Russula Atroviolecea

[Auspicion]

Today I discovered a purple mushroom on a hike in some coniferous debris. After spore prints, microscopy, and much research I discovered this mushroom to be Russula Atroviolecea. This much I know. However, for the life of me, I could not find out if this particular mushroom is edible or not... It's smell and the fact that it is dark purple lead me away from trying it at all, but I can't just let this remain a mystery... Does anybody know whether this species is edible or not? If nobody knows this, does anybody know how I can safely figure out whether it is edible or not? IE - what kind of chemical analysis would I need to undertake if I wanted to know for sure if it was toxic?

[Dave W]

With Russula species, if one rules out the "foetid" types (foul or sweetish odor and cap that is usually sticky and/or crusty... sickeners), and one also rules out the acrid types (for instance, R. emitica... sickenes) by tasting/spiting, then what's left are species of variably desirable edibility. Many are crumbly, insubstantial, and don't taste that good, others offer better texture/flavor, and a few are choice.

I don't know the species R. atroviolcaea. Is it a western NA species? I see your location is CA, Auspicion.

There are a few distinctive species here in eastern NA, but for the majority of Russulas I run across, I don't get much further than "Russula" (or maybe some subspecies/section of Russula) for the ID. I'm interested in how you arrived at the species ID atroviolacea. Do you have any photos. A sought-after edible often found in CA is Russula xerampelina. It (and a few related species) are uncommon here in eastern NA.

My grandparents generation of eastern European immigrants used to eat multiple species of Russulas, including (presumably) the acrid types like emitica. Before preparing as food, they boiled in "three waters", which apparently eliminates the indigestible substance. With the good edible Russulas, this is not necessary.