Can this be a Mollisia pteridis (Albt. & Schwein) Gillet s.s. Ellis& Ellis 1985? So yes, is there an actual name available?
Mollisia pteridis is now synonyme of Fuscolachnum pteridis (Alb. & Schwein.) J.H. Haines (1989), var. pteridis. I suppose that my found isn't a Fuscolachnum pteridis s.s. Haines because of the absence of cilindrical, incrusted hairs, typical for this F. pteridis.
The drawings of Ellis & Ellis of the Mollisia pteridis (nr. 2108) fits very well with my found in contrary with the drawing of Ellis & Ellis of the Dasyscyphus pteridis (nr.2102) , at this moment also a synonyme of Fuscolachnum pteridis (Alb. & Schwein.) J.H. Haines.
I am aware that both species are coming from the same epithet Peziza pteridis Albert&Schwein but I don't know if the E&E nr2108 has been described under another name. Thanks in advance for any reaction.

Growing on blackening parts of the stem of Pteridium aquilinum

Apothecia -0,5 mm diam. first globose, then cupulate, outside dark brown with adpressed hairs, hairs on the margine pale; disc greyish

Excipulum: dark brown, conspicously thick-walled, subglobose (7-10x5-10 µm), in the transition between excipulum and the hairs  becoming to textura prismatica
Hairs: 30-60x4-6 µm ; brown, thick-walled with septa , tapering, smooth, outgoing from excipulumcell;  top obtuse
Hairs at the margin hyaline and thin- to sligtly thick-walled
spores 8-9x1,5-2 µm; LC 1; minute LB on the poles
Asci 35-40x6 µm, 8-sp; ascusbase short and broadened, with croziers; IKI bb
Paraphyses filiform to cilindrical x 2µm, with vacuolair content; septed on the base

Stip Helleman, 14-05-2017 00:30

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Dear Lieve,
indeed your fungus is not Fuscolachnum pteridis I think, it resembles Mollisia (Tapesia) rosae macroscopical, so if you find anchoring hyphae or subiculum. At the time I do not have a idea about the species of Tapesia that are described on this host.
regards,
Stip

Peter Püwert, 14-05-2017 02:34

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Hi Stip,
after ELLIS et ELLIS is the already in my opinion Mollisia pteridis. With INDEX FUNGORUM is the current name Fuscolachnum pteridis and also ZOTTO a photo shows on his homepage as a Fuscolachnum, that those of Lieve resembles. Here is definitely clarification need.
Greetings Peter.

Lieve Deceuninck, 14-05-2017 20:53

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Many thanks Stip and Peter!

Hans-Otto Baral, 14-05-2017 20:54

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Hoi together

Thanks for drawing my attention to this discrepancy and for this wonderful collection!

To be honest, all images in my folder are not mine but seem to be correctly identified when relying on Haines 1989, as they show distinctly warted hairs. This one has definitely smooth hairs and is something else.

Ellis & Ellis (Mollisia pteridis) fig. 2108 indeed show smooth hairs and say p. 567 that the fungus grows on blackened bases of Pteridium which is the case also here.

type material does not exist but Haines was sure that the original description matches his interpretation of a fungus with warted hairs.
Zotto

Stip Helleman, 14-05-2017 21:05

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Dear Peter,
herzlichen Dank für dein Kommentar. Genau diese Mollisia pteridis in E&E ist diese Art. Haines seine Beschreibung zeigt doch deutlich warzige cylindrische Haaren.
Es ist jedenfalls noch nicht geklärt.

Stip

Stip Helleman, 14-05-2017 21:11

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Anyone knows, where was this synonimisation of Mollisia pteridis?
Stip

Lieve Deceuninck, 14-05-2017 21:12

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Dear

Gillet (1882) dind't give a description of the microscopic features of the hears. The description is Ellis & Ellis give drawings with smooth hairs. That's why I'm surprised to find now Mollisia pteridis as synonym with Fuscolachnum pteridis (Haines 1989).

Gillet 1882: Cupule érumpante, céracée molle, très-petite; diam. 1 mm. au plus; à l'oeil nu, elle ne paraît que comme un point brunâtre, d'abord fermé, globuleux, légèrement déprimé et montrant à son milieu ses bords rapprochés apparaissant comme un point blanchâtre; ouverte étante humide, elle laisse voir l'hymenium que est jaunâtre et d'autant plus pâle que l'humidité est plus grande et plus prolongée; toujours elle reste creuse avec les bords plus ou moins connivents à la manière d'une bourse; l'exterieur est brunâtre à l'état sec; humide, il pâlit et prend une teinte vert-clair; cette couleur semble due à des soies brunes, courtes, dirigées de bas en haut; ces. soies sont blanchâtres sur les bords et les font paraître comme ornés de de petites crénelures distantes les unes des autres (LD: I assume this is just a macroscopic description); chair jaunâtre; thèque cylindracées, un peu renflés en massue à leur sommet; spores oblongues. – Pr. éparse ou irrégulièrement en groupes sur les tiges pourries de fougères et surtout du pteris aquilina.

Hans-Otto Baral, 14-05-2017 21:17

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Which synonymization do you mean? All combinations in SF are based on Albertini & Schweinitz's Peziza pteridis. Do you mean how Ellis & Ellis came to their identification?

Ellis & Ellis give a wrong author citation, as Mollisia pteridis Gillet instead of (A & S) Gillet. maybe they meant "sensu Gillet".

Lieve Deceuninck, 14-05-2017 21:22

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Hi Stip

In Haines publication of  Fuscolachnum pteridis (Alb. & Schwein.) J.H. Haines, Mem. N. Y. bot. Gdn 49: 317 (1989) var. pteridis (comb. nov) Mollisia pterides (Alb & Schwein) Gillet was indicated as synonymous.  Is this what you wanted?

Stip Helleman, 14-05-2017 22:47

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Hi Lieve,
Yes, thank you, I did not look in the varieties.
In the meanwhile I have read Gillet and found he was the first making this combination with the A. & S. basionym. his description does not fit this collection and E&E which are Mollisias according the present interpretation. Gillets interpreation of Mollisia however is more doubtful, it includes operculate species too for example M crec'hqueraultii  (= Lamprospora crechqueraultii ) which combination fortunately did not make it to Mycobank.
Lieve, could you test KOH on a slide with a water mount for a yellow reaction and do you have a photo of the Vacuolebodies in the paraphyses.

cheers,
Stip
It seems to be clear that we have 2 different species going under the same name

Lieve Deceuninck, 15-05-2017 10:55

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Hi Stip
None yellow reaction in KOH.
Subiculum present, photo added
Extra photographs of vacuolair content in paraphyses added.
Greetings, Lieve.

• 
• 
• 
• 

Hans-Otto Baral, 17-05-2017 11:29

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Dear Lieve

I am not sure if your fungus is a Mollisia. For me it looks more like a Pyrenopeziza. The vacuoles you show are non-refractive, and I think I see also one globose refractive drop in two paraphyses, though out of focus. 

Mollisia and Pyrenopeziza have frequently been confused, so the species might still exist in Mollisia, but I do not have a convincing name at hand.

Zotto

Lieve Deceuninck, 17-05-2017 15:43

Re : Mollisia pteridis sensu stricto Ellis & Ellis (1985)?

Dear Zotto

Thank you for your great help with this little fungus.

I'll complete my description and keep herbarium material.

Lieve