Collection location: Davis, California, USA [Click for map]
Growing with a potted Echinopsis pachanoi, the soil consists of Black Gold Cactus Soil Potting Mix and some very old horse dung.
Spore range = 10 – 12 x (5.5) 6 μm
Average spore = 10.85 × 6 μ
Q range = 1.67 – 2
Average Q = 1.81
Cheilocsytidia measured = 31×9, 31×12, 33×12, 34×12, 36×12 μ
Pleurocystidia not observed, basidia 4-spored one which was observed on the upper/middle stem, clamps present, hyphae on the pileus encrusted.
|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||15.84||3||(Rocky Houghtby,Alan Rockefeller,Byrain)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
He did good work and was thorough and good-hearted. He just died on a hill of his choosing, by being a bit too relentless in his beliefs, and never backing off. A man of his convictions, even if he did take it too far.
Nice that you have confirmed his prior work here via DNA, Alan! But a three base away “match” is a judgement call, not a firm confirmation.
The cheilocystidia in P. rugosa has a long narrow apex. In California we get annulate Pholiotinas with that type of cheilocystidia, and also ones like these, with much wider cheilocystidia. I have a few sequences of each type now and am working on getting them all into GenBank and scoped. Pholiotina does seem to have a broader distribution than something like Hygrocybe which tends to differ from region to region. P. rugosa is a North American name, while Pholiotina utricystidiata is a name from Germany. Since this collection is just 3 bases from a German sequence, it’s pretty safe to call this a match.
I meant the opposite direction – you’d been pushing P. rugosa instead of the safer P. sect. P. that Byrain liked. Does the presence of P. utricystidiata mean that P. sect. P is the better label for unidentified CA collections now?
Now that Byrain doesn’t post here anymore, there are a lot of things you can do that in previous years just would have not been acceptable. One of my favorites is to use Coprinellus micaceus instead of Coprinellus sect. Micacei, but that is just one example among many.
Three base pairs away from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nucleotide/437037598, a collection from Germany.
Right, that 2- to 4-spored difference. They do make a big deal about that in the Conocybe studies. But also, looking at these obs. again, my obs. of P. teneroides has different cystidia. Those are really globose, much wider. and here they are longer than wide at least. More diversity in Pholiotina.
For Pholiotina aporos you can look at my observation 44402 for comparison. Turns out that guy was a rather common enough species in the spring in the Geneva area. Actually the common wisdom in the area there, it is the only Pholiotina in the spring, all others are in the late fall, so people id it without a scope there.
P. teneroides is 2-spored and P. utricystidiata is 4-spored, I’m certain all the basidia I saw were 4-spored. I have the specimens from observation 127696 and plan to look at it soon, its near the top of the pile of things to look at.
Also, other annulate species of Pholiotina with utriform cheilocsytidia are P. hadrocystis with smaller spores and P. aporos also with smaller spores, but with no germ pore.
And this on the differences from FAN6.
“It is close to Pholiotina teneroides and differs mainly in predominantly 4-spored basidia and smaller, relatively slightly broader spores”
I had id’ed these are P. teneroides. I remember that Pholiotina utricystidiata was a very similar species, but I can’t remember the difference right now, and why I went with one name over the other. I’ve got a bunch of notes on my id at the first obs. there.
These are probably all the same species here in this area.
Cool! I always wondered how to do this. :)
yeah I need to scope one of mine from a potted plant early last fall…
Also, if you write your observation number with underscores on both sides and observation in front of the number, it will embed the link automatically.
"_"observation 69038"_" (minus the quotation marks, of course)
Good documentation. I’ve never seen one like this that I can remember…
Created: 2013-03-29 08:18:54 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2018-03-21 08:19:03 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 309 times, last viewed: 2018-05-02 08:53:33 PDT (-0700)