Clitopilus cf. hobsonii

Do you confirm Clitopilus hobsonii or should I provide some micro-examination to be sure on the species ?

P.s. those brown blobs are not dust or artefacts but something growing from the fungsu, like fungus galls!?

I have no indication they are living things (these are 0.2mm) but they are attached to the gills and they will not come loose even if touched or tried to apply force with dissecting needle. It could be soft faeces which solidified on the gills if that can happen.

Some not-good photos from stereomicroscope (x40) seems to show they are embedded within the gills or even have a tiny stipe?!

I have given a quick check at the spores and I think you are right about Crepidotus - the spores are too large for C. hobsonii, and their shape, a bit like a lemon due to a distinct-swollen apiculus is also Crepidotus rather Clitocybe.

Spores:

(7) 7.1 - 8.3 (8.9) × (4) 4.1 - 4.8 (5.2) µm

Q = (1.5) 1.52 - 1.8 (2) ; N = 12

V = 61 - 98 (110) µm3

Me = 7.6 × 4.5 µm ; Qe = 1.7 ; Ve = 81 µm3

Further research and applying the key on European species, I have landed on Crepidotus subverrucisporus , typically on calcareous habitats

https://www.mykoweb.com/Crepidotus/species/Crepidotus_subverrucisporus_subverrucisporus.html

C. variabilis has smaller spores (Sp 5.5-7.5 x 2.5-4 μm), and more narrow - subcylindrical

C. cesatti has more broad (subglobose) spores (Q. <1.4)

C. luteolus has yellow tinge (at the less)

C. lundellii* is closely related but it is said to have brownish colours when dry and not calcareous

So at the moment, this is Crepidotus subverrucisporus or C. lundellii - I guess I have to re-examine the cheilocystidia?

C. lundellii: https://www.hlasek.com/crepidotus_lundellii1en.html

* One of its synonyms is Crepidotus inhonestus !lol! - why this fungus is dishonest haha!

I abandoned C. hobsonii because of its smaller spore size. Also, the robust apiculum is something which mislead me. But yes, I agree about the longitudinal shadows of the spores (see a better image here!). Moreover, I went to check for the Cheilocystidia and could not find any -I think what I am seeing are basidioles. If I remember what I read in the afternoon, lack of cheilocystidia is a Clitocybe character.

Clitocybe it is. I think it can remain within the variability of C. hobsonii!

Zitat von Ingo W

Hello!

Zitat von Steve_mt

Clitocybe it is. I think it can remain within the variability of C. hobsonii!

The real name is "Clitopilus", not Clitocybe.

http://www.pilzflora-ehingen.d…ora/arthtml/chobsonii.php

VG Ingo W

Alles anzeigen

Dear Ingo,

Yes I got tired yesterday - I corrected the names. I agree re hobsonii, yesterday night I found the differences between the two, mainly the spore length with hobsonii being: 7.5-8.5 and daamsii : 8.0-11.5 um. I really a merry-g0-round here but it is nice to learn. i will never forget the vertical ridges now

Thanks to all - I appreciate a lot

LG

Steve