Large puffball for ID please

[Geoff23]

It stands about 3 inches high and is still firm and young, can't find it in Phillips' book.

[TeresaW]

Lycoperdon excipuliforme- Pestle Puffball?

Don't take my word for it, I'm sure the experts will be along to tell you, but that's what it looks like in my Collins.

[Chris Yeates]

hi

this looks like Handkea excipuliformis, which is surely in the Phillips book?

cheers

Chris

[TeresaW]

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

hi

this looks like Handkea excipuliformis, which is surely in the Phillips book?

cheers

Chris

That's the other name for it in my Collins

[Geoff23]

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

hi

this looks like Handkea excipuliformis, which is surely in the Phillips book?

cheers

Chris

Me not being able to find it doesn't mean it isn't in there! It doesn't look much like the picture, but I'm sure you're right. Thanks.

ETA: there is a disclaimer in the book about it being a non-representative picture.

[Ditiola]

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

hi

this looks like Handkea excipuliformis, which is surely in the Phillips book?

cheers

Chris

Hi
Not that I wish to be pedantic but TeresaW is correct in calling it a Lycoperdon as the name has now changed back.

Below is from the 2008 amendment to the checklist:

LYCOPERDON L.
Bovistella Morgan
Handkea Kreisel
Vascellum F. Šmarda
Following a recent molecular investigation by Larsson & Jeppson [Mycol. Res. 112: 4 - 22 (2008)], the genera Bovistella, Handkea, and Vascellum are placed in synonymy with Lycoperdon. The following entries are the resulting name changes (including a name change for one species previously listed in Bovista).
dermoxanthum Vittad.
Bovista dermoxantha (Vittad.) De Toni
excipuliforme (Scop.) Pers.
Handkea excipuliformis (Scop.) Kreisel
pratense Pers.
Vascellum pratense (Pers.) Kreisel
radicatum Durieu & Mont.
Bovistella radicata (Durieu & Mont.) Pat.
utriforme Bull.
Handkea utriformis (Bull.) Kreisel
Note also a correction to the author citation for Handkea utriformis.



Peter

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by Ditiola

Hi
Not that I wish to be pedantic but TeresaW is correct in calling it a Lycoperdon as the name has now changed back.


Peter

at the risk of being even more pedantic, these are synonyms, based on taxonomic opinion - both are nomenclatorily correct

so while Lycoperdon might be the 'current' name - that doesn't mean it is the 'correct' one . . . .

Chris

[cybershot]

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

at the risk of being even more pedantic, these are synonyms, based on taxonomic opinion - both are nomenclatorily correct

so while Lycoperdon might be the 'current' name - that doesn't mean it is the 'correct' one . . . .

Chris

Chris, is there a convention for labeling current finds correctly? Other than referring to what the Checklist indicates. Certainly reference back through archives such as the WAB Gallery is complicated by the fact that, for example, 'it was once Handkea now it's Lycoperdon, 'it was once Coprinus now it's Parasola etc.

No simple answer methinks!

Cheers

David

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by cybershot

Chris, is there a convention for labeling current finds correctly? Other than referring to what the Checklist indicates. Certainly reference back through archives such as the WAB Gallery is complicated by the fact that, for example, 'it was once Handkea now it's Lycoperdon, 'it was once Coprinus now it's Parasola etc.

No simple answer methinks!

Cheers

David

you're quite correct David; I used to be much more of a 'but it's now been moved to such and such a genus' merchant; the time it matters is if and when you publish an article, but for a more informal forum like WAB, where people are using different books so long as we realise we are talking about the same taxon (pretty obvious with something called excipuliformis !) I think we can be more relaxed

I personally can see the sense in the splits of Coprinus and Collybia for example; Handkea was split off from Lycoperdon largely on the basis of its members having long sinuous pores in the capillitium - the threads which help distribute the spores) it's a very distinctive character and whether you think it is sufficient to separate it is, as I say a matter of opinion - not right or wrong

when the correct name is important, though is when a name is nomenclatorily illegitimate or confused

a classic example is Mycena alcalina - we now know that that is a dubious name and, in fact all previous records without voucher collections have to be effectively junked - even though many popular books (including on page 81 of the latest edition of Phillips!) still have it

I always try, particularly in responses to newer WABbers to give the "Parasola - Coprinus in many books" sort of answer

cheers

Chris