Fungi for id/confirmation

[Leif]

The first one comes from the New Forest:

"New Forest 17 October 2006
Cortinarius with Oak. Trooping in large numbers. Cap 3-6cm ochre-yellow conical pointedly umbonate. Gills ochre broad distant. Stem concolorous clavate. Flesh pale ochre smell musty."



I am pretty sure what this one is, but I am prepared to be disabused.

The second comes from Dancers End in Buckinghamshire:

"Dancers End 15 October 2007
Entoloma euchroum. Purple agaric on dead wood (Ash or Hazel perhaps). Cap purple about 1 cm flattened. Gills deep purple. Stem purple pale at base tapered to cap. In a clump of two. SP89860943. Spores polygonal 7 sided 10x6 10x6 10x6 = 10x6 um2. (Very few spores.)"



And the third comes from Ashridge Forest also in Buckinghamshire. Sadly the description is spartan with no spore data:

"Small completely purple agaric on fallen deciduous wood. Cap about 4 cm. Entoloma euchroum. SP97051560"



The only Entoloma that I know which has a completely purple form is E. euchroum, and according to Noordeloos, it is unlikely to be confused with other species. But there is quite a difference between the above two collections.

And finally, what would people recommend as a solvent for Congo Red powder. In plain water it dissolved, but comes out of solution after a few days or more.

[mykonik]

Originally Posted by Leif

The first one comes from the New Forest:

"New Forest 17 October 2006
Cortinarius with Oak. Trooping in large numbers. Cap 3-6cm ochre-yellow conical pointedly umbonate. Gills ochre broad distant. Stem concolorous clavate. Flesh pale ochre smell musty."



I am pretty sure what this one is, but I am prepared to be disabused.

The second comes from Dancers End in Buckinghamshire:

"Dancers End 15 October 2007
Entoloma euchroum. Purple agaric on dead wood (Ash or Hazel perhaps). Cap purple about 1 cm flattened. Gills deep purple. Stem purple pale at base tapered to cap. In a clump of two. SP89860943. Spores polygonal 7 sided 10x6 10x6 10x6 = 10x6 um2. (Very few spores.)"



And the third comes from Ashridge Forest also in Buckinghamshire. Sadly the description is spartan with no spore data:

"Small completely purple agaric on fallen deciduous wood. Cap about 4 cm. Entoloma euchroum. SP97051560"



The only Entoloma that I know which has a completely purple form is E. euchroum, and according to Noordeloos, it is unlikely to be confused with other species. But there is quite a difference between the above two collections.

And finally, what would people recommend as a solvent for Congo Red powder. In plain water it dissolved, but comes out of solution after a few days or more.

The first is a 'Telamonia group' Cortinarius , and I would not be inclined to dis-abuse you Leif - would be interested to hear what you think it is in due course through !! Was the stipe very solid / hard fleshed ??

The second is probably Entoloma euchroum - the uniformityy of the colour of the basidiome is a good pointer but it's a little bit chunky in stature. E. euchroum is normally a smaller, thinner and more 'gracile' thing ! The habitat at Dancer's End would be right for it !

The third is almost certainly a pallid form of Lepista nuda ! You didn't mention a 'strong smell of menthol' hence I doubt whether it is the hardly recorded L. glaucocana (which at one time was thought of a a pallid form of L. nuda with a strong menthol smell !!)

Nick

[Leif]

Thanks Nick.

Blimey, I was well off for the third one. Could Lepista nuda grow on wood? (I have seen many fungi that usually grow on soil such as Clitocybe butyracea on wood.) I think I need to improve my collection notes. Hohum.

My suspicion for the first one is Cortinarius hinnuleus. The mouldy/earthy smell, distant gill and colour fit. The stem lacks the usual banding though, which leaves doubts in my mind, though it is a variable species. I am pretty sure I would have sectioned a specimen, but clearly I did not note anything unusual, apart from the smell.

[Fungus Ken]

The lack of a ring zone on the stem would raise questions in my mind over Cortinarius hinnuleus, as would the rather ochre-yellow colours. That bulbous base to the stem is a puzzle as well.

There is another species, C. conicus, which keys out in Karl Soop's key alongside C. hinnuleus, in which the cap stains black. This grows with beech, hornbeam and oak and the colours look closer in the image in Cortinarius Flora Photographica. But again, this species should have distinct veil remnants on the stem and a ring zone. The bulbous base to the stem would not be right either.

So I haven't a clue, but if it is C. hinnuleus it would not be at all typical.

Ken

[mykonik]

Originally Posted by Leif

Thanks Nick.

Blimey, I was well off for the third one. Could Lepista nuda grow on wood? (I have seen many fungi that usually grow on soil such as Clitocybe butyracea on wood.) I think I need to improve my collection notes. Hohum.

My suspicion for the first one is Cortinarius hinnuleus. The mouldy/earthy smell, distant gill and colour fit. The stem lacks the usual banding though, which leaves doubts in my mind, though it is a variable species. I am pretty sure I would have sectioned a specimen, but clearly I did not note anything unusual, apart from the smell.

Well there you are Leif - not everything you read in books is gospel - Lepista nuda does (not infrequently) grow on wood but only when it's fairly far gone and rotten - and on that note so does Paxillus involutus - quite commonly in fact (I only added that last comment since someone had queried in another thread whether or not P. involutus did or didn't - and it does) and whilst on the subject of 'things on wood' Lycoperon pyriforme is NOT the only puffball to grown on wood, despite what the books say - L. perlatum and L. molle are not infrequent on wood, but again only when it's well rotten !

I have to say that Cortinarius hinnuleus was my initial thought (thats why I asked about the hardness of the stipe) but as Ken points out in a later post, it would be somewhat atypical if it were C. hinnuleus. - it'll end up being 'just another brown 'Telamonia' Cortinarius I'm afraid !!

I suppose one could get around the critical diagnostic problem by saying it Cortinarius cf. hinnuleus (cf. = 'compare with')



Nick

[flaxton]

Originally Posted by mykonik

and whilst on the subject of 'things on wood' Lycoperon pyriforme is NOT the only puffball to grown on wood, despite what the books say - L. perlatum and L. molle are not infrequent on wood, but again only when it's well rotten !



Nick

Don't do that Nick There have to be some identifications we can do without thinking.

Mal

[Leif]

Originally Posted by mykonik

Well there you are Leif - not everything you read in books is gospel - Lepista nuda does (not infrequently) grow on wood but only when it's fairly far gone and rotten - and on that note so does Paxillus involutus - quite commonly in fact (I only added that last comment since someone had queried in another thread whether or not P. involutus did or didn't - and it does) and whilst on the subject of 'things on wood' Lycoperon pyriforme is NOT the only puffball to grown on wood, despite what the books say - L. perlatum and L. molle are not infrequent on wood, but again only when it's well rotten !

I have to say that Cortinarius hinnuleus was my initial thought (thats why I asked about the hardness of the stipe) but as Ken points out in a later post, it would be somewhat atypical if it were C. hinnuleus. - it'll end up being 'just another brown 'Telamonia' Cortinarius I'm afraid !!

I suppose one could get around the critical diagnostic problem by saying it Cortinarius cf. hinnuleus (cf. = 'compare with')



Nick

Thanks Nick, at least my suspicion about the Cort. was sensible, though probably wrong. I've previously misidentified Lycoperdon perlatum as it was on wood until someone pointed out the error.

Regarding not believing everything you read in books, there is a thread somewhere where we discuss the errors in popular mushroom books. Most have a few obvious errors where the species does not match the photo. Phillips seems to be the only book with no obvious mistakes whereas Jordan has a fair few obvious errors. And of course quite often the descriptions are contraditory. Hygrocybe were largely impenetrable until Boertmann's book appeared.