Observation 59962: Panaeolus subbalteatus (Berk. & Broome) Sacc.
When: 2010-06-21
Who: Byrain
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Found in a large and well irrigated soccer field fruiting with Conocybe apala, Panaeolina foenisecii, and Panaeolopsis species.

The strongly bluing specimens flushed twice. Non-bluing to lightly bluing specimens fruited before, in between, and after those flushes in large numbers. The spore print was jet black.

Also, see this thread – http://www.shroomery.org/...

Images

123727
First bluing flush.
123728
First bluing flush.
123729
First bluing flush.
123730
First bluing flush.
123731
First bluing flush.
123732
First bluing flush.
123733
First bluing flush.
123734
First bluing flush.
123735
First bluing flush.
123736
First bluing flush.
123737
First bluing flush.
123738
First bluing flush.
123739
First bluing flush.
123740
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123741
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123742
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123743
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123744
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123745
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123746
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123747
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123748
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123749
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123750
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123751
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123752
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123753
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123754
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123755
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123756
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123757
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
123758
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123759
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123760
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123761
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123762
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123763
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123764
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123765
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123766
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123767
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123768
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123769
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123770
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123771
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123772
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123773
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123774
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123775
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123776
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123777
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123778
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123779
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123780
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123781
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123782
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123783
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123784
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123785
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123786
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123787
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
123788
Bluing cap, date not accurate.
123789
Copyright © 2010 Workman
Microscopy by Workman.

Proposed Names

13% (3)
Eye3
Based on microscopic features: Microscopy done by Workman.
19% (3)
Eyes3
Recognized by sight: The species concept of Agaricus (Panaeolus) cinctulus is based on a drawing made by Bolton in 1791. No type collection exists. Since it is not possible to know whether Bolton’s species was Panaeolus subbalteatus, P. olivaceus or P. fimicola, I consider Panaeolus cinctulus to be a nomen dubium.
Based on microscopic features: The gill faces need to be checked for sulphidia; the presence of these would indicate that it is probably Panaeolus fimicola.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
No offense
By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2014-01-08 15:50:28 CST (-0500)

but, you vote “as if” on a proposed name then complain when someone else votes “as if” on your proposed name. There’s no agenda my friend. I vote how I see it. That vote can change if new info comes to light. Don’t take things so personally, the mushrooms will still be there in the morning.

Since they have gotten DNA from 90 million year old fungi, I think there is a good chance they can get DNA from the holotype.

Only in very rare circumstances would you ever want to base an epitype on an iconotype. Any conspecific holotype with and earlier date than the proposed epitype for P. cinctulus would take priority over the later name.

I have no problem with leaving them as active synonyms for now. I’m fine with whatever consensus is reached, even if that is conserving the name P. cinctulus. That’s what is great about M.O., we get to have these types of discussions with like minded people.

Herbert
By: Byrain
2014-01-08 13:14:30 CST (-0500)

I don’t mean to be mean, but your entire argument rests solely on a very old type collection that no one here has even seen, a garbage description, & how illustrations/micrographs which again no one here has seen can not possibly show the difference between P. cinctulus, P. olivaceus, P. fimicola, P. subfirmus & all the other species Gerhardt included despite Gerhardt who has seen it saying it clearly does show the difference. You also failed to address how the P. subbalteatus description was supposed to be unnecessary according to Gerhardt or how anyone can possibly know what species it refers to from that terrible non-description.
http://www.mycobank.org/...

Its inappropriate & highly unappreciated to further your agenda with my observations, the ground you are standing on is not even shaky, it gave away before you even started walking. Come back and change the names after all the blanks have been filled in & all of Gerhardt’s arguments have been addressed and refuted and it will be appreciated then, in the mean time please take this vote war elsewhere.

Personally, I have strong reservations on using any name based on that description when Gerhardt did such a great work with the epitype. I recognize that this is not the end of it so I think its best to leave both names approved and let MO users decide for themselves which is better.

I did respond…
By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2014-01-07 14:32:04 CST (-0500)

I guess you didn’t notice. I have the right to vote on any observations here on M.O. You are the one who seems to be disregarding the facts. Sorry to have to point that out to you.

Herbert
By: Byrain
2014-01-07 14:11:03 CST (-0500)

Please take your vote wars elsewhere, especially when you aren’t even considering or refuting the arguments laid forth by the leading expert…

That bluing is sick!
By: Randy Longnecker (Randy L.)
2014-01-07 12:51:35 CST (-0500)

Never seen it so intense on this species.

Created: 2010-11-29 23:03:27 CST (-0500)
Last modified: 2014-01-07 13:40:50 CST (-0500)
Viewed: 618 times, last viewed: 2016-12-01 21:12:32 CST (-0500)
Show Log