Mini Foray - 2 for ID please

[Nettle Runner]

Anston Stones Wood 1 July 2008

I had just over an hour in the Stones, searching a small clearing under mainly beech trees (I was looking for more Lactarius ) and found a few I am getting familiar with, and two unknowns.


Polyporus leptocephalus


Auricularia auricular-judae (I am not 100% with this one, as there were so many on one log)







An unknown. Cap 20mm Stem 20 x 2mm Smell none No Milk not brittle On wood


Scutellinia scutellata (I thought it unusual to find this on soil)





Marasmius rotula (I could not resist such a nice group)





Unknown. Found growing amongst moss, but it was attached to a twig.
Cap 20mm Stem 60 x 1.5mm Smell none

Your comments and observations welcomed
Les

[mykonik]

Originally Posted by Nettle Runner

Anston Stones Wood 1 July 2008

I had just over an hour in the Stones, searching a small clearing under mainly beech trees (I was looking for more Lactarius ) and found a few I am getting familiar with, and two unknowns.


Polyporus leptocephalus


Auricularia auricular-judae (I am not 100% with this one, as there were so many on one log)







An unknown. Cap 20mm Stem 20 x 2mm Smell none No Milk not brittle On wood


Scutellinia scutellata (I thought it unusual to find this on soil)





Marasmius rotula (I could not resist such a nice group)





Unknown. Found growing amongst moss, but it was attached to a twig.
Cap 20mm Stem 60 x 1.5mm Smell none

Your comments and observations welcomed
Les

Hello Les,

My comments re: your photographs..................

1. Yes - Polyporus leptocephalus as you suggest.

2. Yes - Auricularia auricula-judae, as sugested (a mixture of mature and immature basidiomes but please note the photo is upside down !)

3,4,5 - Interesting - A collybioid agaric, possibly a species of Collybia itself but difficult to say from a photo - you say it had no smell which rules out Micromphale. This could be sent to Kew if you collected the material and there was more than one specimen !

The only thing I though was that it could be Collybia erythropus (very young) but the stipe is very dark coloured and that still doesn't feel quite right !

6. Scutellinia sp. - there are several species in this genus, and can't be told apart without microscopy.

7, 8 - Marasmius rotula as you say

9, 10 - Also interesting - I think that this is a species of Entoloma growing amongst Calluna vulgaris by the look of it - but could not say which species, without microscopy [like all of this genus, impossible to name to species without microscopy - and even then extremely difficult !] - another one that Kew might accept if you collected the material. But if there was only ONE specimen I wouldn't bother since 'singletons' are usually no use as herbarium material.


Nick

[mykonik]

Hello again Les,

Regarding photo no's 3,4,and 5.......

I think that it may actually be a Micromphale because of the general aspect (which doesn't really fit Collybia erythropus) and there is one in this genus that has no smell whatsoever viz. Micromphale inodorum.

I have found this a few times in the last few years near Egham in Surrey, at this time of the year, but it is a rarely seen or collected thing in Britain.

The only feature that still slightly puzzles me is the rather white gills (they are normally supposed to be greyish-white) but if you have collected the material I would send it to Kew (when dried off) to check my diagnosis.

Nick

[Nettle Runner]

Hi Nick
Thanks for your most detailed comments and explanations.

I am now confused (easily done ) when you say single specimen are of no use to KEW.

Firstly, could you explain what KEW do on receiving a dried specimen.
Do the have to 'revive' it, or do they work on it in the dried state?
Then, why is a single specimen of no use. Some fungi must only grow as singletons. Is it that the examined specimen is destroyed, and a second is then required for their records / herbarium?

Just very curious, and not having experienced any microscopic examinations, totally in the dark.

Also, I was not aware that Scutellinia had more than one sp in the genus.

Finally, the pic was the correct way up, it was the log that got turned over

Les

[CapAndBracket]

Quote: Also, I was not aware that Scutellinia had more than one sp in the genus. unquote.

I'm afraid we only have the common species of many genre in our books,
imagine how big they would be to contain everythng.

Ellis + Ellis contains descriptions of 12 Scutellinia (so there are probably more)

Cheers J.P.

[mykonik]

Originally Posted by Nettle Runner

Hi Nick
Thanks for your most detailed comments and explanations.

I am now confused (easily done ) when you say single specimen are of no use to KEW.

Firstly, could you explain what KEW do on receiving a dried specimen.
Do the have to 'revive' it, or do they work on it in the dried state?
Then, why is a single specimen of no use. Some fungi must only grow as singletons. Is it that the examined specimen is destroyed, and a second is then required for their records / herbarium?

Just very curious, and not having experienced any microscopic examinations, totally in the dark.

Also, I was not aware that Scutellinia had more than one sp in the genus.

Finally, the pic was the correct way up, it was the log that got turned over

Les

Les,

More than happy to explain............

Specimens sent to Kew have to be microscopically examined if a diagnosis is required. This is done by rehydrating (if previously dried, which is the preferred way of sending things) and staining tiny fragments of the cap, gill edges, stipes etc., and looking at them microscopically.

The whole specimen is not usually used up intially (although it may be if very small !) BUT will then be incorporated into the national herbarium for investigators to have access to if needed for any future taxonomic studies. Since it may sit there for years (possibly many tens of years !) and during that time things gradually deteriorate, it is preferred if more than one specimen is made available - and to be honest it is usually possible to find more of something that appears to be just a singleton by carefully examining the surrounding substrate / area where one finds it (although I admit that is not an absolute !)

The best illustration of this is that there are numerous 'type' specimens (i.e the very first specimen on which a new species was described at some time in the past) in herbaria around the world, which consist of only a solitary specimen which has decayed or deteriorated so that (for instance) only the stipe is left - i.e completly useless for any form of study.

Hence the material needs to be of an ample quantity to justify the work carried out intially (by Kew) so that it may become a permanant specimen in the herbarium - singletons of things thought or known to be rarities, or new British records are kept however, but then the above comments come into play and one runs the risk of ending up with nothing more than a bit of stipe or a bit of gill.

The best example of this is that I can think of is Hygrocybe substrangulata Orton, which was described from British material, but the type of which now consists of only a tiny fragment of a gill - it was a singleton which has been gradually destroyed during subsequent examinations ! So now, no-one can ever compare the original fruitbody to anything !

As to Scutellinia species there are (currently) 26 accepted British species (and plenty more worldwide) - and they mostly look alike !! The available literature covers hardly any of them but that is quite normal in mycological circles, with too many genera, albeit with current work being undertaken it is getting better in certain areas.

Nick