Observation 69186: Inocybe rimosa (Bull.) P. Kumm.
When: 2011-06-13
(48.0° 117.0° )
No herbarium specimen

Proposed Names

55% (3)
Eye3 Eyes3
Used references: Artificial Key to Common and Noteworthy Species of Inocybe from the Pacific Northwest-Brandon Matheny, Matchmaker
Based on microscopic features

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
More fun reading
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2011-06-18 21:40:50 CEST (+0200)

Yes, I read about the odor here too :-)

BTW, I think the FJ sequences of sororia are Swedish..

Re: Just for fun
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2011-06-18 19:48:16 CEST (+0200)

All “HQ604nnn” numbers are the UBC (Vancouver, BC) specimens. The tight cluster of four HQ specimens are the specimens from southern Vancouver Island and adjacent Gulf Islands. The other three speciemens that went with Inocybe arenicola, are two from the Queen Charlotte Islands (now Haida Gwaii) and one [HQ604625] from Smithers in NW BC.

Oluna describes the Inocybe sororia odour as that of fresh corn husk/silk.

Not easy
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2011-06-18 18:47:51 CEST (+0200)

but my guess is that you’d find this one in the lower lineage in the (quick and dirty) tree, posted below. Whatever its name should be, at least it belongs in the rimosa group..

By: Drew Parker (mycotrope)
2011-06-18 15:45:40 CEST (+0200)

An even aged stand of middle aged, widely spaced Pinus ponderosa, open with very little understory. Is around 900 meters elevation.

Just for fun
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2011-06-18 14:32:21 CEST (+0200)

I picked a few sequences of Inocybe sororia, added the two arenicola that were available, and made a tiny tree:

I also read Kauffman’s description of sororia:

It says odor somewhat pungent or lacking… Looks to me like you have at least two species/varieties in the rimosa cluster, named sororia?

By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2011-06-18 11:10:52 CEST (+0200)

with sororia. It looks a bit more slender and maybe a bit shorter spores than arenicola. Any info about habitat for it?

And Drew, how would you describe the habitat for this one?

By: Drew Parker (mycotrope)
2011-06-16 23:17:52 CEST (+0200)

It’s not been easy to find information on I. arenicola, but did find this on the web: http://www.actafungorum.org/actaforum/viewtopic.php?t=1966 I see nothing there that would conflict with it being the same as my collection. Basidiocarps and micro-structures look quite close.

We don’t know Inocybe arenicola
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2011-06-16 22:49:35 CEST (+0200)

The first time we have heard about Inocybe arenicola. We have posted two observations of the “North American” Inocybe sororia that is similar to Inocybe rimosa. It is more robust and less rimose and has distinct “corn silk” odour. O&A

Found one more option
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2011-06-15 11:22:32 CEST (+0200)

Inocybe arenicola, also with similar micro characters, but not rimose (first named Inocybe fastigiata f. arenicola)..
Known from sandy habitats with Salix repens and probably also pine and other trees. Possible?

You can find a key to european species in the Rimosae/Maculata group by the end of this article (I do beleive that Washington shares many species with northern Europe :-)


By: Drew Parker (mycotrope)
2011-06-15 10:17:20 CEST (+0200)

are 11-16 × 5-7 µm. Sambucina has thick walled encrusted cheilocystidia, these do not. Breitenbach says that I. rimosa is very variable both microscopically and macroscopically and that “even the spores have a relatively large amplitude”. The photo of rimosa in Breitenbach looks similar to this one though a bit more rimose. Perhaps moist conditions minimized the degree of rimosity in my collection.

That’s right, but..
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2011-06-15 09:12:28 CEST (+0200)

I agree with Oluna – they don’t look typical for rimosa or obsoleta.
I’d take a look at other options, why not Inocybe sambucina: Spores 7-10 × 3.5-5 μm

By: Drew Parker (mycotrope)
2011-06-15 08:33:40 CEST (+0200)

The gills on this collection look a bit more yellowish/olive than this photo indicates. Not sure if it’s the photo or the color developed since it was taken. So is the only visible difference between the two the color of the lamellae, and a white veil on younger caps?

I don’t think
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2011-06-15 08:14:39 CEST (+0200)

Stangl did any molecular studies. Those who have, and claim obsoleta to be different from the rimosa cluster, could also be mistaken, of course..

But just take a look at this:

Oluna et Adolf
By: Drew Parker (mycotrope)
2011-06-15 07:01:15 CEST (+0200)

They are not encrusted, but do they look like a fit for rimosa to you?

Did you check cheilocystidia?
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2011-06-15 03:44:55 CEST (+0200)

Your photo does not show clearly the rimose character of the cap surface. Also, in I. rimosa, cheilocystidia should be without any encrustations. According to Stangl (1989), I. obsoleta is among the synonyms of I. rimosa. – Oluna

Check also
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2011-06-14 09:46:14 CEST (+0200)

Inocybe obsoleta, identical with rimosa in the microscope, but without the yellow gills, and with a white cover on the cap on young specimen.

Created: 2011-06-14 09:11:36 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2011-06-16 22:57:34 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 260 times, last viewed: 2016-09-04 21:51:30 CEST (+0200)
Show Log