Leccinum species

SheffieldLass · #1 (**permalink**) 23-07-2009, 06:34 PM

I assumed that this one was going to be Leccinum scabrum ... I've had L scabrum in the same location last year. Under birch (the same birch of the very recent Xerocomus ...) The wetness on the cap was mainly due to heavy rain, it is a bit greasy not slimy when dry.

However the spores are very small, and I've measured them from a spore print too, and from the stipe, checked plenty. (10.2) 10.9-13.2 (14.7) x (3.4) 3.7-4.4 (5.0)um Qav=3.0, averaging at 12 x 4um (The specimen from last year had spores of the normal size for L scabrum, average 16.2 x 5.1um Qav=3.2)

spores

The caulocystidia are of scabrum size, but these were greyish in water, but according to Noordeloos' key and details they are hyaline in water, but appearing greyish in KOH (if I have read that correctly) ....

caulocystidia in water

Loads of cystidia .... 32-41 x 7.7-10um, which are rather wider than the figures he gives (5.5-7.5um)

This is from a cap scalp ....

So I'm not sure on this one ... none of the Leccinum species seem to have spores this small ....

Melanie

Chris Yeates · #2 (**permalink**) 23-07-2009, 07:06 PM

hi Melanie

a wise man once said:
"just because it's big doesn't necessarily make it any easier to name correctly (just easier to spot in the first place) give me fungi you can put a name to unambiguously rather than these characterless monsters . . . ."

oh - that was me!

those spores are small for a Leccinum

Andreas to the rescue?

C

SheffieldLass · #3 (**permalink**) 24-07-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

hi Melanie

a wise man once said:
"just because it's big doesn't necessarily make it any easier to name correctly (just easier to spot in the first place) give me fungi you can put a name to unambiguously rather than these characterless monsters . . . ."

oh - that was me!

C

Melanie

mollisia · #4 (**permalink**) 24-07-2009, 09:44 PM

Hello,

my opinion to this one is, that it is all respect a very typical Leccinum scabrum. Colouration of the cap, colour and dispersion of the stipe squamules, the ochraceous colouration of the places slugs have eaten, the flesh being nearly unchanging in places cut with a sharp knife but becoming rose to reddish when squized, no blueish spots in the stem base, cutis of narrow hyphae with long end cells with a Q of a least 5-7 or even more.
Only the spore size is quite astonishing. But it would be astonishing for any Leccinum species.
Usually I would advise to keep the eyes on the location and check whether next year or next season the specimens there have again short spores. But you have done that already and we know therefore, that they have been longer and better fitting last year.

My conclusion therefore is, that it is just L. scabrum ss.str. and nothing else, but it is noteworthy that it may occure with spores smaller then the range given in literature.

best regards,
Andreas

SheffieldLass · #5 (**permalink**) 24-07-2009, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mollisia

Hello,

my opinion to this one is, that it is all respect a very typical Leccinum scabrum. Colouration of the cap, colour and dispersion of the stipe squamules, the ochraceous colouration of the places slugs have eaten, the flesh being nearly unchanging in places cut with a sharp knife but becoming rose to reddish when squized, no blueish spots in the stem base, cutis of narrow hyphae with long end cells with a Q of a least 5-7 or even more.
Only the spore size is quite astonishing. But it would be astonishing for any Leccinum species.
Usually I would advise to keep the eyes on the location and check whether next year or next season the specimens there have again short spores. But you have done that already and we know therefore, that they have been longer and better fitting last year.

My conclusion therefore is, that it is just L. scabrum ss.str. and nothing else, but it is noteworthy that it may occure with spores smaller then the range given in literature.

best regards,
Andreas

I cut it into small pieces to dry, thought it was worth keeping, and thought I'd do another spore print with a part, just by way of triple checking, make sure I hadn't made a blooper, and they were the same ... just as small. It is very early in the season and last year quite a few were produced over a period of time so I'm sure there will be more this season, so I'll be checking them all! All the other species I'm checking have correctly sized spores so it isn't that my microscope has suddenly altered ....

Cheers

Melanie

SheffieldLass · #6 (**permalink**) 30-07-2009, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mollisia

Only the spore size is quite astonishing. But it would be astonishing for any Leccinum species.
Usually I would advise to keep the eyes on the location and check whether next year or next season the specimens there have again short spores. But you have done that already and we know therefore, that they have been longer and better fitting last year.

I found another in the same location today, and took a small section ... spore sizes on that one were more typical .. I did a quick pore squash and just checked the largest ones ... 16-17um long, though there were some small ones too. I've set it to do a spore print so will get the size range in due course, to see how it compares.

Melanie