Entoloma?

[SheffieldLass]

Found yesterday, just the one, in slightly-improved grassland, close-cropped sheep pasture, acid, but probably within the radius of influence of a single oak tree.




I was going to dismiss this as Marasmius oreades, because of the cream and pink look, and there were some in a nearby field 5 days ago. But thought I'd just check the spores to be certain, as I had a slight niggling feeling that it wasn't ... and this is what I got, not what I was expecting at all ....

very knobbly spores. Basidia 4 spored

big, thick walled, crystal topped cystidia, abundant on face and gill edge

clamps present (believe me they are there though the detail seems to have been lost on upload)

I then looked and realised the gills have a pinky look, though now a day later they are more like beige with a hint of pink, so with those spores I assume it must be Entoloma, unless there is anything else which has ones like these?
A very quick look at FAN1 and funga Nordica has drawn a blank. I've not yet done a cap scalp or looked at the stipe, and i should have already gone to bed, so it is back in the fridge and will get looked at tomorrow evening.

Is this Entoloma, or something else obvious that I've missed ....

Melanie

[SheffieldLass]

Instead of thinking grassland and Entoloma subsection Inocephalus, I'm now thinking oak/Inocybe might be more along the right lines .... cystidia are certainly the right type...

[Chris Yeates]

definitely an Inocybe. . . look at those thick-walled cystidia ('metuloids') - might be in with a hope as you have some characters there*, but it's a difficult genus . . . you could be in the mixtilis / margaritispora / praetervisa area (though I think you can exclude the first one as it is a conifer associate)

* nature and distribution of cystidia on the stem can be very important

Chris

(PS nothing like oreades, surely?)

[ManwithNoname]

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

. . . you could be in the mixtilis / margaritispora / praetervisa area (though I think you can exclude the first one as it is a conifer associate)

... but wouldn't these species all have more of a distinct basal bulb on the stem?

Keying out an Inocybe can be a nightmare!

PS According to the Basidiomycota Checklist:

I. mixtilis - 'Habitat: On soil with deciduous, or rarely coniferous trees in mixed woodland.'

[SheffieldLass]

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

(PS nothing like oreades, surely?)

I think there is quite a resemblance here (maybe not to the experienced eye). These were in a nearby field.



And a typical spore ...


Now I hope I'm not going to be embarassed by having got this one wrong ...

I need to check the condition of the Inocybe, see if it is still OK in the fridge .. I have a friend who is very good on Inocybe, and has all the literature, see if we can get it to species level. Using Funga Nordica I too wondered if it was I mixtilis / margaritispora / praetervisa as that was where the key seemed to lead but as MWNN commented, mine doesn't really have a bulbous base, which creates a definite doubt ... I'll need to look at the other features like the caulocystidia.

Melanie

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by SheffieldLass

I think there is quite a resemblance here (maybe not to the experienced eye). These were in a nearby field.



And a typical spore ...


Now I hope I'm not going to be embarassed by having got this one wrong ...

I need to check the condition of the Inocybe, see if it is still OK in the fridge .. I have a friend who is very good on Inocybe, and has all the literature, see if we can get it to species level. Using Funga Nordica I too wondered if it was I mixtilis / margaritispora / praetervisa as that was where the key seemed to lead but as MWNN commented, mine doesn't really have a bulbous base, which creates a definite doubt ... I'll need to look at the other features like the caulocystidia.

Melanie

hi

no, that is definitely oreades I agree - though the cracking of the top (which is slightly reminiscent of your Inocybe) is somewhat atypical - probably caused by the successive rain-then-dry weather we have been experiencing

I concede that the softwood / hardwood link is probably not of particular importance as regards mixtilis (I was following FoS)

looking at Britzelmeyer's original description of mixtilis as published by Saccardo when he transferred it to Inocybe from the virtually all-inclusive Agaricus, he describes it has having "Pileo subviscoso, fibrilloso, rimuloso, pallide flavo-albo . . . medio flavo-rufo umbonatoque" was yours slightly viscous when fresh? it could certainly be described as "pale yellowish-white"; interestingly he doesn't mention anything about the stipe base - that has clearly come from later descriptions . . . . nor does he mention habitat other than to say "in silvis Bavariae australis" and I daresay that southern Bavarian woods can be quite varied

also, rather interestingly, Kuehner and Romagnesi, in the Flore Analytique (1953) while they admittedly do include mixtilis in their "groupe : Marginatae" - a key feature of which is a white stipe (at least early on), key it to "Espèces venant dans les bois ou dans les prés . . ." - i.e. species occuring in woodland and in meadows

doubtless Andreas will have something cogent to say

best

Chris

PS I've now linked a second monitor to one of my laptops - makes life a lot easier being able to keep different windows fully open at the same time - drag stuff around from one screen to the next - great fun, I thoroughly recommend it

[SheffieldLass]

It has been a marathon session trying to come to an id on this one .. must have used about 6 books and a fair few keys ... And certainly the three main contenders were I mixtilis, I margaritispora and I praetervisa which ever key we used. Pileipellis suggested I margaritispora and I praetervisa. Spore size seemed to be a bit large for I margaritispora and I mixtilis, but not quite I praetervisa. We were looking for caulocystidia with long, bendy necks (which I praetervisa has according to the most recent book dedicated to Inoycbe - Italian book I think; the other books made no obvious distinction), the other two Inocybe have more compact caulocystidia. But the squash only showed compact ones. So it was looking marginally in favour of I margaritispora.

Well I came home and decided to capture some microphotos of the caulocystidia and pileipellis and to do some serious measuring. I still wasn't convinced we'd got it right. The squash of the stipipellis this time showed some long necked caulocystidia. And I measured plenty of spores and they fitted in the I praetivista range. Also measured the cheilocystidia and caulocystidia including the thickness of the walls. These tally with the latest book, I think ... if memory serves me correctly. So I'm going for I praetervisa on this one ...



caulocystidia

some nice encrusted pigment on the pileipellis
I've finally got to see what encrusted pigment looks like.

Spore sizes were (8.7) 9.2-11.0 (12.2) x (5.4) 5.8 -7.2 (8.3)um.
Cheilocystidia 48-62 x 10-22um, with wall thickness 2.4-4.5 (average 3.6um)
Caulocystidia 54-78 x 15-26um, wall thickness 1.9-4.8, average 2.8um
Pileipellis hyphae width 1.2-7.5, average 3.5um.

If anyone can find a better match let me know ... I can only presume this one was not typical by not having an obviously bulbous base.

Melanie

[Chris Yeates]

hi Melanie

a macroscopic distinction between mixtilis and praetervisa is the width of the stipe - the latter being wider / more robust . . .

. . . and yours clearly appears to be the latter, so I think that coupled to all your other, microscopical, efforts praetervisa it is . . . .

good stuff

best

Chris

[SheffieldLass]

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

hi Melanie

a macroscopic distinction between mixtilis and praetervisa is the width of the stipe - the latter being wider / more robust . . .

. . . and yours clearly appears to be the latter, so I think that coupled to all your other, microscopical, efforts praetervisa it is . . . .

good stuff

best

Chris

Yes, at 10mm it is right at the top end of I praetervisa too ..

Melanie