11-03-2026 17:36
Michel Hairaud
Bonjour, Je cherche des indices pour cette réc
12-03-2026 19:44
Enrique Rubio
Hi to everybody.Can you give me any suggestions ab
08-03-2026 14:05
Thierry Blondelle
Bonjour à tous,Sur 3 récoltes supposées de H. l
12-03-2026 15:45
Åge OterhalsDear forum,I found this small discomycete on a ver
11-03-2026 16:48
Bruno Coué
Bonjour, je serais heureux d'avoir votre avis sur
11-03-2026 14:14
Gernot FriebesHi,I would like to share a collection of Scopinell
we are preparing a short note on a German record of what we call "Selenaspora guernisacii". To our knowledge, "Selenaspora batava" is a synonym and the genus is monotypic (see Nancy S. Weber in Mycologia 87/1/1995: 90-95, and Dieter Benkert in Österr. Zschr. f. Pilzkunde 20/2011: 13-17.)
Now, the Index of fungi, and, if I'm not mistaken, Mycobank as well list both taxa separately, and there are several entries in the web suggesting that "S. batava" (not guernisacii) occurs in America and Europe".
Does anyone know of a new publication (perhaps "molecular") claiming that both taxa are different species?
As far as we could find out, the species had hitherto been known only from 4 countries (France, The Netherlands, Georgia and the United States). We would appreciate any information about other records which may have escaped our notice.
Thanks for your help!
Till
in Coolia 2 (2) (1955) under "MYCOLOGISCH NIEUWS 11-13" appears the following:
". . . . .12. SELENASPORA. BATAVA Heim & Le Gal.
U herinnert zich wel de beschrijving van deze opzienbarende vondst in Fungus 10 van 1938. Het blijkt nu, dat de soort al eerder was beschreven, door Crouan, onder de naam van Ascobolus Guernisaci . Mme Le Gal heeft het materiaal gezien en is tot de conclusie gekomen, dat het in ieder geval geen Ascobolus is in de zin zoals die tegenwoordig wordt opgevat. Mme Le Gal meent, dat het geslacht Selenaspora zeer zeker gehandhaafd moet blijven (Rev. Mycol. 18: 87-88 . 1953), maar onze soort moet nu S. Guernisaci (Cr.) Heim & Le Gal heten." which strongly suggests that they are indeed synonymous / conspecific.
best wishes
Chris