Observation 14561: Cystoderma fallax A.H. Sm. & Singer

Proposed Names

75% (3)
Eye3 Eyes3
Used references: Pacific Northwest Key Council and Mushrooms Demystified.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Small spores…yes…
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2008-11-25 00:13:35 CET (+0100)
Doug…. I didn’t save any but did check the spores. They were definitely small, in the range of 3- 4 microns. I went with C. fallax because, as you say, the basic literature doesn’t give one many options and other pictures on the web were similar in appearance. They were growing primarily in Sitka spruce woods.
Might not be…
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2008-11-24 21:56:55 CET (+0100)

These might not be, did you happen to save these? Take a look at the spores, I think there is enough taxonomic significance in spore size for C. fallax, it has small spores. Really small, the ave length should be 4-4.5 um, not more than that. If the ave. length is 5-6 um, then it probably isn’t.

The defining character for C. fallax is the sheath on the stipe. In Cystoderma on the stipe the sphaerocysts grow on a sheath. In C. fallax this sheath is membranous, and persistant, and there are only a few species where this is true, and for the western US it seems that it is only true for C. fallax. Other Cystoderma will have a fibrous sheath, which breaks up in various amounts for different species, so you get different amounts of veil. In C. fallax the veil will be fairly large, persistent, and point upwards toward the cap margin.

There is a mention in published descriptions that C. fallax is consistently rusty brown in color, without any yellow. We usually find stuff that is golden yellow it seems, and I’m not sure any of that is C. fallax. Also the published descriptions mention that C. fallax is rare compared to other species… the name seems to have been picked up by it getting published in Arora, I wonder how much of what we find and call C. fallax really is…

The common names for Cystoderma seem to be tossed around here in the west, such that I’m confused by them now, and there don’t seem to be that many species, that I for one wouldn’t mind looking at them, it seems like it wouldn’t be that hard to get a better understanding, if enough material is looked at.

So, I’m just saying that I’m a little confused by the state of Cystoderma understanding, and it might be interesting to look at the spores here… at least…

Created: 2008-11-24 05:28:11 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2008-11-24 05:28:11 CET (+0100)
Viewed: 44 times, last viewed: 2016-03-21 06:15:57 CET (+0100)