Caesar’s Amanita

Amanita caesarea


Jајчарка, булка, царска габа



Back to species overview
<< Previous -Alessioporus ichnusanus
Amanita curtipes -Next >>
Not evaluated Data deficient LEAST CONCERN Near threatened Vulnerable Endangered Critically endangered Extinct in the wild Extinct
Assessment info
Habitat and Ecology
Use and Trade
Conservation Actions


Scientific name

Amanita caesarea


(Scopoli) Persoon


Agaricus caesareus Scop.

Assessment info

IUCN Red List Category and Criteria

Least Concern N/A

Date assessed



Tofilovska, S.


Kost, G.


Karadelev, M.

Rusevska, K.


Miskovic, M


Amanita caesarea is an ectomycorrhizal species, mainly with oak and seldom with beech, sweet-chestnut and hornbeam. It has been found at 158 sites in the country, broadly dispersed in 50 biogeographic regions. The total number of sites is guesstimated to be up to 316 while the highest possible number of mature individuals is estimated at ca. 15 800. The population trend is stable since the species occurs at the edges of forests, in open, sunny coppice woodlands that are abundant in the country. It is assessed as least concerned.


Current population trend



Amanita caesarea is reported as common at the observed sites. According to the instructions for estimation of mature individuals provided by Dahlberg and Mueller (2011), an estimate can be made of ca. 15,800, based on the probable total number of sites in the country (ca. 316), the estimated number of functional individuals at each locality (estimated to be five), and the template of how many mature individuals each reproducing genotype may give rise to (the template used ten).Population trend is stable since the species occurs at the edges of forests, in degraded, coppice forests, mostly in open woodlands that are abundant in the country.

Habitat and Ecology


1 Forest
1.4 Forest – Temperate

Habitat and Ecology

Amanita caesarea is an ectomycorrhizal species, primarily with Quercus frainetto, Q. pubescens, Q. cerris, Q. coccifera, Q. petraea, and seldom with Fagus sylvatica, Castanea sativa and Carpinus orientalis in the country.

Suitable environment is forest edges, in open, sunny areas, on dry to moderately damp soils.

The species usually produces sporocarps from mid-spring to mid-autumn, and it is frequently noticed during warm and rainy seasons.

Amanita caesarea has been recorded at 158 sites in the country, broadly dispersed in 50 biogeographic regions (Melovski et al. 2013), at elevation ranges between 200–1,400 m a.s.l.. Six of the known sites are located in national parks, as follows: Galicica – one site, Pelister – two sites, Mavrovo – three sites in the zone for sustainable use. The species is edible, conspicuous, so it has been searched for in the past, and it has been frequently reported. However, since its appropriate habitat is common in the country, an estimation of probable sites was made (Dahlberg and Mueller 2011). The total number of sites is guesstimated to be maximum two times as high as the current number, resulting to be up to 316 sites.

Use and trade

Use and trade

It is an edible, highly appreciated species. It is collected by mushroom foragers but it is rarely traded by mushroom purveyors.



In practice, the silvicultural system has clear-cutting in oak forests. As a result, bare lands and coppice forests are created (Trajkov et al. 2016). As a rule, these are unfavorable conditions for fungi since the natural environment is changed, and in a period of time the mycorrhiza might be diminished. Nevertheless, Amanita caesarea prospers in coppice forests and open areas; consequently, the type of forest management in the country has created a suitable habitat for dispersal and prospering of this species.

Conservation actions

Conservation actions

Conservation needed: At places of logging activities, instead of clear-cutting, trees of various age should be left on site. Reforestation in the lower oak belt with alien tree species rather than oak should not be applied.



Dahlberg, A. and Mueller, G.M. 2011. Applying IUCN red-listing criteria for assessing and reporting on the conservation status of fungal species. Fungal Ecology 4(2): 147-162. doi:10.1016/j.funeco.2010.11.001

Fraiture, A and Otto, P (eds). 2015. Distribution, ecology & status of 51 macromycetes in Europe. Results of the ECCF Mapping Programme. Botanic Garden Meise, Meise.

Friebes, G., Dämon, W., Michelitsch S., Pidlich-Aigner H. and Krisai-Greilhuber, I. 2017. Verzeichnis und Rote Liste der Großpilze der Steiermark (Österreich). Joannea Botanik 14: 29–112.

Holec, J. and Beran, M. (eds). 2006. Red list of fungi (macromycetes) of the Czech Republic. Příroda, pp. 1-282. Praha.

Index Fungorum Partnership. 2020. Index Fungorum. Royal Botanic Gardens Kew and Chinese Academy of Science (the custodians). Available at:

Ivančević, B., Matavuly, М. and Karaman, М. 2012. Fungi (mushrooms and lichens) in Serbian legislation. Biologia Serbica 34(1-2): 19-35.

Kasom, G. and Miličković, N. 2006. Protected species of macromycetes in the Republic of Montenegro. Institute for the Protection of Nature, Podgorica, Montenegro.

Laurent-Dargent, J. 2009. La liste rouge des champignons (macromycètes) rares ou menacés en Lorraine. Sciences pharmaceutiques.

Melovski, Lj., Markoski, B., Hristovski, S., Jovanovska, D., Anastasovski, V., Klincharov, S., Velevski, M., Velkovski, N., Trendafilov, A., Matevski, V., Kostadinovski, M., Karadelev, M., Levkov, Z. and Kolchakovski, D. 2013. Regional division of the Republic of Macedonia for the needs of biological databases. Macedonian journal of Ecology and Environment 15(2): 81-111.

Peev, D., Petrova, A.S., Anchev, M., Temniskova, D., Denchev, C.M., Ganeva, A., Gussev, C. and Vladimirov, V. (eds). 2015. Red Data Book of the Republic of Bulgaria. Vol. 1. Plants and Fungi. Sofia.

Senn-Irlet, B., Bieri, G. and Egli, S. 2007. Rote Liste der gefahrdeten Grosspilze der Schweiz. BAFU, WSL, pp. 92, Bern.

Sugny, D., Beirnaert, P., Billot, A., Caillet, M. & M., Chevrolet, J.P., Galliot, L., Herbert, R. and Moyne, G. 2013. Liste rouge des champignons supérieurs de Franche-Comté. Publication commune Fédération Mycologique de l’Est, Conservatoire National Botanique de Franche-Comté et Société Botanique de Franche-Comté, LUNÉVILLE, imprimerie PARADIS.

Tănase, C. and Pop, A. 2005. Red List of Romanian Macrofungi Species, Bioplatform – Romanian National Platform for Biodiversity. pp. 101-107. Academiei Române, Bucureşti. ISBN 973-27-1211-2

Tkalčec, Z., Mešić, A., Matočec, N. and Kušan, I. 2008. Red book of Croatian Fungi. Ministry of Culture, State Institute for Nature Protection, Zagreb.

Trajkov, P., Nestorovski, L. and Trajanov, Z. 2016. The Republic of Macedonia. Chapter 36. In: C Vidal et al. (ed.), National Forest Inventories, Assessment of Wood Availability and Use, pp. 667-682. Springer International Publishing Switzerland. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-44015-6_36

Wojewoda, W. and Ławrynowicz, M. 2006. Red list of macrofungi in Poland. Kraków Available at: