Marasmius

[flaxton]

I found Marasmius androsaceus today on Heather debris





Not the best of images but when I checked on the A-Z the photo of androsaceus shows one picture of something I am sure is not androsaceus, which should have an almost black very thin stipe and a second of what I think is probably Marasmius rotula



(with the distinct collar of that species. Bulliardii and limosus also have this collar but have fewer gills)


The first photo of ramealis is OK but the second shows the same photo as androsaceus

The second photo of rotula looks more like androsaceus to me

Anyone with more experience got views?

Mal

[CloudedYellow]

It would be good to sort these out so I have downloaded them and put them in the archive so that the errors are easy to spot.

labelled_as_ramealis_1


labelled_as_ramealis_2


labelled_as_androsaceus_1


labelled_as_androsaceus_2


labelled_as_rotula_1


labelled_as_rotula_2


Mal is saying that he thinks that

ramealis 1 is ok

ramealis 2 is the same image as androsaceus 1

androsaceus 1 is not (I agree)

androsaceus 2 is probably rotula (I agree)

rotula 1 (Mal does not comment but I don't think that is rotula)

rotula 2 Mal thinks is looks like androsaceus

Richard

[flaxton]

Richard
As we have had no comments everyone must agree

Mal

[mykonik]

Originally Posted by CloudedYellow

It would be good to sort these out so I have downloaded them and put them in the archive so that the errors are easy to spot.

labelled_as_ramealis_1


labelled_as_ramealis_2


labelled_as_androsaceus_1


labelled_as_androsaceus_2


labelled_as_rotula_1


labelled_as_rotula_2


Mal is saying that he thinks that

ramealis 1 is ok

ramealis 2 is the same image as androsaceus 1

androsaceus 1 is not (I agree)

androsaceus 2 is probably rotula (I agree)

rotula 1 (Mal does not comment but I don't think that is rotula)

rotula 2 Mal thinks is looks like androsaceus

Richard

I hadn't noticed this one !!

ramealis 1 = Marasmiellus ramealis as suggested (it's common on coniferous debris even though most of the books don't mention that !)

ramealis 2 = Inocybe petiginosa !

androsaceus 1 = Inocybe petiginosa (same picture as above isn't it ?)

androsaceus 2 = Marasmius rotula

rotula 1 = ????? - Could be very young Marasmius wynnei but impossible to say with certainty from this photo. The dark stipe bases and light upper portion is suggestive of that species.

rotula 2 = Marasmius rotula (as suggested)

Nick

[fairplay]

We all knew that was Inocybe pet.. what was that again ? yeh, Inocybe petiginosa.

We all held back because we were testing you Nick

Neil.

[mykonik]

Originally Posted by fairplay

We all knew that was Inocybe pet.. what was that again ? yeh, Inocybe petiginosa.

We all held back because we were testing you Nick

Neil.

Hope I've not been found lacking !

Inocybe petiginosa is actually a rather common taxon, albeit grossly under-recorded due to it's cryptic colours and the very small basidiomes, these usually hidden under vegetation, fallen leaves or large grass tufts in woodland and it will also grow on very decayed woody substartes such as old stumps or fallen trunks.

It's very common on acidic soils in the New Forest (for instance) and also in some woodland on chalk in southern England e.g Vernditch Chase in South Wiltshire - just takes a great deal of looking for, but once seen never forgotten.

The small to very small size, pileus with 'frosted' appearence and the contrast between the pallid pileus and coloured stipe are typical.

Nick

[CloudedYellow]

Thanks Nick and Mal,

I have updated the images in the A-Z, I hope correctly!

Inocybe petiginosa is a new addition, I have added that with your comments Nick, hope that is ok with you.

Richard