Washed out Entoloma nitidum?

FungiJohn · #1 (**permalink**) 05-03-2009, 09:31 PM

A rather washed out species and still needing to go under the scope:

Would appreciate comments ... I'll then spend a couple of hours

John

mollisia · #2 (**permalink**) 05-03-2009, 09:41 PM

Hallo John,

no, that is something much better than E. nitidum.
I cannot say just from looking what it is, but I'm sure it's something not too common. Entoloma jubatum looks quite similar, also may be plebejum or even E. porphyrophaeum.

This one needs thorough microscopy. Important will be the existence or absence of Cheilozystidia, same for clamps and you certainly should look for the pigment situation in the cuticule as well as for the cuticule type. Pigments always in water mount, because some Entoloma have two sorts of pigments, of which the vacuolare one is soluable in KOH. In case you use KOH you will classify those in the group with only encrusting pigment, because the KOH diluted the intracellular pigment!

best regards and good luck

Andreas

FungiJohn · #3 (**permalink**) 05-03-2009, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mollisia

Hallo John,

no, that is something much better than E. nitidum.
I cannot say just from looking what it is, but I'm sure it's something not too common. Entoloma jubatum looks quite similar, also may be plebejum or even E. porphyrophaeum.

This one needs thorough microscopy. Important will be the existence or absence of Cheilozystidia, same for clamps and you certainly should look for the pigment situation in the cuticule as well as for the cuticule type. Pigments always in water mount, because some Entoloma have two sorts of pigments, of which the vacuolare one is soluable in KOH. In case you use KOH you will classify those in the group with only encrusting pigment, because the KOH diluted the intracellular pigment!

best regards and good luck

Andreas

Thanks Andreas

There was something about this one that didn't quite ring bells! I might just pass this one to Kew

I'll update you when I know more

John

mollisia · #4 (**permalink**) 05-03-2009, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FungiJohn

Thanks Andreas

There was something about this one that didn't quite ring bells! I might just pass this one to Kew

I'll update you when I know more

John

Hallo John,

why not have a look at the gill edge first? May be there are some characteristic cheilocystidia.
If it should turn out as Entoloma jubatum (which NOORDELOOS says to be common, what contradicts my experience, but Noordeloos has of course much more experience), then it has charackteristic cheilocystidia and also quite typical spores. Some for E. porphyrophaeum and plebejum.
I think the chance is good to see something that helps you in determination. And if you look at it, just make a preparation of some cuticule hyphae to look if they are by chance clampless (E. henrici).

best regards,
Andreas

FungiJohn · #5 (**permalink**) 05-03-2009, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mollisia

Hallo John,

why not have a look at the gill edge first? May be there are some characteristic cheilocystidia.
If it should turn out as Entoloma jubatum (which NOORDELOOS says to be common, what contradicts my experience, but Noordeloos has of course much more experience), then it has charackteristic cheilocystidia and also quite typical spores. Some for E. porphyrophaeum and plebejum.
I think the chance is good to see something that helps you in determination. And if you look at it, just make a preparation of some cuticule hyphae to look if they are by chance clampless (E. henrici).

best regards,
Andreas

OK, will do Andreas. I'm also fairly confident in getting further samples if need be.

John