When: 2010-06-21

Collection location: Davis, California, USA [Click for map]

Who: Byrain

No specimen available

Notes:
Found in a large and well irrigated soccer field fruiting with Conocybe apala, Panaeolina foenisecii, and Panaeolopsis species.

The strongly bluing specimens flushed twice. Non-bluing to lightly bluing specimens fruited before, in between, and after those flushes in large numbers. The spore print was jet black.

Also, see this thread – http://www.shroomery.org/...

Images

First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First bluing flush.
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
First set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Second set of pictures of the second bluing flush.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Specimen(s) found in between flushes, date not accurate.
Bluing cap, date not accurate.
Copyright © 2010 Workman
Microscopy by Workman.

Proposed Names

13% (3)
Based on microscopic features: Microscopy done by Workman.
-13% (3)
Recognized by sight: The species concept of Agaricus (Panaeolus) cinctulus is based on a drawing made by Bolton in 1791. No type collection exists. Since it is not possible to know whether Bolton’s species was Panaeolus subbalteatus, P. olivaceus or P. fimicola, I consider Panaeolus cinctulus to be a nomen dubium.
Based on microscopic features: The gill faces need to be checked for sulphidia; the presence of these would indicate that it is probably Panaeolus fimicola.
57% (1)
Recognized by sight: White stem, blue staining, in grass

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Herbert
By: Byrain
2014-01-08 19:14:30 CET (+0100)

I don’t mean to be mean, but your entire argument rests solely on a very old type collection that no one here has even seen, a garbage description, & how illustrations/micrographs which again no one here has seen can not possibly show the difference between P. cinctulus, P. olivaceus, P. fimicola, P. subfirmus & all the other species Gerhardt included despite Gerhardt who has seen it saying it clearly does show the difference. You also failed to address how the P. subbalteatus description was supposed to be unnecessary according to Gerhardt or how anyone can possibly know what species it refers to from that terrible non-description.
http://www.mycobank.org/...

Its inappropriate & highly unappreciated to further your agenda with my observations, the ground you are standing on is not even shaky, it gave away before you even started walking. Come back and change the names after all the blanks have been filled in & all of Gerhardt’s arguments have been addressed and refuted and it will be appreciated then, in the mean time please take this vote war elsewhere.

Personally, I have strong reservations on using any name based on that description when Gerhardt did such a great work with the epitype. I recognize that this is not the end of it so I think its best to leave both names approved and let MO users decide for themselves which is better.

Herbert
By: Byrain
2014-01-07 20:11:03 CET (+0100)

Please take your vote wars elsewhere, especially when you aren’t even considering or refuting the arguments laid forth by the leading expert…

That bluing is sick!
By: Randy Longnecker (Randy L.)
2014-01-07 18:51:35 CET (+0100)

Never seen it so intense on this species.

Created: 2010-11-30 05:03:27 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2018-03-23 05:35:49 CET (+0100)
Viewed: 792 times, last viewed: 2020-07-05 02:20:23 CEST (+0200)
Show Log