Observation 18392: Gymnopilus P. Karst.
When: 2009-02-14
Herbarium specimen reported

Notes: In mulch by the side of the trail.

Spores roughened, immediately dextrinoid

6.5 – 8.0 × 4.5 – 5 micrometers

Pileus trama interwoven, taste bitter.

Cheilocystidia, capitate, mucronate, or narrowly clavate.

Pleurocystidia abundant, mostly narrowly clavate, sometimes mucronate or capitate.

6.33 × 4.32
6.54 × 4.85
7.57 × 4.50
7.57 × 4.94
7.73 × 4.99
7.74 × 4.94
7.91 × 4.68
7.95 × 4.89
8.03 × 5.42
8.27 × 4.53

Images

36323
36322
36324
36325
36327
36333
36334
36605
cystidia 200x
36606
cystidia 200x
36607
Spores 2000x, 10.8 micron divisions
36608
Spores 2000x, 10.8 micron divisions
36609
Spores 2000x, 10.8 micron divisions
36610
Spores 2000x, 10.8 micron divisions
36611
Spores 2000x, 10.8 micron divisions
36612
Spores immediately dextrinoid
37240
Pleurocystidia capitate, mucronate and narrowly clavate.
37241
Pleurocystidia capitate, mucronate and narrowly clavate.
37242
Pleurocystidia capitate, mucronate and narrowly clavate.
37243
Pleurocystidia capitate, mucronate and narrowly clavate.
37244
stipe trama

Proposed Names

68% (3)
Eyes3
Recognized by sight
-20% (2)
Recognized by sight: Burnt sienna pileus, whitish partial veil coating stipe and in-rolled pileus margin
Used references: The North American Species of Gymnopilus, L. R. Hesler
Based on microscopic features: Spore dimensions, presence and shape of pleurocystidia.
Based on chemical features: Dextrinoid reaction of spores

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Not lecythiform
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2009-02-23 06:13:17 CST (-0600)

Those cystidia are not lecythiform, I would say they are lageniform to fusoid-ventricose, with a capitate apex. I think capitate is really just for the apex form, the shape is described with another term.

The clavate pleurocystidia might be just basidia. I saw with a few of the gymnopilus that the basidia would extend, and some fraction of basidia are twice as long as the rest.

Also with Gymnopilus I found that the cystidia would usually contain two to three different shapes, is almost equal amount, often one would dominate, but the other shapes would be a large fraction, 20-40% of them obs.

I don’t know about the spores being that small, I’ve seen some Gymnopilus, with I think spores in the 4 um length range, now those are small. I need to check my notes on those. I think that was one which keyed out to G. bellulus, except it didn’t have dextrinoid spores. In the monograph it turns out there is G. subellulus (something like that) with non-dextrioid spores, but this one was only seen once, so I’m not sure how much I trusted that id (or description). Except that once was by A. H. Smith in Jackson Forest Mendocino, and the one I had was found by Debbie Viess in Jackson forest in Mendocino one foray there, she’s so nice to me there, getting me the little brown jobs to look at.

Spore size corrected
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2009-02-22 21:49:57 CST (-0600)

The spore sizes listed were too small because of a math error. Now that the sizes are corrected its no longer in Microspori. I also added pics of the pleurocystidia and stipe trama. Some of the pleurocystidia are labeled as lecythiform in the images but I think a better descriptive term is capitate.

Microspori
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2009-02-17 00:51:14 CST (-0600)

Do you have a shot on the cystidia, how capitate is it? There are
several options in the Hessler & smith monograph. What is the size
range of the cystidia?

I saw a few capitate cheilocystidia, but there aren’t nearly as many as there are on some species. And they don’t stick out as much. Compared to other members of Gymnopilus, the cheilocystidia are smaller and less common. I have several of these on the dryer and I can take another look at them if need be. I was surprised by the small spore size, there can’t be too many species from CA with spores that small.

Good luck with Gymnopilus.
By: Dimitar Bojantchev (dimitar)
2009-02-16 09:32:45 CST (-0600)

Interesting collection. The spores are indeed small for the
Genus. That’s the most diagnostic feature so far. That means that it
is not G. sapineus.

Do you have a shot on the cystidia, how capitate is it? There are
several options in the Hessler & smith monograph. What is the size
range of the cystidia?

I will compare against my collections.

D.
Very interesting presentation
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2009-02-16 06:38:59 CST (-0600)

Unfortunately, I don’t know your concept of Gymnopilus sapineus, but it ought to be something else..
In Europe, it was synonymized with G. penetrans for a long time, but the name has now been applied to a medium-sized species with a tomentose cap, deep yellow gills and distinctly larger spores than this one.

Created: 2009-02-14 23:29:19 CST (-0600)
Last modified: 2014-10-14 00:09:16 CDT (-0500)
Viewed: 390 times, last viewed: 2016-11-04 16:30:22 CDT (-0500)
Show Log