Please do not re-click a link while waiting for a page to load. (It’s slower and degrades site speed for all users.)
To get images for machine learning, see MO Images for Machine Learning


Mario Gabiati collection. The caps were mostly turned to ink when they arrived in the lab – I dried them, but they turned to a puddle of black goo. Probably good for spore morphology but little more. I’ve asked him to recollect and dry them more quickly.


Copyright © 2016 Mario Gabiati
An improved tree with bootstrap values

Proposed Names

66% (3)
Recognized by sight
Used references:
Based on chemical features: Matches 622/652(95%) with the Coprinellus micaceus reference sequence JN159565 from Melzer 2020
-29% (1)
Recognized by sight: Since this species is global in distribution, it might have been the one described as Coprinellus micaceus

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
There are about ten things going under the name Coprinellus micaceus
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2016-05-07 17:13:45 MDT (-0600)

Exactly how close they each look to what we call Coprinellus micaceus is hard to know, since most GenBank records don’t have photos. Some are probably rather different looking while others probably look very similar macroscopically, and perhaps even microscopically. What needs to be done is more sequencing combined with microscopy, so sequences can be associated with species concepts.

What is clear from this tree is that the same thing that we call Coprinellus micaceus in California also occurs in Australia, Argentina and was found on sea sponges in Israel.

Since this species has global distribution, it is possible that it is Coprinellus micaceus sensu stricto. Since that taxon was described in 1786 there is probably no holotype, so a sequenced neotype needs to be designated.

I made a new tree which fixes the incorrect sequence names and adds a lot more location information.

The most recent phylogenetic analysis I could find was from 2001, where they said that the Coprinellus micaceus sequences differ based on geographical location. That conclusion was based on a very small number of sequences – now 15 years later there are a lot more sequences in GenBank and a much more complete picture is beginning to emerge. There are several species going under C. micaceus with worldwide distribution, and others that appear restricted to a certain geographic area. Some of the clades are strictly Asian, others are just in the USA. My sequence is the first time that a member of this clade has been documented from the USA.

please explain …
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2016-05-07 15:17:03 MDT (-0600)

the results of your tree. from what I can see, it looks as tho collections of so-called C. “micaceus” are popping out all over the place, which mean, I guess that the samples are not what they claim to be? or what?

By: Byrain
2016-05-06 07:17:31 MDT (-0600)

It looks worse of a mess than I was suspecting.