Bonjour Lothar,

Very interesting collection. It looks like a Moellerodiscus

Amitiés

Michel

Hello Michel,

thank you for your first opinion.

I do not clearly now how the boarder between Ciboria and Moellerodiscus (former Ciboriopsis) goes. If there ist one ...

Best regards from Lothar

Hi Lothar & Michel

I agree with Moellerodiscus, and do not remember a similar collection. maybe M. lentus could be compared. Important is to know the croziers. :-)

About the generic limits: we must also ask how heterogen Ciboria is. It seems to be very heterogen when relying on DNA. For instance, C. bulgarioides is closely related to Cenangium acuum, though I do not see much similarities, but not at all to C. amentacea, and I remember that other Ciborias go to further clades....

maybe Moellerodiscus is more homogen than Ciboria.
Zotto

Hello Zotto,

thank you very much for your opinion. First: sorry, in fact I did not look for the croziers. I have kept a small piece fresh and try to look again this evening.

I find the swollen end-cells of the excipulum with bright yellow vacuolor content very striking. Does M. lentus have such? I do not remember that at all.

Best regards from Lothar

At least the VBs are in M. lentus typically pale yellowish-brownish, also in the paraphyses.

I think I studied a very similar species (or identical) in Corsica in Nov. 2014, but on Eucalyptus (fruits and twigs). Ascospores measured 8-9.8 × 3.8-4.5 µm and paraphyses with a large VB of yellow content. The external "hairs" (see photo) had the same content.

Yes. The large, clavate, excipular cells with VBs with yellow content are typical and the asci arise from croziers. This is a extremely common species on Eucalyptus debris at Asturias.

I agree for the species with Nicolas & Enrique (though one has to be cautious when different hosts are involved...)
But it is not a Moellerodiscus. In Moellerodiscus (cf. lentus complex) you will not see this kind of VBs, and never in the most external cells of the excipulum. Maybe only at the margin you will see some similar pigments but then much more weak.
Cheers,
Raúl

I agree fully with Raúl. I think is not a Moellerodiscus. In fact, these clavate excipular cells with conspicuous VBs are identical (but with no yellow content, obviously) with those of Ciboria/Rutstroemia americana. This fungus needs to be sequenzed.

Hi Raul,

you are certainly the expert in this group. I agree that the VBs are paler in my M. lentus on Populus leaves HB 8809 from Ile de Re, it seems that the margin does not show there striking VB-refractivity, though it has chlorinaceous VBs in the paraphyses.

But you really think that the species on Eucalyptus should be placed in another genus than M. lentus? For me they look very very similar. Is DNA the reason for your opinion?

Zotto

Hi Zotto
Yes, I think it would be better placed in a different genus. Apart from the molecular divergence, I see these differences... In Moellerodiscus (cf lentus complex): presence of SCBs in paraphyses, different type of VBs (less refractive), the not so wide spores (but I admit this is quite variable character), and, for me the most important, the nearly always present hemiamyloid reaction of the excipular cells. So far, I only haven´t seen it in the Moellerodiscus cf lentus which grows on Fraxinus leaves and it was doubtful in the one on Ceratonia leaves (the one with croziers).
Raúl

I forgot... Also you won´t see the perfect globose cells of the Moellerodiscus excipulum (I mean at middle upper flanks). In the Eucalyptus species I would say textura angularis. I post one image of it.
Raúl

o.k., but when I hear this I suppose that Orbilia should be split into 100 genera, fir which it would be not too difficult to find such characters (except for amyloidity).

It is difficult to know where you can set the boundaries...

Holst-Jensen, Vralstad & Schumacher in "Kohninia linnaeicola, a new genus and species of the Sclerotiniaceae pathogenic to Linnaea borealis" Mycologia, 96(1), 2004, pp. 135–142:

 "Several new species belonging in the Sclerotiniaceae are yet to be described, but the uncertain delimitation of core genera is a problem. The genera Ciboria Fuckel and Ciborinia Whetzel in particular are polyphyletic (Holst-Jensen et al 1997b, 2002), as probably is the type genus Sclerotinia Fuckel (Holst- Jensen et al 1998). While several new species could be described and accommodated within these genera as currently delimited (Schumacher 2000), only few species would be included if the genera were restricted to monophyletic entities. Because we believe that classification should reflect evolutionary relationships, we now restrict ourselves from describing new taxa with affinity to Ciboria and Ciborinia sensu lato. However, new taxa of the Sclerotiniaceae can and should be described if they are characterized by distinctive features, are clearly distinguishable from other taxa of the family and in particular if phylogenetic evidence support a specific classification. This could be either by linking them to type species of genera or to well-characterized genera, e.g., Myriosclerotinia N.F. Buchw. (Holst-Jensen et al 1998). If new taxa are sufficiently distinctive, another possibility is to erect new genera to host the new taxa, but this should be supported by phylogenetic evidence to avoid creation of paraphyletic taxa."

Raúl

Yes, it is true that sclerotiniaceous phylogenetic trees are very difficult to interpret, at least when they are based on rDNA analyses. Since many years we have the problem to place "our" two sclerotiniaceous species on Veronica seeds in a system, and this is one reason why our almost finished article did not appear, although a preliminary placement for a species is better than remaining unpublished.

But I disagree when molecular workers believe that taxonomic entities must be monophyletic. Evolution may have taken this way, but it is not logical to confine generic or other level concepts to monophyly. When doing so we achieve a lot of entities with rather variable morphology, and no morpho-key will enable to identify a genus anymore.

Apart from this I believe that it is a matter of taste at which branching level we can speak of a genus.

Hello together,

today I had problems with the internet and so I can read only now.

First: I found no croziers when I again looked at the material. Now it ist dried.

Nicolas: exactly these cells I saw when I analysed the fresh, bright yellow discs.

Today, the apothecia were faded to ochraceous brown and - I did not find the swollen cells with the yellow pigment any more. They were collapsed to large extent.

When I found the yellow one two days ago, in the vicinity there were also brown apothecia (on Rubus and Eucalyptus) which likely were M. lentus s.l., too. I did not notice the swollen yellow cells there, too.

I agree more with Zotto: it should be all Moellerodiscus. But - what do I know?

Best regards to everybody from Lothar

P.S. Todayb I collected more fungi - basidiomycetes like Chaetocalathus craterellus and Pleuroflammula ragazziana, but also ascomycetes - at least one of them I will post afterwards.

@Zotto: I also found Orbilia rubella (at least I strongly think so) on an dead twig in 2 m height on a living Nerium oleander. I did not put it on the doerrex but dry it in the air - maybe you are interested in the sample?

Hi Lothar

I strongly hope you made pics of the Orbilia whem still fresh! O. rubella in the mediterranean? Impossible. I could imagine O. albovinosa which is known from Eucalyptus.

"M. eucalypti" has croziers so it would be a surprize if there are none.

Yes, VBs disappear when fruitbodies get older or dry... that's life.

Hi Zotto,

Orbilia is very minute, especially the spores, microscopically - I made few fotos but that is very unsatisfactory with my equipment and skills. I give them anyway ...

 I also made macrofotos but they are not really very good, too (small fungus).

Surely it maybe something else than rubella - but I mean it is at least related.

I think I will send you the fungus when I am home.

Best regards from Lothar

P.S. I add a fotos of the ascusbasis of M. "lentus" from Acacia

Moellerodiscus: woww, simple septate! What now? It can hardly be this aestivalis-issue because there the VBs are hyaline and almost non-refractive.

Orbilia: Indeed, the spores look like rubella or phragmotricha! I measured them as 9-10 x 1.3-1.4 which fits indeed better rubella than phragmotricha. I will look at the hairs when you sent me the sample. Danke dir!!! Falls du die Funddaten parat hast kannst du sie mir schon per Mail schicken.

Hi Zotto,

of course you get the collection data. Openly spoken: by now I have them not complete  myself. I have the GPS-data of the foto and from this I will reconstruct villages and relations to towns. Exact maps with names of the places are not available (for me) in this part of Europe :-)

I am happy that I was not too wrong with O. rubella.

I send you the collection when I am back home again.

Best regards from Lothar

Hi Lothar,

try this for maps: http://geoportal.lneg.pt/geoportal/mapas/index.html?servico=CGP50k

Grüße
Martin

Hi Martin,

thank you very much - I will try this by time :-)

Best regards from Lothar