
18-07-2025 23:03
Hello.Fruitings between 51 and 130 microns in tota

16-07-2025 17:34

Hello,I have trouble distinguishing above mention

14-07-2025 11:20

Bonjour, Voici une espèce de (?) Hyaloscyphace

16-01-2023 21:31

Hello, Nearby the find of Calycina claroflava on

14-07-2025 17:55
Yanick BOULANGERBonjourAutre dossier laissé en suspendJe viens de

14-07-2025 11:17
Yanick BOULANGERBonjourJ'ai un dossier Jackrogersella qui est rest

14-07-2025 15:52
Gernot FriebesHi,I wanted to share this collection on Rubus idae

14-07-2025 13:37
Gernot FriebesHi,do you think this collection could be R. ulmari
Will someone help me identify?
Thank you in advance.
Regards
Mirek

A very hard topic for such a novice in this topic as me.
I had to review everything that is available on the internet before I came to any conclusions.
Initially, I tried to compare my collection to T. fuckeliana. However, the features did not suit me at all, although on the asco-sonneberg website I found collections identical to mine, signed just as T. T. fuckeliana;
http://asco-sonneberg.de/pages/gallery/nectria-fuckeliana-100325-mcol-0123451.php?group_id=7071&position=16
However, I measured the spores visible in the pictures themselves and their size is rather very similar to mine and not as stated in the description so I gave up this option.
Then I used the work "The genus Thelonectria (Nectriaceae, Hypocreales, Ascomycota) and closely related species with cylindrocarpon-like asexual states - 2016". I may be wrong but it seems to me that it is written with errors. There are large inaccuracies in the key (see scan No. 01).
Yesterday I came to the earlier work of the same authors and according to her my collection is the closest to Thelonectria discophora;
"Phylogeny and taxonomic revision of Thelonectria discophora
(Ascomycota, Hypocreales, Nectriaceae) species complex - 2013 ".
(See scan 02)
Today I have measured a greater number of spores and their dimensions are practically perfectly consistent with this description!
(11.4) 11.9 - 15.1 (16.2) × (4.6) 4.9 - 5.9 (6.2) µm
Q = (2.1) 2.2 - 2.8 (3); N = 34
Me = 13.4 × 5.5 µm; Qe = 2.5
Individual dimensions of the spores are given in the picture nr. 03
Christian, fruiting bodies are not overripe. I showed germs germinating but there were very few. In my opinion, the fruiting bodies are of the perfect age for microscopy. In my collection there are completely immature spores and free spores that are already germinating. However, the vast majority of spores are moderately mature, with ornamentation already formed. This time I have measured just such.
I compared other species but in their case the size of the spores is not compatible with mine!
Thank you for the hint!
You'll agree with me?
Regards
Mirek

http://www.centrodeestudiosmicologicosasturianos.org/?p=15486
It is true that my photo is not as perfect as Enrique but you can see sufficient arrangement of the cells.
Is this how it was supposed to look like?
Regards
Mirek

Your help was priceless!
Mirek