Observation 89364: Collema F.H. Wigg.


Proposed Names

86% (1)
Recognized by sight

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
Maybe he’s, uh, “partaking”?…
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2014-06-22 19:53:33 PDT (-0700)

Or maybe a freudian slip?? ascus = sack, maybe that works a little better! :)

I didn’t think C. coccophorum had been seen anywhere near you. But that is sure what it’s looking like. Happen to have any more of it? Maybe send some to Schultz himself! Let him and Bennett duke it out.

I swear it says 8/cocks – I don’t even see word “ascus” in there :-)
By: Andrew Khitsun (Andrew)
2014-06-22 19:33:11 PDT (-0700)

Otherwise it’s all alchemy to me – I don’t know how you guys wade through this soup of different descriptions to arrive at any conclusions. Every author has slightly different description of the same species, and descriptions of neighboring species overlap. Here is what Thomson says about C.tenax:
spores 8, fusiform or ellipsoid submuriform, 3-4-celled or with 3-4 transverse and 1 longitudal septa, 17-30 × 8.5-13 micrometres. And Collema coccophorum has not been found in Wisconsin yet, it seems

That’s cool!
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2014-06-22 18:49:43 PDT (-0700)

I’ve always wanted to see Agonimia opuntiella. Maybe now I know where to look. :)

I can help decypher at least: “no longitudinal septae, 8 per ascus”.

Funny thing is, according to the Sonoran Flora:

C. coccophorum – spores 1-septate, occasionally 2- or 3-septate

C. tenax s. lato – spores always 3-septate or sometimes submuriform (i.e., with longitudinal septae, not just transverse septae)

Granted, the Sonoran Flora also call both species extremely morphologically variable, separable only by spores. But the spores Bennett saw clearly indicate C. coccophorum, at least if you follow the taxonomy of M. Schultz et al. in the Sonoran Flora. (And Schultz kinda is the world authority on these things.)

Collema still regularly gives me headaches, so interpret all this however you like! :)

Jim Bennett provided his opinion, and he thinks it’s C.tenax
By: Andrew Khitsun (Andrew)
2014-06-22 18:18:23 PDT (-0700)

Here is his findings:
Spores 15×4-6, 2(4)celled, pointed, clear, no logg? septa, 8/cocks? Unfortunately, not being versed in Lichenise, I can’t decipher some of the words in his notes – the ones with (?) are the ones I can’t read.
He also found Agonimia opuntiella in the mix.

If I say it’s C. coccophorum
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2012-03-14 23:35:17 PDT (-0700)

…then it almost certainly is not. But I have a hard time reconciling all those globular isidia-like structures with the description for C. polycarpon. I found 2-celled fusiform spores ~18×5µm. That would seem to rule out everything in the C. tenax group (which grows on soil not rock, anyway). Will be interested to hear Bennett’s opinion.

By: Andrew Khitsun (Andrew)
2012-03-14 19:23:30 PDT (-0700)

I tentatively IDd this as C.polycarpon. Jason IDd this as C.coccophorum. The latter has not (yet) been described from WI. J.Bennett also has a specimen of this and I’m waiting for his ID too.