Donald Hobern's picture

Ink-Caps

Observed: 30th September 2012 By: Donald HobernDonald Hobern’s reputation in Fungi and LichensDonald Hobern’s reputation in Fungi and Lichens
P1080629-resize
P1080632-resize
P1080633-resize
P1080635-resize
DSCN2532
DSCN2542
DSCN2535
DSCN2539
Description:

28 September - Head of largest cap (not fully opened) and spore print measures 40mm by 55mm. Presumably therefore too large for Coprinellus micaceus or Coprinus silvaticus, suggesting Coprinopsis atramentaria?
30 September - added more pictures. The eight pictures (in order) are:
1. Clump of 3 toadstools on 28 September
2. Same with ruler for scale
3. The largest, and rightmost, toadstool's gills
4. Spore print from largest toadstool
5. Remaining 2 toadstools on 30 September
6. New clump of toadstools around 2m away from first
7. Underside of one of new toadstools
8. Cross section of one of new toadstools
The new toadstools look similar to the originals, although none is (at least yet) as large. These new toadstools seem clearly to show the mica-like particles of Coprinellus micaceus.
2 October - the new toadstools are developing exactly like the first clump. The stipes appear pruinose with visible caulocystidia.
I therefore believe that, despite the size of the first toadstools, these are all C. micaceus.

Identifications

Caution: Do NOT use iSpot to identify fungi to eat!

Some fungi are very poisonous so a mistaken ID could have serious consequences.

Species interactions

No interactions present.

Comments

Donald Hobern's picture

Gills too sparse?

It's been pointed out that the gills are rather sparse for Coprinopsis atramentaria. Does this suggest something different (allowing at the same time for the size)?

The gills deliquesced overnight.

Donald Hobern

Martincito's picture

The gills don't look sparse

The gills don't look sparse to me.

Martincito's picture

One of those new mushrooms

One of those new mushrooms does have a bit of a glisten, doesn't it? Maybe the second clump is a different species? Unless one of the experts disgrees, I'd suggest a generic ID of "Coprinus" for this collection of photos, which would definitely be right... I think!
PS Except they've changed the genus names so they neither of the possibilities is now Coprinus!!

Donald Hobern's picture

I'll monitor the new ones

If the new ones proceed as the old ones did, I'll feel comfortable with C. micaceus for all of them.

Thanks,

Donald Hobern

miked's picture

They are not Coprinopsis

They are not Coprinopsis atramentaria, they might be Coprinellus micaceus but not sure enough to tick this one

Donald Hobern's picture

Pruinose stipes

I've checked the stipes and they appear pruinose, with caulocystidia clearly visible under a stereomicroscope.

I think that rules out C. truncorum.

Donald Hobern