Observation 136549: Panaeolina foenisecii (Pers.) Maire
When: 2013-06-16
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Pale ones are probably one day older than the dark-capped ones. Waiting for some spores to drop.

Proposed Names

94% (3)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight: Typical thin-stemmed variety.
29% (1)
Used references: MO discussions.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Okay, if any more of these pop on my lawn…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2013-06-27 21:17:21 ART (-0300)

I’ll preserve and touch base with Christine. If they’re done for the year, then I’ll keep this is mind for next year.

Dave
By: Byrain
2013-06-27 21:11:16 ART (-0300)

With all due honesty, I’m not sure we should trust the absence of visible oil drops when we can’t even tell the spores are ornamented. :)

You should consider sending some Panaeolus/Panaeolina collections to wintersbefore, she seems capable and willing do good work with them.

Also, this collection doesn’t seem quite as robust as the collections I have called P. castaneifolia in the past, I’m not sure that means anything.

If it contains controlled substances
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2013-06-27 21:05:01 ART (-0300)

they are in such small amounts as to be negligible.
Even if you sent straight-up Psilocybe in the mail, there is an extremely low risk that you would ever get in any sort of trouble for it (unless you were sending them to an Herbarium of Ill Repute).

Although I continue to call my collections…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2013-06-27 20:49:49 ART (-0300)

of this very common lawn-dweller “foenisecii”, the possibility that the name “castaneifolia” applies to some collections should be considered. P. castaneifolia has been reported from the New York City area, so the possibility of it occurring in eastern NA has been established.

I am not equipped to make subtle splitter-IDs like foenisecii vs. castaneifolia. But the name “castaneifolia” does not appear to enjoy a currently well-established usage here in my region, so IMO “foenisecii” is currently the name that applies to my collections. If anyone is interested in examining my collections of this type, then I am willing to preserve/send materials. There is a special concern with these types, though. Reports indicate that P. foenisecii may contain controlled substances and I don’t know if there’s an acceptable way to legally send materlas through the mail. May need to wait until next year anyway, as this type is primarily a late springtime mushroom, and this year’s flushes may be over around here.

Looked at a few online photos…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2013-06-17 15:37:11 ART (-0300)

of Panaeolina foenisecii spores, and it appear that the oil drops are not always very easy to detect… even with much better resolution than I get with with my old scope.

Spore photos.
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2013-06-16 23:23:58 ART (-0300)

First spore photo from top shows spores from one of the smaller dark-capped mushrooms. Second spore photo shows spores from the larger faded capped specimen. I could not find any oil droplets in any of the spores. Maybe this is just a function of my scope not being up to the task? With lighter-colored spores, I can generally readily see oil droplets.

Created: 2013-06-16 11:52:37 ART (-0300)
Last modified: 2013-06-27 21:23:00 ART (-0300)
Viewed: 71 times, last viewed: 2016-06-24 00:04:49 ART (-0300)
Show Log