Hydrophyllum occidentale

Hydrophyllum occidentale

Hydrophyllum occidentale, also known by the direct translation, Western Waterleaf, is a close relative to the Ballhead Waterleaf (Hydrophyllum capitatum), which I have had much better success with. Go read that article to learn about a much better edible plant.

Western Waterleaf is a larger plant, and very much a perennial. The leaves look much the same as Ballhead Waterleaf, deeply pinnately divided, with the lower divisions going all the way to the stem. The leaves are taller, and there are more of them as well. The biggest difference between Western and Ballhead, though, is that the flower clusters are below the leaves in Ballhead Waterleaf, and above the leaves in Western Waterleaf.

The root is a tangle of thickened black roots, each about the size of a bean sprout, all attached to a gnarly central perennial core. With Ballhead Waterleaf, I separated each of the roots to make cleaning easier, but with Western, I needed to pull all the roots off the central core just to make cleaning possible.

The leaves are fuzzy, but not nearly as furry as Ballhead Waterleaf. The younger ones are not bad, even raw with the fuzz on them. The older ones are a bit tougher, and have a bit of bitterness to them. I boiled them for 2-3 minutes, like I do with Ballhead Waterleaf, and they turned out rather tough; not actually stringy, but definitely tough. Even the younger ones seemed tougher. Maybe it's just because I expect to have to chew a raw leaf, but not a limp cooked leaf.

The stems are quite tough and stringy; not very edible. Quite a contrast to the nice crisp stems of Ballhead Waterleaf.

I cooked the roots for 20 minutes, just like I do with Ballhead Waterleaf, and found them to still be very tough and stringy. Even a full half hour did not help. There were a few lighter colored roots, which I assume are younger, which did turn out tender, and good to eat. But considering how few of them I found, I don't think it worth digging up the whole plant just to try to sort out a few of those from the rest.

In summary, the young leaves can be munched on if you wanted, but Western Waterleaf is in no way the 3-course feast that I have found Ballhead Waterleaf to be. Ballhead Waterleaf is much more abundant in my mountains, and so I will likely leave the stands of Western Waterleaf in peace.

Pteridium aquilinum

Pteridium aquilinum
"fiddlehead" with last year's dry fronds behind

Bracken Fern (Pteridium aquilinum) grows everywhere, all around the globe, on every continent. It is used for food in many places, but seems to have an especially strong following in Korea. Even if it is all the same species, there will be regional variations, so here is my experience with my local type.

Bracken Fern or Brake grows in large areas up in our mountains, usually along with aspen trees. The aspens grow above it, but the ferns tend to shade out most other plants. If you find it, you will find a lot of it. I found it just getting started at the end of May, when the shoots were just the right size and tenderness for picking.

The shoots are called fiddleheads, because they are young ferns, but unlike most ferns, Bracken Fern shoots do not look at all like fiddles. Instead of a spiral, the stem is bent over once, in an inverted U shape, and the fronds are curled up in two rows, getting ready to spread out on each side of the stem. It looks more like a clenched eagle claw than a fiddle. There will be plenty of dry brown fronds on the ground from the year before, so you can check some other characteristics. They are twice pinnately branching, the first time opposite or nearly opposite, the second time alternate, and then the simple leaflets form a row along each branch.

Bracken contains a known carcinogen called ptaquiloside, which is fairly volatile, and should be deactivated by cooking. Hank Shaw has a well researched description of Bracken and how to cook it on his blog, "hunter-angler-gardener-cook". It also contains a B1 inhibitor, so you may not want to eat it all the time, even if they do it in Korea. Since it is only good when sprouting, it would take a lot of effort to eat all the time anyway.

I cooked it in the manner recommended by Koreans: boil it in salt water for a few minutes, then soak it in cold water for an hour, then saute in whatever fashion you like. I tried it sauted in butter and salt, and also with sesame oil, onions, and soy sauce. But I also couldn't resist tasting a little raw and before sauteing for comparison. 

When raw, the stem is tender, fairly bland, and mucilaginous (slimy), with the outer skin being kind of crisp. The fronds are also quite tender, and have a crisp texture, without the mucilaginous quality of the stems. There is some bitterness there, but not very much.

After boiling and soaking, they are about the same, still tender, but not actually crisp any more.

Unfortunately though, the saute step seemed to bring out quite a bit of bitterness, especially as an aftertaste. I didn't enjoy them much in the butter and salt saute. (Actually, I used a soy-free margarine, because some of us here are lactose-intolerant.) The taste is like a fairly bitter, but otherwise bland, asparagus. The sesame/soy saute was better, with the strong flavors offsetting the blandness, and maybe hiding most of the bitterness.

Other people have reported much better results with this plant, so it could be that our regional variety is just not as good. In any case, the best results for me came from simply boiling them. Without the saute step, it is probably a good idea to change the water at least once.

Smilacina racemosa

Smilacina racemosa

False Solomon's Seal (Smilacina racemosa) is a great tasting spring shoot and has become one of my favorite wild foods to cook with in the spring. But in order to enjoy it, one must be able to distinguish it from the more slender and much more bitter species of False Solomon's Seal, and learn to identify it when it is young, before it is easily identifiable from the flowers.

First, one has to distinguish between Smilacina racemosa (False Solomon's Seal) and Smilacina stellata (Starry False Solomon's Seal). They look very similar, but S. stellata is much more slender in both the leaves and the stem. The biggest difference is in the flower cluster (inflorescence). S. stellata has flowers in a simple raceme, where each flower stalk branches off from a central stem. S. racemosa has flowers in a compound raceme or panicle, where there is a central stem, but instead of each stalk branching off from that having a single flower, each stalk is itself a smaller raceme of flowers.

top: S. racemosa root
bottom: S. stellata root

The roots are also noticeably different, so that might turn out to be a better way of being sure you are picking the correct species at the time when the shoots are young and tender. Both species propagate primarily by the roots, which grow horizontally an inch or two underground and send up shoots occasionally, so they are usually found growing in large colonies. The roots of S. stellata are rather ordinary looking roots, with smooth tan skin and lots of rootlets off the main root. The roots of S. racemosa are quite different looking; they are thicker and have rings giving them a segmented appearance, such that it doesn't take much imagination to see a resemblance to insect grubs. This makes it fairly easy, once you are familiar enough with the plant to identify it when it is a young shoot, to pull up some root and be sure you have the species you want.

Second, one must pick the shoots of the plant when they are very young, before the leaves have fully developed. When the leaves have spread out fully, alternating up the stem, the stem will be tough and fibrous, so it's not very good eating. But before the leaves are fully developed, when they are still in a dense cluster at the top of the stem, the stem is tender and very good eating. They are only at this stage for a short time in the spring. If you miss them, you will have to wait until next year.

All of us who tried the shoots thought they were very good both raw and after steaming for 5-10 minutes. When raw, they are tender and juicy, and have a distinct flavor which we all found hard to describe. The best I way I can describe it is somewhere between "fruity" and "oniony". After steaming, they were even better. They distinctive flavor is toned down, and they taste somewhat like asparagus, but maybe even better than asparagus.

I have been used the young shoots in all kinds of dishes. They work great anywhere you would use asparagus, such as in stir fry, curry, savory crepes, etc. I even tried it chopped up and fried it in a cheesesteak sandwich, and it added a really great flavor. The shoots store well in the refrigerator, where I was able to keep them for over two weeks before using them all.

The leaves have a good flavor even after the stems have become tough, although they become more bitter as they get older. Still, they are never as bitter as Smilacina stellata. They can be eaten raw at any time, but I especially enjoyed the steamed cluster of leaves at the top of the young shoot, which have a slightly minty flavor to them. So don't discard the leaves before cooking the shoots; they are great too.

Later in the year, you can enjoy the fruits. They are small, round or slightly lobed, and grow in clusters at the top of the plant, so you strip a bunch off at one time. They become red and juicy when fully ripe, but they are usually mildly bitter. If you wait until after the first cold spell, when the leaves are turning yellow and starting to fall off, and are lucky enough to find some berries still hanging on, they can be extremely good at this time. These late season, very ripe berries are sweet and cherry-flavored. I also enjoy the unripe fruit, when they are whitish-green with little red spots. They are firm instead of juicy, and have an oniony flavor which goes very well with meats. I have boiled them or fried them. They were very good fried up with a little sausage and greens such as Chenopodium album.

I have tried the roots from this plant. Boiling for 20 minutes with a change of water rendered them marginally edible, but still very bitter, and still much too fibrous to eat.

Note that the official genus name has been changed from Smilacina (Desf.) to Maianthemum (F.H. Wigg.), so you may find more recent information under the botanical names Maianthemum racemosum and Maianthemum stellatum.

Smilacina stellata

Smilacina stellata

There are two kinds of False Solomon's Seal, Smilacina racemosa and Smilacina stellata. (Younger botanists have reclassified these plants as Maianthemum racemosum and Maianthemum stellatum, showing that you cannot always trust the latin name either.) Smilacina stellata, commonly known as Starry False Solomon's Seal, is far more common in my area. It is distinguished from the other species by being more slender in the size of its leaves, stem, and root. It also has fewer flowers in a simpler inflorescence. That is, there is a single flower or fruit on each branch coming off the main stem, whereas with Smilacina racemosa, each branch from the main stem branches again such that there are multiple flowers or fruit on each branch.

All parts of the plant are bitter, making this plant mostly one to avoid.

Samuel Thayer says (in Nature's Garden) that he quite likes the shoots of S. racemosum, but S. stellata has "very small shoots of poorer flavor". Even allowing for the poorer flavor, which was quite bitter, they are very tough and fibrous, and hard to get anything out of. Some of the very youngest ones were less tough when cooked, but not less bitter.

The rhizomes are easy to pull up if one finds them in soft soil. After boiling for 20-25 minutes to soften them, they become moderately edible, but still quite bitter. Not as bad as the shoots, but bad enough to be avoided unless starving, which is unlikely considering the number of much better tasting plants which grow in the same area.

In contrast to Smilacina stellata, its slightly larger cousin, Smilicina racemosa, is much better tasting and much less bitter. It is a very good edible plant, and you can read more about it in its own article.