Among the species of ethnomycological importance, the following stand out for their commercial significance, both nationally and internationally: Amanita caesarea complex Guzmán & Ramírez-Guillén (2001), Boletus aff. edulis Bull., Lactarius deliciosus (L.) Gray, Cantharellus cibarius Fr., Turbinellus floccosus (Schwein.) Earle ex Giachin & Castellano,and Ramaria aff. flava (Schaeff.) Quél. (Estrada-Martínez et al., 2009; Jiménez-Ruíz et al., 2013; Pérez-López et al., 2015). This highlights their potential as a resource that complements timber harvesting (Garibay-Orijel et al., 2009; Pérez-Moreno et al., 2009).

In addition, seven taxa reported to have medicinal properties were collected: Lycoperdon perlatum Pers. and Leotia lubrica (Scop.) Pers.(scarring), Agaricus silvaticus Schaeff. (antioxidant), Infundibulicybe gibba (Pers.) Harmaja (stimulant), and Laccaria laccata (Scope.) Cooke and L. amethystina Cooke and Hydnum repandum L. (antitumor) (Dai et al., 2009; Robles et al., 2007). Particularly, Vázquez-Mendoza (2012) identified 21 medicinal taxa from the Sierra Norte de Puebla. Worldwide, more than 500 species of wild fungi with medicinal properties are recognized, and approximately 100 of them are ectomycorrhizal (Pérez-Moreno et al., 2009, 2020).

Finally, seven taxa identified as toxic were recorded: Amanita chlorinosma (Peck) Lloyd, A. flavoconia G. F. Atk., A. pantherina (DC.) Krombh., A. muscaria (L.) Lam., Lactarius pubescens Fr., L. deceptivus Peck,and Russula emetica (Schaeff.) Pers. (Hall et al., 2003; Montoya et al., 2007). This finding takes on particular significance given the growing interest in harvesting and consuming wild mushrooms and highlights the importance of compiling detailed mycological inventories in regions where wild mushroom foraging is becoming increasingly common. This is to prevent poisoning cases that occur when a toxic species is mistaken for an edible one, mainly due to the ignorance and recklessness of inexperienced foragers, as well as to the loss of traditional mycological knowledge (Ruan-Soto, 2018; Yaneva et al., 2026).

In terms of species richness, 80 species have been documented in the state of Puebla (Guzmán, 2008; Marín-Castro et al., 2015; Pérez-López et al., 2015; Romero-Arenas et al., 2009; Vázquez et al., 2016; Vázquez-Mendoza & Valenzuela-Garza, 2010). Therefore, the taxa collected at the two sampled sites account for 87 % of the macromycetes recorded for the region, indicating a high level of species richness given the small sampling area (5.3 ha). Table 2 lists the species identified at each of the sites or at both.

A significant contribution of this study is the documentation of 34 species as new records for the Sierra Norte de Puebla (Table 2). Of these, 10 were collected only in the Emiliano Zapata ejido and nine in Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila. In both locations, most specimens were collected in pine forests, except for Strobilomyces confusus Singer and Lepiota clypeolaria (Bull.) P. Kumm., which were also collected in sacred fir forests; however, it is important to note that sampling was limited to five sites in this type of forest, which likely influenced the results. A similar pattern was observed for the total number of identified macromycetes, as 76 % were collected in the Pinus forest.

Regarding species numbers, the results indicate a similar proportion between the two study sites, with a slightly higher proportion in the Emiliano Zapata ejido (57 %) than in Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila (43 %) (Table 2). However, an ecological analysis calculating alpha and beta diversity is needed to supplement the information presented in this study.

Conclusions

This paper introduces fungi identified at two sites in the Chignahuapan-Zacatlán region of Puebla, where 114 species of macromycetes have been recorded; 34 of these represent new records for the Sierra Norte de Puebla. This is significant, given the small study area, and highlights the region’s importance as a reservoir of fungal diversity associated with temperate forest ecosystems. Furthermore, there is a clear need to conduct a greater number of mycological surveys both in that region and throughout the rest of the state, especially considering the climate vulnerability and deforestation that affect the forests and the ecosystem services they provide.

There are 59 edible species recorded in the area, which highlights the potential of this non-timber forest resource as a source of protein for the diet of ejido members, as well as a source of additional income through its commercialization, thus incorporating this resource into forest management would contribute to the sustainable management of both timber harvesting and macromycete populations.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the communal landholders of Rancho Nuevo Nanacamila and Emiliano Zapata for their assistance in carrying out our field activities, as well as the Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias, INIFAP (National Institute for Research on Forest, Agriculture and Livestock) for the funding provided through the projects: “Integrated forest resource management for the sustainability of ecosystem services in the face of climate change” (“Manejo integrado de recursos forestales para la sustentabilidad de los servicios ecosistémicos ante el cambio climático”) and “Silvicultural treatments and their impact on populations of edible ectomycorrhizal fungi” (“Los tratamientos silvícolas y su impacto en las poblaciones de los hongos ectomicorrizógenos comestibles”), and Francisco Moreno Sánchez, MSc, for the creation of Figure 1.

Conflict of interest

Marisela Cristina Zamora-Martínez states that she did not participate in any stage of the document's editorial process.

Contributions by author

Marisela Cristina Zamora-Martínez: research design, data collection, supervision of fieldwork, identification of fungal material, drafting of the manuscript; Rocío Sánchez Colín: fieldwork, identification of fungal material, systematization of field data; Fernando Ismael Chávez-Díaz: fieldwork, revision of the manuscript.

References

Aguirre-Acosta, E., Ulloa, M., Aguilar, S., Cifuentes, J., & Valenzuela, R. (2014). Biodiversidad de hongos en México. Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad, 85(Suppl. 1), 76-81. https://doi.org/10.7550/rmb.33649

Cifuentes, J. (2008). Hongos. Catálogo taxonómico de especies de México. En J. S. Ocegueda & J. Llorente-Bousquets (Coords.), Capital natural de México, Volumen I Conocimiento actual de la biodiversidad [CD 1]. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad. https://es.scribd.com/document/622305403/Cifuentes-2008-Hongos-Cata-logo-taxono-mico-Me-xico

Contreras-Cortés, L. E. U., Vázquez-García, A., & Ruan-Soto, F. (2018). Etnomicología y venta de hongos en un mercado del Noroeste del estado de Puebla, México. Scientia Fungorum, 47, 47-55. https://doi.org/10.33885/sf.2018.47.1192

Dai, Y.-C., Yang, Z.-L., Cui, B.-K., Yu, C.-J., Zhou, L.-W. (2009). Species diversity and utilization of medicinal mushrooms and fungi in China (Review). International Journal of Medicinal Mushrooms, 11(3), 287-302. https://www.dl.begellhouse.com/journals/708ae68d64b17c52,4f53a14232dd0d51,28301e4640ed5a8f.html#

Delgado-Fuentes, A., Villegas-Ríos, M., & Cifuentes-Blanco, J. (2005). Glosario ilustrado de los caracteres macroscópicos en Basidiomycetes con himenio laminar. Facultad de Ciencias de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. https://books.google.com.mx/books?id=BUzHH9Xbg4kC&printsec=frontcover&hl=es&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Estrada-Martínez, E., Guzmán, G., Cibrián-Tovar, D., & Ortega-Paczka, R. (2009). Contribución al conocimiento etnomicológico de los hongos comestibles silvestres de mercados regionales y comunidades de la Sierra Nevada (México). Interciencia, 34(1), 25-33. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/339/33934104.pdf

García, E. (2004). Modificaciones al sistema de clasificación climática de Köpen (Serie Libros Núm. 6). Instituto de Geografía de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. https://publicaciones.geografia.unam.mx/index.php/ig/catalog/book/83

García-Rodríguez, J. L., Sarmiento-López, H., Amador-Sierra, D., & Mejía-Bojórquez, J. M. (2012). Hongos silvestres ectomicorrícicos de bosques templados fríos de los municipios de Pueblo Nuevo, San Dimas y Durango, Durango [Libro Técnico Núm. 8]. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias.

García-Valencia, L. E., González-Escobedo, R., Zamora-Martínez, M. C., Pérez-García, J., Garibay-Orijel, R., García-Campusano, F. (2025). Silvicultural practices shape fungal diversity and community composition: Metabarcoding study in a Pinus forest Central Mexico. Forest, 16(9), Article 1397. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16091397

Garibay-Orijel, R., & Ruan-Soto, F. (2014). Listado de los hongos silvestres consumidos como alimento tradicional en México. En Á. Moreno-Fuentes & R. Garibay-Orijel (Eds.), La Etnomicología en México, Estado del arte (pp. 91-109). Red de Etnoecología y Patrimonio Biocultural (Conacyt), Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo, Instituto de Biologia de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Sociedad Mexicana de Micología, Asociación Etnobiológica Mexicana A. C., Grupo lnterdisciplinario para el Desarrollo de la Etnomicología en Mexico, Sociedad Latinoamericana de Etnobiología. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/404583550_Libro_Etnomicologia_en_Mexico_estado_del_arte

Garibay-Orijel, R., Argüelles-Moyao, A., Álvarez-Manjarrez, J., Ángeles-Argáiz, R. E., García-Guzmán, O. M., & Hernández-Yáñez, H. (2020). Diversity and importance of edible mushrooms in ectomycorrizal communities in Mexican Neotropics. In J. Pérez-Moreno, A. Guerin-Laguette, R. Flores-Arzú, & F.-Q. Yu (Eds.), Mushrooms, Humans and Nature in a Changing World. Perspectives from Ecological, Agricultural and Social Sciences (pp. 407-424). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37378-8_15

Garibay-Orijel, R., Córdova, J., Cifuentes, J., Valenzuela, R., Estrada-Torres, A., & Kong, A. (2009). Integrating wild mushrooms use into a model of sustainable management for indigenous community forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 258(2), 122-131. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378112709002497

González-Rivadeneira, T., & Argueta-Villamar, A. (2018). Del bosque a la mesa: Conocimientos tradicionales sobre los hongos alimenticios de la comunidad P’urhepecha de Cherán K’eri. Revue d’ethnoécologie, (13), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.4000/ethnoecologie.3488

Guizar-Nolasco, E, Ávalos-Rosales, D. M., Espinoza-Guerrero, E., & Olguín-del Rosario, K. (2016). Estudio florístico de la cuenca de abasto de la Región Chignahuapan-Zacatlán, Puebla, México. Comisión Nacional Forestal-Gerencia Estatal Puebla, Turismo de Naturaleza de la Sierra Norte de Puebla, A. C., Asesores en Manejo de Recursos Forestales S. C. https://es.scribd.com/document/855103302/Estudio-Floristico-UMAFOR-2108Chignahuapan-Zacatlan

Guzmán, G. (1998). Análisis cualitativo y cuantitativo sobre la diversidad de los hongos en México (Ensayo sobre el inventario fúngico del país). En G. Halffter (Comp.), La diversidad biológica de Iberoamérica, Vol. II (pp. 111-175). Programa Iberoamericano de Ciencia y Tecnología para el Desarrollo, Instituto de Ecología, A. C., y Secretaria de Desarrollo Social. https://books.google.com.mx/books/about/La_Diversidad_biologica_de_Iberoamerica.html?id=PhlFAQAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y

Guzmán, G. (2008). Análisis de los estudios sobre los macromycetes de México. Revista Mexicana de Micología, (28), 7-15. https://www.scientiafungorum.org.mx/index.php/micologia/article/view/1026

Hall, I. R., Stephenson, S. L., Buchanan, P. K., Yun, W., & Cole, A. L. J. (2003). Edible and poisonous mushrooms of the world. New Zealand Institute for Crop and Food Research. https://theswissbay.ch/pdf/Books/Survival/Flora%20and%20Fauna/Fungi/Edible%20and%20Poisonous%20Mushrooms%20of%20the%20World%20%282003%29.pdf

Hawksworth, D. L., & Lücking, R. (2017). Fungal diversity revisited: 2.2 to 3.8 million species. Microbiology Spectrum, 5(4), Article FUNK-0052-2016. https://doi.org/10.1128/microbiolspec.funk-0052-2016

Index Fungorum. (2026, febrero). Index Fungorum [Database]. Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. www.indexfungorum.org

Jiménez-Ruíz, M., Pérez-Moreno, J., Almaraz-Suárez, J. J., & Torres-Aquino, M. (2013). Hongos silvestres con potencial nutricional, medicinal y biotecnológico comercializados en Valles Centrales, Oaxaca. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas, 4(2), 199-213. https://doi.org/10.29312/remexca.v4i2.1232

Kong-Luz, A. (2003). El género Russula (Fungi, Russulales) en el Parque Nacional La Malinche [Tesis de Maestría en Ciencias, Universidad Autónoma de México]. Repositorio DGB UNAM. https://ru.dgb.unam.mx/items/973ba302-62e8-441c-bcff-57138135e0f2

Largent, D. L. (1986). How to identify mushrooms to genus I: Macroscopic features (3rd edition). Mad River Press Inc. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=4144654

Li, H., Tian, Y., Menolli, Jr., N., Ye, L., Karunarathna, S. C., Pérez-Moreno, J., Rahman, M. M., Rashid, M. H., Phengsintham, P., Rizal, L., Kasuya, T., Lim, Y. W., Dutta, A. K., Khalid, A. N., Huyen, L. T., Balolong, M. P., Baruah, G., Madawala, S., Thongklang, N., … Mortimer, P. E. (2021). Reviewing the world´s edible mushrooms species: A new evidence-based classification system. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 20(2), 1982-2014. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12708

Marín-Castro, M. A., Silva-Díaz, V., Linares-Fleites, G., Castagnino, A. M., & Ticante-Roldán, J. A. (2015). La biodiversidad de los hongos ectomicorrízicos y su importancia para la conservación del bosque de la zona poblana del Parque Nacional Malintzi. En G. Pulido-Flores, S. Monks & M. López-Herrera (Eds.), Estudios en Biodiversidad, Volumen 1 (pp. 180-195). Zea Books. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/biodiversidad/17

Martínez-Alfaro, M. A., Pérez-Silva, E., & Aguirre-Acosta, E. (1983). Etnomicología y exploraciones micológicas en la Sierra Norte de Puebla. Boletín de la Sociedad Mexicana de Micología, (18), 51-63. https://www.scientiafungorum.org.mx/index.php/micologia/article/view/574

Medel-Ortiz, R., Espinoza-Texis, A., Sánchez-Alonso, P., Romero-Arenas, O., & López-Reyes, L. (2011). Diversidad de hongos. En Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (Ed.), La Biodiversidad en Puebla: Estudio de Estado (pp. 98-110). Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla. https://smadsot.puebla.gob.mx/images/Biodiversidad_en_Puebla2.pdf

Montoya, A., Méndez-Espinoza, C., Flores-Rivera, R., Kong, A., & Estrada-Torres, A. (2007). Hongos tóxicos de Tlaxcala [Libro Técnico Núm. 2]. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias.

Pérez-López, R. I., Mata, G., Aragón-García, A., Jiménez-García, D., & Romero-Arenas, O. (2015). Diversidad de hongos silvestres comestibles del cerro El Pinal, municipio de Acajete, Puebla, México. Ecosistemas y Recursos Agropecuarios, 2(6), 277-289. https://doi.org/10.19136/era.a2n6.677

Pérez-Moreno, J., Guerin-Laguette, A., Flores-Arzú, R., Yu, F.-Q., & Verbeken, A. (2020). Setting the scene. In J. Pérez-Moreno, A. Guerin-Laguette, R. Flores-Arzú & F.-Q. Yu (Eds.), Mushrooms, humans and nature in a changing world. Perspectives from ecological, agricultural and social sciences (pp. 3-28). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37378-8_1

Pérez-Moreno, J., Lorenzana-Fernández, A., Carrasco-Hernández, V., & Yescas-Pérez, A. (2009). Los hongos comestibles silvestres del Parque Nacional Izta-Popo, Zoquiapan y Anexos. Colegio de Postgraduados, Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jesus-Perez-27/publication/326832659_Hongos_comestibles_silvestres/links/5c397877a6fdccd6b5a5eb03/Hongos-comestibles-silvestres.pdf

Pérez-Silva, E., & Herrera-Suárez, T. (1991). Iconografía de macromicetos de México I Amanita. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. https://books.google.com.mx/books/about/Iconograf%C3%ADa_de_macromicetos_de_M%C3%A9xico.html?id=u9-YK0lu5ywC&redir_esc=y

Phillips, R. (1991). Mushrooms of North America. Little Brown and Company.

Robles, L., Huerta, G., Andrade, R. H., & Ángeles, H. M. (2007). Conocimiento tradicional sobre los macromicetos en dos comunidades Tseltales de Oxchuc, Chiapas, México. Etnobiología, 5(1), 21-35. https://revistaetnobiologia.mx/index.php/etno/article/view/233

Robles-García, D., Suzán-Aspiri, H., Montoya-Esquivel, A., García-Jiménez, J., Esquivel-Naranjo, E. U., Yahia, E., & Landeros-Jaime, F. (2018). Ethnomycological knowledge in three communities in Amealco, Querétaro, México. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 14, Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-017-0202-7

Rodríguez-Alcalá, O., Cedano, M., Villaseñor-Ibarra, L., & Arias, A. (2002). Guía ilustrada de los hongos del Bosque La Primavera. Universidad de Guadalajara. https://es.slideshare.net/slideshow/hongos-del-bosque-la-primavera-tomo-1/66900507

Romero-Arenas, O., Huerta-Lara, M., Becerril-Herrera, M., Bautista-Calles, J., Damián-Huato, M. Á., Tapia-Rojas, A. M, Valencia-de Ita, M. de los Á., & Bonilla-Vazquez, L. A. (2009). Diversity of wild mushrooms in the commonwealth of Benito Juárez, Tetela de Ocampo; Puebla-México. Research Journal of Biological Sciences, 4(2), 179-186. https://doi.org/rjbsci.2009.179.186

Ruan-Soto, F. (2018). Intoxicaciones por consumo de hongos silvestres entre los tsotsiles de Chamula, Chiapas, México. Sociedad y Ambiente, 6(17), 7-31. https://doi.org/10.31840/sya.v0i17.1838

Smith, S. E., & Read, D. (2008). Mycorrhizal symbiosis (3rd ed.). Academic Press. https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/monograph/9780123705266/mycorrhizal-symbiosis

Vázquez, S., Valenzuela, R., & Del Castillo, R. F. (2016). Macromicetos lignícolas de la Sierra Norte de Puebla, México, con notas sobre su distribución altitudinal. Acta Botánica Mexicana, (114), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.21829/abm114.2016.1100

Vázquez-Mendoza, S. (2012). Nota científica: Macromicetos medicinales provenientes de la Sierra Norte de Puebla, México; depositados en el herbario "Gastón Guzmán", ENCB-IPN. Etnobiología, 10(2), 34-37. https://revistaetnobiologia.mx/index.php/etno/article/view/208

Vázquez-Mendoza, S., & Valenzuela-Garza, R. (2010). Macromicetos de la Sierra Norte del estado de Puebla, México. Naturaleza y Desarrollo, 8(1), 43-58. https://ru.dgb.unam.mx/items/267215e2-5f63-43c4-8cdc-1770293d24db

Yaneva, G., Dimitrova, T., Cherneva, D., Iliev, I., Mihalev, K., & Georgieva, S. (2026). Recent advances in toxic wild mushroom distribution and social epidemiology. International Journal Environmental Research and Public Health, 23(4), Article 411. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph23040411

Zamora-Morales, B. P., Zamora-Martínez, M. C., Nieto de Pascual-Pola, M. C. del C., & García-Campusano, F. T. A. (2018). Condiciones edáficas, abundancia y riqueza de hongos ectomicorrizógenos comestibles. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Forestales, 9(48), 226-252. https://doi.org/10.29298/rmcf.v8i48.152

Zhang, P., Tang, L.-P., Cai, Q., & Xu, J.-P. (2015). A review on the diversity, phylogeography and population genetics of Amanita mushrooms. Mycology, 6, 86-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/21501203.2015.1042536

Todos los textos publicados por la Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Forestales –sin excepción– se distribuyen amparados bajo la licencia Creative Commons 4.0 Atribución-No Comercial (CC BY-NC 4.0 Internacional), que permite a terceros utilizar lo publicado siempre que mencionen la autoría del trabajo y a la primera publicación en esta revista.