Notes: can hardly believe how much time spent (and could spend considerably more, e.g. chemistry, ink mount) on this tiny (2×1cm) specimen
on “carbonate cemented feldspathic and lithic sandstone” of middle Miocene Astoria Formation, well above high tide, not shaded
lirellae to 2.0 × 0.6 mm
growing with or over a Verrucaria sp.
O. herbarium and O. rupestris 3-septate spores:
Smith et al. (2009) has spores (16)18-24(-26)u with “distinct perspore”, on “…bark, wood… and sandstone, often in shaded situations”;McCune has spores 18-22×5-8u, “fairly common on Picea and Pinus twigs, also on hardwoods and other substrates”; Ertz and Egea has spores 18-28x(4-)5-8u, “on acid to basic bark or on rock… when on rock, in ombrophobous [shielded from rain] communities…”
O. rupestris – compare with photo by Curtis Björk at http://www.waysofenlichenment.net/lichens/Opegrapha/ ; Smith et al. (2009) has spores 14-22×5-8u, lichenicolous “On crustose Verrucariaceae, especially V. baldness, on hard limestone”; in the key of Brodo (2001) “on calcareous rock. Spores 4-celled, 22-29×5.5-8u; thallus thin or endolithic, often parasitic on other lichens”; Thompson (1997) has O. saxicola (= O. rupestris on North American Checklist) spores 20-30×5-8u without perispore, “on the underhangs of calcareous rock cliffs”; North American Checklist has it as lichenicolous
McC “Opergrapha is understudied in the PNW. I suspect the number of species could easily double by focusing on the genus.”
Ertz and Egea “This is a large and difficult genus, especially for the corticolous and lignicolous species with a lot of contradictions in the literature, and some unsolved problems.” (my underline)
|User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote.|
|I’d Call It That||3.0||4.81||1||(wanderflechten)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
“ombrophobous”? Who talks like that! :) You’ve got to love the difference in spore size between the British Flora and North American authors.
But I’m not seeing anything resembling a perispore here. Do you maintain doubts? It would seem that O. rupestris is the best name for this based on all the info you’ve given.
What a lot of work. Was it edifying? :)
Created: 2012-09-13 00:56:11 CDT (-0500)
Last modified: 2012-09-13 01:05:20 CDT (-0500)
Viewed: 91 times, last viewed: 2016-12-03 13:09:03 CST (-0600)