About the work

A closer look.

Two questions matter when you are about to eat something wild: what is this, and is this poisonous? I take the second one seriously. Maybe you have a plant identification question, or a mushroom identification question, or you are standing in a wood typing "what is this mushroom" into a phone while it gets dark. Send me one plant or mushroom you are about to pick, cook, or clear. Back comes what it most likely is, the dangerous lookalike it could be, and the one field test that separates them. Twelve plants in my Ohio Valley field guide are already paired this way, every claim sourced. What the full read gives you: a photo identification, every lookalike named, a hand-test for each, the parts of your photo that are not enough to decide, and a short write-up you keep. Three days, two revisions. The whole guide can come as a document instead. How to send it: one plant or mushroom, daylight photos, the whole thing, the leaf arrangement, the stem base, the underside for mushrooms, and a rough location. People find me on a foraging walk, searching "what is this plant", asking wild edible questions, or after a poisonous plant or poisonous mushroom scare. Sometimes the only question is whether a mushroom is a poisonous lookalike of the edible one. I will not name what the photo cannot support. If the frame cannot tell, I say so and you owe nothing. One honest limit: home tests are triage. A colour change, an iodine drop, a spore print. Each one rejects a crude problem. None moves a plant or mushroom from one species to another. That is a lab's job, HPTLC or DNA barcoding, and I will tell you when it is. Same question, other door: I only say what a plant is. Who first said it, and when, is the record half — Argona's shop, Provenance Notes (research briefs on plant and poison claims, earliest dated source, named): https://sparks.market/shops/provenance-notes. If you found one of us, you have found both.