salut enrique,

i would consider h. monticola as a possibility. its typical in river banks. i've found it often together with vibrissea-species ...

best

dirk

oh - i overlooked the blackening. no idea ... ;-)

Hi Dirk. I don't know Hymenoscyphus/Phaehelotium monticola but the pattern of the spore guttulation seems to be different for this species with two big Lbs, isn't?

Thanks

Hi Enrique,

Moreover, Ph. monticola has paraphyses with less refractive vacuoles into my opinion. This Phaeohelotium is unknown to me.

Bernard

Thanks Bernard

Dear Enrique,
I don't want to be a neg but the apical ring in your plate does not look like a hymenoscyphus type to me, more the calycina type with the protruding top which could lead to complete different directions
Perhaps Z. comes by and has a idea about the species.
best wishes,
Stip

Hi all

just now I saw this posting, because our email account is presently blocked (the whole yesterday and with unclear future). Anybody writing me might use our alternative zottoevi@gmail.com.

My first idea was the group around Phaeohelotium fulvidulum. But the typical species is without croziers, so excluded. I have three deviating taxa as separate folders, and particularly my griseobrunneus would be an option because of the colour. But the spores are too long there, no overlap.

Stip's objection about the apical ring is right, but in P. fulvidulum such a ring may also occur, see for instance my drawing Hymenoscyphus fulvidulus, HB 5572b.JPG. So I think a Phaeohelotium would be the correct genus.

Zotto

Many thanks to Bernard, Stip and Zotto