Neil Sanderson
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Chris Keys out using the LGBI2 sterile corticolous key as an
Opegrapha, which is what I would have thought from the pictures. Ends at the couplet: Quote:Conidia 5-8 × 1-2 μm; thallus dull olive to red-brown …………………………….
Opegrapha rufescensConidia of two types: 4-7 × 1-1.5 μm or 7-9 × 0.7 μm; thallus dull grey-olive ..
Opegrapha niveoatraNeither quite match, but the thallus colour is more like
Opegrapha rufescens(which is now called Pseudoschismatomma rufescens), but this would need fertile material to confirm, I could easily be wrong. Neil
Christine Those are very small young podetia, so the best response is to find some nearby older ones!
To answer some of your questions, I would say
Cladonia polydactylais very variable but Cladonia macilentanot so much (and the later is not closely related to Cladonia polydactyla, but is close to Cladonia floerkeana). The description in Dobson is wrong in my opinion, well developed Cladonia polydactylais never farinose-sorediate and, as the Nordic Flora states, it is granulose sorediate; that is actually the main way of telling them apart when Cladonia polydactylais poorly developed and lacks cups. As a general rule if an earlier source differs from the Nordic Flora, the latter is probably correct. The orange patches reacting K + purple on the undersides of the squamules being diagnostic is interesting, but I think this also occurs in other red apothecia Cladoniaspecies such as C. digitata, but I will have a look on Cladonia macilenta. I have attached a couple of picture of well grown material of both species. Cladonia macilenta, is quite a distinct gracile narrow tapering species and is much less widespread than Cladonia polydactyla, at least in the south. As for your Cladonia: the soredia look too fine to be
Cladonia polydactylaand it does not seem to have the normal blueish tinge of this species, so may be young Cladonia macilentaI hope this helps
Neil
Yes the Convoy S2+ torches we use now are dangerously powerful, and require safety glasses Buy from a reputable source, such as a DIY supper store; 100% UV protection safety glasses are about £4.50 in B&Q. Test the glasses with your UV light by holding a piece of white paper or your finger nail where your eyes would be and turn on the torch. It will be obvious if the glasses work! See pictures. You can also do this check in the shop, the cheapest glasses in B& Q where not even in packaging
I use these industrial safety glasses in the lab, but use a pair of 100% UV protection swimming googles in the field as they fold down easily into a pocket.
Also in the field your finger nail is a good reference subject to test your battery power, do not look into the light!
Neil
Mark Yes Andre said he had sent you a test at the BLS field meeting at Painshill, I hope the complications can be worked out! I was able to use a positive K/UV test to confirm some sterile
Lecanographa lynceamaterial on an old Oak there. I would have called it that anyway, but the strong K/UV mauve fluorescence ruled out Lecanographa amylacea, I hope. I have also just got a negative K/UV test from a scrap of apparent sterile Lecanographaspecies I collected from an old Oak in Mark Ash Wood on the Wessex Lichen Group visit a couple of years ago. It is an easily accessed tree, so I will get some more soon and recheck this too. I tried the Pd/UV test on some more
Syncesia myrticolasorediate morph on the underside of an old Oak in dark, miserable and very humid conditions in Shave Wood this lunch time. One patch was apparently full charged with protocetraric acid and gave a good strong orange-red reaction, which was obvious (and fluoresced orange-red) but a second bit of the same thallus had a week and yellowish Pd reaction and was difficult to see with the damp conditions, but was easily confirmed by the yellow-orange UV fluorescence. So yes the Pd/UV looks good for amplification of week tests. Also tested serval non Pd reacting lichens, which did nothing with this test. I was interesting to see the amount of dew precipitation on the lichens on the dry over hanging side of the tree,
Sporodophoron cretaceum( Schismatomma cretaceum) in particular was holding on to great globs of dew; in the majority of its habitats it probably gets most of its water by the precipitation of dew. Admiring this, I was pleasant surprised to spot some of the short stalked pinhead Chaenothecopsis retinensparasitising the Sporodophoron cretaceum; second New Forest record, sixth modern British site, seventh modern world record and eighth record ever (I think). Anyway my strike rate for this has gone from once every 10 years to about once every 6 months (some pictures from the first Forest record attached, worth looking out for as black hemispheres poking out of Sporodophoron cretaceum). All the best
Neil
To follow on from the above Pictures of
Cladonia macilentaand Cladonia polydactyla. Both have K + yellow podetia and have red apothecia/pycnidia, but the
Cladonia macilentahas a gracile podetia with fine soredia, podetia often with a yellow tinge and never with cups. Cladonia polydactylais less gracile, with course granular soredia, podetia often with a blueish tinge and with cups when mature (but absent when young). Really quite different looking
Cladoniaspecies (and apparently not closely related genetically) but the presence or absence of cups is not actually a very useful way of telling them apart, despite getting top billing is most descriptions. All the best
Neil
Chris Looking at
http://fungi.myspecies.info/taxonomy/term/3927/descriptions ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://fungi.myspecies.info/taxonomy/term/3927/descriptions Neil
The end cells of the spores appear a bit paler than the others which would suggest Hysterium pulicare, but I do not know these fungi well, so not sure how pale the the end cells need to be. All the best
Neil
Wellcome Ishpi Neil
Juliet The forked podetia is probably damaged. Most
Cladoniadescriptions are of well grown material and break down in the face of the reality of scrappy and broken material. The podetia without cups just looks like normal Cladonia coniocraea to me! The classic error perpetuated by idealised
Cladoniadescriptions is that Cladonia polydactylais defined by having cups, well it has cups when well grown but does not when small and young. Hence the majority of Cladonia polydactyladoes not have cups and many records of Cladonia macilentamade on the basis of material with red apothecia/pycnidia, a K + yellow spot test and no cups are actually of poorly grown Cladonia polydactyla. Cladonia macilentaand Cladonia polydactylaare best told apart mainly by the former have fine farinose soredia and the latter having course granular soredia. Cladoniais great but like Sphagnum species, just do not expect to identify every individual! However, there is a need for a ID guide that tries to cover the pit falls of poorly developed material, even if to point out when ID is impossible!
All the best
Neil
Steve No
Cladonia ramulosa(scruffy as we call it affectionately in the New Forest) very definitively does not have a strongly sorediate podetia surface. The LGBI2 gives this description: Quote:Podetia … surface variously squamulose, in part granular-scabrid or at times partially or almost entirely decorticate, rarely with few, scattered, granular soredia
Even for a
Cladoniathis species is very variable but the smallish size, rough podetia surface created by the cortex breaking up and the Pd + red spot test are reasonably diagnostic. I have attached a picture of some well developed New Forest material. What you have is probably mainly
Cladonia coniocraeawith a single Cladonia fimbriatapodetia to the left with the cup. All the best Neil
On a morning dog walk today I found some colonising Phyllopsora roseion an old Oak at Kings Hat, Hollands Wood, which was an interesting comparison to the odd material I found a few days ago in Busketts wood. This was much more like I remember typical Phyllopsora rosei, with small rounded granules and barely developed squamules and very unlike the material from Busketts Wood. I was being to convince myself that this odd material was just young colonising Phyllopsora roseibut now I am not not so sure. I have also added a picture of another find from the walk, a magnificent head of the EN
Hericium coralloides: I am having a good year for stumbling into rare tooth fungi when looking for lichens, having found VU Hericium erinaceusearlier in the year! Oops. After a suggestion elsewhere, I check again and it has very small algae (c7µm), so is actually just a very damaged poorly grown Micarea. Comes of trying to identify absolutely everything, including scrappy stuff best ignored! Neil
Chris It is likely to be
Collema flaccidum, but to confirm, you should see the young globose isidia, visible in your pictures, becoming flattened and squamule like as they age, see http://fungi.myspecies.info/taxonomy/term/4623/mediahttp://fungi.myspecies.info/taxonomy/term/4623/media” class=”bbcode_url”> Collema subflaccidum, where the isidia remain globose, although this is a less likely species on a wet rock habitat. Neil
Chris Thanks
The Lichens of Great Britain and Ireland (LGBI) gives the range for
Micarea prasinaas 4-7 μm and for Bacidia squamellosa5-12 μm, so it is finding larger diameter algae that clinches in identification. Micareaalgae are distinctively small, to quote the LGBI: Quote:Photobiont green, cells usually thin-walled, c. 4-7 μm diam. and often paired (‘micareoid’)
Although it is not quite that simple, a few species including
Micarea sylvicolaand Micarea bauschianahave chlorococcoid, non-micareoid photobionts, but recent DNA sequence analysis has put then in a different genus Brianariaand family Psoraceaehttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/274161002_Brianaria_Psoraceae_a_new_genus_to_accommodate_the_Micarea_sylvicola_group ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274161002_Brianaria_Psoraceae_a_new_genus_to_accommodate_the_Micarea_sylvicola_group Micarea‘ are all in the Pilocarpaceae(along with species without ‘micareoid’ algae) https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6fcc/a06e7ef0df9b4f8b58a8dab187d1d2a17ec5.pdf ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6fcc/a06e7ef0df9b4f8b58a8dab187d1d2a17ec5.pdf Exactly what the ‘micareoid’ algae are classified as I have no idea from a quick google, the inverted comas are suggestive of taxonomic mystery.
All the best
Neil
Paul I think your and Mark’s, thalli are simply young thalli. The picture on fungi/myspecies from Melbury is an old, somewhat worn thallus (slug eaten a bit?), hence the different appearance (I note this actually my picture from British Lichens website!, that is fine).
Phaeographis smithiiappears to be a fairly mobile species which was lost from the south east to acidifying pollution; there are old records from Essex. It is now returning to former haunts with the decline in acidifying pollution and it will presumably be sometime before mature thalli exist. Just to see if I can get attachments to work, I have (I hope) attached a photo of a
Phaeographis smithiiapothecia cross section from an Oak twig in the New Forest (from Jan Vondrak’s Matley Wood plot). I have found with a sharp knife and wet apothecia one can separate Phaeographis smithiifrom Phaeographis dendriticain the field, if you cut the apothecia on a slant the closed or open exciple is reasonably easy to see. Impossible when dry though. -
AuthorPosts
