Observation 128181: Panellus pusillus (Pers. ex Lév.) Burds. & O.K. Mill.

When: 2012-08-11

Collection location: Santa María La Asunción, Oaxaca, Mexico [Click for map]


Who: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)

No specimen available

Phylogenetically very close to Panellus stipticus.

Proposed Names

38% (3)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight: On top whitish at the margins and reddish in the center. With a clearly defined smooth stem,
-30% (4)
Recognized by sight

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
It’s necessary to vet the sequences
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-02-17 13:13:10 CST (-0500)

Use multiple sequences from reliable researchers if possible, and run BLAST to verify that the results make sense.

By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-02-17 00:03:18 CST (-0500)

because it seems to me that someone would have to id the specimens in order to test them…
which specimens decided the base pair??

By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-02-16 23:59:31 CST (-0500)

No matter which specimens you check, you’ll see that Panellus and Favolus are distantly related.

By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-02-16 23:48:48 CST (-0500)

isn’t all this dependent on the specimens sampled??

By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-02-16 23:33:26 CST (-0500)

the following DNA sequences:
JQ409357.1 and L43375.1.

You can also see that they are not closely related by looking at 117 Clades of Euagarics. Panellus comes out near Mycena in clade 48 and Polyporus comes out near Ganoderma, past clade 114. They are quite distant phylogenetically.

By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-02-16 23:14:32 CST (-0500)

what specimens were used in order to determine this?

I checked using BLAST
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-02-16 22:55:22 CST (-0500)

Favolus and Panellus are not closely related.

what research…??
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-02-16 21:38:07 CST (-0500)

how can you say they are in two different orders without any research??
it’s an “eyeball-deep similarity” according to who, you??

what research?
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2013-02-16 21:32:46 CST (-0500)

they’re in two separate orders. the mutual presence of pores is an eyeball-deep similarity. the same goes for Filoboletus and Favolaschia.

By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-02-16 21:19:07 CST (-0500)

sure, this is the current classification…
i’d still like to see the research.

very distantly…
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2013-02-16 21:13:28 CST (-0500)

Polyporaceae (Polyporales) vs. Mycenaceae (Agaricales)

By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-02-16 20:36:08 CST (-0500)

they both seem very closely related, imo.
it would be interesting to see some dna research on the two.

Not a Favolus
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-02-16 20:32:54 CST (-0500)

This is Panellus pusillus due to the smooth stem, and reddish tones near the center of the top of the cap. The Panellus pusillus in North America has angular pores and Panellus pusillus in Australia has round pores.

See http://www.mycoquebec.org/...

By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-02-16 20:29:57 CST (-0500)

this is a Favolus.
the pore shape is wrong for Panellus pusillus.

Created: 2013-02-10 04:57:17 CST (-0500)
Last modified: 2013-02-16 22:54:31 CST (-0500)
Viewed: 149 times, last viewed: 2018-01-11 08:11:46 CST (-0500)
Show Log