Accès membres

Mot de passe perdu? S'inscrire

18-09-2025 08:35

Edmond POINTE Edmond POINTE

Bonjour amis mycologues,Trouvé sur moquette de ch

17-09-2025 19:43

Philippe PELLICIER

Sur branche morte de Mélèze. Les ascospores sphÃ

18-09-2025 19:40

Sylvie Le Goff

BonjourPensez vous que le genre Pulvinula puisse c

18-09-2025 16:14

Bernard Declercq Bernard Declercq

Hello,I am looking for a copy of following paper:H

17-09-2025 16:14

Philippe PELLICIER

Apothécies enterrées, fermées au début puis s'

17-09-2025 10:50

Heather Merrylees

Hi there!I am hoping for any advice on the identif

11-09-2025 16:57

Jason Karakehian Jason Karakehian

Our revision of Marthamycetales (Leotiomycetes) is

16-09-2025 12:53

Philippe PELLICIER

Pézizes de 1-4 mm, brun grisâtres, sur les capsu

03-09-2025 12:44

Enrique Rubio Enrique Rubio

Hi to somebody.I would like to know your opinion o

15-09-2025 14:40

Nicolas VAN VOOREN Nicolas VAN VOOREN

Hello.I'm searching for a digital copy of the seco

« < 1 2 3 4 5 > »
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
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
  • message #60069
Hans-Otto Baral, 19-11-2019 08:02
Hans-Otto Baral
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
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
Hans-Otto Baral
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
Ethan Crenson, 19-11-2019 16:56
Re : Tapesia ?
Thank you very much!