|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.|
|I’d Call It That||3.0||16.90||3||(T. Sage,Alan Rockefeller)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
But once I said Superball consistency, you still doubted me. ;)
I post many observations, and try to include notes. I will do better at this in the future as I progress in mycology, thank you for the advice.
This original observation was made hastily while my fiance was grocery shopping! Hahaha, take care Daniel!
others will too. The problem, Tim, is that your original observation did not include the data you included afterwards. By adding a descriptions of “superball consistency” to the original observation, you negate my original comment.
The additional photos prove Scleroderma. But there was no indication in your photos this was a Scleroderma: no marbling, no thick peridium visible in the photos, no thick ropey rhizomorphic base. And no description of such in your original observation. These field notes are essential to accurate observations.
I told you I knew the difference between a puffball and an Earthball!
You, Alan, Byrain…. All doubted me! :)
I don’t mind being questioned, it helps me learn. This though felt a tad insulting…
No hard feelings though, I think it is funny!
Your latest photos have convinced even me.
The next problem is determining species. Even now, 6 days after the initial observation, the specimen is quit immature. There is no hint of dark purple, which would suggest either S. laeve or S. cepa; there is some reddening just under the peridium, which does hint at A. laeve.
I have removed my suggestion of Lycoperdon nigrescens.
But I’m still not sure what this is other than Scleroderma. There is marbling of the gleba in your second photo: a key ingredient for this genera. There also is quite a thick peridium, which might help identification if we knew how thick it was?
Any more questions?
But usually there is a quick color change within 1-2 days after the fungus becomes erumpent. Color change can be violet-tinged, to purple or purple-black. But even when pure white, there should be off-white veins visible if you blow up the exposed gleba. I don’t see any.
Is usually (always?) purple on the inside.
But I know the difference between an Earthball and Puffball. Thank you for you help and input!
I will certainly be going back.
the pinched look of the middle specimen, and unless 1 day old have interior gleba with visible veination. Interior of this collection has no visible veination that I can see. Ergo, Scleroderma highly unlikely.
But if Scleroderma (for the same of dialogue) go back for additional collection next week. Gleba should have matured by then, and there should be some color on the inside. This time, slice with a knife through the base of the specimen, including any rhizomorphs attached to the bottom. Will need a close-up of the sliced peridium as well. Many Scleroderma are determined/identified by the number and size of multiple layers in or near the peridium. Plus any discoloration or bruising.
Hope you’re right, Tim. I am unconvinced.
That this is Scleroderma. As hard as a superball. The skin is thick, it is just that the gleba is immature.
Scleroderma means “thick skin” referring to the outer shell of the fungus which is often 1 or more cm thick. Peridium of this observation perhaps a few mm thick, which makes Scleroderma problematic. Not a bad guess based on habitat though.
I think, if you go back, you should find other, more mature sporocarps. In my experience this matures within a few days.
Created: 2011-10-18 19:42:51 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2011-10-26 12:54:50 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 160 times, last viewed: 2016-03-31 01:35:42 PDT (-0700)