Observation 91295: Paxillus Fr.
When: 2012-03-31
No herbarium specimen

Notes: I chanced upon this single specimen, growing at the base of a eucalypt.


Copyright © 2012 Kari Vivash
Copyright © 2012 Kari Vivash
Copyright © 2012 Kari Vivash
Copyright © 2012 Kari Vivash
I’ve added another photo of this still unidentified mushroom, which gives an idea of the underside/gills. It’s not a terribly good photo, unfortunately, but it may provide an extra clue. As Gerhard suggests, this could well be an old specimen, as the gills appear somewhat shrivelled.

Proposed Names

55% (1)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight
28% (1)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Yes, I do have
By: Gerhard Koller (Gerhard)
2012-04-19 21:29:30 BST (+0100)

and I am not sure if I didn’t post it already. If not I will in near future.

P. rhodoxanthus…
By: Kari (Kari)
2012-04-13 01:09:08 BST (+0100)

have evidently made their way down to this part of the world. Bruce Fuhrer (Field Guide to Australian Fungi) says that P. rhodoxanthus are gregarious in eucalyptus forests and woodland.

But as you say, there are so many fungi around the place yet to be indentified…

Have you got a photo of the Phylloporus you found in the Blue Mountains?

Don’t think so.
By: Gerhard Koller (Gerhard)
2012-04-12 09:31:41 BST (+0100)

And if so it could be just Phylloporus, as far as I know P. rhodoxanthus is restricted to North America. There are so many Phyllopori who are still in need of a name. I found one in the Blue Mountains several years ago who still is unnamed.

By: Richard and Danielle Kneal (bloodworm)
2012-04-12 03:35:17 BST (+0100)

the season in Australia, it might be possible, but i doubt it.
check the location at a later date and see if you can find another specimen…
that is your best bet.

No decurrence…
By: Kari (Kari)
2012-04-12 02:29:49 BST (+0100)

of the gills.

I’m now wondering if this could be an old specimen of a Phylloporus rhodoxanthus. Do you think my mushroom bears some resemblance to these?


decurrent gills…
By: Richard and Danielle Kneal (bloodworm)
2012-04-11 10:23:38 BST (+0100)

were the gills decurrent? that may suggest Omphalotus.

By: Gerhard Koller (Gerhard)
2012-04-11 10:17:29 BST (+0100)

it is so dried up that the photo of the gills is of no use too. Still Tricholoma could be an option but I am now not so convinced of this guess anymore. Sorry.

Added a photo of the gills – poor photo – sorry.
By: Kari (Kari)
2012-04-11 02:51:00 BST (+0100)

I’ve just added a photo depicting the underside, sorry about the poor quality of this photo (it’s why I didn’t post it originally) – but maybe it will give an extra clue to this mushroom’s identity. As you suggested, it is most likely an older specimen, judging by the wizened nature of the gills.

Underside? Gills are very important for determination.
By: Gerhard Koller (Gerhard)
2012-03-31 10:28:25 BST (+0100)

I do not believe this to be a Paxillus. Paxillus in Australia is introduced. One of the most common fungi in Oz is Paxillus involutus with introduced birch trees. Native relatives of Paxillus are Austropaxillus but this doesn’t look like them. Furthermore, the specimens look over-aged or dried up. I suspect (just a wild guess) this to be a Tricholoma.

Created: 2012-03-31 02:24:22 BST (+0100)
Last modified: 2012-04-11 10:22:58 BST (+0100)
Viewed: 141 times, last viewed: 2017-06-13 02:20:02 BST (+0100)
Show Log