|I’d Call It That||3.0||5.40||1|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
that we see regularly on Gotland, are usually medium sized (maybe 6-8 cm), when young with faint greyish/violaceous zones. This one was a little larger, but also rather aged, which could explain the change of cap colour to more ochraceous.
The story is, that when we first found them, the only possible species in our books, was violascens. Moser mentioned the name luridus as a synonym.
If we should follow later descriptions, it’s more likely to be luridus, and we probably don’t have violascens here at all.
But I’m not quite convinced about splitting this into two species. There’s still no DNA evidence to support it… I hope that Kytövouri does a better job with the flavidus group.
is the new name for Lactarius flavidus ss. KORHONEN. I just read that in the Funga Nordica. But it is said to occure in svamp places under Betula. I have found it a few times in Sweden and Finland, in mixed forest always so can’t tell if Betula was always present.
So I agree, that from ecological point of view, it can not be one of the yellow species. But from colour it can also not be one of the dark species (violascens, luridus). May be something new? Do they always look like this in colour? If you had an exsiccate that could be sent to Ilkka Kytövuori, we certainly would get an answer. Those violet milking species have a bit different spores.
yes, it is not as yellow as most collections. But it is a completely different colour then luridus and violascens has, which have a dark slate-grey with violet hue in it. Your fungus is reddish brown or reddish-ochraceous-brown and looks very much like an aged L. flavidus ss. KORHONEN. Compare with the picture in HEILMANN-CLAUSSEN of L. flavidus ss. KORHONEN p.p. (page 94/95) and imagine this foto in a duller colour – then you have your collection ;-)) Compare to the colours of L. violascens and luridus – those are completely different, whereas the foto of L. violascens has an untypical yellow tone in it.
But when you mention the ecology, it is not fitting to L. flavidus ss. KORHONEN either, but would fit for L. luridus and L. violascens.
So, quite strange, indeed. You don’t have fotos of younger exemplaires too?
L. violascens is a big and stout fungus compared to L. luridus. L. violascens has a similar look as L. turpis or L. sanguineus, with big caps up to 12 cm or more and short stipes usually significantly smaller then the cap diameter. L. luridus is more elongate, with a stipe usually at least reaching the cap diameter and with smaller fruitbodies rarely exceeding 6-7 cm.
I have large problems telling Lactarius violascens and luridus apart. So I wouldn’t mind if someone claimed that this is luridus instead of violascens.
But it’s not Lactarius flavidus – not sensu Korhonen or anyone else. There is no sign of yellow in these.
I find them regularly under oak and hazel on Gotland.
This complex is under work of Ilkka Kytövuori and this species will recieve a new name in future. Lactarius flaviduss ss. orig. is a lighter species from thermophilic Quercus forests. Lactarius violascens is a darker, stout species from thermophilic Fagus and Quercus forest, often with Tilia
Created: 2008-10-14 21:43:29 BST (+0100)
Last modified: 2011-03-22 09:27:03 GMT (+0000)
Viewed: 127 times, last viewed: 2016-10-22 18:10:11 BST (+0100)