Notes: University of Tennessee Knoxville Herbarium specimen.
Collected by E. Lickey
Description by E. Lickey:
“1 Fruitbody under mixed hardwoods and hemlock canopy
Pileus convex, 10 mm broad, “dull deep violet blue” (18D4)
Lamellae “deep grayish lavender” (18C3), close, attached
Stipe 1.5 mm broad, 25 mm long, “dusky blue violet” above (18F8)
fading to whitish at base."
Except for the abundant erect elements on the pileipellis, this taxon is a rather good match for Singer’s “Prunulus syringeus” aka Pseudobaeospora murrillii (Horak), as described by Desjardin, based on his collections of material referable to Coker’s (1929) concept of the former species.
Pileipellis A cutis of hyphae 3.8 – 5 microns wide, in one section with many erect elements 24-80 × 3-6 microns. Dingy yellow in KOH (3%).
Spores smooth, partial population dextrinoid, globose to subglobose to broadly ellipsoid, 3.7 × 3.5 microns, Q = 1.0 -1.3
Caulocystidia 12-50 × 3-5 microns. Scattered at stipe apex, clamped, cylindrical to clavate to slightly sinuous or cylindrical and weakly capitate.
[admin – Sat Aug 14 01:59:00 +0000 2010]: Changed location name from ‘Caldwell Fork Trail, Cataloochee Cove, Waynesville, Haywood CO., North Carolina, USA’ to ‘Caldwell Fork Trail, Cataloochee Cove, Waynesville, North Carolina, USA’
|I’d Call It That||3.0||5.88||1||(Christian Schwarz)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
those doubts were lost!
Pseudobaeospora is a genus where no amount of homework can replace actual experience. Many of the species-level differentiators are relative, so familiarity with other taxa is important.
Additionally, the pileipellis appeared to have some erect elements as opposed to a simple flat cutis.
Seems like you’ve done all your homework on this one. Why do you doubt your genus id and only say it’s promising?
Created: 2009-05-14 05:26:44 AEST (+1000)
Last modified: 2011-05-07 00:22:15 AEST (+1000)
Viewed: 162 times, last viewed: 2017-06-06 13:34:56 AEST (+1000)