Observation 194912: Cladonia cariosa (Ach.) Sprengel

Proposed Names

29% (1)
Recognized by sight
57% (1)
Eye3 Eyes3
Used references: ID provided by Jim Bennett

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
For what it’s worth
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2015-05-09 00:12:43 CEST (+0200)

I see from time to time patches of Cladonia in the Great Basin without any stalks or apothecia which key out over and over to C. cariosa. The reason I mention it is that the squamules in these patches are highly variable, from fairly large and tongue shaped and curled up, to almost granular (not unlike the ones in this observation), sometimes with continuous variation from one to the other in the same patch. I’m getting the idea that this is a highly variable species. But people maybe only post photos that look like “real” cariosa, kinda brushing the rest under the rug.

In summary: I’m not entirely surprised that this is cariosa. (Despite misgivings stated in comments below…)

Jim Bennett thinks it’s C.cariosa
By: Andrew Khitsun (Andrew)
2015-05-09 00:01:03 CEST (+0200)

Most of what I see on the web for this species looks different though :-(

Maybe you should consider Pilophorus?
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2014-12-31 11:31:25 CET (+0100)

The tiny round “shell-shaped” squamules are dead-ringers for Cladonia peziziformis, but I’ll readily admit the podetia strain the bounds of that species quite a bit. Rule out C. parasitica because it’s not on bark or wood and the squamules are ironically too big. Rule out C. botrytes — not on wood, apothecia way too dark. Rule out … Well you get the idea. Actually, and rule out Pilophorus because its primary thallus is crustose, not squamulose. C. cariosa should have browner apothecia and longer tongue-shaped squamules. I’m really running out of options…

Jason, I have to apologise for picking your brain. My bad.
By: Andrew Khitsun (Andrew)
2014-12-31 03:44:47 CET (+0100)

Some correction is in order. This sandy patch contained more than one species, and more than just Cladonia. It took me sometime to sort out the mess. Let me correct and amend some of my previous comments. Yes, this is the smallest Cladonia I’ve ever seen (the other stuff, which I will upload later, is not Cladonia, probably). The average size of podetia is just shy of 3mm, and the average size of apothecia is just shy of 1mm. The patch they occupy is slightly bigger than I said before – probably a nickel to quarter size, and they are a bit bigger than sands of grain. The apothecia color pretty much stayed the same – they are dark brown in nature (upper two photos) and black when dried (bottom four photos are staged indoors). The stuff that mixed in an caused confusion in my unsettled brain can be seen in observation 195238.

Weird
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2014-12-28 05:27:38 CET (+0100)

C. cariosa? Or a really small C. peziziformis?

This is the smallest Cladonia I’ve ever seen.
By: Andrew Khitsun (Andrew)
2014-12-28 04:26:43 CET (+0100)

The entire patch is smaller than a dime, and apothecia are the size of sand grains.

Created: 2014-12-28 04:19:56 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2015-05-09 00:45:17 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 51 times, last viewed: 2016-02-08 05:05:25 CET (+0100)
Show Log