the unit of measurement cited, but I believe I get the gist of it. Actually, gill material is not that difficult to work with. Although I gather that I probably sometimes mount too much material. I usually mount basidio tissue in Congo red, because it seems to accentuate details.

It is best to use just a couple micrograms of gill tissue for the mount – use an amount so small that if it was pure LSD crystal and you ate it, it would be a microdose. Mount it in KOH to help break up the cells, and press down firmly, but not hard enough to break the spores or cover slip with the end of a pencil or something. Using a really tiny bit of material will help the cover slip stay intact as you crush the material.

See observation 136028 to get an idea of what you will be seeing if it’s Panaeolus fimicola, especially the sulphidia.

or something similar, I’ll look for sulphidia. My better scope (the binocular AmScope) should be sufficient to this task. Although, my ability to produce a decent section is a potential issue. Any suggestions?

That is a feature that P. fimicola has.

1. For the print, I don’t see any brown/purple contrasting with the black strip. P. foenisecii prints all show distinct contrast, eg. obs 278232.
2. The spores in the micro are mounted in KOH. P. foenisecii spores mounted in KOH should have a brownish tinge.
3. Average spore quotient here appears to be in the neighborhood of 1.5. This is too small for P. foenisecii.

lists both cinctulus and subbalteatus as distinct species. (I had been under the impression they were synonyms.) Spore size/shape seems to be similar for these two species.