|I’d Call It That||3.0||6.47||1||(zaca)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
“as being long and slender and loosely-attached with conspicuous cilia”
That is true, particularly for H. leucomela (the one that I saw more frequently in tis genus) but doesn´t apply to any other that I think already observed (H. obscurata and H. speciosa). However, a closer look to my specimen shows that in comparision the lobes are not so long and it is not so loosely-attached. These together with the white flecks on lobes and the spectacular hoods, make a different picture to me. The apothecia are a bonus.
As when I posted the observation and don’t see any alternative to P. adscendens, though as we know it is a very variable species. I remember to see this well developed hoods in other specimens at this location and I will look to my photos. Anyway, it is a place where I can go easily.
as being long and slender and loosely-attached with conspicuous cilia. But that may just be because the first one I ever studied was H. leucomela. There are many which are very Physcia-like in the sense of being clearly foliose, closely-attached, with no cilia. I agree that maculae such as this are exclusively Physcia. But the overall shape approaches some Heterodermia.
Regardless, I think we should both be able to agree that the “hoods” clearly indicate Physcia adscendens, and there’s nothing else this can be?
It’s an extremely variable species, but it’s the only one with soredia on the inside of burst-open inflated lobe tips. Does this look different than typical material in Portugal? I confess it is more Heterodermia-like than I’m used to seeing (narrow elongate almost ascending lobes), but you have such a maritime climate, that maybe this is to be expected.
Created: 2014-05-19 11:40:55 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2014-05-19 11:54:36 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 58 times, last viewed: 2017-06-18 03:39:56 PDT (-0700)