Observation 167585: Mixed collection

BFF? I always wonder what is going on in this situation. Here we have the provider of nutrients to a host of photosynthetic (beech) and non-photosynthetic plants (Monotropa, Conopholis). The Clitocybe looks happy, the Russula worn out. Maybe it is just that way of things, but I think something is going on!

Species Lists


Proposed Names

29% (1)
Recognized by sight

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
Having different species actually attached.
By: walt sturgeon (Mycowalt)
2014-06-18 10:33:01 CDT (-0400)

It happens occasionally.

The interaction of one fungus with another is interesting and poorly known. Of course they could just be sharing the same turf.

By: Byrain
2014-06-18 10:04:06 CDT (-0400)

When the Russula popped up first it created a nice little sheltered environment for the Clitocybe to follow?

By: Martin Livezey (MLivezey)
2014-06-18 07:46:01 CDT (-0400)

I put this observation up, not to identify the species but to suggest an interaction between the two. Discussion of ID of both species naturally follows. The Clitocybe fits generally with the idea of C. gibba from my limited experience. When it or something similar is found in the forest, it seems to be supported by a very evident (1 to 4" in each direction) mycellial matt in the surrounding leaves. Daniels suggestion in an early comment that it may be mycorrhizal fits well with a concept of a saprobe on leaf litter that has no problem being an opportunist on a generous neighbor. But I digress…,

Just checked the internet, Walt,
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2014-06-18 00:33:42 CDT (-0400)

and many see Clitocybe gibba as a saprobe on leaf litter. Sorry. Certainly there was leaf litter in the obs. on MO. My bad. Apologies?

Maybe not, Walt.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2014-06-17 23:38:05 CDT (-0400)

Just went through the 5 pages of obs. here on MO identified as Clitocybe gibba, and didn’t find any growing directly from wood.

Then again, Clitocybe is a genus best left to experts, and I don’t consider myself to be an expert there.

I do have a collection in MO identified as Clitocybe, but no genus yet. There is a twig or small branch to prop the fungus on, but the fungus is was not growing on it.

Don’t know, Walt.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2014-06-17 23:26:52 CDT (-0400)

Arora says “Solitary to scattered or in small groups on ground in woods, especially under oak but also with conifers; widely distributed. In coastal California it fruits in the winter and early spring but is not common; in New Mexico it is common in August along with C. squamulosa (see comments).”

Doesn’t sound as if Arora thinks it is saprophytic. I’ve never found it on wood. But it might be on well-rotted wood and still be mycorrhizal. Interesting question. I haven’t tried to grow it.

Isn’t this the reason single images can be used in multiple observations?
By: Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
2014-06-17 20:46:05 CDT (-0400)
Clitocybe gibba
By: walt sturgeon (Mycowalt)
2014-06-17 20:38:18 CDT (-0400)

is a saprobe as far as I know.

I think the poor condition of R. vinacea
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2014-06-17 20:34:46 CDT (-0400)

is merely that it is the older of the two fungi.

Yes, they are both
By: Martin Livezey (MLivezey)
2014-06-17 19:43:50 CDT (-0400)

mycorrhizal, but I bet the Clitocybe gibba is taking a little more than it is giving to the Russula vinacea. But I don’t have any proof.

I think
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2014-06-17 01:15:56 CDT (-0400)

you are looking at two mycorrhizal species, Martin. It has been documented that up to 7 different mycorrhizal fungi can inhabit the same 1/2 centimeter of rootlet. Apparently happy together, anyway.

could be
By: walt sturgeon (Mycowalt)
2014-06-16 23:13:20 CDT (-0400)

Russula vinacea & Clitocybe gibba.

Created: 2014-06-16 21:02:57 CDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2014-06-16 21:06:46 CDT (-0400)
Viewed: 75 times, last viewed: 2019-09-09 15:39:23 CDT (-0400)
Show Log