Collection location: SE 78th Ave. and Stephens St., Portland, Multnomah Co., Oregon, USA [Click for map]
Older specimens now, but with one small sporocarp just beginning to show. Under Deodor cedar. Near Western hazel, Tall Oregon grape, Vine maple, Wood violet.
|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||4.76||1||(Byrain)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
|I’d Call It That||3.0||6.08||1|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
which has many more better quality close-ups.
Coprinopsis lagopus is a species described in Europe. The tendence is to separate the concept of Coprinus lagopus U.S., in a different taxon, Coprinopsis pachyderma, described by Bogart. It is a complex that requires urgent review.
It could also be another species.
Mushrooms Demystified is a great book, I’m not disputing that. However, the Kees Uljé Coprinus site is a far better resource for inky caps as it is specialized rather then general and is available freely online (The only exception I can think of is maybe C. comatus which Arora lists a few species Uljé did not). Both resources are outdated and with old names, but with sites like mycobank and index fungorum looking up the new names is not hard at all. And I was using lbm as a synonym to lwm, Arora’s book is self admittedly not the best resource for either as mushrooms like that often need microscopy for a confident id and MD focuses on the macro.
I would propose that anyone who is interested in mycology shouldn’t discount written or online resources, both are essential and have their uses. I also don’t have hundreds of $ for mycological texts though. It would be nice if more texts were freely available online. :)
David told the Oregon Mycological Society the reason for not including more species was the lack of space his publisher allowed, as well as lack of concise data on lbms: “little brown mushrooms.” In my opinion, Coprinopsis is not an “lbm” but rather a “lwm”: little white mushroom. Any brown observed on a Coprinopsis would probably indicate a different genus, don’t you think? After 25 years of growing and observing fungi, I do notice the difference between young and old in Coprinopsis is often 2 days. Button one day, deliquenced the next. As I drive by the property my ability to detect mushrooms is limited.
Yes, there are limitations as to what can be published and whether there will be a market for what is published. Before quality photos and greater peer review, such as here at MO, that was even more common. At the time (and continuing to this date) I would posit Arora is still a very good book for the buck. If your mycological budget extends into hundreds of $$$ per reference book, Arora is still an excellent option. For my library it is quite adequate.
There may be a time in the near future where online resources become more important than written references. By that time I hope to be retired.
Is not the best resource for lbms, Arora says this himself in the texts. I suggested numerous other species this could be, please check out Kees Uljé key for the group, all of them have wooly veil remnants (Some differently colored, but not all). http://www.grzyby.pl/... Though I really don’t know how to distinguish the species in the group macroscopically and can only rely on the keys at this point, but that doesn’t change that other species that look like C. lagopus should macroscopically exist in the states. My observation was just one example of such a species and I meant even if I am mistaken about it being C. scobicola it would not match C. lagopus. However, I don’t know of any other species with 2-spored basidia that is could be and C. scobicola matches well enough. You can compare my data with the key if you’re interested. And as should be obvious, there are many more species to consider with 4-spored basidia including C. lagopus. :)
If all you want is a field guide name that may not represent what you truly found, I guess C. lagopus is good enough. Personally I think just calling it Coprinopsis is better then such a field guide name (Not to say all names in field guides are bad).
What Arora describes as “wooly” is very similar, if not identical, to this obs. Later the name was changed. My copy of Arora was autographed in 1987.
You seem to suggest this is another species. “(Even if my id is mistaken,…” There is another suggested ID?
I may be able to collect and dry material still this year. But the season for us is now advanced, and in my experience a freeze will stop the fruiting.
Perhaps its the same Coprinopsis as before, but why C. lagopus? There are other species out there in the US. Obs 105561 shows that (Even if my id is mistaken, its not C, lagopus). If you want, please collect a bunch with pictures and dry them out before they turn into ink and take note of the veil remnants on the cap margin (They’re important to see microscopically as well as macroscopically). I’ll scope them, but its really hard to work with deliquesced specimens. :)
Just that I’ve collected the same species from the same location for the past 5 years.
When there are several species it could be? Here is a key to the group. http://www.grzyby.pl/...
You need microscopy to use it, but at the very least it should show that “I’d call it that” is not very appropriate for these without more info…
Edit: I’m sure you’ve been told this before, if you don’t agree with me. Can you please tell me your reasoning?
Created: 2012-12-02 15:34:24 CST (-0500)
Last modified: 2012-12-03 09:52:01 CST (-0500)
Viewed: 147 times, last viewed: 2017-08-28 00:10:02 CDT (-0400)