05-03-2026 10:07
Hulda Caroline HolteHello, I found and collected this species growing
07-03-2026 13:06
éric ROMERO
Bonjour tous, Sur cône d'épicea fortement imbu,
08-03-2026 14:05
Thierry Blondelle
Bonjour à tous,Sur 3 récoltes supposées de H. l
05-03-2026 16:30
François BartholomeeusenDear forum members, On the 2nd of February 2026,
06-03-2026 09:41
Alain GARDIENNET
Hi forum, I'm now looking for another reference c
Tricharina
Patrice TANCHAUD,
17-01-2024 22:54
Bonsoir,
récolte au sol, apothécie 8 mm pour la plus grande, spores 16-19 x 9,5-11 µm.
J'y verrais bien Tricharina praecox...
Merci d'avance pour vos avis éventuels.
Patrice
Merci d'avance pour vos avis éventuels.
Patrice
Doc1-0077.pdf
Patrice TANCHAUD,
17-01-2024 23:26
Re : Tricharina
En poursuivant les recherches, je vois que T. ochroleuca pourrait être un bon prétendant...
A voir.
Uwe Lindemann,
18-01-2024 14:40
Re : Tricharina
Hi Patrice,
T. ochroleuca is a nomen dubium.
Regarding the shape of the ascospores I would suggest hiemalis, subhiemals or tophiseda. Did you use the key in the following paper? https://ascomycete.org/Journal/Article/art-0363
Best, Uwe
T. ochroleuca is a nomen dubium.
Regarding the shape of the ascospores I would suggest hiemalis, subhiemals or tophiseda. Did you use the key in the following paper? https://ascomycete.org/Journal/Article/art-0363
Best, Uwe
Patrice TANCHAUD,
19-01-2024 10:31
Re : Tricharina
Many thanks Uwe for this reference, I had not considered this publication, although it is of great importance given the quality of the work with sequencing. The spores, without guttules or granules, seem to eliminate T. tophiseda, then concluding between T. hiemalis and T. subhiemalis seems more difficult without DNA.
Uwe Lindemann,
19-01-2024 12:37
Re : Tricharina
Because of the spore quotient, I would tend towards hiemalis. But to be absolutely sure, sequencing would be necessary.
Best, Uwe
Best, Uwe
Patrice TANCHAUD,
19-01-2024 17:44
Re : Tricharina
We agree. Thanks.