When: 2011-03-14
Collection location: Davis, California, USA [Click for map]
Who: Byrain
Notes:
Growing in a mixed group of pine and she-oak (Casuarina equisetifolia) from old wood chips and wood fragments dropped from the two kinds of trees growing there. The specimens are small, the caps measuring 2 cm across at most and the spore print is rusty brown. The caps are also viscid.
Edit (12-29-13):
Spores with an absent or non-visible germ pore
Spore range = (7) 8 – 9 × 4 – 5.5 (6) µm
Spore average = 8.55 × 5.03 µ
Q range = (1.5) 1.64 – 1.8 (2)
Average Q = 1.71
Cheilocystidia measured = 10×7, 11×6, 16×7, 20×6, 23×7, 23×9 µ
Caulocytidia measured = 25×15, 29×10, 37×8 µ
cap cells measured = 28×12, 30×21, 33×13, 39×10, 40×13 µ
Basidiole measured = 23×6 µ
4-spored basidia observed, some basidioles seen with yellowish contents
Clamps observed on the base of the cystidia, stem hyphae & pileipellis
Species Lists
Images
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 5.76 | 1 | (Byrain) | |||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
-2.56 | -85.21% | |||||||
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 11.49 | 2 | (Byrain,Alan Rockefeller) | |||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
1.84 | 61.33% | |||||||
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 11.49 | 2 | (Alan Rockefeller,Byrain) | |||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
1.84 | 61.33% | |||||||
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 5.76 | 1 | (Byrain) | |||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
2.56 | 85.21% | |||||||
Comments
Add Comment
So there could be more than one annulate Pholiotina without a germ pore…
The closest match is a Pholiotina aporos sequence from Hungary, but that’s only a 94% match so it’s not the same thing as they had.
aCTTGaTAGGTTGTCGCTGGCTCCCTTGGGGGCATGTGCACGCTCATCATTTTTATATTTCCACCTGTGCATCATTTGTAGTTCTGGAATACTTTGCAGTAAAAGCTTTCGAGTTTTGGCTGCGTTTGAAGGTGCTGCTGTGCTTTACAAAAGCCAGCTCTCCTTTGTATTTTCCAGATCTATGTTTTTTCATATACACCATGTATGTTAGAGAATGAAATCTAAGGCCTTAAAAAGCCTATATAAACAATATACAACTTTCAGCAACGGATCTCTTGGCTCTCGCATCGATGAAGAACGCAGCGAAATGCGATAAGTAATGTGAATTGCAGAATTCAGTGAATCATCGAATCTTTGAACGCACCTTGCGCTCCTTGGTATTCCGAGGAGCATGCCTGTTTGAGTGTCATTTAAATCATCAAACCTTTCATTACCTTGAAGGTTTGGATATGGGAGTGTTGTTGGTCTTATGTGGTCAGCTCTCCTCAAACGTATTAGCGGAAAGCTTTTGTAACCATCTATTGGTGTGATAATTATCTATACCATTGACAGTTACACTTAGTATAAGCATTCTGCTTCTAACTGTCTGCTTATGTGGACAACATTTGACAATTTGACCTCAAATCAGGTAGGACTACCCGCTGAACTTAAGCA
Another one to do DNA work on, in the mean time I think its close enough that using the possibly misapplied European name is fine. Also, given my level of experience when I found these, its very possible that the caps being viscid really means they were just wet. :)
Oh, there is also this Pholiotina without a germ pore which does not seem to be P. arrhenii…
A spring time find with a cellular cap, and spores lacking pores. It does seem to mke a reasonable id of P. aporos. Interesting to see that in California. The cap being viscid is interesting, if enough of these are found, could be another species to name here, has to see the dna work done.
You make a good point about the membranous veil. And I agree that is would be interesting to see under an scope, I’ll save them for when the chance arises.
Looks more like a Pholiotina with the more membranous veil, that is in the middle of the stipe. The common G. marginata has a fibrous veil that is at the top of the stipe, near the cap margin. Not sure which Pholiotina, this one would be interesting for the scope.
…these observations:
64378 – http://mushroomobserver.org/64378?q=3rnV
64375 – http://mushroomobserver.org/64375?q=3rnV
64358 – http://mushroomobserver.org/64358?q=3rnV
And Clitocybe nuda.
Can be further seen in observation – 64375
Created: 2011-03-15 13:45:00 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2018-01-30 19:08:11 PST (-0800)
Viewed: 216 times, last viewed: 2018-04-05 15:51:56 PDT (-0700)
Show Log
This easily keys to Pholiotina aporos, there aren’t really any other options included. Some differences in the description is on average the spores are slightly wider and the cheilocystidia are not so “cylindrical, narrowly clavate to narrowly lageniform” and are more utriform or globose. The difference in cheilocystidia shape can be further seen in Douglas’ obs 44402.