Name: Clitocybe dealbata (Sowerby) Gillet
Most Confident Observations:
Copyright © 2017 Patrick Harvey (pg_harvey)
Copyright © 2013 amadej trnkoczy (amadej)
Copyright © 2010 Richard Sullivan (enchplant)
Copyright © 2015 Eva Skific (Evica)
Version: 3
Previous Version 

First person to use this name on MO: Nathan Wilson
Editors: Alan Rockefeller, Jacob Kalichman


Rank: Species

Status: Deprecated

Name: Clitocybe dealbata

Author: (Sowerby) Gillet


Preferred Synonyms:Clitocybe rivulosa (Pers.) P. Kumm.

Deprecated Synonyms: Clitocybe sudorifica


Domain: Eukarya

Kingdom: Fungi

Phylum: Basidiomycota

Class: Agaricomycetes

Order: Agaricales

Family: Tricholomataceae

Genus: Clitocybe

Show Subtaxa

Brief Description: Descriptions: [Create]


Add Comment
By: Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
2018-01-02 22:32:38 CST (-0500)

Kuyper 1996:

“Clitocybe dealbata (Sow.: Fr.) Kumm. Separation of C. dealbata and C. rivulosa (Pers.: Fr.) Kumm. has been considered as very difficult. The characters usually considered as sufficient for separating two taxa on species level, viz. general habit, pileus form, and colour of the pileus were found to show intergradations in Dutch collections. Herbarium collections in several Dutch herbaria filed under C. dealbata were found to consist of young specimens of C. rivulosa. Harmaja (1969: 75) adopted only the name C. dealbata and nowhere discussed the name C. rivulosa, the latter name without arguments just being declared a nomen dubium. Harmaja did not provide a macroscopical description of C. dealbata, implying that he did not see fresh material of it himself, but as he included a collection from Lundell & Nann- feldt (1938) under the name C. rivulosa, I have no doubts about the identity of Harmaja’s species. An earlier collection distributed as C. dealbata (Lundell & Nannfeldt, 1936), was identified as C. candicans (Pers.: Fr.) Kumm. by Harmaja. Lamoure (1983) concluded, on the basis of interfertility experiments that C. dealbata and C. rivulosa had to be consid- ered conspecific. She also choose the name C. dealbata for it. The application of the name C. dealbata is, however, beset with some difficulties. Aga- ricus dealbatus, as illustrated by Sowerby (1799), depicts a small hygrophanous white mushroom with a convex to. infundibuliform pileus, growing under a canopy of firs. Al- though it cannot be excluded that Sowerby illustrated slender specimens of a Clitocybe (e.g. C. candicans (Pers.: Fr.) Kumm.), his figure is more strongly reminiscent of Hemi- mycena lactea (Pers.: Fr.) Sing. Fries (1821: 92) sanctioned the name C. dealbatus, but his listing of Sowerby’s taxon as a separate variant, different from Fries’s main interpre- Kuyper: Notulae ad floram agaririnam – XXIV-XXVIII 227 tation of A. dealbatus seems to suggest that Fries was in doubt whether his taxon was identical with Sowerby’s. Later interpretations (Kiihner & Romagnesi, 1953) of the name C. dealbata included not only C. rivulosa but also a closely related species with a farinaceous smell (a character not mentioned by Sowerby; Fries explicitly stated that the species was inodorous). This latter taxon is better known as C. augeana (Mont.) Sacc.(syn. C. ruderalis Harm.). As the name C. rivulosa is of unambiguous application, it has been accepted by me (Kuyper, 1995: 48). The name C. dealbata is best rejected as a nomen dubium, as none of the interpretations that have been in use correspond to Sowerby’s taxon. Although C. rivulosa is generally regarded as a grassland species, it can grow in for- ests as well. Records of muscarine poisoning by C. phyllophila (Pers.: Fr.) Kumm. or C. candicans refer to C. rivulosa as the two other species do not contain muscarine (Stijve & Kuyper, unpublished).”

Number of users interested in this name: 0

Created: 2007-01-10 00:05:32 CST (-0500) by Nathan Wilson (nathan)
Last modified: 2020-05-13 23:48:40 CDT (-0400) by Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
Viewed: 1119 times, last viewed: 2020-08-04 17:10:49 CDT (-0400)
Show Log