Beiträge von Steve_mt

I' ve consulted Melzer key and I am concluding on Psathyrella panaeoloides - it looks alike in many ways so I think it is correct!

I found this Psathyrella s.l. which is likely a new species for me. It has hazelnut-brown pileus with tiny white fibrils on the pileus (veil remnants) which goes beige-tawn when dry (hence hygrophanous). Because of these fibrils I do not think it is a Parasola. Spores sizes: (6.8) 7.4 - 8.4 (8.6) × (4.5) 5 - 5.7 (5.8) µm // Me = 7.9 × 5.3 µm; They have a wide germ pore. Cheilocystidia abundant, not very large / Pleurocystidia seen, rare or infrequent. The fibrils of the remnant veil seems to have some incrustated pigment. I think I have also seen Pileocystidia (not sure - see last image).

Any indication would be appreciated

Is that a real photo or something generated with AI!!!! Amazing image - What camera/Lens was that!

The posted plant looks like Cyperus eragrostis or glomeratus.

Can you provide a photo of the cross section of one fruiting body ?

Large size and robust

Dirty brown center and scales

Yellowing at the base and then fades away after 30mins

Cystidia small and infrequent

Basidia 4-sporous (ca. 30 x 7 um)

Spores 5.4 x 4.1 average

Strong phenolic smell

Habitat under pine trees

Agaricus moelleri (or something else?)

Spores in Iodine solution:

Cystolepiota sp....

I have found this interesting Lepiotoid macrofungus under Quercus ilex (and pine trees closeby) which surprised me for having no dextrose reaction with Iodine, hence questioning if it is a Lepiota, unless there are a group of Lepiota species (or circumcrscibed genus) for non-amyloid Lepiotae.

The fungus is cream-beige overall with carmel-brown veil that splits into scales like a Lepiota does! The stipe is white-pruinose but when touched or with age it is peach-brown, The flesh at the base is dark brown, lighter above. The ring is ascending, white above, peach-brown below

Spores in groups of 2-8 (now this is a Lepiota-thing!) tiny, difficult to explain the shape vut I would say elliptical with one end slightly more flattened than the other, but not distinctly so. They do not stain well with COngo red. Oil body and apiculum present

(3.5) 3.8 - 4.4 (4.6) × (2.1) 2.4 - 2.8 (3) µm

Q = (1.3) 1.5 - 1.7 (1.9) ; N = 35

Me = 4 × 2.6 µm; Qe = 1.6

Cheilocystidia quite frequent, grouped together and clavate to sphaeropedunculate, smallish,

15.74 − 27.39 x 5.27 − 9.7 µm (average 20 x 7 um)

basidia not much in good shape, but 4-sporous, small, with 2.8um long needle-thin sterigmata

The pileus skin is a trichoderm but the veil above is a hymenoderm of sphaeropedunculate shaped elements, quite similar to the cheilocystida, but remarkably larger - 36.9 x 14.1 µm (range: 26.11−42.84 x 11.56−16.36 µm)

Section 2.5-4.2cm high and cap 1.5-2.9 cm wide

Further details on the images

Dear Michael,

No problem, we are here to discuss, share opinions, learn and after all have fun communicating with real people rather than stuck in some AI app or screen. Thanks for the time to reply and have interest in my finding, and same goes to Oehrling, if he is still wants to talk to me after disappointing him a bit with the spore-stain

For now I place it as L. leucothites unless a better option arises, but as you said it looks alike and spore measurements are within the range, although from the literature shown, the range is quite wide!

Cheers!!!

Spore sizes of L. leucothites found on online literature

First nature: 7-9 x 4.5-5µm

University British Columbia: 7–10.0 x 5.0–7.0 µm

Mushroom expert: 8-11 x 5-6.5 µm

I also found a twin brother of my specimen, smallish with ring hanging on the rim of the pileus and no traces on the stipe!!!

Leucoagaricus leucothites (Vittad.) Wasser 1977 media - Encyclopedia of Life

New measurements in water.

9.27 5.77

7.93 5.18

7.23 5.45

8.55 5.08

8.79 6.25

8.28 6.04

7.83 5.36

8.83 6.05

8.00 5.91

7.20 5.37

7.55 5.16

6.45 5.40

8.78 5.60

8.55 5.40

8.82 6.03

6.84 5.49

8.31 5.06

7.36 5.59

8.99 5.30

8.77 6.24

7.45 6.05

7.83 5.60

8.12 5.73

8.05 5.91

7.90 5.72

7.36 4.88

8.16 5.76

7.47 5.29

7.57 5.68

7.77 5.58

6.90 5.00

8.04 5.27

7.38 5.25

7.63 5.34

8.34 5.95

8.28 5.59

7.49 5.46

8.57 5.78

7.99 5.94

9.55 5.46

7.89 5.45

8.94 5.73

8.51 5.65

8.71 5.68

7.67 4.88

(6.5) 7.2 - 8.8 (9.6) × (4.9) 5.1 - 6 (6.2) µm

Q = (1.2) 1.3 - 1.6 (1.7) ; N = 45

Me = 8 × 5.6 µm ; Qe = 1.4

Deeply sorry for not mentioning it - in many images the spores are stained in Congo Red (and also some post editing of the images to increase the contrast and make the bg whitish) and a few in Lugol's iodine to show their dextrinoid character typical of Leucoagaricus.

Without stain, the spores are hyaline.

Some comparisons with Leucoagaricus cinerascens hold well.

https://www.mycocharentes.fr/pdf1/1331.pdf

MycoDB : Fiche de Leucoagaricus cinerascens

Dear friends, I need your advice on this nice Leucoagaricus I found in a park under Pinus halapensis (and Eucalyptus) on calcareous soil. A rather robust basidiocarp, white/beige with a rather pale brown or coffee-milk pileus which in old specimens cracks into large scales. Spores dextrinoid, almond-ovate with rounded end and an indistinct or absent germ. pore (not sure about it to be honest, but seems not evident). The cheilocystidia are quite narrow and many are subcapitate or ventricose. The pilleipellis was also examined and terminal hyphae observed (see images). I am undecided about a few species such as L. leucothites? (must be white and has larger cheilocystidia!) L. wichanskyi (germ pore should be absent?) or L. cinerascens (cheilos are wide?) but I can't make up my mind.

Pileus up to 7cm wide

Spores dextrinoid 8.5 − 12.9 x 5.3 − 7.1 µm (10 x 6 um) / Q-factor: 1.4-2.0 (1.6)

Cheilocystidia subcapitate or ventricose 31.1 − 55.0 µm x 6.2 − 11.4 µm ( 42.28 9.14 µm)

Images attached here

Zitat von Steve_mt

Dear Oehrling and Michael, thank you for your replies.

Ring or not, I am not sure because I do not see a scar on the stem, but you could be right.

I reckon microscopy is required at this stage and I have marked that I have an exsiccatum for SM-552. I report findings over the weekend.

Thank you

LG / FG

Stephen

Alles anzeigen

So finally I had time to examine the spores and gills of an exsiccatum which was not in very good shape (larvae destroyed physically part of the specimen. Here are some notes:

The gills turned beige-brown with age

Spore print white

Spore deposit/production abundant

Cystidia generally absent (but check image of a possible finding of a cheilocystidium)

spores broadly ovate or shield like with apiculum and distinct germ pore

Sizes:

(7.5) 7.8 - 9.3 (10.2) × (5) 5.3 - 6.1 (6.6) µm //

Me = 8.5 × 5.8 µm; Qe = 1.5 ; Ve = 147 µm3

Ring may be present and got detached and hanging at the rim during basidiocarp growth

I am thinking on Leucoagaricus, specifically L. leucothites ?

>I cannot upload pics!!!<

.... wanted to add that I bought this

https://proficook-france.fr/en/proficook/37-deshydrateur-alimentaire-4-ebenex-proficook-pc-dr-1116-4006160501117.html

The lowest temperature is 40C and unfortunately my thermometer (external metal thermometer) indicates 44C eith lid closed. Removing the lid and raising some compartments, I get around 36-40C. Hope this is fine for molecular testing and cell conservation for microscopy.

I wonder if anyone uses this too

This topic is of interest also to me. At the moment I have been struggling in finding a cheap or free image stacking software mostly for myxo but also for micro-images and small mushrooms. Any suggestions ?

Question 2 is that I have an SLR and I can have an adapter so as to fit in the microscope trinocular head (an old 1980s AxioLAB Zeiss). Do you have experience if photos taken this way produce good quality images. I am currently taking pictures of my eyepiece from an expensive point and shoot camera. Its 4x optical zoom enlarges the image nicely and it is very fast.

With the SLR the shooting is a bit slow procedure as I assume one has to refocus and adjust settings between live view and switching to shooting mode. Also I loose the ocular micrometer option.

Dear Oehrling and Michael, thank you for your replies.

Ring or not, I am not sure because I do not see a scar on the stem, but you could be right.

I reckon microscopy is required at this stage and I have marked that I have an exsiccatum for SM-552. I report findings over the weekend.

Thank you

LG / FG

Stephen

I am trying to identify this species found under carob trees and some pine needles from a tree further apart, on damp humus. No partial veil and I don't see a vulva. 26/11/2020

Thanks, will do over the weekend.

spores, cheilo/pleuro, and pileipellis.

Thank you, we have the same thoughts on this. I'll check the micro shortly. I was wondering if it is too small for L. subincarnata?

Thanks for replying

I have another Lepiota to show you. No microscopy for the time-being but specimen are being dried. Three specimens growing under oak tree (Quercus ilex) although Pine trees are also present not far. Specimen small, around 3cm tall with a cap about 2cm. Ring present but deteriorated with time. From my understanding, the stipe darkens to reddish brown with age that at one point when at home, I thought I might have gathered two different species, but on seeing photos in situ I believe they are all the same species. Margin pleated. Very elegant the tufts of veilar remains, toffee-brown in colour. Your opinions are welcomed on how to help to get an identification, unless molecular sequencein is the only way forward. Thanks!

Hello, rainy and cold season started in Malta and the mushrooms are punctual.

I was lucky to find something quite rare (for my eyes!) a small Lepiota with nice pattern of veilar remnants on the cap. I have dried a specimen for later microscopy, but at the moment I wish to have some clues. The fungus was about 2.5 cm tall and a cap of about 2 cm across. Scent indistinct or faint. It was growing in a mixed aforested area in a valley (sem-riparian) and the two trees present were Quercus ilex and Pinus halepensis. I have got an idea of L. subincarnata or because it is small, L. echinella.

I can carry microscopy after 5 days because I am away from my home Lab.

It has been decided at this hour during a meeting by JONEF members and we updated the deadline during this meeting to 10th Dec. It will be shown online soon, too.

Tnx