Code: Bot_780/2014_DSC9714

Habitat: Path side surrounded by pastures and mixed wood, near a farm house, locally flat terrain on southeast oriented mountain slope, open place, however, because of mountain ridges only about two hours of sun per day in winter months; mixed overgrown old scree and alluvial deposits, calcareous ground, exposed to direct rain, average precipitations ~ 3.000 mm/year, average temperature 7-9 deg C, elevation 560 m (1.850 feet), alpine phytogeographical region.

Substratum: on cut-off surface of three felled down Juglans regia trunks in its initial disintegration stage.

Place: Lower Trenta valley, near abandoned farm house Skokar, Trenta 2, between villages Soča and Trenta, right bank of river Soča, East Julian Alps, Posočje, Slovenia EC

Comments: I initially thought these tiny mushrooms were ascomycete cup fungi. However, under the microscope, the species turned out to be a rather peculiar, cup-shaped basidiomycete. It had been thriving almost the whole January 2014 (the warmest ever measured in Slovenia!) on these logs. The species is not present in the Slovenian fungi check list (Ref.: 1). This surprises because it has been recorded in all surrounding countries and is not considered a very rare one. Surprises also the substratum found. Ref.: 2. states 39 different species of hardwood, however, Juglans regia is not among them. The logs were infected with Ascocorine sarcodes, Trametes sp, and Exidia sp. too.

Taxonomy of this genus (syn.: Cyphellopsis / Solenia) seems not yet fixed. Several mycologists agree that it is almost impossible to distinguish among many described species in it. It has already been a member of several genera. In addition, some DNA analysis doesn’t support presently supposed morphological division into species and speaks more in the direction of a ‘cloud’ of highly variable forms probably representing a genus, which is in a vigorous (micro)evolutionary process (Ref.:2). May be this explains a bit too large spores of this observation. Strange enough, based on DNA it’s closely related to gilled mushrooms and is placed in the family Niaceae, which includes, hard believing, salt-water-inhabiting fungi (Ref.:7.). The whole taxonomy story is described in Ref. 5.

Nikon D700/Nikkor Micro 105mm/f2.8 and Canon G11, 6.1-30mm/f2.8-4.5

Species Lists


Shown with Ascocoryne sarcoides.
Shown with Ascocoryne sarcoides.
Shown with Ascocoryne sarcoides.
Shown with Ascocoryne sarcoides.

Proposed Names

62% (2)
Recognized by sight: Dirty light ocher-brown colored patches on dark brown cut-off surface of an old log.
Used references: (1) A. Poler, ed., Seznam gliv Slovenije (in Slovene), 2nd Ed., Assoc. of Mycol. Soc. of Slovenia (1998).
(2) G.J. Krieglsteiner (Hrsg.), Die Grosspilze Baden-Württembergs, Band 3., Ulmer (2001), p 601.
(3) S. Buczacki, Collins Fungi Guide, Collins (2012), p 394.
(7) P. Bodensteiner, M. Binder, JM. Moncalvo, R. Agerer and D.S. Hibbett, Phylogenetic relationships of cyphelloid homobasidiomycetes, Mole. Phylogenetics and Evol. (2004), 30 : 1–15. available at
Based on microscopic features: Spores smooth. Dimensions: 8.8 [9.7 ; 10.1] 11 × 4.5 [5 ; 5.2] 5.7 microns, Q = 1.7 [1.9 ; 2] 2.2 ; N = 25 ; C = 95%, Me = 9.9 × 5.1 microns ; Qe = 1.9. Basidia dimensions: 28.7 [38.7 ; 47.9] 57.9 × 4.6 [5.5 ; 6.3] 7.2 microns, Q = 6.2 [7 ; 7.7] 8.4 ; N = 10 ; C = 95%, Me = 43.3 × 5.9 microns, Qe = 7.3. Olympus CH20 NEA 100x/1.25, magnification 1.000 x, oil (spores); NEA 40x/0.65, magnification 400x (asci, hairs), in water. AmScope MA500 digital camera.

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
name ambiguity
By: amadej trnkoczy (amadej)
2014-01-27 14:40:09 CST (-0600)

Thanks for your comment. All my books have ‘Merismodes anomala’ and MycoBank considers it as a valid name, so I decided for it. I tried to use this name, but MO refused it and suggested ‘M. anomalus’. But, as you say, this is in discrepancy with Index Fungorum.

Index Fungorum
By: walt sturgeon (Mycowalt)
2014-01-27 14:17:09 CST (-0600)

has the spelling as M. anomala although it was published as M. anomalus. They prefer Cyphellopsis anomala as the current name.

Regardless, nice observation!