When: 2011-10-08

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

Who: Byrain

No specimen available


Proposed Names

28% (1)
Recognized by sight: rhacodes? molybdites?
46% (2)
Recognized by sight: Still not seeing what rules this out, a friend had some fruiting in his backyard too so they’re out.

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
here’s an interesting observation of C. molybdites in CA
By: Britney Ramsey (Riverdweller)
2011-10-24 05:44:22 CEST (+0200)


I have never found C. molybdites, it doesn’t occur to me to suggest it. My bad.

For this observation, I would say we’ve beaten the horse to death. There isn’t enough development to see all features. Spore print?

I lean away from making ID decisions based on location, especially when it’s the difference between WA, OR, and CA. There are in fact several more observations on MO posting C. Molydbites in CA.

Problem in citing PNW Key Council for Davis, CA observation.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2011-10-24 04:54:08 CEST (+0200)

There has never been a confirmed collection of C. molybdites in the PNW. And that is carried through with the PNW Key Council key to Chlorophyllum.

However, Arora notes C. molybdites in several locales in CA, so must consider it as well.

While Byrain suggests the green tint to the cap is a “camera artifact”, the difference between consumption of C. molybdites and C. brunneum is such I would err on the side of extreme caution.

In 2007 when this key was published, C. brunneum and C. rhacodes had just been transferred to Chlorophyllum from Macrolepiota. It has happened several times before. Dr. Lorelei Norvell once spoke about the variation in correct naming of this exact species. Confusing at least.

C. molybdites
By: Byrain
2011-10-24 03:39:26 CEST (+0200)

I saw a lot of Chlorophyllum brunneum buttons today (obs – 80376) and then looked through the C. molybdites observations on this site, I think this button macroscopically matches those much better.

You’re probably right
By: Byrain
2011-10-10 03:54:42 CEST (+0200)

And that is the most helpful picture of the double edged annulus I have seen yet. Seeing that, I think this one has a simple one edged annulus.

a good example of
By: Britney Ramsey (Riverdweller)
2011-10-10 03:49:13 CEST (+0200)

C. rachodes that shows a double edged tattered ring
See the upper rim of the ring is white and is tattered (rather than softly torn).
The lower edge is tattered as well, dark brown, pointing down.

I chose C. brunneum for your observation primarily on the cross section photo showing the “shelved” bulb. To me, that’s a distinct ridge.
I would have to guess on what that ring would look like if it had been further along. My guess is weak ring with one edge and C. brunneum.

By: Byrain
2011-10-10 03:27:04 CEST (+0200)

The double edged annulus has always confused me, I’ve added another picture, what kind of annulus do you think it portrays?

Habitat & green color
By: Byrain
2011-10-10 01:58:53 CEST (+0200)

It was growing in an open grassy area along a bike path near some city trees I don’t recall, many of which are probably not native. I don’t remember anything like pine or oak and I am not familiar with filberts to say if they were present or not.

The green color is a camera artifact, my shade provider is greenish and usually doesn’t affect the color, in this case it did.

By: Britney Ramsey (Riverdweller)
2011-10-10 01:53:10 CEST (+0200)

here’s THE key to Chlorophyllum of the PNW.

I agree with you that brunneum is the likely choice. The only macroscopic feature not covered in your photos is the manner of the ring.

OK. Totally confused now.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2011-10-10 00:59:55 CEST (+0200)

Original site of growth was in grassy area, without trees? No filberts, no pine?

I do see green stains on some of the first photos.

Maybe this is C. molybdites. I have no experience with that.

Pine cones
By: Byrain
2011-10-09 21:04:21 CEST (+0200)

Weren’t at the site of the observation, I brought the specimen home and used those for size comparison.

The bulb
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2011-10-09 20:34:16 CEST (+0200)

may be disfigured from something heavy laying on top of it, like a large pine cone .

By: Byrain
2011-10-09 20:04:28 CEST (+0200)

Chlorophyllum brunneum is the dominant species in my area, maybe that’s what it is. The rimmed bulb is much less prominent then I would be expecting and is only abrupt on one side. So maybe its from the way it was growing in the grass?

As for C. molybdites, the specimens I found had the gills turn greenish only late in maturity which I thought was common for them.

Lastly, I have eaten and enjoyed C. brunneum multiple times.

Well, young specimen.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2011-10-09 18:50:51 CEST (+0200)

C. brunneum appears (just appears at this time) to be dominant in my area, but hasn’t been often considered or was usually ignored. It stains brown or dark red-brown nearly instantly when cut, or especially when scratched near the base of the stipe. I didn’t know that until just a few years ago, and suddenly was finding it everywhere. C. molybdites I have not found, so don’t really have an opinion on, other than that it has green gills early in development. I would have expected your specimen to have a strong green tint to the gills had it been C. molybdites.

I have eaten Chlorophyllum several times. The majority of my collections now are C. brunneum, so it seems likely C. brunneum is edible. A neighbor finds it regularly on his property and eats it; has never reported any illness and in fact waits for it each year. He too was surprised to learn it was different from C. rhacodes, which seems to be in every guidebook while C. brunneum is mostly ignored, as “everyone knows” what they have is C. rhacodes.

By: Byrain
2011-10-09 08:49:33 CEST (+0200)

The stem cross section is staining reddish. The one and only time I found C. molybdites so far the stem stained reddish and they had a green spore print. I thought that C. rhacodes stains reddish as well?

No staining on any portion of cut surface.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2011-10-09 08:38:02 CEST (+0200)

Isn’t this C. rhacoides by definition?