25-06-2025 16:25
Thomas FlammerMy first impression was sth like Rutstromeia, but
25-06-2025 16:56
Philippe PELLICIERBonjour, pensez-vous que S. ceijpii soit le nom co
24-06-2025 22:29
Danny Newman
Hello AscoFrance, I have recently photographed, c
24-06-2025 14:00
Warre Van CaenegemI'm currently in Croatia doing fieldwork that is n
23-06-2025 04:03
Francois Guay
Hi, I found this tiny sulfur yellow asco growing o
23-06-2025 13:25
Enrique Rubio
I would like to hear your opinion on this Scutelli
22-06-2025 13:52
DirkW
Dear friends,anyone out there with this paper?:DOU
26-05-2025 18:09
Henk RemijnGood day,In a burned forest near Hulst on the bord
20-06-2025 08:33
Josep Torres
Hello.Small, blackish, mucronated surface grains s
Hymenoscyphus phascoides
Javier Ormad,
10-02-2012 21:44
Hi all.I have a collection of Hymenoscyphus phascoides, but seeing IF, scoring as Hymenoscyphus phascoides (Fr.) Spooner anon., (2012), without having proof of publication...
Which is the valid name in the updated?
Thank you
Javier
Martin Bemmann,
10-02-2012 22:13
Re : Hymenoscyphus phascoides
Hi Javier,
maybe you did not try Mycobank. H.ph. is given there as a legitimate name and it provides at least the Latin diagnosis. But still not solving the quest of the source... :-( Maybe an entry too recent (2012).
Cheers
Martin
maybe you did not try Mycobank. H.ph. is given there as a legitimate name and it provides at least the Latin diagnosis. But still not solving the quest of the source... :-( Maybe an entry too recent (2012).
Cheers
Martin
Hans-Otto Baral,
10-02-2012 22:29
Re : Hymenoscyphus phascoides
I think the combination does not yet validly exist. In the web it is attributed to Fries, but I never heard of a combination in that genus made by Fries.
I think the fungus is better placed in Bryoscyphus, and I wonder why Brian did not suggest this. Though Bryoscyphus is not easily defined and delimited except for its bryophily.
Zotto
I think the fungus is better placed in Bryoscyphus, and I wonder why Brian did not suggest this. Though Bryoscyphus is not easily defined and delimited except for its bryophily.
Zotto
Martin Bemmann,
10-02-2012 22:42
Re : Hymenoscyphus phascoides
just an addition:
The diagnosis given at Mycobank turnes out to be nothing but the description of Fries for his Peziza phascoides on Phascum moss, placed by him in his section Mollisia.
The diagnosis given at Mycobank turnes out to be nothing but the description of Fries for his Peziza phascoides on Phascum moss, placed by him in his section Mollisia.
Javier Ormad,
10-02-2012 23:17
Re : Hymenoscyphus phascoides
Me also I think it best to place it in Bryoscyphus, it has not yet happened. I wonder about the validity of the name of IF.
If there is determination and it is valid.
Who makes the publication of 2012?
Who makes this Latin diagnosis?
I do not understand
If there is determination and it is valid.
Who makes the publication of 2012?
Who makes this Latin diagnosis?
I do not understand
Martin Bemmann,
10-02-2012 23:34
Re : Hymenoscyphus phascoides
Hi Javier,
as I said the Latin "diagnosis" is just the description of Peziza phascoides given by Fries in his Systema Mycologicum 2 (1822): 138 f.
Regards,
Martin
as I said the Latin "diagnosis" is just the description of Peziza phascoides given by Fries in his Systema Mycologicum 2 (1822): 138 f.
Regards,
Martin