Observation 193214: Pachyphlodes Zobel
When: 2014-12-11
No herbarium specimen
0 Sequences

This is a dime sized pink fuzzy fungi, I haven’t gone back to see if it has gotten larger or disappeared in the last few days.

Proposed Names

-3% (2)
Recognized by sight
57% (1)
Recognized by sight
61% (2)
Recognized by sight: I found similar observations 120258 and 200069.
Used references: Rosanne Healy who studies mitotic spore mats wrote,“All of the bright pink spore mats I have sequenced are produced by species in a clade that includes Pachyphlodes thysellii. Pachyphlodes virescens also belongs to this clade. Both species were described from the West Coast. P. thysellii seems to have a world-wide (Northern Hemisphere, temperate) distribution, but may be part of a species complex.”

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Thanks for the links Danny
By: Elsa (pinknailsgirl)
2015-03-29 15:33:17 PDT (-0700)

I have seen some what I could call “spore mat” comparing with photos in Mycophile article (I didn’t know the term either until this obs., so anyway, thanks for sharing this with us Debbie). My only doubt is if Dr. Healy saw this obs. photo, because it doesn’t seem a “spore mat” like the ones I saw in the article, but resuming, only with microscopy we can give a name to this beautiful thing.

here are some answers!
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2015-03-29 13:26:05 PDT (-0700)


in which Dr. Healy and her research are thoroughly referenced. There are surely conidial and/or conidiogenous characteristics which microscopy could help confirm to ensure that this is an anamorphic Pachyphlodes and nothing else, but Dr. Healy’s comments (by way of Debbie) about its abundance are pretty strong support on their own.

see her 2014 Mycophile article here as well

let the journal envy begin… http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/...

I don’t know
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2015-03-29 13:20:25 PDT (-0700)

as I’ve never heard of that term.

As for Debbie’s proposal (or that of her friend), most (all?) of these Pachyphlodes were recombined from Pachyphloeus by Doweld in 2013 via a quick, dirty and characteristically explainationless Index Fungorum “publication.” All (most?) appear to be hypogeous fungi in the Pezizaceae. P. thysellii, described here:

makes zero mention of an asexual form/stage, which is not at all to say one does not exist, but I feel like more than this one photograph is necessary to be calling this by that name.

By: Elsa (pinknailsgirl)
2015-03-29 11:46:27 PDT (-0700)

I agree with you. Do you think this could be included in the “spore mat” definition?

I am still learning,
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2015-03-29 09:36:48 PDT (-0700)

it seems, how to look at full images instead of just thumbnails. Thank you for pointing out my mistake. By sclerotia, I’m assuming a hardened, hypogeous to subhypogeous, solid mass, from which fertile structures are produced when conditions are right. By that definition, this does not so sclerotia-like. I guess the question then is whether Laetisaria is capable of fruiting on soil.

By: Elsa (pinknailsgirl)
2015-03-29 09:03:23 PDT (-0700)

It seems to be growing on soil, at least I thought it was. One of the links says “Fungus overwinters in thatch and soil as pink sclerotia”

me too, elsa
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2015-03-29 08:03:58 PDT (-0700)

But it looks like that genus grows either on lichen or grass, not wood. Otherwise, very similar indeed. Thanks for the links

It reminds me
By: Elsa (pinknailsgirl)
2015-03-06 11:56:37 PST (-0800)
Looks like
By: Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
2014-12-12 22:09:43 PST (-0800)

Created: 2014-12-11 15:49:54 PST (-0800)
Last modified: 2015-03-06 09:25:38 PST (-0800)
Viewed: 180 times, last viewed: 2017-09-20 17:30:23 PDT (-0700)
Show Log