I posted this a little whiles after seeing observation 68601 (http://mushroomobserver.org/68601?q=4oaH), I left the name blank since I couldn’t recall whatever names I have seen used here in the past at the time.

@Myxomop: I see your point about not using a descriptive, non-taxonomic name like mycoheterotroph. The debates about what to call morels showed that whatever one may personally call them (“good tasting” or whatever), this website is set up as a database of taxonomically-valid names. I was just trying to be more specific than Plantae, and I’m not very familiar with the species lists here on MO. I can’t figure out how to make an internal link to a species list, but I think this the species list you are referring to. I still think it’s a MHT, but the name should be a species, genus, or family (etc).

@T. Sage: I am by no means an expert on plants either. It could be some kind of parasite; I’m just more familiar with MHTs in Western North America than I am plant parasites. Searching Wikipedia, here’s an example of a plant root parasite (from eastern N.A.).

I am not very familiar with the oddball chlorophyll-lacking plants (or any plants, for that matter!), but couldn’t this potentially be getting food from another source, such as a plant root?

Is there a way to discern the ‘host’ by sight of the plant? Can you at least tell whether it is a plant or a fungus?

is essentially akin to saying Saprotroph sp. My vote is to avoid naming by nutritional mode, especially in instances where a species list already groups obs sharing the characteristic described by the proposed name.

Looks like a plant to me.