| | S | M | T | W | T | F | S | | 29 | 30 |
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
| |
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
| |
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
| |
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
| |
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
| 1 | 2 | » Stats |
Members: 50,141
Threads: 82,304
Posts: 852,998
Top Poster: glsammy (15,069) | | Welcome to our newest member, nippynorman | |  | 
01-10-2008, 12:31 PM
|  | Knight Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Red Rose County
Posts: 5,205
| | | Earthball comparison for I.D. This was identified for me yesterday as Scleroderma citrinum - Common Earthball. (Thanks to everyone for that).
Could you please tell me if this one (below) is the same type but at a different stage?
They look quite different to me, but were both photographed in the same wood, on the same day.
Thanks again
Mike. | 
03-10-2008, 05:02 PM
|  | Knight Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Red Rose County
Posts: 5,205
| | | Re: Earthball comparison for I.D. No takers on a possible I.D. for picture 2?
Been back to the same area today and both types are still there, although the earthballs have mostly opened up with spores puffing out at the slightest touch.
I've had a good look through WAB's fungi identify page, but can't find anything looking the same.
Any help would be much appreciated.
Regards
Mike. | 
03-10-2008, 05:19 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: York
Posts: 3,314
| | | Re: Earthball comparison for I.D. Mike
I would say that 2 is an old 1  People don't normally photo earth balls and puff balls when they are "past their best" but I suppose to aid identification it is something we could do.
Mal | 
03-10-2008, 05:28 PM
|  | Knight Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Red Rose County
Posts: 5,205
| | | Re: Earthball comparison for I.D. Quote:
Originally Posted by flaxton ...I would say that 2 is an old 1... | Thanks flaxton - As you will have deduced, I am a complete numpty as far as fungi goes.
Regards
Mike. | 
03-10-2008, 06:00 PM
|  | Member of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Poole, Dorset
Posts: 454
| | | Re: Earthball comparison for I.D. Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancashire Lad Thanks flaxton - As you will have deduced, I am a complete numpty as far as fungi goes.
Regards
Mike. | Don't worry you're not alone there Mike. | 
03-10-2008, 06:20 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: York
Posts: 3,314
| | | Re: Earthball comparison for I.D. Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancashire Lad Thanks flaxton - As you will have deduced, I am a complete numpty as far as fungi goes.
Regards
Mike. | Some of us more experienced forayers act like numpties on occasions | 
03-10-2008, 07:05 PM
| | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,261
| | | Re: Earthball comparison for I.D. | 
03-10-2008, 07:35 PM
| | New Member | | Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18
| | | Re: Earthball comparison for I.D. Quote:
Originally Posted by flaxton Mike
I would say that 2 is an old 1  People don't normally photo earth balls and puff balls when they are "past their best" but I suppose to aid identification it is something we could do.
Mal | Hi,
I thought that was a really good idea. I am too old to become a fungi expert now, "numpty" and "past my best"  I just want to learn about those that I see regularly but I want to learn about their life cycle. Why they are there and that kind of thing. I know that I can look it up once I have got an ID but the internet isn't all it's cracked up to be.
It wouldn't just be an aid to identification, it would say more about what happens next. Earthballs are a good example because they tend to hang around for a bit.
Here is a pic of Scleroderma citrinum (var simpson?)
Cheers
Colin | 
03-10-2008, 08:24 PM
| | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,261
| | | Re: Earthball comparison for I.D. Hi Colin,
Not sure what you mean really, but Scleroderma citrinum only tends to hang around a bit simply because of it's thick leathery 'skin' - the other earthballs most commonly seen are thinner skinned and wouldn't normally last so long, but I can't see if there are any advantages or disadvantages in this.
By the way, the Parasitic Bolete Pseudoboletus parasiticus for some reason only grows on S.citrinum, but we are told to look out for other Boletes growing on other Scleroderma spp., but there are no known records yet, just wishful thinking I think.
Neil.
Oh, by the way, where did this var. simpson come from ? |  | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | | | | 25 members and 354 guests | | Ace, Action_Man, borg, clowder, Fibonacci, GTH, jaguarondi, Jennie, Naturenutz, nikolai_avenger, nippynorman, Pete Collins, Richard Baber, RobinP, Sofija, Stalkball, sunnydale, sweedie, thewoose, UB4 gardener, wayne h, Weedy, welsh.lensman, willowjay, Za | » New Wildlife Posts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | » New Environment Posts | | | | | | | | | » New Activity Posts | | | | | | | | | » New Community Posts | | | | | | | | | |