Possible Diatrypella sp.

RobSutton · #1 (**permalink**) 16-02-2009, 07:50 PM

Found this growing on Hazel (Corylus avellana) near Stainforth in the Yorkshire Dales. The only thing I could come up with using Fungi of Switzerland was Diatrypella verrucaeformis but was thrown a little bit as it is not mentioned at all in Ellis & Ellis so I'm not really sure anymore - even if it is a British species? Is there an equivalent list to the Basidiomycota Checklist for Ascomycota?

Spores - conspicuous droplets at either end, allantoid c6-8µ x 1.5µ. Found it almost impossible to get intact asci out under the microscope so not sure if they are many-spored. Sorry about the poor quality photo.

As usual any help is gratefully received and very much appreciated.

ps probably a silly question but when you measure strongly curved spores should you go along the curve or direct from end to end?

Chris Yeates · #2 (**permalink**) 16-02-2009, 08:18 PM

hi Rob

Diatrypella verruciformis is the same as D. favacea (which is the current name)

so if it fits the description of favacea in E & E then that's your fungus . . . . surprised you haven't got any intact asci as that looks like nice material

measure end to end (along the curve would in some instances be impossible - google Helicodendron e.g. http://vietsciences.free.fr/khaocuu/.../namsoi116.jpg

)

cheers

Chris

mollisia · #3 (**permalink**) 16-02-2009, 08:22 PM

Hallo,

I think that Diatrypella verruciformis is correct.
It is may be not in ELLIS & ELLIS because it is too ubiquistic?
curved spores are usually measured from one to the other end in direct line, not following the bow.

best regards,
Andreas

RobSutton · #4 (**permalink**) 16-02-2009, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

hi Rob

[i]

measure end to end (along the curve would in some instances be impossible - google Helicodendron e.g. http://vietsciences.free.fr/khaocuu/.../namsoi116.jpg

)

cheers

Chris

I see what you mean.

Thanks once again Chris.

RobSutton · #5 (**permalink**) 16-02-2009, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mollisia

Hallo,

I think that Diatrypella verruciformis is correct.
It is may be not in ELLIS & ELLIS because it is too ubiquistic?
curved spores are usually measured from one to the other end in direct line, not following the bow.

best regards,
Andreas

Thanks Andreas - It is in fact in Ellis & Ellis under a different name, Chris sorted out the nomenclature for me by pointing out a name change.

mollisia · #6 (**permalink**) 16-02-2009, 09:24 PM

Hallo,

in Germany we keep Diatrypella favacea as a distinct species, growing on birch, whereas D. verruciformis occurs on a lot of hardwood, especially on Corylus and Alnus. And if I remember right, doesn't has D. favacea a yellowish stroma?

best regards,
Andreas

Chris Yeates · #7 (**permalink**) 17-02-2009, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mollisia

Hallo,

in Germany we keep Diatrypella favacea as a distinct species, growing on birch, whereas D. verruciformis occurs on a lot of hardwood, especially on Corylus and Alnus. And if I remember right, doesn't has D. favacea a yellowish stroma?

best regards,
Andreas

hi Andreas

I'm not sure about a yellowish stroma

. . . I assume that the British checklist is following Index Fungorum (about which I know you house doubts) in synonymizing the two taxa - they are clearly very close

I have no worries about keeping the two apart - as we have discussed in an earlier thread, my problem is when someone (who?) decides to synonymize records of Pyrenopeziza chailettii with Mollisia lychnidis . . . based on what? I hesitate to send my records of the Pyrenopeziza to a database which will do that to them . . .

Chris

mollisia · #8 (**permalink**) 17-02-2009, 06:25 AM

Hallo Chris,

sorry about the confusion with the yellow stroma - I mixed that up with Eutypella flavovirens ....

What concerns the differences between D. favacea and D. verruciformis we accept the following:
stroma in favacea 2,5-3 x longer than broad
spores smaller (appr. 5-6 x 1 µm vs. 6-7 x 1,5-2 µm in verruciformis)
growth exclusively on Betula (also on Alnus?)

I have no knowledge about pyrenos, so may be I better keep my mouth shut. Up to now I have found the two differences in stroma and spore size convincing enough to separate them. As I have no knowledge (and no literature) about pyrenos, may be there are investigations that show intermediates or molecular data give other argument? So may be I better keep my mouth shut when it comes to pyrenomycetes ....

bets regards,
Andreas