Observation 97598: Cortinarius subgenus Dermocybe (Fr.) Fr.

When: 2012-06-17

Collection location: Cardinia Reservoir Park, Victoria, Australia [Click for map]

Who: Tex (Stopwhispering)

No specimen available

Proposed Names

16% (2)
Recognized by sight
Used references: “A Field Guide to Australian Fungi.” – B. Fuhrer.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
By: Karl Soop (karlsoop)
2014-06-25 03:55:47 PDT (-0700)

You’re right, Mike, most of the Australian dermocyboid species are in fact in Splendidi, There’s C. kula (which is very much like the NZ C. vinicolor) plus 2 more all-red species, then C. cf. persplendidus, 2 gastroid species (truffles), C. clelandi and C. sejunctus.

The only other dermocyboid section in Australia seems to be Icterinula. This is a big section in NZ and South America, but very small in Australia: C. walkeri (=C. austrovenetus), the NZ species C. canarius, plus a red NZ species, as far as known at present. C veronicoides and C. papaver (= C. austrocinnabarinus) belong to other clades.

Btw. I corrected my previous comment; it is of course Splendidi which is sister to Leprocybe.

By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2014-06-25 00:12:44 PDT (-0700)
Karl for providing that information, yes our Southern Hemisphere Dermocyboid corts with red to orange hues in the gills and veil form a separate group (Sect. Splendidi) but you mention in your book that the cap does not exhibit these pigments, all of my collections of C. persplendidus here in NZ and other collections I have seen here seem to lack any red or orange colour in the cap, they are generally a dark brown to almost black at the disk but these Australian collections all look to have a reddish-orange pigment in the cap, that is one of the distinct macroscopic differences I see between these Australian and New Zealand collections, also the Australian collections look to have a sparser veil than our NZ collections of C. persplendidus.

I would propose Cortinarius Sect. Splendidi for all of these Australian collections but do they really fit into that section with the distinct red-orange pigment in the cap?

Oh Adolf, I’m not certain this observation is actually supported by a dried collection but the tree Karl provided does refer to this taxon.

By: Karl Soop (karlsoop)
2014-06-24 09:01:51 PDT (-0700)

Hi Timmi,
I have only seen pictures of the Australian taxon, and read the description of Bougher & Syme 1998, so I only have a general impression of small macro differences, which may in fact be fortuitous. I know the NZ taxon, which seems to have less reddish lamellae, often a more bulbous stipe with a darker veil (see the image of the latest posting by Mike W. http://mushroomobserver.org/168267?q=22Jvk).

It seems to me that the Australian Splendidi are more Dermocybe-like than the NZ Splendidi, e.g. C. kula (which is all red). The other known NZ Splendidi, C. ophryx and C. tigrellus, both lack reddish tones, but possess a thick, bulbous stipe with a dark veil. Their phenotypes are quite Leprocybe-like, and our studies (unpubl.) put Splendidi in a sister-clade relationship with section (not subgenus!!!) Leprocybe. The strong fluorescence with many of them is also a common trait.

By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2014-06-24 08:04:58 PDT (-0700)

Apologies for my negative comment. This observation is tagged as having no herbarium specimen and I usually ignore observations without specimens. I got quite upset when I saw such a nice posting without supporting material, as it was claimed to be.

By: TimmiT
2014-06-24 04:54:20 PDT (-0700)

Hi Karl,

Thanks for your comment. Do you (or anyone) have plans to publish a new name/s?

Out of interest what are the macroscopic differences?

By: Karl Soop (karlsoop)
2014-06-24 04:43:08 PDT (-0700)

In fact neither of these species can be ascribed to a subgenus Dermocybe (let alone a genus of that name), as they form a lineage (section Splendidi) that is completely separate from that of the type of Dermocybe (C. cinnamomeus).

I wanted to include a small ITS tree showing the difference between the real C. persplendidus and the Australian species, but I forgot how to include images in this forum. It is not simply to send it along with the comment, as in most other fora? It was something with exclamation marks perhaps? I try it and we shall see. Anyway, these are GenBank sequences that anyone could check. There are also some small macroscopic differences.

By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2014-06-24 03:23:35 PDT (-0700)

The sequences are different so it should not be called something it is not, it fits into Cortinarius subgenus Dermocybe but it is not a published species.

You can call it any names you like!
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2014-06-24 03:19:40 PDT (-0700)

If you don’t have any supporting specimens, you can call it any names you like. Nice photography, but not too useful for mycology. Sorry! Adolf

What’s in a name?
By: TimmiT
2014-06-24 02:48:54 PDT (-0700)

If they fall within the current description of Cortinarius persplendidus why not keep calling them that until something is published saying otherwise?

Not C. persplendidus
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2014-06-24 02:03:07 PDT (-0700)

This Australian Dermocybe is very closely related to C. persplendidus but is genetically distinct, it is not a published species yet, personal communication with Karl Soop.
Here is a few links to my observations of the true C. persplendidus

Dermocybe splendida is Cortinarius persplendidus
By: Tom May (funkeytom)
2014-06-20 07:58:31 PDT (-0700)

This one used to be called Dermocybe splendida, but because there already is a Cortinarius splendidus (an American species described by Peck) the name in Cortinarius for the Australian species is Cortinarius persplendidus.

Created: 2012-06-17 03:05:16 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2014-06-24 01:59:51 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 276 times, last viewed: 2017-12-12 06:14:06 PST (-0800)
Show Log