Observation 221923: Pyrofomes demidoffii group

When: 2015-11-06

Collection location: Myron and Sonya Glasberg Conservation Area, Missouri, USA [Click for map]

Who: Patrick Harvey (pg_harvey)

Specimen available

“The Writings of C. G. Lloyd”, vol. 4, p. 523:
“The account of Fomes juniperinus in North American Flora was evidently made up from the original publication, and reproduces a number of errors. The spores are merely stated to be reddish brown smooth which was copied verbatim. They are so pale colored that they appear hyaline under a low power. Spines blunt, etc., also copied. The plant has no spines or cystidia as originally stated. I think accidental projecting hyphae have been so mistaken. I have long suspected that Fomes juniperinus is the same as Fomes Demidoffii, known from a single specimen, in the Museum at Paris, from Russia. Both are rare plants, the former known from but few collections, the latter from the type only in the museum at Paris. Both grow on the red cedar (Juniperinus). Both have a black, rimose surface. Both have reddish context, and exactly the same spores. In fact they are the same plant in every particular, and Fomes Demidoffii is prior, if one wants to use such an uncouth name. For my part, I do not intend to do so. While the plant is rare in our Southern States, it is quite common, I am told by Prof. Long, in the Southwest New Mexico, growing on various species of Juniperinus. Although it is exactly the same plant as Fomes Juniperinus, and fruiting specimens can not be distinguished by any character, Mr. Murrill with his usual liberality discovered that the New Mexican plant was a new species, which he calls Fomes Earlei. Messrs. Hedgcock and
Long have recently published that Fomes Juniperinus and Fomes Earlei produce different kinds of rots in the host, While I know nothing on this subject. I venture it will be found to be a mistake of some kind when the real truth is learned. I feel so sure that the fruiting bodies are absolutely the same that I question if it can produce a different rot in different localities, though I can not say to the contrary.”

Proposed Names

34% (2)
Recognized by sight
Used references: “The Writings of C. G. Lloyd”, vol. 4, p. 523
84% (1)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
No one has commented yet.

Created: 2015-11-06 08:47:37 PST (-0800)
Last modified: 2016-10-07 08:00:08 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 81 times, last viewed: 2017-08-06 21:13:51 PDT (-0700)
Show Log