Observation 129975: Galerina vittiformis f. tetraspora Arnolds
When: 2012-12-19
Who: Byrain

Notes: Very small, on a mossy rock alongside the trail growing with the Rimbachia species in obs 128355.

Spores minutely roughened with a plage (?) & with a slow/weak dextrinoid reaction that fades approximately after a day. The rough ornamentation was lessened with melzers.
Spore range = 9 – 11 × 5 – 6 μm
Average spore = 9.88 × 5.75 μ
Q range = 1.5 – 1.83
Average Q = 1.73
20 spores measured.

Cheilocystidia abundant
Cheilocystidia range = (44) 46 – 68 (73) x 9 – 12 μ
Average cheilocystidium = 53.45 × 10.28 μ
20 cheilocsytidia measured.

Pleurocystidia scattered
Pleurocystidia measured = 54×11, 58×13, 63×17, 70×15 μ

Caulocystidia abundant, some forked at the base
Caulocystidia range = (52) 54 – 105 (111) x 14 – 25 (29) μ
Average caulocystidium = 76.24 × 18.92 μ
20 caulocystidia measured.

Pileocystidia not observed, basidia 4-spored, clamps present, stem hyphae roughened.


Spores, 1000x, mounted in KOH
Spores, 1000x, mounted in KOH
Spores, 1000x, mounted in KOH, 1μ divisions
Spores, 1000x, mounted in melzers
Pileipellis, mounted in KOH

Proposed Names

-31% (2)
Recognized by sight
Used references: A Monograph on the Genus Galerina Earle
Based on microscopic features
75% (2)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight
Used references: Douglas
A Monograph on the Genus Galerina Earle
Based on microscopic features

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2013-03-11 09:44:40 AEST (+1000)

Well, the veil thing can be hard to see in Galerina. Pretty much all of them that do have a veil, have a fibrous veil that can be very light, often disappearing or hard to see at all when broken. The veil for G. clavata and others took me a few years to find the just right young specimens to see that it they do have a veil. In Mycenopsis there are ones where the veil was attached to the stipe at the base, making it also hard to see when open. In G. badipes the amount of veil fragments on the stipe is extremely variable. So, I’m not all that enthused about the use of the veil as a taxonomic character.

But there is also the note in Smith and Singer about how in stirps Minima the caulocystidia are only on the upper stipe, so you don’t have to just look for a veil, or be confused by that. Like I said, you can see evidence for cystidia all the way down the stipe in the photo, so these aren’t stirps Minima. But if you go further up the key, Smith and Singer split sec. Galerina and sec. Naucoriopsis based on “margin of the pileus curved inwards”, which I still have no clear idea what they mean by that. And as a sectional characteristic I think it is a little crazy. Also the caulocystidia on the upper stipe only is what you see in Naucoriopsis, so that makes me wonder more about stirps Minima.

By: Byrain
2013-03-11 05:36:46 AEST (+1000)

By the veil, I mean the faint traces of a white veil on the cap margin, best seen in the first picture on the specimen in the back, but G. vittiformis f. tetraspora sounds good and maybe that is not what they meant by the veil on the stem. Though now that I think about it, I saw one other tiny Galerina on moss during that hike. That one had very clear remnants of a veil/annulus on the stem, it was also very old so I left it… Maybe that could of been stirps Minima? I’ll have to keep my eyes open for it in the future.

Not sure, not really.
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2013-03-10 09:49:28 AEST (+1000)

Well, not sure what you mean by veil on the margin. Actually, with this one, are you can check it under the scope, the gill edges, and the cap edges are thick with cheilocystidia. If the guy is small enough you can see the gill edges and cap margin look white, but this is from the thick edges of colorless cystidia. Actually the whole stirps Minima has been a bit of a mystery to me, and I haven’t seen any species that fall into this area, and I’m not sure really what they mjean by this stirps in the Smith and Singer. There don’t seem to be many documented species from there. That and the Porospora also, or Inocyboides, it would be good to see well documented obs. from those species, I’m not sure what they really are at this point.

Wait were you asking about the dextrinoid thing? Yeah it is really inconsistent in Smith and Singer about what is or isn’t dextrinoid. But they are all dextrinoid except for the Tubariopsis, which also are lacking clamp connections. And also the species that have the small smooth spores, G. sideroides and others. That are mixed in the stirps of Mycenopsis in Smith and Singer, but they should really be gathered into another section of Galerina, which I’ll do if I ever get around to publishing a paper on Galerina.

Thanks for the info!
By: Byrain
2013-03-10 06:00:11 AEST (+1000)

I had some difficulty on the stirps Minima vs stirps Vittiformis key, at first I thought the latter was correct and ended up like you did around G. vittiformis, but I am under the impression it has an absent veil and I clearly see traces of a rudimentary veil on the cap margin? Maybe I am misunderstanding what it means by veil? Do you have any photo examples to help explain it? :)

By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2013-03-10 05:24:25 AEST (+1000)

Ok, so you got me on this one, hadn’t seen that name before, had to take some time and get back to Smith and Singer on that one. Yeah, so there is a desc. of that species there. But that seems to be a “Smith special” species, desc. from a single specimen. I have taken the view that you should ignore these species, unless there is a really strong reason for them, two or more obviously separate features and such.

But that species is in stirps Minima of section Galerina. Yes, with the pleurocystidia, this does look to be in section Galerina. But I don’t see the veil on the upper stipe that would put it into stirps Minima here. And in the second photo, nice how you have that in such good focus for such small guys here, I can see evidence of caulocystidia all the way down the stipe. Stirps Minima should not have cystidia on the bottom half of the stipe.

So, then you are back in stirps Vittiformis, and then with the 4-spored basidia (nice you got that feature), and the lack of pileocystidia, I think we have G. vittiformis var. tetraspora. The spore size looks about right there also, the var. vittiformis with a 2-spored basidia has consistently larger spores.

Created: 2013-03-09 08:14:14 AEST (+1000)
Last modified: 2013-03-13 06:23:20 AEST (+1000)
Viewed: 254 times, last viewed: 2016-12-08 01:13:35 AEST (+1000)
Show Log