Observation 137667: Panaeolus (Fr.) Quél.
When: 2013-06-26
(39.9765° -75.3106° 107m)
Project: Panaeolus

Notes: Spores are actually SMOOTH (and not “finely roughened” – these spore walls are not lumpy as in images of P. olivaceous spores that have been shared-Thanks!!). The heterogenous cell contents becomes less visable/dbecome even in Melzer’s. Spore size avg 13.67 × 8.69; sulphidia seem to be absent, but this may require another look at another section; I believe this collection better represents malformed Panaeolus rather than any of the four described species of Panaeolopsis (as I suspect Panaeolopsis may be polyphyeletic and nested within Panaeolus), also the gills are well formed and the margin is not tightly appressed to the stipe, unlike would be typical for other “secotiod” genera.
Cap 1-3 cm wide; hygrophanous; beige; Found in freshly sodded lawn in residential area.


Edit: CCB 08/08/13
ITS BLAST Panaeolus retirugis (loc=Asia?)-98%; Panaeolus campanulatus (loc=China)-97%
598/604 (99%) ITS sequence similarity with P. fimicola (obs 136028).

Images

342088
Photos and collection courtesy of Clayton Beach.
342089
Photos and collection courtesy of Clayton Beach.
342090
Basidia, 100x objective, KOH mount: Basidia were both 2 – to 4-spored were found (25-35 microns long), however, 4-spored basidia were more frequently encountered. The basidia often had brown pigments near apices.
342091
Basidia, 100x objective, KOH mount: Basidia were both 2 – to 4-spored were found (25-35 microns long), however, 4-spored basidia were more frequently encountered. The basidia often had brown pigments near apices.
342092
Basidia, 100x objective, KOH mount: Basidia were both 2 – to 4-spored were found (25-35 microns long), however, 4-spored basidia were more frequently encountered. The basidia often had brown pigments near apices.
342093
Basidia, 100x objective, KOH mount: Basidia were both 2 – to 4-spored were found (25-35 microns long), however, 4-spored basidia were more frequently encountered. The basidia often had brown pigments near apices.
342097
Basidia, 100x objective, KOH mount: Basidia were both 2 – to 4-spored were found (25-35 microns long), however, 4-spored basidia were more frequently encountered. The basidia often had brown pigments near apices.
342102
Cheilocystidia, 100x objective, KOH mount: Cheilocystidia were particularly difficult to find and photograph in rehydrated dried material, perhaps due to partial secotioid morphology, however, cheilocystidia were observed, hyaline, more or less bottle-shaped approx 20-30 microns long.
342109
Clamps present
342110
Large germ pore measured at 2.0 microns wide; 100x Melzer’s mount.
342111
Pileipellis 40x objective; Melzer’s mount.
342112
Pileipellis 40x objective; Melzer’s mount.
342113
Spores appear very finely roughened in KOH SPORES ARE SMOOTH (spore wall is not lumpy and uneven appearance probably “inside granulation”), germ pore slightly forward, nearly flush/even.
342114
Spores appear very finely roughened in KOH SPORES ARE SMOOTH (spore wall is not lumpy and uneven appearance probably “inside granulation”), germ pore slightly forward, nearly flush/even.
342115
Spores appear very finely roughened in KOH SPORES ARE SMOOTH (spore wall is not lumpy and uneven appearance probably “inside granulation”), germ pore slightly forward, nearly flush/even.
342116
Melzer’s mount; 100x objective: the ornamentation cell contents/granulation becomes less visable/disappears, spores appear smooth in Melzer’s reagent.
342117
Melzer’s mount; 100x objective: the ornamentation cell contents/granulation becomes less visable/disappears, spores appear smooth in Melzer’s reagent.
342118
Melzer’s mount; 100x objective: the ornamentation cell contents/granulation becomes less visable/disappears, spores appear smooth in Melzer’s reagent. Spore average:13.67 × 8.69;Q avg=1.57
15.96×9.55
12.72×7.75
15.6×9.33
12.38×...

Proposed Names

60% (4)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight
-12% (4)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Added hyperlink to obs 136028
By: Stephen (Ιερονυμοσ)
2014-06-12 12:21:32 CDT (-0400)
Panaeolopsis sp. or mutant Panaeolus fimicola
By: Workman
2013-08-12 21:13:55 CDT (-0400)

I’ve examined specimens of this “species” and noted its close affinity with P. fimicola, which is apparently supported by ITS BLAST. One feature that seems to be consistent is the irregular mixed size and shape of the spores.

Lol
By: Hashfinger
2013-06-27 09:35:59 CDT (-0400)

…@ Light

Your…
By: lightworkerpeace (gsharpnolack)
2013-06-26 23:48:08 CDT (-0400)

…microscopy is turning me on!

spore wall
By: Christine Braaten (wintersbefore)
2013-06-26 20:30:46 CDT (-0400)

is not lumpy on these like in the ones that you and Byrain linked, so they are not roughened. Thanks for linking the pictures! I still try to upload some DIC images since those are nice to look at.

P. olivaceus …
By: Stephen (Ιερονυμοσ)
2013-06-26 20:03:20 CDT (-0400)

I can provide you with samples of observation 64988 for reference if you want.

Okay
By: Byrain
2013-06-26 12:49:05 CDT (-0400)

but the descriptions I have don’t mention chrysocystidia either and say no pleurocystidia. Do the descriptions you have say otherwise?

Literature
By: Christine Braaten (wintersbefore)
2013-06-26 12:41:30 CDT (-0400)

There will be no reference to sulphidia before 1996 when Gerhardt published the term to refer to what was previously and erroneously referred to as chrysocystidia. I’ll see what I can do about getting electronic copies of other descriptions.

Re: Original description for Panaeolopsis
By: Byrain
2013-06-26 12:15:29 CDT (-0400)

I only have descriptions are for Panaeolopsis nirimbii Watling & Young & P. obtusa Contu, the latter is in a language google can’t translate…. The P. nirimbii description doesn’t mention anything about gills not being well formed or sulphidia, can you PM me your Panaeolopsis literature or maybe even share it here? :)

I agree that you certainly could be right about Panaeolopsis not being a good genus, where that leaves the species we have been calling Panaeolopsis I am not sure.

Edit: Actually google can read most of the P. obtusa description which is in French, I was just copying the wrong part… Still, as far as I can tell it says nothing about the gills not being well formed or sulphidia.

Original description for Panaeolopsis
By: Christine Braaten (wintersbefore)
2013-06-26 12:01:03 CDT (-0400)

Have you compared those other observations with an original description for Panaeolopsis? Either way, I do not think Panaeolopsis represents a good genus, (and I am just making a hypothesis here) but I think Panaeolopsis is probably polyphyletic and nested within Panaeolus. I will look for sulphidia and show these mounted in water as you may be right that the spores may be smooth. I’ll also try and get some DIC images, any ornamentation should show up well there.

Gills well formed
By: Byrain
2013-06-26 11:40:44 CDT (-0400)

Every time I have seen what has been called Panaeolopsis, the gills have been well formed, just the cap doesn’t expand very much if at all. See observation 64792 or observation 70784, now if you want to argue that those are also not Panaeolopsis I am all ears. :)

You can look at image 15130 to see spores that show the Panaeolus olivaceus roughness well, in my experience you can see it best around the edge of the spore wall.

Photos 13, 14 and 15
By: Christine Braaten (wintersbefore)
2013-06-26 11:22:52 CDT (-0400)

are photos of the spores in KOH, the spores appear very finely roughened to me and similar to other P. olivaceous spores that I’ve seen photos of. Can you link a picture of Panaeolus olivaceous spores that are more roughened than these? I did not find sulphidia but I can look again if you believe the spores may actually be smooth. Panaeolopsis is probably not a good name to apply to this collection, the gills are well formed, and Panaeolopsis like other secotiod genera is probably not a good grouping (polyphyletic and nested within Panaeolus).

These look more like
By: Byrain
2013-06-26 11:16:13 CDT (-0400)

Panaeolopsis than P. olivaceus to me, the spores don’t look that roughened, are you sure they are rather than just spore contents showing up or something?

Created: 2013-06-26 10:11:56 CDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2014-06-24 09:21:19 CDT (-0400)
Viewed: 444 times, last viewed: 2016-11-30 11:51:15 CST (-0500)
Show Log