Observation 45472: Cortinarius (Pers.) Gray
When: 2010-05-16
No herbarium specimen

Images

85906
85907
85910
Spores at 1000x magnification, scale divisions=1µm.
85911
Basidium on the left, Bifurcate cheilocystidium on the right, both at 1000x magnification, scale divisions=1µm.
85912
Suprapellis at the top stained with congo red, hyaline subpellis through the centre and brown pigmented pileus trama at the bottom all at 400x magnification plus an image of the clamp connections in the cells of the suprapellis at 1000x magnification.

Proposed Names

18% (2)
Recognized by sight
15% (3)
Eye3
Recognized by sight
50% (3)
Eyes3
Recognized by sight: I would call it a cort…

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Definitely Cortinarius
By: Karl Soop (karlsoop)
2010-12-31 04:52:45 EST (-0500)

There has been some discussion about Galerina patagonia, but this very common species always grows on wooden debris, in clusters, always has a ring, and a thin and tough stipe.

I also think you may have 2 different species in your first two pictures. The second one is so extremely like Cortinarius peraureus that I have difficulty associating it with something else. Your comment about a small, viscid fruitbody perhaps refers to the first one? If that is so, the presence in L-spermum/Kunzea and rather obtuse spores would indeed indicate C. verniciorum, as Noah suggests.

Ok,
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2010-05-17 17:52:15 EDT (-0400)

Thanks again Douglas for the comments, I also don’t particularly like congo red although it has come in handy for staining the cell walls making it easier to view, I seem to remember reading somewhere that it is carcinogenic.
I also have methylene blue that I may start using more often!
Unfortunately I don’t have Meltzer’s Reagent, it’s very hard to get here due to some of the constituents being restricted, it’s a real pain because that reagent is indispensable.

I took a closer look and would like to note that the pleurocystidia are absent, I looked through my key’s again and with the combination of a viscid pileus surface, pale brown spore deposit not rusty as I first thought, spores thick walled, punctate and not collapsing readily in KOH, cheilocystidia present but lacking pleurocystidia and clamp connections present which I don’t think they are in Galerina I come to Hebeloma, after coming to this conclusion I remembered a photograph of an undescribed Hebeloma species in one of my field guides that they give the common name of White Rimmed Pie, it seems to be a very good match to that species and the photo looks identical to my second image here.
In the field guide they describe the stipe as being slightly flattened which is a definite macroscopic character in my collection, especially towards the base.

Um, maybe?
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2010-05-17 06:40:49 EDT (-0400)

Could be a Galerina, but might want to hold open the option of it being a Cortinarius. Although Corts shouldn’t have cystidia, there are a few listed as having cystidia. I think a good dividing factor could be dextrinoid spores. Galerina patagonia looks to be part of the Nauroriopsis group, where all others species in that group have dextrinoid spores. The source I have (A. E. Wood “Studies in the Genus Galerina in Australia”, Australian Systematic Botany 14, 615–676 – sorry forgot to list that before…), doesn’t record any reactions with Meltzer’s, he used Congo Red for studies (grr… I hate congo red…). I don’t know the reaction in the spores for G. patagonia. So, if the spores are dextrinoid, that would suggest Galerina really, and not Cort. But if they aren’t dextrinoid, then you still don’t know.

Then again Hebeloma spores are often dextrinoid, so that could be another option.

And just to make your life more miserable, when you are in the area of these small brown guys that probably aren’t studied, there are species which don’t easily relate to the defined genera, and then you just get to decide. There are a few species that seem to keep wandering around between Galerina, Pholiota, Phaeogalera and so on, depending on the next publication.

Thanks,
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2010-05-17 05:43:10 EDT (-0400)

Thanks for having a look, the only thing that made me think it was similar to G. patagonica was the shape of the cheilocystidia which looks very similar with the bifurcate apex, there was another shaped cheilocystidia that was ventricose-rostrate with a long cylindrical neck.
There is a very good chance this is an undescribed species as many of the fungi in NZ have not been discovered let alone studied in any detail, are we in agreement that this is Galerina?

Ok, looked up a source here…
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2010-05-17 05:23:00 EDT (-0400)

Ok, I finally got around to looking up a source here.

The listing for G. patagonia seems to be different here. It seems that macroscopically it is fairly closely related to G. unicolor/G. marginata and such. So, it should have a veil in most cases, but loses the veil in some cases.

But it differs also microscopically, the spores should be 7.8–10.5 × 5.1–6.3 μm. So, your spores are small. Also the cystidia should be more evident and larger, more 40–55 × 12–15 × 7–9 μm.

So, don’t know, I would say still not sure, but G. patagonica doesn’t look to be that good a match here.

Cutis,
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2010-05-16 21:34:13 EDT (-0400)

Pileipellis a cutis of repent cylindrical hyphae, 57-92µm long by 3-4µm in diameter, clamp connections present.

I think it’s closer to,
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2010-05-16 09:35:00 EDT (-0400)

Galerina patagonica with the bifurcate cheilocystidia, the pileipellis is made up of a suprapellis and a subpellis, clamp connections are present in the suprapellis cells.
The pileus trama is made up of brown pigmented elements.
The annulus is fugacious meaning tending to disappear which has happened in these specimens but it can still be seen if you look closely.
I was unable to locate any pleurocystidia this time but I’m pretty sure they’re there, I just need to make better sections to examine and I’m sure I’ll find them.

it looks similar to
By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2010-05-16 06:13:29 EDT (-0400)
Hi Douglas,
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2010-05-16 04:41:29 EDT (-0400)

I only had a quick look at the spores collected from the apex of the stipe, a quick look at the edge of the lamellae didn’t show any cheilocystidia and if they are there they are not abundant.
I’ll make some micrographs of as many characters as I can find and add them here either later today or tomorrow.

If it is Descolea it’s definitely not one of the four species that have been previously described from New Zealand which all have a distinct membranous annulus.

Love to see a photo…
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2010-05-16 03:42:47 EDT (-0400)

Do you have photos of the spores? You should check in see what the cystidia on the gill edge look like. And from down there, you should check on the cap surface to see if it is a cutis or cellular, since there is Descolea to wonder about.

Spores,
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2010-05-16 02:58:29 EDT (-0400)

The spores from this collection are on average 6-7×4-5µm and are punctate or very finely verruculose, amygdaliform in side view and ellipsoid in face view with a plage, spore deposit in mass is rusty brown.

Created: 2010-05-16 02:40:34 EDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2012-10-15 06:22:11 EDT (-0400)
Viewed: 178 times, last viewed: 2016-10-23 04:18:28 EDT (-0400)
Show Log