Lepiota species possibly

[fairplay]

Originally Posted by Wood Wanderer

Thanks for the added confusion ..... and I thought it was all settled, oh the joys of fungi ID !!!

Interestingly Red Cracking Bolete is quite common in this area and I have never seen it with this light cap colour it is always darker and cracked / torn to fully reveal the red colour beneath.

Still I have learnt a few more Genus along the way

John

Genera John, Genera.

Neil.

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by fairplay

Xerocomas chrycenteron. . . .

Neil.

Xerocomus chrysenteron, Neil

Chris

(those that live by the sword . . . . )

[waxcap]

I really enjoyed that thread.

[Wood Wanderer]

Originally Posted by fairplay

Genera John, Genera.

Neil.

Yes I know but my Latin O Level was a long time ago ...... even though I did actually pass !!

[mollisia]

Hello,

Originally Posted by fairplay

I read it differently. I believe what Andreas is saying is that the fungus comes under the general group of Xerocomas chrycenteron which includes porosporus, rubellus, ripariellus, pruinatus, engelii, cisalpinus, bubelinus and armeniacus. (plus a few more that have not been found in Britain yet)
These have all now been placed within the new genus of Xerocomellus

Because of a teensy weensy patch on the cap showing some redness, Andreas feels this should be Xerocomellus chrycenteron and not X.porosporus and with somebody trying to break my arm behind my back, I reluctantly have to agree with Andreas.

So Sepia Bolete it is NOT, but boring old Red Cracked Bolete it IS. (Couldn't you find a bit of Polyfiller to cover that red patch with - then it would easily pass for X.porosporus )

Confused ?

Neil.

*missingsmily"lol"*

a little correction, Neil: I don't feel it SHOULD be X. chrysenteron, but I fell it COULD be. I would surely not consist of it being chrysenteron instead of porposporus. What I intended to say is, that this reddening of the cuticule would be untypical for porosporus, but typical for chrysenteron. Not SO untypical that it would totally exclude porosporus though.

@Woodwanderer: Here two fotos of light capped X. chrysenteron, where you see the stipe too and therefor surely agree that both are not X. porosporus.
The upper fotos shows a similar disrupted tube layer at the cap margin as your fotos shows it. One can imagine that it looks like gills when looked at from above



best regards,
Andreas

[Wood Wanderer]

Andreas

Many thanks for your detailed explanation .... just to confirm my understanding

you are saying that "probability" states that it is X. chrysenteron based on the limited evidence of the photos but you have not ruled out completely that it could be X. porosporus

thanks for the photos showing the light cap version of X. chrysenteron, all very confusing but then that is what makes the ID of fungi so satisfying when you finally get one right which in my case is "not very often"

Regards

John