20-03-2026 16:16
Edvin Johannesen
These 0.5 mm diam. acervuli were breaking through
19-03-2026 19:34
Filip Fuljer
Hello everyone,a few days ago I collected this str
19-03-2026 18:25
William Slosse
Good evening everyone, On 18/03/26 I found a few
17-03-2026 10:09
François Freléchoux
Bonjour, Voici la description rapide d'un petit d
19-03-2026 17:50
Enrique Rubio
Hi to everybodyThese thiny, blackish pseudothecia
18-03-2026 13:09
Khomenko Igor
I recently examined Celtis occidentalis branches
17-03-2026 19:41
Bernard CLESSE
Bonsoir à toutes et tous,Pourriez-vous m'aider à
18-03-2026 17:22
Katarina PastircakovaHi there,I'm looking for the following literature:
Dear Forum,
On rotten wood of Salix sp. in a moist place I found a helicosporous hyphomycete with branched well-developed conidiophores, brown and septate.The hyaline hollow conidia were coiled in two dimensions and measured 15-18µm.
Using the work of Zhao(2007), the keys brought me to the genus Helicosporium.
Could someone confirm this and eventually give me the right taxon?
Marc
Saludos cordiales
Helicosporium-1989-v81-p356a-0001.pdf
Dear Josep and Chris,
Thank you for your comments and the magnificent article of Goos.
I combined the keys and descriptions of Goos and Zhao. The branched and anastomosing conidiophores, the large denticles (3.5-4.1µ), the large conidial filaments (2.5-2.9µ) and the larger conidia (18-23µ) brought me to Helicosporium lumbricopsis.
Could you agree?
Marc
Sigo pensando en el Helicosporium griseum = Helicosporium lumbricoides
Saludos cordiales.
Josep
Using Goos and Zhao we have to choose between H griseum and H lumbricopsis.H griseum is a commonly found species, reported worldwide. In general it has smaller conidia and smaller filaments compared to H lumbricopsis, which is known as a tropical and subtropical species.
Following Linder(1929) and Moore(1955) the differences between the two species were more environmental than morfological.
H griseum with larger than normal dimensions does not seem unlikely.
Marc
Bonjour Marc,
J'ai déjà été confronté à ce type de récolte. Les études citées sont de bonnes études, sérieuses, mais ne peuvent être suffisantes. En particulier je pense que la connaissance de ces champignons en Europe est insuffisante, et que par conséquent il peut être hasardeux de se baser sur une comparaison seulement morphologique avec les espèces citées par ces études originaires d'Asie pour donner absolument un nom. Avec des données moléculaires, ce serait déjà moins aléatoire.
Alain