27-11-2025 15:41
Thomas LæssøeSpores brownish, typically 4-celled; 26.8 x 2.4;
27-11-2025 12:01
Thomas Læssøehttps://svampe.databasen.org/observations/10496727
27-11-2025 11:46
Thomas Læssøehttps://svampe.databasen.org/observations/10493918
27-11-2025 11:31
Thomas LæssøeCollectors notes: Immersed ascomata, erumpent thro
23-09-2025 13:31
Thomas Læssøehttps://svampe.databasen.org/observations/10534623
25-11-2025 14:24
Thomas Læssøehttps://svampe.databasen.org/observations/10490522
26-11-2025 18:13
Jason Karakehian
The entire run of Mycotaxon is now available throu
25-11-2025 11:03
Mick PeerdemanHi all,One of my earliest microscopy attempts, so
Eupezizella aureliella ?
Ethan Crenson,
11-07-2023 20:35
Hi all,
I found these white - orange hairy discomycetes in New York City recently. I thought that they might be Eupezizella aureliella.
Apothecia are very small, less than 0.5mm wide, in most cases. They are clothed in bright white hairs. Some of the hairs are tinged bright orange. In a water mount the orange pigment appears to be an oily or resinous exudate. The hairs are narrow above and wider at the base, textured and approximately 35 x 4µm.
Asci are very faintly amyloid (unless that's just a refractive ring I'm seeing). Spores hyaline somewhat fusiform, almost cylindrical, 5-5.5 x 2µm.
On the bark of an unknown tree.
That's all of the data I have right now. Would anyone agree that this is at least close to Eupezizella aureliella?
Thanks,
Ethan
Hans-Otto Baral,
12-07-2023 08:32
Re : Eupezizella aureliella ?
Spores should get longer but otherwise clearly aureliella. Is there any wood at the bark to check if it is coniferous?
Ethan Crenson,
12-07-2023 13:56
Re : Eupezizella aureliella ?
Thank you so much, Zotto. I only collected bark pieces. They are thick and chunky like Black Locust, which is what thought the wood was originally. But it's remotely possible that it's conifer. When I return to the site I'll look more closely. I'll also check a few more apothecia (there aren't many) to see that the spore measurements are correct.