Herbivore dung - Have a dung day!

[flaxton]

A fungus with the proper shape

With a granular surface part of the Nivei section
the first spores I looked at were just cylindrical so I struggled to fit with anything. The next group were angular

and then I noticed the ring on the stem which is very unusual for these small Coprinus so
C ephemeroides.

Mal

[chrisjohnson]

Nice one Mal, and very good photographs as usual. And yes,

Originally Posted by flaxton

A fungus with the proper shape ...Mal

it took a while to work out what I actually posted, and then just wanted to crawl under the nearest dung-heap

Chris

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by flaxton

. . . then I noticed the ring on the stem which is very unusual for these small Coprinus so
C ephemeroides.

Mal

yes . . . . interesting that no-one has re-disposed this one yet - it's clearly a Coprinopsis; first (and only) time I have had this was on incubated donkey dung from Weaponness Valley, Scarborough, in 1985.

what was the dung Mal?

cheers

Chris

[flaxton]

Chris

It is the same deer dung from Duncombe Park that has so far produced Pilobolus crystalinus,P roridus var umbonatus, Ascobolus crenulatus, A stictoideus, A equinus, Thelebolus crustaceus Mucor hiemalis and an as yet unknown Coprinus. Which is good but not quite as good as the deer dung from Askham Bog.

Mal

Ps I was surprised this was still a Coprinus

[SheffieldLass]

Originally Posted by flaxton

A fungus with the proper shape


and then I noticed the ring on the stem which is very unusual for these small Coprinus so
C ephemeroides.

Mal

Snap, or at least I think so ...




On dung, November 22 2011 ... now this bit of land is grazed by cattle and sheep, so anyone care to identify the dung? This was a spot where both do their business ... methinks sheep.

The spores were a bit on the big side though
(8.7) 9.2-10.0 (10.2) x (7.8) 8.0-8.6 (8.9) um, Q av 1.2
average size 9.6x8.3um

But with a ring, with granular veil. Everything else fits.

Melanie

[flaxton]

Melaine
I am sure you are right. There are only a couple of other Coprinus that have the veil and they are much bigger.

Mal

[stickman]

Hi all

I had C.ephemeroides last year from a patch of lawn which had the sediment from a fish pond reguarly emptied on it:



Do you think old Koi Carp dung could win an award for the most obscure substrate mentioned on WAB?

Cheers,
Nick

[flaxton]

I thought it was unusual but it is obviously as common as ...... well ....muck.

Mal

[derekschafer]

Nice photos of C. ephemeroides. The original DNA on Coprinus cordisporus(one of the three species in this group recognised at the time, the others being ephemeroides and patouillardii) placed it outside the Coprinopsis clade, so Readhead et al did not put these species into any of the replacement genera. On morphology they key out with the rest of Coprinopsis. They might get put into a new genus at some stage. Since then there was some additional DNA done on Hawaii collections, leading to the suggestion that all three are the same species.

It would be good to get some DNA done on a series of collections with and without the ring and on different substrates. If they are all mixed up in the resulting tree, the Hawaii paper might be right, if they group with these characters, the classical taxonomy would probably be right.

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by derekschafer

Nice photos of C. ephemeroides. The original DNA on Coprinus cordisporus(one of the three species in this group recognised at the time, the others being ephemeroides and patouillardii) placed it outside the Coprinopsis clade, so Readhead et al did not put these species into any of the replacement genera. On morphology they key out with the rest of Coprinopsis. They might get put into a new genus at some stage. Since then there was some additional DNA done on Hawaii collections, leading to the suggestion that all three are the same species.

It would be good to get some DNA done on a series of collections with and without the ring and on different substrates. If they are all mixed up in the resulting tree, the Hawaii paper might be right, if they group with these characters, the classical taxonomy would probably be right.

that's interesting . . . . I've also chased up
Coprinus Pers. and the disposition of Coprinus species sensu lato
in Taxon 50 (2001) (Redhead et al.)

where there is discussion of the potential generic name Annularius Roussel, 1806 for residual 'Coprinus' species; there is an interesting comment (on p. 208):

"It should be noted that the name Coprinus ephemeroides is currently misapplied in all modem literature. Bulliard illustrated taxonomically significant features for this species, especially the cottony central strand in the interior of the stipe, an anatomical character that could never form in the minute species to which the name is currently applied. Furthermore, it is a feature that J. E. Lange (1939) admitted he could not find in the species to which he applied the name (and whose concept most modem authors follow). It is here suggested that Agaricus ephemeroides Bull. (1793, pl. 582; see also Bulliard & Ventenat, 1809) was actually a small form of Coprinus sterquilinus or possibly C. spadiceisporus Bogart (see more discussion on this taxonomic feature below). Hence, it is likely that both species Roussel named in his genus Annularius, A. typhoides and A. ephemeroides Bull. sensu Bull., are in fact congeneric (using molecular data as a standard), with the result that typification by either species would have the same taxonomic result, i.e., Annularius would be synonymous with Coprinus s.str."

I therefore admit my comment above that "it's clearly a Coprinopsis" is rather simplistic and needs qualifying . . .

Chris