Observation 141512: Multifurca ochricompacta (Bills & O.K. Miller) Buyck & V. Hofst.
When: 2013-07-26

Notes: R. brevipes? white cap yellow gills, hollow stem, no insect damage, gills close, evenly forked. Taste of gills at first pleasant slowly becoming astringent. Smell strong, fruity.

Species Lists

Images

607687
Photo by Jacob Heilmann-Clausen showing white cap
353934
353935
353936
384854
Prominent apiculus
607688
607897
Cross-section of stipe crush mount with KOH and Phloxine
607898
Cross-section of stipe crush mount with KOH and Phloxine

Proposed Names

-40% (6)
Recognized by sight
56% (8)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight: Would you say it smelled like Citronella?
-65% (3)
Recognized by sight: just adding this because it looks similar

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Great job, Martin
By: Terri Clements/Donna Fulton (pinonbistro)
2016-03-27 14:24:57 CST (-0600)

What super documentation. Because this taxon is relatively rare and not well described here on MO I’d like to add a quote from the paper I referenced below: “Observations-This taxon is referred to the section Compactae because of its pale pigmentation, dense, hard trama, and squat, robust stature. It possesses a combination of features previously unknown in the section, including a lack of bruising reactions, dichotomously forked lamellae rather than alternating long and short lamellae, an ochraceous spore deposit, a pungent odor and small spores with extremely low ornamentation, perhaps the lowest ornamentation of any known Russula….”

Terri

Thanks Brian, Terri, and Roy
By: Martin Livezey (MLivezey)
2016-03-27 14:21:41 CST (-0600)

I can’t get an amyloid reaction on the spores or most of the tissue for the life of me. I saw a few dextrinoid fibers. I got this melzers at a NEMF foray microscopy workshop, maybe it is weak. But I do get unambiguous spherocytes – that is proof that it is not H. aurantica. Per your comment, the second spore photo with the light background is in melzers. If that qualifies as an amyloid ridge, then we are in business!

Thanks Terri for the documentation on the low ornamentation of the spores of this species.

Weird spores for Russulaceae
By: Brian Looney (GibbiPicasso)
2016-03-26 09:50:12 CST (-0600)

You have a nice amyloid ridge on a spore in one of the pictures, so I’m now convinced that this is M. ochricompacta. If you want to see really pronounced amyloid spore ornamentation either mount spores from a print in pure Melzer’s reagent or use a little water/KOH to rehydrate gill tissue and use absorbent paper to draw the Melzer’s into the slide while drawing the water out. Or you can dab the rehydrated tissue mostly dry before adding Melzer’s. All of these methods should allow you to see the darker amyloid ornamentation in contrast to the mostly hyaline spore wall. Nice find!

By: Terri Clements/Donna Fulton (pinonbistro)
2016-03-23 16:18:51 CST (-0600)

for description of R. ochricompacta ((Southern Appalachian Russulas. I
Gerald F. Bills and Orson K. Miller, Jr. Mycologia Vol. 76, No. 6 (Nov. – Dec., 1984), pp. 975-1002)) . Cap surface can be lacerate, as it appears here, and white to cream to cream-buff to apricot-buff, described as dry,dull. Gills are adnate to sub decurrent, close, forked 2-3 times, apricot-buff when young to yellow-ocher or ochraceous-orange in maturity. Stem 2-4.5 cm by 2-2.5 cm, color of cap,dry, dull. Context white to pale gray, unchanging, brittle, dense, hard. Odor of lemon oil. Known from mountainous areas of SW Virginia, July and August. Spores: “often appearing smooth in optical section” and “hilar appendix prominent”.

What about sphaerocysts?
By: Roy Halling (royh)
2016-03-23 12:58:25 CST (-0600)

Would a quick squash mount of the context help you decide between Hygrophoropsis and Russulaceae?

I agree these are most likely not Hygrophoropsis.
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2016-03-23 06:59:16 CST (-0600)

These appear to feature cap surface and stipe surface with floccose ornamentation, which is not something I associate with Hygrophoropsis.

Looking at Multifurca photos, the multiple forks in the gills are similar to Hygrophoropsis, and this observation looks like a possible match for Multifurca, except for the orangish tinge seen in these photos.

So I’m wondering… what is the criteria here for completely dismissing Hygrophoropsis? There is a whitish species under this genus name… pallida, var. alba, not sure whether these actually refer to the same species. So may we confidently eliminate this species from consideration here?

Thanks Jacob!
By: Martin Livezey (MLivezey)
2016-03-23 06:43:35 CST (-0600)

I will look at the spores again with melzer. I imagined that some of the spores had ornamentation, but could not see anything consistent. Staining is an obvious next step that I missed. We are so sorry about the attacks in Brussels!

Defintely not Hygrophoropsis!
By: Jacob Heilmann-Clausen (jheilmann-clausen@bio.ku.dk)
2016-03-22 08:43:55 CST (-0600)

I remember this collection very well. I first took it for a Paxillus, but everything except the anastomising gills is very wrong. I strongly believe Multifurca to be the correct genus. Try and check the spores in melzer/iodine. The ornamentetion is said to be really faint and may be missed if not stained.

In Europe we have nothing similar, so there is not much I can add from this side of the Atlantic
Best wishes
Jacob

Defintely not Hygrophoropsis!
By: Jacob Heilmann-Clausen (jheilmann-clausen@bio.ku.dk)
2016-03-22 08:43:52 CST (-0600)

I remember this collection very well. I first took it for a Paxillus, but everything except the anastomising gills is very wrong. I strongly believe Multifurca to be the correct genus. Try and check the spores in melzer/iodine. The ornamentetion is said to be really faint and may be missed if not stained.

In Europe we have nothing similar, so there is not much I can add from this side of the Atlantic
Best wishes
Jacob

Brian Looney suggested H. aurantica as well
By: Martin Livezey (MLivezey)
2016-03-22 08:13:06 CST (-0600)

Spore morphology does not seem to support M. ochricompacta. To me, that cap indicates it is not H. aurantica. So what is it?

Brian: note Jacob’s comment below.

That’s a really cool mushroom, Martin.
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2016-03-21 21:12:05 CST (-0600)

What is the habitat for this collection?

The gills remind me of Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca.

Very cool find Martin
By: Terri Clements/Donna Fulton (pinonbistro)
2015-07-06 13:27:20 CDT (-0500)

I’d love to find one of these. What kind of habitat? The gills look orangish and decurrent? The cap looks like it might be scurfy or is that just age and bug damage?

Terri

I just found this thing! It blew my mind.
By: Geoff Balme (geoff balme)
2015-07-06 13:22:13 CDT (-0500)

http://mushroomobserver.org/208926?q=2besH

I kept thinking those dichotomus gills would have to be distinctive.

Multifurcata
By: Jacob Heilmann-Clausen (jheilmann-clausen@bio.ku.dk)
2013-08-01 08:39:57 CDT (-0500)

Yes indeed, this cannot be anything else than Multifurca ochricompacta. The gooseberry compot smell is close to Citronella, just another reference ;-)

No latex
By: Martin Livezey (MLivezey)
2013-07-31 11:54:47 CDT (-0500)

on this specimen. Jacob Heilmann-Clausen left notes on the taste. In addition to what I noted he said, “taste like gooseberry compote”, or something similar. That does not ring a bell with me. He also asked me to sequence it this fall if possible. Brian, if you want his email, I am sure he would like to share what he knows about this or similar species in Europe.

I did not leave it in my mouth long enough to sense the astringency. My impression on chewing it was that it was sweet and possibly a good edible. Nothing repellent.

Looks like a Lactarius
By: walt sturgeon (Mycowalt)
2013-07-31 09:40:10 CDT (-0500)

Created: 2013-07-31 06:04:10 CDT (-0500)
Last modified: 2016-03-27 14:17:42 CST (-0600)
Viewed: 358 times, last viewed: 2016-11-16 04:52:26 CST (-0600)
Show Log