Observation 163886: Panaeolus fimicola (Pers.) Gillet
When: 2014-04-22
Herbarium specimen reported
0 Sequences

Images

416404
416254
416386
spores @ 1000×.
416387
gill edge @ 400×.
416388
basidia @ 1000×.
416389
cheilocystidia @ 1000×.
416390
sulphidia @ 1000×.
416391
spores @ 1000x w/ measurements.
416399
sulphidia @ 1000x w/ measurements.
416400
gill edge @ 400×.
416401
cheilocystidia @ 1000x w/ measurements.
416402
cheilocystidia @ 1000×.
416645
sulphidia @ 1000×.
416646
sulphidia @ 1000×.
416647
sulphidia @ 1000×.
416834
416835

Proposed Names

49% (3)
Recognized by sight
-16% (4)
Recognized by sight
Based on microscopic features: Lets see some spores, cheilocystidia, and check for those sulphidia (basidiole-like cells).
94% (3)
Eye3 Eyes3
Based on microscopic features: Sulphidia present on gill faces!

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Alt
By: Image Sharer (image sharer)
2014-04-26 08:58:40 PDT (-0700)
workman…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-25 11:40:04 PDT (-0700)
Alan…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-24 15:06:25 PDT (-0700)

i do not understand if that is a joke or not. lol.

question…if these “invisible cells” do exist…how did Gerhardt know to use sulfovanillin to test for them?

Maybe we can’t find sulphidia
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2014-04-24 15:02:13 PDT (-0700)

Because we don’t have sulphovanillin.

:/
By: Byrain
2014-04-24 08:22:27 PDT (-0700)

Rocky, maybe you should try scoping Panaeolus too, between all the specimens, Winters, Bloodworm, Workman, and myself have scoped among others, there are no other sulphidia that we have found. You’re wanting us to look for phantom cells that don’t seemingly exist, please find them if they do. We’re not going to get anywhere debating this, you or someone else is going to need to provide more data before your points could hold any weight.

Rocky…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-24 01:49:10 PDT (-0700)

why wouldn’t Gerhardt mention these…to ensure there was no confusion?
perhaps he had as hard of time describing sulphidia as he did speaking english…??
nonetheless…i appreciate your skepticism, because it is important.
i just have no idea what else they can possibly be…

Highly refractive content
By: Rocky Houghtby
2014-04-23 20:27:17 PDT (-0700)

I don’t see whats so hard to understand about that. Instead of being completely transparent (as many cells are, despite not truly being ‘empty’ or devoid of tissues), the cell contents in sulphidia (as can clearly be seen from Gerhardt’s illustration) are obviously textured beneath a light microscope.

Wild goose chase? To be perfectly honest, I am disappointed that you are helping to propagate this nonsense. There are illustrations of saccate, deformed cells and dozens of descriptions of colorless cell walls with yellow granules. There is absolutely no room for confusion here!

The brown clavate cells can be treated as basidioles or pleurocystidia, they are not the small, clear, saccate to fusiform cells that Gerhardt takes the time to describe in every single species in sections Verrucispora and Laevispora.

“highly refractive content”
By: Byrain
2014-04-23 19:56:10 PDT (-0700)

I think you’re trying to send us on a wild goose chase, if these are not sulphidia I would think sulphidia do not exist at all.

fimicola micro section translated
By: Rocky Houghtby
2014-04-23 19:38:18 PDT (-0700)

Spores ( 9) 11-14 (15 ) x 7-8 (9 ) x 6-8 microns , smooth, slightly
transparent, always significantly brighter than papilionaceus , flattened hardly recognizable germ pore not protruding in lateral view( within a preparation of several spores always visible).
Cheilocystidia hyaline, slender, thickened in the lower part , apex usually not sold capitate , about 25-32 × 6-8 microns; Sulphidia saccular to fusiform with colorless to yellowish little or highly refractive content , some little more than the basidia .
Basidia 4- sporied (sometimes mixed with 2 – sporigen ) , 20-25 × 8.5-10 microns.

I translated both of these. There is no ambiguity AT ALL, sulphidia are hyaline and sometimes the granules inside are yellow. In P. fimicola the sulphidia are specifically saccular to fusiform, not clavate. He even says that the sulphidia are sometimes even more transparent than the basidia.

If Gerhardt didn’t find brown basidioles, than maybe there weren’t any, maybe this isn’t a species that he ever looked at.

translation…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-23 19:23:23 PDT (-0700)

who translated that?
not all of his illustrations are tapered at both ends.
I think “yellowish” is ambiguous.
If he saw brown basidioles on the gill face why would he not mention that in comparison to the sulphidia…it makes 0 sense.

I’m sending that section to someone in Germany to translate.

Incorrect
By: Rocky Houghtby
2014-04-23 19:09:59 PDT (-0700)

This is the direct translation of Gerhardt’s synopsis of sulphidia,

“The third indicator in certain species – (sulphidia)
They occur on the gill face, are colorless (sometimes even yellowish) cystidia with refractive content. These were previously referred to as "Chrysocystidia.” They do not quite correspond to the definition of a Chrysocystidia because they are not yellowish in KOH (as Chrysocystidia are in Hypholoma or Stropharia), but from the outset are yellowish or remain colorless. When mounted in Sulphovanillin they become a beautiful burgundy, which is why I call them “Sulphidia”(Fig. 4 a-e). Their presence or absence is a reliable differentiation of certain types of critical importance."

Gerhardt is very clear that sulphidia are hyaline or yellowish, and turn burgundy in sulfovanillin. As to your suggestion that the shapes of your cells are similar to those portrayed in Gerhardt’s illustrations- Your cells are uniformly clavate while Gerhardt’s drawings depict small vermiform cystidia that typically swell in the middle and taper on both ends.

after translating some of Gerhardt’s text…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-23 18:30:34 PDT (-0700)

i think he says that “some” of the sulphidia may be clear and that using sulfovanillin makes them easier to recognize and differentiate from other microscopical features.
nowhere does he say that it is necessary in order to see them…
i do not believe that if one species presented with brown “basidioles” and another did not, he would not have documented that feature.

sulphidia diagrams from Gerhardt…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-23 17:09:41 PDT (-0700)

P. fimicola.

they look pretty close to me.
i’ll look for more.

This might be fimicola
By: Rocky Houghtby
2014-04-23 16:07:37 PDT (-0700)

I don’t really know. What I do know is that the brown basidiole like cells you guys keep calling sulphidia don’t look anything like the description for sulphidia. Even if they did resemble the size and shape of sulphidia, and magically stopped being brown, you would still have to observe a color change in sulfovanillin to call them sulphidia! The damn things don’t even look like cystidia, they look like basidioles.

Cool find.

sulphidia measurements…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-23 16:01:54 PDT (-0700)

can’t we determine if they are sulphidia based on the measurements in the description?
also, what else are the possibilities here, besides sulphidia??

I disagree…
By: Byrain
2014-04-23 08:44:30 PDT (-0700)

You don’t find these cells with P. cinctulus collections, see obs 135706, you can also see how the cheilocystidia differ, the ones here look far skinnier and not so big and broad.

Those aren’t sulphidia
By: Rocky Houghtby
2014-04-23 04:58:15 PDT (-0700)

You can’t determine if a cell is a sulphidia without sulfovanillin.

cheilocystidia…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-22 23:41:34 PDT (-0700)

added another photo of the cheilocystidia.
it might be worth noting that these cells are not very prevalent, but present.

Byrain…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-22 22:48:21 PDT (-0700)

absolutely.
i am still looking.

Cheilocystidia
By: Byrain
2014-04-22 22:45:11 PDT (-0700)

Is it possible to see several of the cheilocystidia? P. cinctulus has relatively big and broad cheilocystidia in comparison to P. fimicola.

Nice micro!
By: Byrain
2014-04-22 22:40:34 PDT (-0700)

I think seeing cheilocystidia would really help, do you agree that the germ pore looks oblique?

Byrain…
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-04-22 12:23:44 PDT (-0700)

i’m on it…

Created: 2014-04-22 12:03:23 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2014-04-25 13:21:22 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 772 times, last viewed: 2017-11-24 03:25:48 PST (-0800)
Show Log