Urgent warning from scientists: Google is showing AI-generated images of mushrooms that look nothing like the real species – which could have deadly consequences

Experts are warning collectors not to use Google Images to identify mushrooms after the search engine returned misleading AI-generated results.

Searches for some common edible mushrooms return highly inaccurate images as the top result, despite these images being marked as AI-generated.

Foraging experts warn this could lead to dangerous, if not fatal, mistakes for foragers trying to identify safe mushrooms to eat.

Professor David Hawksworth, a mycologist from the University of Southampton, told MailOnline: ‘This is potentially extremely dangerous.’

However, experts routinely warn that it is not safe to pick up and eat mushrooms we find on the ground, even if we think we can distinguish a safe species from a dangerous one.

Foragers have been warned not to use Google Images to identify mushrooms after the search engine provided AI-generated images (stock image)

This problem was first identified by a Reddit user MycoMutant, the moderator of the mushroom forum r/Mycology.

In one afterMycoMutant explained how they had searched for Coprinus comatus, a common edible mushroom often called shaggy mane or shaggy inkcap.

However, the user was surprised to find that the top result was a clear AI-generated image and bore no resemblance to the real mushroom.

MycoMutant wrote: ‘Not only does this not even remotely resemble Coprinus comatus and looks much more like an inkcap from the Psathyrellaceae family, but the image isn’t even real.’

Selecting the image revealed that it was clearly titled ‘Premium AI-generated PSD’ and was hosted on a free stock photo website, Freepix.

Speaking to MailOnline, MycoMutant said they had reported dozens of incorrect snippet images to Google since March last year, most of which came from stock photo sites.

MailOnline identified another case where an AI-generated image was the first result of a common edible mushroom

Rough inkcaps (pictured) are edible, but experts warn it could be risky if collectors are tricked into picking unsafe species while searching for them

MycoMutant added: ‘Stock photo sites are a very poor source for accurate images of mushrooms because while there are many great photographers who can take excellent photos of mushrooms, most of them are unable to identify them accurately.’

Since then, the problem seems to have only gotten worse, with Google even using images posted to the r/Mycology forum by amateur enthusiasts who may have been incorrect in their identification.

Professor Hawksworth added: ‘Even without AI, many images posted are misnamed. There really need to be warnings!’

However, when searching for the ‘parasole mushroom’, another common edible mushroom, the best result was again generated by AI.

The image in the top result was also hosted by Freepix, clearly labeled as a ‘premium AI-generated image’, and bears absolutely no resemblance to the parasol mushroom.

Marlow Renton, foraging instructor and director of Wild Food UK, told MailOnline: ‘I believe this is an area of ​​genuine concern.’

Showing the image, Mr Rentol said he “didn’t know anyone in Britain who looked anything like it.”

One foraging expert said the AI-generated image (right) bore no resemblance to a British mushroom and certainly did not resemble the parasol mushroom (left).

Google’s AI overview described a beech mushroom and offered images of the boletus, another very different edible mushroom

In another case, the AI ​​review produced images of chanterelles while describing the Japanese matsutake, a completely different mushroom

However, AI-powered disinformation wasn’t just limited to Google Image results.

MailOnline was able to identify several cases where Google’s AI overview misidentified edible mushrooms or provided incorrect images.

For example, when Google was asked for a list of common edible mushrooms, Google’s AI described a beech mushroom with images of a bolete, a different and unrelated edible mushroom.

An even more bizarre error: when describing a hedgehog mushroom, the AI ​​overview provided an image of a real hedgehog.

MailOnline found that Google’s AI overview returned incorrect images for several searches for common edible mushrooms

In one particularly bizarre case, Google provided a photo of a real hedgehog when describing the hedgehog mushroom

As AI content and tools become more mainstream, there is also growing concern that novice collectors may be at serious risk.

Mr Renton said: ‘This is a real concern because we are dealing with things that are potentially toxic.

‘Google Image Search is not a reliable image search tool because the algorithm they use actually uses tagged words on the page rather than image recognition software to verify the accuracy of the tag.

“It’s a place to start, but people should always go to the source of the image and make their own judgments.”

Because mushrooms can look so similar, relying on AI can miss details that could distinguish a potentially dangerous species.

In one case, Mr. Renton used a popular AI-powered mushroom identification app on a white bowler cap mushroom, an extremely poisonous species.

Mr Renton says AI-powered apps and information could mistake poisonous species such as the white dome cap (pictured) for similar-looking edible mushrooms

However, the app confidently identified the mushroom as a St George’s mushroom, a highly regarded gourmet mushroom.

“If a novice had trusted the app, they would have poisoned themselves,” Renton says.

Recently, collectors were warned to avoid AI-generated foraging books sold on Amazon.

These books contained AI-generated descriptions and images that were, in many cases, inaccurate and misleading.

Vix Hill-Ryder, wild food educator and founder of the Family Foraging Kitchen, told MailOnline: ‘Although all mushrooms are safe to handle and smell, some wild mushrooms, such as the highly poisonous death cap, which can be mistaken for edible species, that is. toxic.

‘I would recommend using only online search engines and apps as a guiding reference tool to supplement or compare with a positive ID from a reputable book source, and by educating yourself preferably through a course with an expert in their field.’

A Google spokesperson told MailOnline that the company is “looking into this.”