Observation 134219: Gymnopilus penetrans (Fr.) Murrill

Proposed Names

58% (3)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight: on pine

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
I know him personally
By: Gerhard Koller (Gerhard)
2013-05-22 20:42:19 CEST (+0200)

but haven’t seen him for years now. Last met him after he published the Pholiota thing. He is a very down-to-earth humble guy and very amicable.
Should take a look into his book anytime soon though. It’s been a long time. But as this also is not my fave genus …

I’m not sure
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2013-05-22 20:12:20 CEST (+0200)

how to understand the name game regarding Gymnopilus sapineus…

G. sapineus and penetrans were for a long time considered synonyms, both in Europe and North America. I think that may have been true, if we talk about penetrans and sapineus sensu Murrill.

What now is called Gymnopilus sapineus as described in Funga Nordica, is sensu Maire, not Murrill.
I haven’t seen Holek’s book, but he is the one who wrote the Gymnopilus chapter in Funga Nordica :-)

Okay.
By: Gerhard Koller (Gerhard)
2013-05-22 17:04:40 CEST (+0200)

I know this paper. I even have it. But I haven’t used it except once when I was collecting in Sweden.
But I think I know G. sapineus. It is more to the west on spruce and firs, more in the Alps. I am at the uttermost eastern part of Austria where there are the last hills of this mountain chain and it is very dry here and highest elevation is about 800 m. I have never seen G. sapineus here but of course that doesn’t mean it isn’t possible. Will keep an eye but I am pretty sure it is nothing but ordinary penetrans what we have here.

G. sapineus
By: Rocky Houghtby
2013-05-22 16:58:14 CEST (+0200)

According to “THE GENUS GYMNOPILUS (FUNGI, AGARICALES) IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC WITH RESPECT TO COLLECTIONS FROM OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES” by Holec ( an excellent paper!) G. sapineus in your area can share habit, habitat and season with G. penetrans. Macromorphologial differences between the two species can be ambiguous.

Did not scope it.
By: Gerhard Koller (Gerhard)
2013-05-22 16:22:21 CEST (+0200)

G. penetrans is so common I seldom collect some. I have no ambition to distinguish whatever there may be behind this species besides penetrans.
But I see it is getting more and more difficult.
What other species/infraspecific taxa are possible?

Gerhard
By: Rocky Houghtby
2013-05-22 15:19:07 CEST (+0200)

How broad were the Hyphae in the pileipellis? Were they incrusted?

Created: 2013-05-22 14:36:24 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2013-05-22 20:50:35 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 39 times, last viewed: 2016-10-27 20:55:49 CEST (+0200)
Show Log