Observation 49509: Neohygrophorus angelesianus (Smith & Hesler) Singer
When: 2010-08-01
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Growing in leaf litter in fog drip under redwoods. Tiny <2cm tall.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
.
By: Erin Page Blanchard (CureCat)
2011-10-05 19:13:26 EDT (-0400)

I scoped the one I found, I never got a hold of this collection. I did not confirm Neohygrophorus because there were no mature spores. I identified this species last year in Humboldt and think that this observation and my own from Mill Valley are the same. When it is old and dried out it looks a LOT different (and uglier).

To me, this observation and my Mill Valley collection (observation 28564) look like young versions of the Humboldt one, (observation 59525 and observation 59394). Other pictures of this species on MO, especially Sierra collections, look much more drab and tired.

did you ever scope this Erin?
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2011-10-05 14:49:07 EDT (-0400)

Or at least the one that you collected?

It probably IS the same species as the tiny purplish one that you collected in Mill Valley, but I am not convinced that either are Neohygrophorus.

Thanks for the ID!
By: Richard Sullivan (enchplant)
2010-08-04 20:18:03 EDT (-0400)

Curcat I’m so glad you will be able to scope this, having found a new specimen. I’m kicking myself. I was out for a walk and my eagle eyed daughter (12), spotted this mushroom. So I snapped the photos and tucked a specimen into my backpack to scope later. Someone had cleaned out the backpack however, by the time I had gotten got around to scoping it. Thanks all for the ID!

.
By: Erin Page Blanchard (CureCat)
2010-08-04 17:56:33 EDT (-0400)

grey, purple, brown ‘frosted’ colour, widely spaced waxy gills, the stature and size… It all seems to match well to me. I am convinced this is the same thing I found and linked to below, and I dug up the single, tiny specimen last night, so I’ll take a look at it today.

Mike’s YNP collection is currently the default image for this species.

Sorry – don’t see it really
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2010-08-04 10:17:33 EDT (-0400)

I’m not sure what about this makes it Neohygrophorus angelesianus. Are there any more reasons this id?

Esp. if you are so sure now that this has become the default image for the species on this site…

Cool indeed
By: Erin Page Blanchard (CureCat)
2010-08-03 07:13:35 EDT (-0400)

And I would say that Neohygrophorus is a fine guess… Especially since I found what looks to be the same mushroom right in the same area, and I also suspect it is likely a Neohygrophorus, perhaps N. angelesianus:
observation 28564

Though no one seemed to particularly agree with me on that one..

Cool…
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2010-08-02 21:38:05 EDT (-0400)

I wonder if it could be a Neohygrophorus

Created: 2010-08-02 20:32:57 EDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2010-08-06 15:24:18 EDT (-0400)
Viewed: 185 times, last viewed: 2016-03-24 05:53:24 EDT (-0400)
Show Log