Accès membres

Mot de passe perdu? S'inscrire

02-03-2017 21:17

Lepista Zacarias

Dear all,I'm again in trouble to classify specimen

18-03-2017 12:20

Peter Thompson

Hello Everyone,I have been considering a black asc

17-03-2017 21:06

Enrique Rubio Enrique Rubio

HI againBlackish, not setose pseudothecia up to 0.

17-03-2017 01:57

Roland Labbé

Bonjour !Voici un discomycète inconnu de nous.Il

17-03-2017 14:01

Markus Wilhelm

Bonjour, je trouve en Alsace a une Peuple (Populu

16-03-2017 23:55

Lepista Zacarias

Hi everyone,Recently I posted here a topic with a

17-03-2017 09:46

Eduard Osieck

Can somebody provide a copy of the paper "Pilobolu

17-03-2017 18:50

Per Vetlesen

HiIt was found on bark of Juniperus communis in Ha

17-03-2017 14:02

Markus Wilhelm

Bonjour, je trouve en Alsace a une Peuple (Populu

16-03-2017 17:35

Gilbert MOYNE

Espèce croissant sur bois mort très décomposé

« < 747 748 749 750 751 > »
Oedohysterium pulchrum?
Lepista Zacarias, 02-03-2017 21:17
Dear all,
I'm again in trouble to classify specimens in Hysteriaceae. In May last year at the topic
"Hysterobrevium mori (?) on Juniperus" - http://www.ascofrance.fr/search_forum/42906
I thought to have found Hysterobrevium mori. More recently, I found other specimens, which seem to be indeed of that species, by the spores configuration and dimensons. I returned to the place the first observation mentioned above and found new specimens. Now, I have no longer doubts that they must be something other than H. mori. I looked again to the E. Boehm´s webpage:
http://www.eboehm.com/hysteriaceae.html
and conclude that my specimens must belong to the genus Oedohysterium, must probably to a species close to O. pulchrum or even itself. The fact is that, the hymenium shows what can be describe as a red pigmentation as well as the spores, which have (5-) 6 transversal septa and most of them have a longitudinal septum at the 3rd cell from the apex, some of are also longitudinally septated at adjacent cells, and some have no longitudinal septa at all. All these feature fit quite well in the above mentioned species, but the spores dimensions, more precisely their widht does not fit. I got the following values:
(22.3) 22.8 - 26.8 (27.3) × (6.3) 6.7 - 7.7 (7.8) µm
Q = (2.9) 3.1 - 3.7 (4.1) ; N = 30
Me = 24.7 × 7.2 µm ; Qe = 3.4
whereas the values given at eboehm.com are:
22 - 25 (-27) x 5-6 µm.
Can anyone give an help?
Thanks in advance,
zaca

P.S.: I saw that Alain Gardiennet recently posted on the Database another species of Oedohysterium, O. insidens, whose spores are only tranversely septated and bigger (I presume).

  • message #47602
  • message #47602
  • message #47602
  • message #47602
  • message #47602
  • message #47602
Lepista Zacarias, 02-03-2017 21:37
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?
Photos of the specimens
  • message #47603
Alain GARDIENNET, 18-03-2017 08:02
Alain GARDIENNET
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?

Hi Zaca,


Your analysis is exact : it's an Oedohysterium very very closed to O. pulchrum.


Did you colpare with the the paper  Checa et al. 2007 ?


Alain


I add scale on one photo of O. insidens


 

Lepista Zacarias, 18-03-2017 10:44
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?
Hi Alain,
Thanks for the confirmation of my analysis. I could not access the paper of Checa et al. (2007).
Best regards,
zaca
Lothar Krieglsteiner, 18-03-2017 10:50
Lothar Krieglsteiner
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?

Checa & al. 2007- I do not have it either :-)


Regads, Lothar

François Valade, 18-03-2017 12:32
François Valade
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?
This paper is online on Mycologia.
Checa et al. Some new hysteriaceous Fungi from Costa Rica, Mycologia, 99(2), 2007, pp. 285–290.

Ami Alain, il faut citer tes références pour les copains.
Lepista Zacarias, 18-03-2017 14:48
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?
Yeah, the paper is online,
but paid. Since this research is not financed I will not pay for it.
François Valade, 18-03-2017 15:02
François Valade
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?
Right! now it is no more free for more than two years old publications. Mycologia has changed its web hoster
Lepista Zacarias, 18-03-2017 15:06
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?
Thanks, François.
Regards,
zaca
Lothar Krieglsteiner, 18-03-2017 15:08
Lothar Krieglsteiner
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?

Thanks a lot, Francois!


Best regards, Lothar

Lepista Zacarias, 18-03-2017 15:30
Re : Oedohysterium pulchrum?
I gave a look to the paper of Checa et al. (2007) and saw the description of Hysterographium pulchrum (Thanks again to François). The main difference to my specimen is the narrower spores (Fig. 36-45 in that paper). Maybe, there is also a more diverse longitudinal septation in the spores of my specimen that in some cases goes to the end cell. The rest is quite similar.