You wanted to read the book, you were excited to crack it open, you came into it with good faith and anticipation… but you ended up dnf-ing it. Which book and why?
Mine was The Maid by Nita Prose. It was for my book club and looked like a fun murder mystery. Instead I got instant manic-pixie-dream-neurodivergent-girl vibes, and I noped out before the crime scene was even found.
They made one statement and it contains three different factual errors, with a fourth possible depending on how you define the word jungle. It’s a sign that the entire book is poorly researched, and contains no accuracy.
Ah, the Dan Brown special.
Cordyceps is a genus rather than a species, and it exists worldwide but most species are found in Asia. What’s the third error?
They’re not found only in “jungle” or as I would put it “tropical rain forest.” They’re also found in plains and in alpine mountainous areas
specis
That would be a grammatical/spelling error, though, not a factual error.
Getting involved with a Sicilian when death is on the line
Ok I am no mycologist but I have to know how they managed such a density of errors. Without research I am going to guess: 1. Cordyceps is not a species 2. It exists elsewhere 3. Misspelling or improper capitalization of Cordyceps, or the word “speci(e)s”?
Also the Amazon is technically a rainforest, not a jungle (even though Amazon Jungle is a common name)
Yeah. Cordyceps is a genus with hundreds of species , it’s worldwide, but mostly in Asia
The third error, to my way of thinking, is that Cordyceps are found in habitats outside of “jungle.” Many of them collected for the herbal trade are found in alpine areas above the tree line where it is easier to find them.
I let the jungle-thing slide. It’s a direct quote so my problems with it was mistaking genus for species, misspelling “species” and being wrong about the distribution.
I just couldn’t look past all that.
Oh, I assumed “specis” was a typo on your end. That’s a pretty bad typo to have in the second sentence of a published work.