11-04-2026 15:45
Zuzana Sochorová (Egertová)
Please, could anyone send me this paper?Moyne G.,
11-04-2026 13:34
Artem PtukhaHello, I am seeking assistance with the identific
11-04-2026 10:19
Michel Hairaud
Chers amis d'Ascofrance , voici une très bonne no
11-04-2026 10:10
Michel Hairaud
Dear Ascofrance members, here is some very good ne
10-04-2026 23:22
Gernot FriebesHi,ascospores are 1- to 3-septate, approximately
10-04-2026 15:51
William Slosse
Hello everyone, On 08/04/26, I found a growth sit
09-04-2026 15:25
Jac GelderblomOn bare soil between mosses Ifound an asco I deter
09-04-2026 13:55
Thomas Læssøehttps://svampe.databasen.org/observations/10589176
09-04-2026 10:12
Thomas Læssøehttps://svampe.databasen.org/observations/10587061
Tapesia ?
Ethan Crenson,
19-11-2019 05:47
Hello all,
This was collected yesterday in New York City on bare hardwood. Apothecia are tiny reaching 1mm, but in most cases they are smaller. The hyenium is off-white, darkening to dark gray in age. They are waxy and resemble Mollisia, but have a fine white subiculum—so Tapesia then, correct? Only I recall seeing on this forum a comment by Zotto that there is no Tapesia, it's all Mollisia now. However, considering the collection posted here, if this is (was) Tapesia, what do we have?
Asci are IKI+, 52-60 x 5-6µm. Spores lack oil drops, and measure 7-9 (11) x 2-3µm. The subiculum appears hyaline at the outer edges, both in reflected and projected light, however the hyphae beneath the apothecia are brown and measure 3-5µm thick. Paraphyses about 3µm at the tips and do not appear to change color in KOH.
Thanks in advance.
Ethan
Hans-Otto Baral,
19-11-2019 08:02
Re : Tapesia ?
Hi Ethan
Are the apothecia more or less dry? They look a bit so. Tapesia is no more accepted, it is Mollisia. Your sample will be difficult to separate from M. cinerea, despite the subiculum which actually most Mollisia spp. have. Your data are very detailed, but the genus is so complex that DNA (ITS) is necessary to say something clear.
Zotto
Are the apothecia more or less dry? They look a bit so. Tapesia is no more accepted, it is Mollisia. Your sample will be difficult to separate from M. cinerea, despite the subiculum which actually most Mollisia spp. have. Your data are very detailed, but the genus is so complex that DNA (ITS) is necessary to say something clear.
Zotto
Ethan Crenson,
19-11-2019 16:45
Re : Tapesia ?
The apothecia are more or less dry. I'm curious to know what accounts for the presence of the subiculum. An environmental factor, or something else? And I am getting the sense that the reason for the deprecation of the genus Tapesia is an accumulation of mostly unpublished evidence and opinions. Is that wrong? Is there anything in print that i could read that could provide some clarity? I will attempt to have this collection sequenced. If my data are useful and the sequence is successful then perhaps it could help. Who knows?
Thank you Zotto!
Ethan
Hans-Otto Baral,
19-11-2019 16:51
Re : Tapesia ?
No no, this is published. I wrote it in 1985 p. 35 (Bausteine....) and in 1994, Bellemere in 1977.
My 1994 file is attached.
Great, if you get the ITS rDNA then we can probably say what it is.
Zotto
My 1994 file is attached.
Great, if you get the ITS rDNA then we can probably say what it is.
Zotto
Comments-on-Outline-of-Ascom.-1993-0001.doc
Ethan Crenson,
19-11-2019 16:56
Re : Tapesia ?
Thank you very much!