Observation 65481: Lobothallia radiosa (Hoffm.) Hafellner
When: 2011-04-01
Who: zaca
No herbarium specimen

Images

140840
140841
Magnification of the initial photograph
140842
Magnification of the initial photograph
140843
2nd specimen

Proposed Names

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Thanks, Chris, for your kind words.
By: zaca
2011-04-14 14:25:53 PDT (-0700)

Regarding your comment, I just learned about the distinction between the two genera (Aspicilia and Lobothallia) when reading the notes to the description of the genus Lobothallia in CNALH.

defining difference
By: Chris Parrish (kitparrish)
2011-04-14 13:11:27 PDT (-0700)

Fletcher, Purvis, and Coppins in the discussion of Aspicilia in “The Lichens of Great Britain and Ireland” (Smith et al., 2009, p.182): “Species with lobate or placodioid thalli have been considered by some authors to be a separate genus, Lobothallia.”

Learning a lot by following your series of observations, zaca!

“long remaining immersed”
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2011-04-14 12:52:27 PDT (-0700)

I was worried about the non-immersed apothecia in Stridvall’s photos. That explains it, then, maybe. I checked Aspicilia, too, and couldn’t find any sign of species with Lobothallia-like outer lobes like this. I forget, maybe that’s even the defining difference between the two genera??

It was the first time …
By: zaca
2011-04-14 12:37:03 PDT (-0700)

… I encountered a specimen similar to Aspicilia but with radial lobes. I came to the genus Lobothallia after consulting the “stridvall” webpage, where only two species are presented L. radiosa and L. melanaspis, the latter being quite different from my specimen.
In the meantime, I saw that in the Sonoran Desert Lichens Checklists three species are referred: L. alphoplaca, L. praeradiosa and L. radiosa. Their descriptions are available from CNALH. After read these descriptions, I am more convinced that my specimen is a L. radiosa. In fact, is the only one where the green colour is mentioned for the upper-surface, which is a characteristic mark of my specimen. In addition, the description of apothecia and discs (where the species mainly differ) match completely, and I quote:
“Apothecia: usually numerous, mostly densely crowded centrally, long remaining immersed, finally adnate to broadly sessile, 0.5-1.5 mm in diam., often compound or confluent and irregular in outline disc: red-brown to gray-brown, brownish black or almost black, at first concave to almost urceolate, then plane, usually epruinose …”.
Thus I am even more convinced of my proposal for the species of the specimen under consideration.
Thanks, Jason, for your comment.

Lobothallia looks good
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2011-04-13 16:25:09 PDT (-0700)

Don’t know the species radiosa, but doesn’t look like any I know, either.

Created: 2011-04-13 14:21:08 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2011-04-13 14:21:10 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 78 times, last viewed: 2016-10-24 08:20:11 PDT (-0700)
Show Log