Observation 195775: Pseudocyphellaria Vain.

Growing amongst moss under Nothofagus trees

Proposed Names

0% (2)
Recognized by sight
61% (2)
Recognized by sight
28% (1)
Recognized by sight: I’m interpreting it as: medulla and pseudocyphellae white, algae green (tried cyanobacteria, too, just in case, but doesn’t work well in key), surface glabrous (looks like it’s tomentose near apothecia, but that could be pruina, not tomentum, and if you try assuming it is tomentose, it again doesn’t work well)
Used references: Galloway, D.J. 1992. Studies in Pseudocyphellaria (lichens_ III. The South American species. Bibliotheca Lichenologica 46.
0% (2)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Jason, only your Lynx eyes …
By: zaca
2015-01-10 09:03:57 ACDT (+1030)

would be able to see so small pseudocyphellae in this photo; But I have to surrender to the evidence of your explanation and the attached image. No further doubts about the existence of pseudocyphellae!

Okay, it’s not that clear…
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2015-01-09 13:12:17 ACDT (+1030)

But this is what I’m looking at (see photo below). These white marks are, I think, clearly on the underside of the lobes, therefore unlikely to be budding apothecia. I’ll grant that we can’t rule out full-on cyphellae from these photos, but I remember that none of the Sticta in southern Chile look anything like this. In the northern Andes, on the other hand, Sticta would be my first guess. Anyway, that’s why I’m going with Pseudocyphellaria.

Something else came to my attention recently. The species Pseudocyphellaria vaccina is supposed to have yellow pseudocyphellae underneath, but I noticed in another key that it is keyed out both with white and yellow pseudocyphellae. Meaning, presumably, that it can be a subtle character in that species, so we shouldn’t rule it out based on this photo. I’m going to vote the species down in favor of the genus.

I was unable to see any …
By: zaca
2015-01-08 20:01:27 ACDT (+1030)

pseudocyphallae in this photo. The raised things you mention were interpreted as younger and forming apothecia. Unfortunately, I don’t know either species. Thanks, Jason, for clarifying things.

I think you can see raised pseudocyphellae
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2015-01-08 15:53:55 ACDT (+1030)

pretty clearly under the lobes amid the brownish-grayish tomentum when you zoom in on the original image. (Otherwise, yes! this has an uncanny resemblance to the northern Lobaria quercizans…)

Created: 2015-01-08 00:46:38 ACDT (+1030)
Last modified: 2015-01-10 09:04:30 ACDT (+1030)
Viewed: 51 times, last viewed: 2017-12-01 20:46:11 ACDT (+1030)
Show Log