[roy betts]

I agree with Mal, there’s a very good chance this is bubalinus: we had it here last July. Although a ‘new’ species it is apparently being reported all over the place now.

[roy betts]

Don’t think Hygrophorus have gills this decurrent? Can’t really see any that have spores this small.

[roy betts]

Hi Adam,

Your best two images of the end cells were the two titled ‘wart detail’. These seem to show a mixture of large ellipsoid cells and smaller globose cells. I find the best method is to use tweezers to pull off the tips of the brown warts, then you should get mostly chains of terminal cells.

Another thought; is your Cresyl Blue in water or alcohol? (it’s just that I see the ABFG sell it in alcohol). FAN5 says the metachromatic reaction is with Cresyl Blue in water. But does it make a difference to the reaction? Much better to see the spore shape in Melzers – they look more the shape of perplexa to me.

[roy betts]

It has the right colours and spore size for Clitocybe gibba which is quite common and appears in early summer.

[roy betts]

Yep, looks very like a Tricholoma. A quick trawl of grey Tricholoma’s and I found those with large enough spores only grow under broadleaf trees.

Could this be a chunky form of Megacollybia platyphylla? This would have large balloon shaped cystidia lining the gill edge (Tricholoma generally have none).

[roy betts]

Some info. is needed sometimes to even get to a Genus (including substrate & ecosystem). Spore colour is a minimum requirement as immature gills of even dark spored species can be white. Having said that the top collection is a Parasola, but to go further you need details of spore size.

The second one seems to have purple-black spores and a glutinous/gelatinous cap?: might be a Stropharia (or even a Psathyrella?)

The last one may be a Agrocybe (which have snuff-brown spores). It seems to have the remains of a ring on the stipe and also on the cap margin (A. praecox?).

[roy betts]

I’m always having trouble with Panaeolus collections with mottled spores! (and I use a separate bulb as a light source).

Often the mottling seems more obvious with the immature spores which are a paler colour. But then I do get collections which are truly smooth.

According to the BFF5 key the only species with spores “faintly roughened under oil immersion” is P. olivaceus, but it’s spores are 12-15 x 8-10µ and sublimoniform. I have certainly recorded collections under this name.

But your collection with spores more or less ellipsoid and up to 13 x 7.5µ can only be P. fimicola.

This and P. ater are now synonymised. In the BFF5 key they are separate with ater having an oblique germ pore and chrysocystidia and fimcola with a central pore and no facial cystidia (maybe why you couldn’t find any!).

[roy betts]

Lepiota s.l. are generally not too bad but as with every Genus, there are pockets of difficult-to-separate species (or species complexes). Like this instance, they may seem to have attributes of more than one species:

You would need to find large spores (up to 9µ) to convince me it was asperum (the lack of ring and cystidia shape do not suggest this species).

Looking at FE4 as well as FAN5, the spore size and cystidia shape seems to fit perplexum best, but where is the metachromatic (reddish-violet) reaction? The only image of perplexum I have is in BK(FoS)4 where I’ve just notice that the image they use for perplexum (233) is the same image as echinacea (223)!!!

The Checklist’s comments for echinaceum, “Confused with closely related taxa” says it all. My database has 25 asperum, 6 perplexum, 2 calcicola and 1 echinaceum: but are these all identified correctly? It’s a good idea to keep a dried specimens of ‘cryptic species’ as someone may be able to redetermine them at a later date (several of my collections of perplexum/calcicola/echinaceum have been sent to Kew).

[roy betts]

Once more into the breach…

The ring on E. aspera can certainly be ‘lost’ (or end up attached to the cap margin), so it’s worth considering. Spores for this sp. are about the same width as the other spp. we’re considering and are longer: FAN5 quotes 6-9(9.5) x 2.5-3.5(4)µ. Also the cystidia are abundant and shown and described as clavate to sphareodunculate and up to 24µ wide. I don’t think this fits you images/description.

Ruling out perlexa (spores metachromatic), the cystidia of the other 2 spp. are much more like your images (both also have them in fascicles or tufts). Time to go for it: the shape of the cystidia and also the apical cells of the cap ‘warts’ look to fit E. calcicola best.

[NB: I notice the coment for perplexa spores is “… metachromatic in Cresyl Blue, but not very distinctly so.”]

[roy betts]

Like ‘Coprinus’, it’s easier to call them Lepiota’s! (can you remember which are now Coprinellus and which Coprinopsis?). But you’re right, they were moved out of Lepiota in the 5th Update of the Checklist (March 2011).

I’ve had to look up ‘metachromatic’ also: it’s the reddish-violet reaction of spore walls in Cresyl Blue in water (don’t think I have any of that). It’s mentioned in the descriptions in FAN5 with both calcicola & echinacea having a non-metachromatic reaction.

Perplexa does seem to have fewer warts/scales on the stipe: only at the base in fact. It’s keyed separately on the basis of it’s spores being up to 3µ wide and more “penguin-shaped” (Q=1.8-2.6). The other two have spores of similar length, up to 3.5µ wide, and are more cylindric-oblong (Q=1.35-2.15).

Then the terminal cells of the cap warts: in calcicola they are ellipsoid-oblong and with echinacea globose to ellipsoid: and of similar size.

Your spore widths are 3-4µ and on the image they look roughly ellipsoid (which seemed to rule out perplexa). There’s not a lot of difference between any of the three really! It’s probably a ‘best fit’ situation between all these factors although some Cresyl Blue would help!

[roy betts]

Inocybe margaritispora:

Found in Alder/Willow carr this morning. Pretty sure on this one, but I’m always comparing finds with praetervisa and duriuscula.

[roy betts]

Plenty of info. in these images! Important features here are shape, size & dextrinoid aspect of spores, pyramidal warts on cap, gill edge white, clamps present, lack of ring, presence (& shape?) of cheilocystidia. These all point to a group of spp. around Lepiota perplexa (the other possibilities being calcicola & echinacea). Your spore sizes are a tad large but seem to fit the latter 2 better. Unfortunately the key (FAN5) differentiates these two by the shape and size of the apical cells which comprise the pyramidal warts on the cap (there’s always one more thing to measure!).

[roy betts]

With all the current work done on this Genus (including DNA analysis), you’re brave Adam to name Agaricus spp.! But I think you’re right here. The ‘campestris Section’ is unique in having a fertile gill edge (no cystidia).

[roy betts]

Yes Galerina. In Sphagnum, there are probably only about 4 British species of which paludosa is probably the most common and widespread. Other Sphagnum species seem to have no/very little veil on the stipe. So, without additional microscopic data, I would say there is a very good chance that this is G. paludosa.

[roy betts]

Bottom 3 images look more like Agrocybe praecox. The veil is more of a membrane than a cortina. However, the mature gills/spore print appear nearer to Cortinarius colours. A quick look at the spores would probably indicate which.

[Author]

Posts