Ok, after spending (wasting?) 3 hours in Smith and Singer’s 1964 monograph of Galerina of North America. I think I have an id on these. At least it keys out with some assumptions…

But the main feature turns out to be the shape of the cheilocystidia. This is shown in the second micro-shot, which is a gill part (they kinda broke up when I was trying to mount a slice), at 400x under Meltzer’s. The yellow cells are the basidia stained by the Meltzer’s, but the clear cells are the cystidia. They are long, with a thin midsection, and a round bulb at the end. The bulb makes the cystidia “capitate”, and this shape with the long thin section before the bulb was called “tibiiform” (which I have no idea what that means…).

Anyway, the first micro-shot is of the spores, this is at 400x under Meltzer’s. The ave spore size for this guy was measures as 10.0 × 5.8 microns, using 10 spores. The spores should be roughened, in Galerina is genus is defined by the spores being covered with a tight “sack” that wears away in age. This sack breaking up creates a loose rough surface to the spores, and a “plage”, a smooth spot on the end where the sack has completely pulled away. These spores don’t show much roughness, or any distinct plage, but this is common in Galerina, where the sack doesn’t break up much. Also there was no evidence of a germ pore, or I should say a germ pore was not observed.

The guys were found in a swampy deep moss covered area, which also seems to be common for Galerina, and a number of the species are only found here. This species shows no veil, on the stipe or veil fragments on the cap. The cap will be light tan to ocheracious (how ever you spell that), and the stipe should be concolorous with the cap. There will be deep brown striations most of the way to the center, but will fade as the hygrophanous cap dries.

So, with all this, it does seem to key out in the monograph as G. tibiicystis. Which seems to be one of the more common Galerina without a veil in moss covered swampy areas. The only differences from the description is that the spore should be more roughened, here they were only slightly marbled at 1000×. And the stipe in the shots at the site show the stipe to lighter then the cap, and the cap to be more yellow. But the shots at home against white paper show the tan colors, and stipe to be concolorous. So, I’ll go with it.

Species Lists


Proposed Names

86% (1)
Based on microscopic features: Features agree with taxon, once you come to accept there are no clamp connections.

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
No one has commented yet.