Observation 134467: Psilocybe brunneoalbescens Y.S.Chang ex Ratkowsky & Gates

When: 2013-05-25

Collection location: Mount Erica, Baw Baw National Park, Victoria, Australia [Click for map]

Who: TimmiT

No specimen available



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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
By: Django Grootmyers (heelsplitter)
2016-11-15 05:52:04 CET (+0100)

I guess I didn’t search thoroughly enough.

Index/Species Fungoru “Name in Use”
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2016-11-15 04:43:23 CET (+0100)

ïs Kuehneromyces brunneoalbescens (Y.S. Chang & A.K. Mills) J.A. Cooper
However it is trteated, the divisio in brunneo-albescens has to be deleted.

This is probably a Deconica…
By: Django Grootmyers (heelsplitter)
2016-11-15 03:55:39 CET (+0100)

but there is at least one non-bluing Psilocybe species that really belongs there (Psilocybe fuscofulva). I deprecated “Deconica brunneo-albescens” since I couldn’t find a record of it having been published.

In that case
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2013-05-30 03:10:14 CEST (+0200)

delete the connecting “-” and spell it “brunneoalbescens”

No debate
By: TimmiT
2013-05-29 14:00:14 CEST (+0200)

No-one was debating the identity of this observation. The discussion so far has been about nomenclature. These were identified in the field by a mycologist and recorded on the foray list. I can’t remember whether a collection was made. It’s hardly relevant anyway. Observational data is certainly not useless, particularly in a place like Australia where phenological and distribution data are very lacking.

Don’t waste time
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2013-05-29 12:16:54 CEST (+0200)

on what this could be, if you don’t have a voucher specimen. Nice photos, but totally useless without a herbarium specimen. Adolf
P.S. Even the MO spelling checker considers “herbarium” to be a dirty word!

Added photo
By: TimmiT
2013-05-29 07:35:28 CEST (+0200)

The last photo I added was taken the next day at another site, but shows the hygrophanous cap drying from the papilla outward. The name of this species is in reference to the brown cap that is often seen with a pale (dry) umbo.

No list
By: TimmiT
2013-05-28 13:29:54 CEST (+0200)

I don’t have such a list. The best I can do is a list of “Psilocybe” species published in the Catalogue of Australian Fungi. That includes species in Psilocybe s.s. as well as species formerly placed in Psilocybe s.l. (and some synonymous names).

Australian Deconica (World Wide List Too)
By: Image Sharer (image sharer)
2013-05-28 12:27:13 CEST (+0200)

Do you happen to have the entire list of all Deconica or species that should be in Deconica? Or perhaps the Australian list of 20?

I imagine
By: TimmiT
2013-05-28 11:40:31 CEST (+0200)

that there are a lot. Index fungorum only lists 75 species under Deconica. There are at least 20 Australian species that aren’t on that list and probably many more around the world.

By: Image Sharer (image sharer)
2013-05-27 21:36:07 CEST (+0200)

I checked the list at http://www.entoloma.nl/html/psilocybeeng.html and can’t argue.

Are there any other species caught in between Deconica and Psilocybe right now?

By: TimmiT
2013-05-26 11:20:31 CEST (+0200)

That’s why I created the name Deconica bruneo-albescens and made it the preferred synonym, though I don’t think this species has formally been moved/reassigned.

Deconica bruneo-albescens
By: Image Sharer (image sharer)
2013-05-25 16:03:29 CEST (+0200)

If there’s no blue coloration and no active alkaloids, Deconica bruneo-albescens should be considered as the name.

Created: 2013-05-25 14:27:50 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2013-05-25 14:27:52 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 217 times, last viewed: 2018-05-21 17:35:46 CEST (+0200)
Show Log