Observation 65259: Tubaria conspersa (Pers.) Fayod
When: 2004-12-28
Herbarium specimen reported

Notes: Original Herbarium Label: Tubaria conspersa (Pers.) Fayod

Proposed Names

ham
21% (5)
Recognized by sight
76% (4)
Eye3 Eyes3
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
Cool
By: Erin Page Blanchard (CureCat)
2011-04-08 16:25:43 PDT (-0700)

Thanks for the update. Mix ups can happen when you have so many pictures, sketches, and herbarium specimens- often in all different locations. It is totally understandable, so thanks for checking on this.

It is Tubaria conspersa!
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2011-04-08 15:35:50 PDT (-0700)

The Consensus was right! Oluna dug out her collections from that day and found both specimens of Tubaria and Psathyrella paradoxa. We matched the Tubaria collection with the photo and it was a perfect fit. Oluna re-identified the Tubaria as Tubaria conspersa (she had it as T. hiemalis in her original list). Thanks to all of you who pointed out the misidentification (namely CureCat!) and participated in this debate. Adolf
P.S. I don’t have a photo of Psathyrella paradoxa, but I will re-post Oluna’s drawings and some microphotos of the Observatory Hill specimen as (the real) P. paradoxa.

Yes,
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2011-04-07 23:47:26 PDT (-0700)

I was going to mention that, maybe the wrong drawing has been matched up to that photograph.

I think
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2011-04-07 11:50:18 PDT (-0700)

we have two species here – one in the sketch and another in the photo..

Dear friends…
By: Dimitar Bojantchev (dimitar)
2011-04-07 10:37:19 PDT (-0700)

Dear friends, we should not get too excited over a mushroom id – if one is too sensitive then mushroom identification is the wrong exercise where one is guaranteed to have his ego squashed many times… Anyway, I can’t twist my senses here — I do see an obvious Tubaria here from a mile away. In fact I agree with Irene’s affinity to T. conspersa. Plate 27 of Smith’s monograph, illustrating Psathyrella paradoxa does not look close to this one in a number of macro features. Oluna’s excellent micrograph looks very Tubarioid to me too.

Adolf, I hope you do not disinvite me from visiting Victoria this fall…

D.

Any more info…
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2011-04-07 00:38:12 PDT (-0700)

Is there more info about the pileus surface structure?

pileipellis,
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2011-04-07 00:37:57 PDT (-0700)

An examination of the pileipellis structure would clear this up, if a cutis of cylindric and repent hyphae is seen then it is quite possibly a Tubaria species, if a hymeniform layer or one that is almost cellular is seen then Psathyrella is likely, I tend to agree that this is probably a Psathyrella especially if the cheilocystidia at all resemble the pleurocystidia in Oluna’s line drawing, Tubaria have different shaped cheilocystidia.

Tubaria conspersa is a good guess!
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2011-04-07 00:22:41 PDT (-0700)

Tubaria conspersa is a good guess, EXCEPT that T. conspersa should not have pleurocystidia and the cheilocystidia don’t come close to our material.

What is consensus?
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2011-04-06 21:42:13 PDT (-0700)

I admire people who can identify fungi without seeing the specimen, or without doing some microscopy on it. Who is “Consensus”? We will hire him or her to help us.

I found that we have to go with the Consensus and it’s impossible to change the name back. I will wait two weeks to see if another Consensus reads the stars and comes with another name … AC

Nonsence!
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2011-04-06 20:40:21 PDT (-0700)

ditto O&A

Ditto Erin…
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2011-04-06 16:27:39 PDT (-0700)
Drawing added
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2011-04-06 16:11:27 PDT (-0700)

We have added the sketch of this collection. It is in a part of Oluna’s sketch books that we have not scanned yet. The photo is poor, but we will replace it one day. The identification was done using Smith’s Psathyrella monograph.

.
By: Erin Page Blanchard (CureCat)
2011-04-06 15:02:50 PDT (-0700)

Are you sure that this is a Psathyrella? It doesn’t look like it belongs in that genus. I would suggest Tubaria.

Created: 2011-04-06 09:49:25 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2014-01-03 10:27:12 PST (-0800)
Viewed: 357 times, last viewed: 2016-10-25 06:20:56 PDT (-0700)
Show Log