Notes: Growing on bark on a sheded place.
It seems clearly a Lecidella and at the first sight I thought to be the common L. eleaochroma. However, the spores seem to be a bit too small (at least in average) for that species. Here are the values obtained:
(10.6) 10.8 – 12.9 (14.2) x (6.9) 7.3 – 8.8 (9.5) µm
Q = 1.4 – 1.7 (2) ; N = 20
Me = 12 × 8 µm ; Qe = 1.5
I wonder if this can be L. asema instead.
|User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote.|
|I’d Call It That||3.0||0.00||0|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
That probably rules out L. latypiza. But none of these seem dark enough to justify L. elaeochroma in my experience. It should be distinctly brown even in the thinnest of sections. I’m just trying to support your intuition that this is something different than usual! :) (And it’s a genus I’ve very recently invested a great deal of research!)
I never heard of the species you mentioned (which means nothing), but I think that the lack of colour in hypothecium is connected with the thickness of the section (I can see red-brown in the second (which is thicker)). I upload another one where the same colour is also visible.
I’ve come to really trust the color of the hypothecium in this genus. L. elaeochroma should have a bright orange-brown (turning vivid orange in K) hypothecium. I agree with you, L. asema is an option. But I wonder if you have any others. For example, what about L. latypiza? It is also supposed to have a hyaline hypothecium, and spot tests could be C+ KC+y just like L. asema and L. elaeochroma (the Sonoran Flora reports that the spot tests are highly variable in that species).
Created: 2015-06-11 21:59:36 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2015-06-11 22:19:09 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 36 times, last viewed: 2017-02-20 02:50:26 CET (+0100)