Bright orange Discomycete

[FungiJohn]

Posted for Peter (Ditiola) who is having problems submitting threads.

On a recent foray at Longshaw with FungiJohn and Les we found a large bright orange Discomycete.









I have some dried material

Peter

[FungiJohn]

The definite features are:

Many large Apothica 1 - 2 cm growing together in a tight group

Simple septate brown hairs in tufts

Distinctive slender Paraphyses with abruptly swollen spherical tips

Large spores 23.4 - 24.7 x 11.7 - 13 microns

Smooth spores ?

I eliminated Melastiza on account of it's apparent smooth spores and concentrated on the larger species of Cheilymena.

I have been unable to get any mature spores to drop from the specimens and have had to look at spores from squashed material only.

The closest I could get was Cheilymena fibrillose (Currey) Le Gal, and for this species Dennis says ' paraphyses slender, straight, suddenly enlarged to subglobose tips', which is spot on, however the spores are said to be only 15 - 16 x 8 - 9.

There is also a footnote re: C. cornubiensis (Berkely and Broome) Le Gal, that has spores 17 - 22 x 11 - 12, much nearer but not big enough! However I understand this is now combined with Melastiza as M. cornubiensis and apparently this has coarsly verrucose spores 17 - 19 x 9 - 11.

I have tied different stains to see if I can see any ornamentation, and on a few spores, if I juggle with the focus I can just make out a bumpy outline (See image below) but I am not really that convinced and anyway if they really are verrucose spores they are still too big for M. cornubiensis?

[Lancashire Lad]

Going on macro features, the external hairs on the apothecia, and in particular those distinctive tufts around the marginal areas, I wouldn't have had any doubts about this being Melastiza sp.. (Probably showing my novice naivety).

The appearance, shape, grouping of those marginal tufts look very like those on these:-


Without knowledge of the spore sizes provided above, I'd have said that the paraphyses, asci/spore shapes, two guttules. etc. etc. all seem to match pretty well with M.cornubiensis:-


But if the spore sizes are definitely in the region of 23-24microns, then it would apparently discount M.cornubiensis.

Other than there being no great signs of spore ornamentation warts, everything else (spore size, paraphyses shape etc. etc.), seems to be very close to M.contorta:-
MycoKey fungus identifier

I'll watch this thread with interest!

Regards,
Mike.

[diggleken]

Originally Posted by FungiJohn

The definite features are:

Many large Apothica 1 - 2 cm growing together in a tight group

Simple septate brown hairs in tufts

Distinctive slender Paraphyses with abruptly swollen spherical tips

Large spores 23.4 - 24.7 x 11.7 - 13 microns

Smooth spores ?

I eliminated Melastiza on account of it's apparent smooth spores and concentrated on the larger species of Cheilymena.

I have been unable to get any mature spores to drop from the specimens and have had to look at spores from squashed material only.

The closest I could get was Cheilymena fibrillose (Currey) Le Gal, and for this species Dennis says ' paraphyses slender, straight, suddenly enlarged to subglobose tips', which is spot on, however the spores are said to be only 15 - 16 x 8 - 9.

There is also a footnote re: C. cornubiensis (Berkely and Broome) Le Gal, that has spores 17 - 22 x 11 - 12, much nearer but not big enough! However I understand this is now combined with Melastiza as M. cornubiensis and apparently this has coarsly verrucose spores 17 - 19 x 9 - 11.

I have tied different stains to see if I can see any ornamentation, and on a few spores, if I juggle with the focus I can just make out a bumpy outline (See image below) but I am not really that convinced and anyway if they really are verrucose spores they are still too big for M. cornubiensis?

Hi John, this'll be funny, me talking about microscopy!
My ancient copy of Dennis gives M rutilans having the only spore size that fits yours in Melastiza/Octospora group, but seems to have wrong hairs for your/peters pic.
However, Melastiza cornubiensis has brown septate hairs and although the spore size is too big for that (17-19 and 9-11 in Dennis), there appears to be some confusion as B&B , as you say, have 17-22 and 11-12.
So it is confusing, but is that size beyond possibility of M cornubiensis? Its a very small percent increase!
Good luck!
Cheers
Ken

[diggleken]

We cant both be wrong Mike, can we.........?
K

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by diggleken

Hi John, this'll be funny, me talking about microscopy!
My ancient copy of Dennis gives M rutilans having the only spore size that fits yours in Melastiza/Octospora group, but seems to have wrong hairs for your/peters pic.
However, Melastiza cornubiensis has brown septate hairs and although the spore size is too big for that (17-19 and 9-11 in Dennis), there appears to be some confusion as B&B , as you say, have 17-22 and 11-12.
So it is confusing, but is that size beyond possibility of M cornubiensis? Its a very small percent increase!
Good luck!
Cheers
Ken

Microscopy can never be funny Ken

Both Peter and I have spent a good few hours I guess looking at this one. I first got spores > 21 micron and thought that was odd until Peter found some about 25 micron

If we had found it at Clumber we could just put it down to the 'Clumber large size factor' and place it happily into M. cornubiensis

John ... still hoping that some spores will drop on the now dusty slide

[FungiJohn]

I don't suppose these help but here's my take:







John

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by diggleken

. . . .
So it is confusing, but is that size beyond possibility of M cornubiensis? Its a very small percent increase!
Good luck!
Cheers
Ken

yes it is beyond possibility - Melastiza has ornamented spores which lack guttules

John says he's tried various stains - the first question to ask with a mystery operculate discomycete is are the "asci iodine-positive or iodine-negative?"

Chris

[Lancashire Lad]

Originally Posted by Chris Yeates

yes it is beyond possibility - Melastiza has ornamented spores which lack guttules....

Hi Chris,
Is it possible that what we see in Peter's photo aren't guttules?

The Mycokey page for M.cornubiensis mentions aguttulate spores, but then shows a photo which appears to show spores with guttules. - Which would seem to be a basic error.
MycoKey fungus identifier

And of this photo:-

when I first posted it as part of an ID query some while back, (and which seems to show the same sort of ?guttules?), you said "what you have here is the asci with rather immature spores and the paraphyses with their swollen ends (dead right for M. cornubiensis btw)":-
Tiny Orange Discs & Cups (ID Query)

I am - as is often the case with fungi matters - confused

Regards,
Mike.

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by Lancashire Lad

Hi Chris,
Is it possible that what we see in Peter's photo aren't guttules?

The Mycokey page for M.cornubiensis mentions aguttulate spores, but then shows a photo which appears to show spores with guttules. - Which would seem to be a basic error.
MycoKey fungus identifier

And of this photo:-

when I first posted it as part of an ID query some while back, (and which seems to show the same sort of ?guttules?), you said "what you have here is the asci with rather immature spores and the paraphyses with their swollen ends (dead right for M. cornubiensis btw)":-
Tiny Orange Discs & Cups (ID Query)

I am - as is often the case with fungi matters - confused

Regards,
Mike.

you may have a point - it would be useful to have a decent resolution shot of mature spores under oil immersion . . . .

C