Another Entoloma

[RobSutton]

I thought I knew this one - very common brown Entoloma growing all over the place in calcareous grassland around here:



I've looked at similar ones before and got them down to E.conferendum on the basis of their distinct cross-shaped spores. As I've been looking at a few other Entoloma again recently (when will I learn!) I thought I'd get a specimen and get it under the microscope.





I was surprised to see rather different spores to those I expected. Very angular and three dimensional but much more five angled than conferendum spores I've looked at in the past. I tried to capture the shape three dimensionally using a ZereneStacker composite which I was quite pleased with:



.. but I'm not sure it's helped me take this one any further, the other microscopy fits conferendum pretty well - no clamps, no cheilocystidia and if nothing else I think I've ended up with a nice photograph of the fungus in situ!

[Chris Yeates]

hi Rob

I wouldn't really describe these spores as "stellate-cruciform" I'm afraid - you may have to look elsewhere . . . . though looking again . . . . not sure (I think the stacked image, though impressive, may not actually be helping here)

this is what I would consider E. conferendum spores to look like:


hope this won't put you off commenting on my thread asking for help from grassland fungi people . . .

is there a Herr Gminder in the haus?

cheers

Chris

[RobSutton]

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

hi Rob

I wouldn't really describe these spores as "stellate-cruciform" I'm afraid - you may have to look elsewhere . . . . though looking again . . . . not sure (I think the stacked image, though impressive, may not actually be helping here)

this is what I would consider E. conferendum spores to look like:


hope this won't put you off commenting on my thread asking for help from grassland fungi people . . .

is there a Herr Gminder in the haus?

cheers

Chris

I don't think they are "stellate-cruciforme" either, I was expecting to see spores looking like those you posted as I thought I recognised the species. I guess it which just goes to show how little reliance you can put on external characteristics of this group.

I look forward to seeing your grassland queries (unless I've missed it already) - in a reversal of normal things I managed to identify a Cheilymenia fimicola from a nice bit of cow dung today - I did check the paraphyses and hairs so I'm feeling pretty confident - may post it tomorrow as it's come out as quite a nice photo.

PS just spotted the thread the trees in the title threw me at first!

[SheffieldLass]

Originally Posted by RobSutton

I don't think they are "stellate-cruciforme" either, I was expecting to see spores looking like those you posted as I thought I recognised the species. I guess it which just goes to show how little reliance you can put on external characteristics of this group.

Ah, there seem to be plenty that look just like E conferendum but don't have the right spores .... Foolishly I keep picking them. Got one in my tub from todays walk. At least if they have the stellate spores they can quickly and confidently be identified and discarded. As for the others they usually end up being discarded. Well after a time consuming and fruitless attempt to id, dried, and the pics filed under unknown Entoloma. Which is almost the same as being discarded.

Melanie

[mollisia]

Hello,

far from being sure without having a look at them myself, I nevertheless would have let those spores pass for Entoloma conferendum. There are some in the fotos which seem typical, though there are also some which look untypical. But I have not seen those typical conderendum-spores in any species yet, not even singles spores between others, so I would have named this one E. conferendum - but may well be I'm too relaxed with those

best regards,
Andreas

[RobSutton]

Originally Posted by mollisia

Hello,

far from being sure without having a look at them myself, I nevertheless would have let those spores pass for Entoloma conferendum. There are some in the fotos which seem typical, though there are also some which look untypical. But I have not seen those typical conderendum-spores in any species yet, not even singles spores between others, so I would have named this one E. conferendum - but may well be I'm too relaxed with those

best regards,
Andreas

Thanks Andreas - perhaps not too relaxed but I think rather more experienced in these matters.

Ive just spotted some pictures that look fairly similar on this page:

http://www.entoloma.nl/html/inocephaluseng.html

Not the central spore micrograph (which are what I expected to see) but the one on the right labelled "E.conferendum, spores" has some very similar to the ones I've shown - and this is by the man - Machiel Noordeloos