i have found a couple (what i call) Lactarius that did not exude latex.
maybe they aren’t Lactarius…??
these did not exude any latex.
i checked numerous times on each specimen.

i’ll look for that plage and post more micro soon.

this is an odd one.

the milk, which is usually a helpful feature (some Lactarius have very scant or nearly absent milk, though).

In my limited experience, I found it to usually be present on L. deceptivus, and that species (again, in my limited experience) seemed to have a more neatly-round cap with an evenly inrolled margin. These seem more irregular in shape, and not as uniformly inrolled (without the round curbed margin).

Traditionally, Lactarius should be mostly lacking spherocysts in the lamellar trama. If you compare context between Lactarius and Russula, Russula will form florets of spherocysts, whereas Lactarius species have spherocysts more intermixed with the generative hyphae. Russula usually has intracellular pigment (if any), whereas Lactarius has mostly intercellular pigment. While spore ornamentation overlaps between the groups, Lactarius species can have much broader ridges than Russula. I think that the best way to tell between the Russula delica group and the Lactarius piperatus group under the scope is that the Russula spores should have a distinct amyloid plage. I’m pretty sure none of the Lactarius species in this group have an amyloid plage. I’m sure you can attest that except for these two groups, it is fairly easy to tell a Russula and Lactarius apart before going to the scope.

what separates Russula from Lactarius microscopically?