31-08-2025 17:32
Michel Hairaud
Bonjour, Pas d'identité trouvée pour cette réc
31-08-2025 19:41
Enrique Rubio
Hi to someone.I need to download this issue of Sve
31-08-2025 14:34
Thomas FlammerI have found a Rutstroemia on abt. 2000 m on Alnus
29-08-2025 19:04
Thomas FlammerSpores 21.2 - 26.2 x 8.3 - 11.3 µm - Q: 2.20 - 2.
28-08-2025 17:24
Thomas FlammerI know, that this is not the real topic of this fo
29-08-2025 05:16
Francois Guay
I think I may have found the teleomorph of Dendros
27-08-2025 12:02
Pavol PaloHello dear friendsI would like to ask for sharing
25-08-2025 17:37
François Freléchoux
Bonjour,Nous avons trouvé samedi dernier à l'ét
Hyaloscypha
Miguel Ángel Ribes,
04-02-2009 09:42
Buenos días / Good morningViendo el mensaje de Roland Labbé de ayer titulado "Calycina sp" (Hyaloscypha fuckelii var fuckelii), pienso que tengo una recolección igual o muy parecida. Con las claves que envió Zotto llego a H. fuckelii var fuckelii o H. aureliella, porque no sé interpretar correctamente si tiene o no resina amarillenta en los pelos (aunque en las fotos macro así parece) y si los pelos son romos o no.
Las medidas son estas:
_________________________________________________________
Seeing Roland Labbé's message about "Calycina sp" (Hyaloscypha fuckelii var fuckelii), I think I have an equal or very similar one. With the keys that Zotto sent I come to H. fuckelii var fuckelii or H. aureliella, because I do not know interpret correctly if my recolection has or not yellowish resin in the hairs (at the macro photos it looks like) and if the hair is blunt or not.
The measures are these:
Sporal measurement (1000x, watter, fresh material)
5.3 [6.5 ; 7] 8.1 x 1.5 [1.9 ; 2.1] 2.5; Q = 2.6 [3.3 ; 3.5] 4.2 ; N = 40 ; C = 95%; Me = 6.73 x 1.98 ; Qe = 3.42
Hair measurement (1000x, water and congo red + Phloxina B, fresh material)
25.3 [38.5 ; 43.9] 57.1; N = 35 ; C = 95%; Me = 41.19
Muchas gracias / Thnak you
6570.pdf
Hans-Otto Baral,
04-02-2009 13:16
Re: Hyaloscypha
Hi Miguel
I do not understand your hair data, seems to be hair length. What is the support? You should try to identify the wood (coniferous or not). But without an illustration of the hairs I cannot give any suggestion. You can measure the width of the hair apices. In aureliella they are wider, about 1.5 µm, in fuckelii only 0.7-1 µm.
Here a nice image of aureliella showing the yellow resin (not always so distinct!), made by Hans Bender.
Zotto
I do not understand your hair data, seems to be hair length. What is the support? You should try to identify the wood (coniferous or not). But without an illustration of the hairs I cannot give any suggestion. You can measure the width of the hair apices. In aureliella they are wider, about 1.5 µm, in fuckelii only 0.7-1 µm.
Here a nice image of aureliella showing the yellow resin (not always so distinct!), made by Hans Bender.
Zotto
Miguel Ángel Ribes,
04-02-2009 16:21
Re: Hyaloscypha
Hi Zotto
Sorry, the hair measurement shows the length of them. I am not sure about the wood, because it was a mix forest with "laurel" (laurus novocanariensis), "pino" (pinus radiata) and "brezo" (erica arborea).
These are the hair apices measurement: 0.7 [1 ; 1.1] 1.5; N = 36 ; C = 95%; Me = 1.08, so this suggest H. fuckelii.
Concerning to the hair illustration (and the rest of microscopical characters), can't you see the attached pdf file in my first message?
A great image.
Thanks Zotto.
Sorry, the hair measurement shows the length of them. I am not sure about the wood, because it was a mix forest with "laurel" (laurus novocanariensis), "pino" (pinus radiata) and "brezo" (erica arborea).
These are the hair apices measurement: 0.7 [1 ; 1.1] 1.5; N = 36 ; C = 95%; Me = 1.08, so this suggest H. fuckelii.
Concerning to the hair illustration (and the rest of microscopical characters), can't you see the attached pdf file in my first message?
A great image.
Thanks Zotto.
Hans-Otto Baral,
04-02-2009 17:16
Re: Hyaloscypha
oh, I overlooked the pdf. Yes, this looks very much like fuckelii. Coniferous wood is easy to recognize under the bino by breaking and looking on the pores. There are only very minute pores, no vascular bundles as in angiosperm wood.
Zotto
Zotto
Miguel Ángel Ribes,
04-02-2009 21:13
Re: Hyaloscypha
Hi Zotto
This is a longitudinal break of the Hyaloscypha wood. If I have undertand you, this is a vascular wood, not a coniferous wood.
Thanks
This is a longitudinal break of the Hyaloscypha wood. If I have undertand you, this is a vascular wood, not a coniferous wood.
Thanks
Hans-Otto Baral,
04-02-2009 22:50
Re: Hyaloscypha
huuuu, this is a radial view , yes. Difficult to say. Looks a bit coniferous. Better is a cross break which is more difficult, I know. But usually possible with a razor blade if not too hard, or simply by breaking if medium rotten.
Here you can see the difference
zotto
Here you can see the difference
zotto
Miguel Ángel Ribes,
05-02-2009 00:11
Re: Hyaloscypha
Ok, tomorrow I will try it. It is difficult because when I attempt to break the wood in transversal section is disintegrated.
Thanks,
Thanks,
Miguel Ángel Ribes,
10-02-2009 20:58
Re: Hyaloscypha
Hi Zotto
Sorry for the delay. I think this is a cross break of the wood, but I am not be able to interpreted it.
Thanks
Sorry for the delay. I think this is a cross break of the wood, but I am not be able to interpreted it.
Thanks
Hans-Otto Baral,
10-02-2009 22:57
Re: Hyaloscypha
oh yes, so do I. It is too rough. Good breaks are mainly possible if the wood is medium decayed. This one is perhaps still too hard. With a razor blade it is possible to make a smooth surface, and if you are able to a greater magnification, 2-3x as large, then I should become sure.
Zotto
Zotto
Miguel Ángel Ribes,
11-02-2009 19:41
Re: Hyaloscypha
Hi again
I have made some new transversal cuts with a razor blade, and theese are the results, I think more clear than before. With your scheme I am thinking in a coniferous wood, isn't it?
Note: theese are 10x magnification photos
Thanks
I have made some new transversal cuts with a razor blade, and theese are the results, I think more clear than before. With your scheme I am thinking in a coniferous wood, isn't it?
Note: theese are 10x magnification photos
Thanks
Miguel Ángel Ribes,
11-02-2009 19:46
Re: Hyaloscypha
Another one
Hans-Otto Baral,
11-02-2009 21:14
Re: Hyaloscypha
wow! yes, now it's very clear: coniferous.
so H. fuckelii goes also on conifers.
Zotto
so H. fuckelii goes also on conifers.
Zotto
Miguel Ángel Ribes,
11-02-2009 23:14
Re: Hyaloscypha
Thanks Zotto
You are so kind. It wil be the first citation for Canary Islands (Spain).
You are so kind. It wil be the first citation for Canary Islands (Spain).
Hans-Otto Baral,
12-02-2009 11:05
Re: Hyaloscypha
I am sure that Esperanza Beltran and Luis Quijada will be interested in these data since they make check lists of canary islands. Do you have contact with them?
ebeltran@ull.es
Zotto
ebeltran@ull.es
Zotto
Miguel Ángel Ribes,
12-02-2009 13:51
Re: Hyaloscypha
Yes, of course
I have more than ten new species for Canary Island or Tenerife waited to be published. When I had the first draft paper/scheme I will send it to Esperanza in order to be reviewed. I only need enough time to write it, but I don't find it.
Thanks again.
I have more than ten new species for Canary Island or Tenerife waited to be published. When I had the first draft paper/scheme I will send it to Esperanza in order to be reviewed. I only need enough time to write it, but I don't find it.
Thanks again.