Observation 3255: Hohenbuehelia petaloides (Bull.) Schulzer
When: 2007-05-05
No herbarium specimen

Notes:

These are growing in an attached cluster, on a log, sadly situated in a thicket of poison oak, making it impossible to get a good photo without laying down and rolling about in the stuff. The largest one is 8 cm across. They are moist and pliable. I was unable to see any hint of spore color. I did ascertain that the gills aren’t serrated and are decurrent. Any suggestions?


After I found that I couldn’t easily ID these, I immediately thought of Panus conchatus, which I’ve seen several examples of this season. All were dense, with considerably less moisture, even when young, and quite sturdy. These were still fairly fresh, judging by the amount of moisture and integrity of the gills, when photographed, and quite fragile. Also, the P. conchatus whose caps look like these are much older. I found only one set of photos of Clitocybe americana and they seem quite different to me.


Hohenbuehelia petaloides seems a possibility but not an entirely convincing one, either.


June 16: The Panus conchatus seen earlier, in this park, are all still present, even if dried to cardboard-like hardness. These, on the other hand, are entirely gone, supporting my feeling that they were NOT P. conchatus. Which doesn’t say what they are, but at least I’ve ruled out one possibility.

Proposed Names

35% (3)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight: Having now observed and identified one other example of this species, I believe Nathan is correct.
-37% (3)
Recognized by sight
30% (3)
Eye3
Recognized by sight
28% (1)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2011-04-24 17:44:44 EDT (-0400)

doesn’t look promising. Lack of purple and an un-inrolled margin. Hohenbuehelia maybe, why not Pleurotus?

It may not be H. petaloides but…
By: Debbie Drechsler (debdrex)
2008-11-17 08:45:23 EST (-0500)

…it most certainly was NOT Panus conchatus. I saw several P. conchatus that season and this bore no resemblance to any of them.

That’s a pity
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2008-11-17 01:18:51 EST (-0500)

I find it hard to support the idea of a Hohenbuehelia then – more likely Panus conchatus after all.

I’m afraid I can’t answer that question, Irene.
By: Debbie Drechsler (debdrex)
2008-11-16 20:41:40 EST (-0500)
Metuloids?
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2008-11-16 16:35:28 EST (-0500)

Did it have pointed, thick-walled cystidia?

Clitocybe or Panus
By: Darvin DeShazer (darv)
2007-05-09 00:06:39 EDT (-0400)

Clitocybe americanus is common on hardwoods and the photo looks similar to a large Panus conchatus

Hohenbuehelia?
By: Nathan Wilson (nathan)
2007-05-08 23:06:41 EDT (-0400)

With the crowded white gills and the colored cap this seems the most likely to me. However, they typically have a lateral stipe like observation 2044.

Created: 2007-05-08 16:56:05 EDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2012-09-07 23:42:23 EDT (-0400)
Viewed: 158 times, last viewed: 2016-11-20 07:57:00 EST (-0500)
Show Log