ID's please

[Johnny81]

The first photograph (the white bracket) was put on here back in August and was identified as being possibly Daedalea quercina. Now going back to the site the colours on some brackets next to it have changed and could they possibly be Daedaleopsis confragosa? I am a complete beginner, so I figure getting family/genus correct may help in the learning process. Growing on Alder beside a river run off (river nene) on neutral soil in Northamptonshire.


Finally is this one of the Mycena? Growing in same area as above if I remember correctly in October. Cap was approx 35mm wide.

Cheers, hope none of this is too vague.

[flaxton]

The first is as you say Daelalea quercina. The second looks like Inonotus radiatus and the last I think is a Psathyrella. I cannot make out a red edge to the gills but but you can see the very dark spores maturing, I would go for P prona.

Mal

[mollisia]

Hello,

in my opinion the first is Daedaleopsis confragosa, not Daedalea quercina.

best regards,
Andreas

[diggleken]

I cant believe I'm going to disagree with Andreas, but the pores are wrong for Daedaleopsis confragosa.
Cheers
Ken

[Johnny81]

Cheers guys. This fungi ID lark is tough, just when I think I have found what I think it is, it is something different!
Seems a nice little spot for fungus, not just the brackets either. Gonna keep my eye on the area throughout the year. I also found these growing on a different alder tree in the same area, my gill shot didn't turn out well so have not included it, which probably won't help. Bracket measured on average 30mm across.

[diggleken]

Hi Johnny, yep, bit of a tough ask fungi...................
This one is Turkeytail, Trametes versicolor, sadly not versicolour.
Cheers
Ken

[Ken Burgess]

Originally Posted by diggleken

I cant believe I'm going to disagree with Andreas, but the pores are wrong for Daedaleopsis confragosa.
Cheers
Ken

Hi Ken

Never wise a wise move to contradict Andreas... Try having a look at some images on the web of fresh Daedaleopsis confragosa. The pores shown in the photo are very typical of young, fresh specimens of that species.

Ken

[Ken Burgess]

Originally Posted by Johnny81

my gill shot didn't turn out well so have not included it, which probably won't help.

Details of the fertile surface are crucial, even if a photo isn't available. If it had pores it could have been Trametes versicolor, as Ken suggested. However, if the under surface was smooth and ochre in colour, it could have been Stereum hirsutum. My first thought would have been the latter, but I can't make out enough detail of the hymenium from this shot.

Ken

[Johnny81]

I shall revisit soon and get a better shot with better light of the underside. Funnily enough I got these from an arable field hedgerow, on a chopped down oak (I think) today! Same species possibly, looks the same to me !?



Mycology is so interesting but ID's are so bloody hard, seems really complicated topic to me! Saying that I guess its patience, experience and practice.

[mollisia]

Hello Ken (diggleken),

Originally Posted by diggleken

I cant believe I'm going to disagree with Andreas, but the pores are wrong for Daedaleopsis confragosa.
Cheers
Ken

in this case I'm pretty certain, that it is at least not Daedalea quercina, because the tree is no oak. And the gill structure is not so untypical for Daedaleopsis confragosa, especially not when they are young.

It's not allowed to put in links here, but when you take the three wordss "ubcbotanicalgarden" "daedaleopsis" and "confragosa" in a google search, the first link will lead you to the "Botany foto of the day", and you will see there a very nice picture showing the same structure of hymenophor then in Johnny81 picture.

Ken (Burgess) also has made the experience of those longitudinal, somewhat labyrithical pores of young Daedaleopsis, as I see

best regards,
Andreas