Observation 46782: Clitocybe nuda (Fr.) H.E. Bigelow & A.H. Sm.

When: 2010-06-10

Collection location: Yosemite National Park, California, USA [Click for map]

Who: Darvin DeShazer (darv)

Specimen available

Collection saved for the Yosemite Fungal Survey
Collection Accession Number: DD 653
Latitude: 37 48.30
Longitude: 119 51.12
Elevation: 4463 ft
Environment: mixed conifer forest, river flood zone
Substrate/Host: sand and conifer litter
Odor & Taste: odor mild and slightly fragrant
Spore Print: none taken
DNA Sample: none taken

Species Lists


Scale is in cm.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
So, in summary…
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2010-08-13 00:52:09 -03 (-0300)

What we have to go on is a bunch of vague descriptions of COLOR for goodness’ sake, (a character we de-emphasize when talking to trigger-happy beginners every year), and a “slightly” smaller spore size based on a handful (or less) of collections…

Given the radical color changes I’ve seen in straight-up L. nuda from a single patch (ranging from deep purple to brown to silvery-gray brown), this quote becomes particularly disturbing:
“Clitocybe glaucocana appears to be one of the species in the series leading from C. irinia to C. nuda"…(based on COLOR)

…without a second morphocharacter (…and ideally a third, and genetic evidence now that it is 2010), there is no reason to put this thing on a spectrum or in “series” at all… it’s seems to be at most a paler form. For a distinct species to be even somewhat credible, two characters AT MINIMUM have to covary!

So… let’s just say I’m waiting for more evidence.
I must be grumpy tonight.

By: Erin Page Blanchard (CureCat)
2010-08-13 00:03:37 -03 (-0300)

I second Christians query.

I found something similar in Yosemite and ended up calling it C. nuda for lack of a preferable name… Though it does look different than what I am used to seeing, I figured the location, habitat, and unusual fruiting time accounted for the peculiarities.
observation 48502

Bigelow and Smith say
By: Robert Sasata (Sasata)
2010-08-12 23:56:36 -03 (-0300)

“The Status of Lepista-A New Section of Clitocybe” Brittonia 12(2): 144-177. (1969)
Clitocybe glaucocana appears to be one of the species in the series leading from C. irinia to C. nuda. The colors are consistently paler then C. nuda, but more intense than the subtle lilaceous tints found at times in C. bartelliae or C. graveolens. These two species are separated from C. glaucocana by their distinctive odors. We did not find the strong subfarinose odor ascribed to C. glaucocana by its author, but in some collections the odor was fragrant and in agreement with the report of Kuehner & Romagnesi (1953).” from p. 169.

By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2010-08-12 22:33:48 -03 (-0300)

Please explain to me what this entity is.
It has been driving me nuts.
C. glaucocana is supposed to be white when it emerges, and becomes indistinguishable from C. nuda later… or something… But I would happily accept ANY evidence to convince me that this is a sound name with some sort of established concept.
Gentlemen, I ask you:

Created: 2010-06-13 00:39:57 -03 (-0300)
Last modified: 2013-12-03 15:25:18 -03 (-0300)
Viewed: 162 times, last viewed: 2018-06-09 13:08:03 -03 (-0300)
Show Log