DOCSLIB.ORG

Recording Dorset No.10 November 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Recording Dorset No.10 November 2011 Recording Dorset No.10 November 2011 An online magazine concerned with the distribution, identification and recording of wildlife in Dorset Published by DERC Contents Dorset Hemiptera-Heteroptera (True Bugs) 3 The Status of Water Voles in Dorset 15 The DFG Visits the DFG 17 Dorset Plant Galls 20 A further site for Medicinal Leech Hirudo medicinalis in Dorset 22 Recording Dorset’s Birds 24 Splachnum ampullaceum Cruet Collar-moss re-established as a Dorset species 25 Sending in your records 26 © Dorset Environmental Records Centre November 2011 Illustrations by Bryan Pickess, John Newbould Front cover: Puccinia urticaria © Bryan Edwards Page 2 Dorset Hemiptera-Heteroptera (True Bugs) Part 2: LYGAEIDAE (GROUND BUGS) The Order Hemiptera includes those insects that have a mouthpiece forming a long thin tube known as a rostrum that is used to pierce and suck sustenance from its food source. The order is divided into two suborders Heteroptera and Homoptera and together contains well over 1800 species. Over 600 of these belong to the suborder Heteroptera, the main difference being that Homoptera hold their wings tent like over their body whereas Heteroptera hold them flat on the body. It is with the later group that this and future article will be concerned. County lists covering the whole of the country have been produced on three occasions; the first was by Butler (1926) followed by Bedwell (1945) and Masse (1955). Although there is a national recording scheme for Heteroptera as yet no distribution maps have been produced therefore information regarding coverage mostly comes from Southwood & Leston (1959). The 2nd part of Dorset Hemiptera-Heteroptera deals with the family Lygaeidae or to use their common name ground bug. These are as their name suggest found mainly at ground level. The family consists of 86 species, 12 of which have been added since the publication of Southwood and Leston (1959). Dorset with its large expanses of heathland and its south facing coastal cliffs is well placed to have a large proportion of the British species. This is borne out by the fact that 78% (67 species) have been recorded from the county. For the most part, the only means of identification is still S&L, however access is required to many journals for comprehensive coverage of the family. Because of their secretive nature and small size ground bugs are not as easily found and recorded as the shield bugs and their allies covered in Recording Dorset 9. However, in recent years the introduction of a commercial suction device that can be easily converted to a suction trap has lead to many species regarded as rare being found to be widespread. As already stated many of the species are associated with dry soils on heathland, chalk downland and coastal situations, however there are exceptions, for instance the genus Grossipes is associated with coniferous cones, whilst Heterogaster urticia will be found amongst the leaves of stinging nettle and Kleidocerys resedae is readily beaten from trees. Of the 865 Dorset records held by DERC for ground bugs over 300 are for the 5 most common species whilst Heterogaster urticae is one of the top ten most abundant bugs in the county. Although over twenty entomologist are referred to in the text, as with the first report the main contributors of records are Dale, Haines, Day, Morris and Hunnisett. The records cover V.C. 9 and that part of V.C.11 now included in Dorset. A distribution map is shown for species with more than ten records and individual records are given for less than that number. The number in square brackets following the species name gives some indication of the number of records held for that species as follows: 10+ = 10 – 20; 20+ = 20 – 50; 50+ = 50 – 100; 100+ more than 100. The order in which the species are listed follows Kloet & Hincks (1964) but up-to-date nomenclature has been used. List of contributors: AAA AA Allen JCD JC Dale AJW AJ Wise JH J Hunnisett AMM AM Massee JSD JS Denton BN B Nau KD K Dolbear CDD CD Day MAS MA Salmon CHA CH Andrews MGM MG Morris CWD CW Dale PK P Kirby DH D Hallett RC R Crossely FHH FH Haines SCSB SCS Brown GEW GE Woodroffe SJ S Judd GGES GGE Scudder TAM TA Marshall ICC IC Cross WGB WG Blatch The information is set out as follows: SU00 v- 1972 SCSB 10 km grid square Month (May) Year Recorder Key to map symbols: ● <1970 ● >1970 (The maps were produced using the DMAP for Windows Software) Page 3 Heterogaster urticae Fabricius, 1775 Chilacis typhae Perris, 1857 Status: Common [50+] Status: Common [4] This bug, as its name suggests, is closely associated with the The common name for this insect is the Reedmace bug, a genus Urtica Stinging Nettles. The general appearance is of a fitting name as it spends all stages of its life either on the flower parallel-sided bug with long pubescence and banded legs. The head or hibernating in the litter at the base of Great Reedmace adults overwinter beneath bark or in the hollow stems of woody Typha latifolia. Mating takes place in late May and the brown- plants. Mating takes place in June and July on the host plant. red larvae become adult from mid-July onwards. The only other Nationally it can be found mainly in the south but with scattered bug that could be found on this plant is Cymus glandicolor but records as far north as Yorkshire. It is widely distributed in this does not have a well-defined yellow V mark on the scutellum Dorset and can be found by sweeping nettles between June like Chilacis typhae. Massee (1955) shows it as being found and September. throughout England but becoming rarer in the north. Despite the host plant being fairly common in Dorset the records for the The earliest Dorset record is from Portland SY67 vi-1875 bug are sparse. The indications are that it is certainly under- JCD, the most recent being Brownsea Island SZ08 2007 recorded. MAS. It seems strange that this common bug was not mentioned in Dale’s book on the parish of Glanvilles The earliest Dorset record is from Studland SZ08 x-1934 Wootton (Dale, 1878). SCSB; Iwerne Minster ST81 vii-1949 CDD; Littlesea SZ08 1964 MGM; Ryewater Nursery ST61 viii-2007 KD. 3 Henestaris laticeps Curtis, 1836 2 Status: Local [10+] This ground bug is immediately recognised in the field by its 1 protruding eyes. It is associated with Buck’s-horn Plantain Plantago coronopus and over-winters as an adult. Its can be found in areas of sparse vegetation where its colour merges so 0 well with the ground that it will not be spotted unless it moves. Nationally it is confined to the coastal strips of the English and 9 Welsh southern counties. Likewise in Dorset it can only be found in suitable strips along the coast despite the fact that its 8 host plant is fairly common throughout the Poole Basin. The first Dorset record was by Dale who found it at 7 Lulworth Cove SY87 viii-1879, whilst the last was from Worbarrow Bay SY87 viii-2005 JH. 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 Nysius Heterogaster artemisiae Shilling, 1829. The British mainland list of the genus Nysius contains 5 species Status: Notable B [9] that can be divided into two groups, recent arrivals and those A bug very similar to the above but without the long pubescence that have been recorded in the British Isles for at least 50 years. and with different coloured legs. It is mainly associated with In general they all have very similar requirements regarding thyme and consequently is found amongst coastal sandhills habitat and life style. They prefer warm sunny areas with scant and chalk scree. Overwintering adults mate in early June with vegetation where their colouring makes them difficult to see new adults occurring in late August to September. The bug against the background. They over-winter as adults with the can be found along the south coast with scattered records from following year’s offspring becoming fully grown in August to southern inland counties. In Dorset it is restricted to the coast. September. Except for one, their host plant cannot be named Although there are three specimens in the Dale Collection none with any confidence. are labelled so they cannot be assumed to be from Dorset. The first mention of the species in Dorset is in Butler (1923) but no Nysius thymi Wolff, 1804 recorder is given. Status: Common [9] Ballard Cliff SZ08 1955 GGES; Portland Bill SY66 1955 As the name suggests this bug is strongly associated with GGES; Swanage SZ07 1956 GEW; Durdle Door SY88 thyme and has a widespread distribution in Britain. Until 1959 1985 SJ; Ballard Cliff SZ08 1987 SJ; Lulworth Cove SY87 this and the next species were considered as forms of the same vi-92 BN; Winspit SY97 vi-95 JSD; Portland SY66 vi-95 species but Woodroffe (1959) found consistent differences in JSD; St Oswald’s Bay SY88 ix-1998 (PK). both size and genitalia. Burton Bradstock SY48 ix-1980 MGM; Sandford SY98 vi-1982 MGM; Holton Heath SY99 viii-1982 MGM; Eype Mouth SY49 ix-1984 MGM; Winfrith Heath SY88 vii- 2000 JH; East Stoke Fen SY88 ix-2000 JH; Poole Bay Cliffs SZ08 vi-2001 JH; Mudeford Spit SZ19 vii-2001 JH; Bovington Heath SY88 viii-2007 JH. Page 4 Nysius ericae Schilling, 1829 Ortholomus punctipennis Herrich-Schaffer, 1839 Status: Common [6] Status: RDB3 [2] Although the name suggests an association with heather it is All British captures of this species have been from sandy places, thought that its host plants are more varied.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Primer Registro Para El Neotrópico De La Familia Artheneidae Stål, 1872
    www.biotaxa.org/rce. ISSN 0718-8994 (online) Revista Chilena de Entomología (2021) 47 (2): 311-318. Nota Científica Primer registro para el Neotrópico de la familia Artheneidae Stål, 1872 (Heteroptera: Lygaeoidea), con la especie Holcocranum saturejae (Kolenati, 1845) introducida en Argentina First record for the Neotropics of the family Artheneidae Stål, 1872 (Heteroptera: Lygaeoidea), with the species Holcocranum saturejae (Kolenati, 1845) introduced in Argentina Diego L. Carpintero1, Alberto A. de Magistris2 y Eduardo I. Faúndez3* 1División Entomología, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”. Av. Ángel Gallardo 470 (C1405DJR), Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina. E-mail: [email protected]. 2Cátedras de Botánica Sistemática, y Ecología y Fitogeografía, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Lomas de Zamora, Ruta Provincial 4, Km 2 (1832), Llavallol, Partido de Lomas de Zamora, Buenos Aires, Argentina. E-mail: [email protected]. 3Laboratorio de entomología y salud pública, Instituto de la Patagonia, Universidad de Magallanes, Av. Bulnes 01855, Casilla 113-D, Punta Arenas, Chile. *[email protected] ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:2C786219-0AE9-40A2-A175-E3C8750290A https://doi.org/10.35249/rche.47.2.21.17 Resumen. Se cita por primera vez para la Argentina a la especie Holcocranum saturejae (Kolenati) (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Artheneidae), que se alimenta principalmente de totoras (Typha spp., Typhaceae) y, en menor medida de otras plantas, en base a una muestra proveniente de la Reserva Natural Provincial Santa Catalina en Lomas de Zamora, provincia de Buenos Aires. Se muestran imágenes de ejemplares recolectados y se dan sus caracteres diagnósticos. Se comenta brevemente la importancia de la aparición de esta especie en la Región Neotropical.
    [Show full text]
  • Mycoparasitism Between Squamanita Paradoxa and Cystoderma Amianthinum (Cystodermateae, Agaricales)
    Mycoscience (2010) 51:456–461 DOI 10.1007/s10267-010-0052-9 SHORT COMMUNICATION Mycoparasitism between Squamanita paradoxa and Cystoderma amianthinum (Cystodermateae, Agaricales) P. Brandon Matheny • Gareth W. Griffith Received: 1 January 2010 / Accepted: 23 March 2010 / Published online: 13 April 2010 Ó The Mycological Society of Japan and Springer 2010 Abstract Circumstantial evidence, mostly morphological from basidiocarps or parasitized galls or tissue of other and ecological, points to ten different mushroom host agarics. On occasion, chimeric fruitbodies appear obvious, species for up to fifteen species of the mycoparasitic genus as in S. paradoxa (A.H. Sm. & Singer) Bas (Fig. 1), but for Squamanita. Here, molecular evidence confirms Cysto- other species, the hosts are unknown (Table 1). It appears derma amianthinum as the host for S. paradoxa, a spo- that in all cases, galls induced by Squamanita mycelium radically occurring and rarely collected mycoparasite with contain chlamydospores, and the term protocarpic tuber has extreme host specificity. This is only the second study to been replaced by the term cecidiocarp (Bas and Thoen use molecular techniques to reveal or confirm the identity 1998). Hosts of Squamanita include distantly related of a cecidiocarp of Squamanita species. Phylogenetic species of Agaricales, such as Galerina Earle, Inocybe (Fr.) analysis of combined nuclear ribosomal RNA genes sug- Fr., Hebeloma (Fr.) P. Kumm., Kuehneromyces Singer & gests the monophyly of Squamanita, Cystoderma, and A.H. Sm., and Amanita Pers. However, Squamanita also Phaeolepiota, a clade referred to as the tribe Cystoder- parasitizes species of Phaeolepiota Maire ex Konrad & mateae. If true, S. paradoxa and C. amianthinum would Maubl.
    [Show full text]
  • Gasteromycetes) of Alberta and Northwest Montana
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1975 A preliminary study of the flora and taxonomy of the order Lycoperdales (Gasteromycetes) of Alberta and northwest Montana William Blain Askew The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Askew, William Blain, "A preliminary study of the flora and taxonomy of the order Lycoperdales (Gasteromycetes) of Alberta and northwest Montana" (1975). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 6854. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/6854 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A PRELIMINARY STUDY OF THE FLORA AND TAXONOMY OF THE ORDER LYCOPERDALES (GASTEROMYCETES) OF ALBERTA AND NORTHWEST MONTANA By W. Blain Askew B,Ed., B.Sc,, University of Calgary, 1967, 1969* Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 1975 Approved 'by: Chairman, Board of Examiners ■ /Y, / £ 2 £ Date / UMI Number: EP37655 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Phylogenetic Studies in the Genus Amanita
    1170 Molecular phylogenetic studies in the genus Amanita I5ichael Weiß, Zhu-Liang Yang, and Franz Oberwinkler Abstracl A group of 49 Amanita species that had been thoroughly examined morphologically and amtomically was analyzed by DNA sequence compadson to estimate natural groups and phylogenetic rclationships within the genus. Nuclear DNA sequences coding for a part of the ribosomal large subunit were determined and evaluated using neighbor-joining with bootstrap analysis, parsimony analysis, conditional clustering, and maximum likelihood methods, Sections Amanita, Caesarea, Vaginatae, Validae, Phalloideae, and Amidella were substantially confirmed as monophyletic groups, while the monophyly of section Lepidell.t remained unclear. Branching topologies between and within sections could also pafiially be derived. Stbgenera Amanita an'd Lepidella were not supported. The Mappae group was included in section Validae. Grouping hypotheses obtained by DNA analyses are discussed in relation to the distribution of morphological and anatomical chamcters in the studied species. Key words: fungi, basidiomycetes phylogeny, Agarrcales, Amanita systematics, large subunit rDNA, 28S. R6sum6 : A partir d'un groupe de 49 esp,ces d'Amanita prdalablement examinees morphologiquement et anatomiquement, les auteurs ont utilisd la comparaison des s€quences d'ADN pour ddfinir les groupes naturels et les relations phylog6ndtiques de ce genre. Les sdquences de I'ADN nucl6aire codant pour une partie de la grande sous-unit6 ribosomale ont 6t6 ddterminEes et €valu6es en utilisant l'analyse par liaison en lacet avec le voisin (neighbor-joining with bootstrap), l'analyse en parcimonie, le rcgroupement conditionnel et les m€thodes de ressemblance maximale. Les rdsultats confirment substantiellement les sections Afiarira, Caesarea, Uaqinatae, Ualidae, Phalloideae et Amidella, comme groupes monophyldtiques, alors que la monophylie de la section Lepidella demerxe obscure.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of Argentine Agaricales 4
    Checklist of the Argentine Agaricales 4. Tricholomataceae and Polyporaceae 1 2* N. NIVEIRO & E. ALBERTÓ 1Instituto de Botánica del Nordeste (UNNE-CONICET). Sargento Cabral 2131, CC 209 Corrientes Capital, CP 3400, Argentina 2Instituto de Investigaciones Biotecnológicas (UNSAM-CONICET) Intendente Marino Km 8.200, Chascomús, Buenos Aires, CP 7130, Argentina CORRESPONDENCE TO *: [email protected] ABSTRACT— A species checklist of 86 genera and 709 species belonging to the families Tricholomataceae and Polyporaceae occurring in Argentina, and including all the species previously published up to year 2011 is presented. KEY WORDS—Agaricomycetes, Marasmius, Mycena, Collybia, Clitocybe Introduction The aim of the Checklist of the Argentinean Agaricales is to establish a baseline of knowledge on the diversity of mushrooms species described in the literature from Argentina up to 2011. The families Amanitaceae, Pluteaceae, Hygrophoraceae, Coprinaceae, Strophariaceae, Bolbitaceae and Crepidotaceae were previoulsy compiled (Niveiro & Albertó 2012a-c). In this contribution, the families Tricholomataceae and Polyporaceae are presented. Materials & Methods Nomenclature and classification systems This checklist compiled data from the available literature on Tricholomataceae and Polyporaceae recorded for Argentina up to the year 2011. Nomenclature and classification systems followed Singer (1986) for families. The genera Pleurotus, Panus, Lentinus, and Schyzophyllum are included in the family Polyporaceae. The Tribe Polyporae (including the genera Polyporus, Pseudofavolus, and Mycobonia) is excluded. There were important rearrangements in the families Tricholomataceae and Polyporaceae according to Singer (1986) over time to present. Tricholomataceae was distributed in six families: Tricholomataceae, Marasmiaceae, Physalacriaceae, Lyophyllaceae, Mycenaceae, and Hydnaginaceae. Some genera belonging to this family were transferred to other orders, i.e. Rickenella (Rickenellaceae, Hymenochaetales), and Lentinellus (Auriscalpiaceae, Russulales).
    [Show full text]
  • Cystoderma Amianthinum Cystoderma
    © Demetrio Merino Alcántara [email protected] Condiciones de uso Cystoderma amianthinum (Scop.) Fayod, Annls Sci. Nat., Bot., sér. 7 9: 351 (1889) Agaricaceae, Agaricales, Agaricomycetidae, Agaricomycetes, Agaricomycotina, Basidiomycota, Fungi ≡ Agaricus amianthinus Scop., Fl. carniol., Edn 2 (Wien) 2: 434 (1772) ≡ Agaricus amianthinus Scop., Fl. carniol., Edn 2 (Wien) 2: 434 (1772) var. amianthinus ≡ Agaricus amianthinus var. broadwoodiae Berk. & Broome, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist., Ser. 5 3: 202 (1879) ≡ Agaricus granulosus var. amianthinus (Scop.) Fr., Epicr. syst. mycol. (Upsaliae): 18 (1838) [1836-1838] = Agaricus rugosoreticulatum F. Lorinser, Öst. bot. Z. 29: 23 (1879) ≡ Armillaria amianthina (Scop.) Kauffman, Pap. Mich. Acad. Sci. 2: 60 (1923) [1922] = Armillaria rugosoreticulata (F. Lorinser) Zeller [as 'rugoso-reticulata'], Mycologia 25(5): 378 (1933) ≡ Cystoderma amianthinum (Scop.) Konrad & Maubl., Icon. Select. Fung. 6(3): pl. 238 (1927) ≡ Cystoderma amianthinum f. album (Maire) A.H. Sm. & Singer, Pap. Mich. Acad. Sci. 30: 112 (1945) [1944] ≡ Cystoderma amianthinum (Scop.) Fayod, Annls Sci. Nat., Bot., sér. 7 9: 351 (1889) f. amianthinum ≡ Cystoderma amianthinum f. olivaceum Singer, Pap. Mich. Acad. Sci. 30: 111 (1945) [1944] ≡ Cystoderma amianthinum f. rugosoreticulatum (F. Lorinser) A.H. Sm. & Singer, Pap. Mich. Acad. Sci. 30: 110 (1945) [1944] ≡ Cystoderma amianthinum f. rugosoreticulatum (F. Lorinser) Bon [as 'rugulosoreticulatum'], Bull. trimest. Soc. mycol. Fr. 86(1): 99 (1970) ≡ Cystoderma amianthinum (Scop.) Fayod, Annls Sci. Nat., Bot., sér. 7 9: 351 (1889) var. amianthinum ≡ Cystoderma amianthinum var. rugosoreticulatum (F. Lorinser) Bon, Docums Mycol. 29(no. 115): 34 (1999) = Cystoderma longisporum f. rugosoreticulatum (F. Lorinser) Heinem. & Thoen [as 'rugoso-reticulatum'], Bull. trimest. Soc. mycol. Fr. 89(1): 31 (1973) = Cystoderma rugosoreticulatum (F.
    [Show full text]
  • Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States
    Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States September 1993 OTA-F-565 NTIS order #PB94-107679 GPO stock #052-003-01347-9 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States, OTA-F-565 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1993). For Sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office ii Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop, SSOP. Washington, DC 20402-9328 ISBN O-1 6-042075-X Foreword on-indigenous species (NIS)-----those species found beyond their natural ranges—are part and parcel of the U.S. landscape. Many are highly beneficial. Almost all U.S. crops and domesticated animals, many sport fish and aquiculture species, numerous horticultural plants, and most biologicalN control organisms have origins outside the country. A large number of NIS, however, cause significant economic, environmental, and health damage. These harmful species are the focus of this study. The total number of harmful NIS and their cumulative impacts are creating a growing burden for the country. We cannot completely stop the tide of new harmful introductions. Perfect screening, detection, and control are technically impossible and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, the Federal and State policies designed to protect us from the worst species are not safeguarding our national interests in important areas. These conclusions have a number of policy implications. First, the Nation has no real national policy on harmful introductions; the current system is piecemeal, lacking adequate rigor and comprehensiveness. Second, many Federal and State statutes, regulations, and programs are not keeping pace with new and spreading non-indigenous pests.
    [Show full text]
  • LUNDY FUNGI: FURTHER SURVEYS 2004-2008 by JOHN N
    Journal of the Lundy Field Society, 2, 2010 LUNDY FUNGI: FURTHER SURVEYS 2004-2008 by JOHN N. HEDGER1, J. DAVID GEORGE2, GARETH W. GRIFFITH3, DILUKA PEIRIS1 1School of Life Sciences, University of Westminster, 115 New Cavendish Street, London, W1M 8JS 2Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD 3Institute of Biological Environmental and Rural Sciences, University of Aberystwyth, SY23 3DD Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT The results of four five-day field surveys of fungi carried out yearly on Lundy from 2004-08 are reported and the results compared with the previous survey by ourselves in 2003 and to records made prior to 2003 by members of the LFS. 240 taxa were identified of which 159 appear to be new records for the island. Seasonal distribution, habitat and resource preferences are discussed. Keywords: Fungi, ecology, biodiversity, conservation, grassland INTRODUCTION Hedger & George (2004) published a list of 108 taxa of fungi found on Lundy during a five-day survey carried out in October 2003. They also included in this paper the records of 95 species of fungi made from 1970 onwards, mostly abstracted from the Annual Reports of the Lundy Field Society, and found that their own survey had added 70 additional records, giving a total of 156 taxa. They concluded that further surveys would undoubtedly add to the database, especially since the autumn of 2003 had been exceptionally dry, and as a consequence the fruiting of the larger fleshy fungi on Lundy, especially the grassland species, had been very poor, resulting in under-recording. Further five-day surveys were therefore carried out each year from 2004-08, three in the autumn, 8-12 November 2004, 4-9 November 2007, 3-11 November 2008, one in winter, 23-27 January 2006 and one in spring, 9-16 April 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Bovista Plumbea
    © Demetrio Merino Alcántara [email protected] Condiciones de uso Bovista plumbea Pers., Ann. Bot. (Usteri) 15: 4 (1795) Agaricaceae, Agaricales, Agaricomycetidae, Agaricomycetes, Agaricomycotina, Basidiomycota, Fungi = Bovista brevicauda Velen., České Houby 4-5: 832 (1922) = Bovista ovalispora Cooke & Massee, Grevillea 16(no. 78): 46 (1887) ≡ Bovista plumbea f. brevicauda (Velen.) F. Šmarda, Fl. ČSR, B-1, Gasteromycetes 12: 239 (1958) ≡ Bovista plumbea Pers., Ann. Bot. (Usteri) 15: 4 (1795) f. plumbea ≡ Bovista plumbea var. brevicauda (Velen.) F. Šmarda, Fl. ČSR, B-1, Gasteromycetes: 367 (1951) ≡ Bovista plumbea var. flavescens Hruby, Hedwigia 70: 350 (1930) ≡ Bovista plumbea var. ovalispora (Cooke & Massee) F. Šmarda, (1958) ≡ Bovista plumbea Pers., Ann. Bot. (Usteri) 15: 4 (1795) var. plumbea = Bovista suberosa Fr., Syst. mycol. (Lundae) 3(1): 26 (1829) = Endonevrum suberosum (Fr.) Czern., Bull. Soc. Imp. nat. Moscou 18(2, III): 151 (1845) ≡ Globaria plumbea (Pers.) Quél., Mém. Soc. Émul. Montbéliard, Sér. 2 5: 371 (1873) ≡ Globaria plumbea (Pers.) Quél., Mém. Soc. Émul. Montbéliard, Sér. 2 5: 371 (1873) var. plumbea ≡ Globaria plumbea var. suberosa (Fr.) Quél., Mém. Soc. Émul. Montbéliard, Sér. 2 5: 371 (1873) = Lycoperdon bovista Sowerby, Col. fig. Engl. Fung. Mushr. (London) 3: tab. 331 (1803) ≡ Lycoperdon plumbeum Vittad., Monogr. Lycoperd.: 174 (1843) = Lycoperdon suberosum (Fr.) Bonord., Bot. Ztg. 15: 595 (1857) Material estudiado: España, Jaén, Andújar, Lugar Nuevo, 30SVH0922, 246 m, en suelo en ribera de río, 24-III-2016, leg. Concha Morente, Dianora Estrada, Salvador Tello, Tomás Illescas y Demetrio Merino, JA-CUSSTA: 8817. España, Pontevedra, Vilaboa, Lago Castiñeiras, 29TNG2690, 405 m, en prado bajo cedros y castaños, 24-V-2016, Dianora Estrada y Demetrio Merino, JA-CUSSTA: 8818.
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Checklist of Volvariella in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands
    Post date: June 2010 Summary published in MYCOTAXON 112: 271–273 An annotated checklist of Volvariella in the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands ALFREDO JUSTO1* & MARÍA LUISA CASTRO2 *[email protected] or [email protected] 1 Biology Department, Clark University. 950 Main St. Worcester, MA 01610 USA 2 Facultade de Bioloxía, Universidade de Vigo. Campus As Lagoas-Marcosende Vigo, 36310 Spain Abstract — Species of Volvariella reported from the Iberian Peninsula (Spain, Portugal) and Balearic Islands (Spain) are listed, with data on their distribution, ecology and phenology. For each taxon a list of all collections examined and a map of its distribution is given. According to our revision 12 taxa of Volvariella occur in the area. Key words — Agaricales, Agaricomycetes, Basidiomycota, biodiverstity, Pluteaceae Introduction Volvariella Speg. is a genus traditionally classified in the family Pluteaceae Kotl. & Pouzar (Agaricales, Basidiomycota), but recent molecular research has challenged its monophyly and taxonomic position within the Agaricales (Moncalvo et al. 2002, Matheny et al. 2006). Its main characteristics are the pluteoid basidiomes (i.e. free lamellae; context of pileus and stipe discontinuous), universal veil present in mature specimens as a saccate volva at stipe base, brownish-pink spores in mass and mainly the inverse lamellar trama. It comprises about 50 species (Kirk et al. 2008) and is widely distributed around the world (Singer 1986). Monographic studies of the genus have been mostly carried out in Europe (Kühner & Romagnesi 1956, Orton 1974, 1986; Boekhout 1990) North America (Shaffer 1957) and Africa (Heinemann 1975, Pegler 1977). In the Iberian Peninsula (Spain, Portugal) and Balearic Islands (Spain) the records of Volvariella are scattered, as they are often included in general checklists and prior to our study the only taxonomic paper on this genus, in this area, was an article by Vila et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Fungi in Ireland
    FOREST FUNGI IN IRELAND PAUL DOWDING and LOUIS SMITH COFORD, National Council for Forest Research and Development Arena House Arena Road Sandyford Dublin 18 Ireland Tel: + 353 1 2130725 Fax: + 353 1 2130611 © COFORD 2008 First published in 2008 by COFORD, National Council for Forest Research and Development, Dublin, Ireland. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, or stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying recording or otherwise, without prior permission in writing from COFORD. All photographs and illustrations are the copyright of the authors unless otherwise indicated. ISBN 1 902696 62 X Title: Forest fungi in Ireland. Authors: Paul Dowding and Louis Smith Citation: Dowding, P. and Smith, L. 2008. Forest fungi in Ireland. COFORD, Dublin. The views and opinions expressed in this publication belong to the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect those of COFORD. i CONTENTS Foreword..................................................................................................................v Réamhfhocal...........................................................................................................vi Preface ....................................................................................................................vii Réamhrá................................................................................................................viii Acknowledgements...............................................................................................ix
    [Show full text]
  • The Genus Crepidotus (Fr.) Staude in Europe
    PERSOON I A Published by Rijksherbarium / Honus 8 01anicus. Leiden Volume 16. Part I. pp. 1-80 ( 1995) THE GENUS CREPIDOTUS (FR.) STAUDE IN EUROPE BEATRICE SENN-IRLET Systematisch-Gcobotanischcs lnsti1u1 dcr Univcrsit!lt Bern. C H-3013 Dern. Switzerland The gcnu~ Crepidotus in Europe is considered. After an examination of 550 collce1ions seven1ccn species and eigh1 varie1ies ore recognized. Two keys ore supplied; all taxa accept­ ed ore typified. Morphological. ecological and chorological chamc1ers arc cri1ically cvalua1cd. De crip· tivc stotis1ies arc used for basidiospore size. An infrageneric classifica1ion is proposed based on phcnctic rela1ionships using differcn1 cluster methods. The new combinations C. calo­ lepi.r var. sq11amulos1,s and C. cesatii var. subsplwerosporus arc inlroduced. The spore oma­ memouon as seen in the scanning electron microscope provides 1hc best character for species dclimilntion and classification. INTRODUCTION Fries ( 1821 : 272) established Agaricus eries De rm illus tribus Crepido111s for more or less pleurotoid species with ferruginous or pale argillaceous spores and an ephemeral. fibrillose veil (!). His fourteen species include such taxa as Paxillus arrorome111osus, Le11ti11el/11s v11/pi11us. Panel/us violaceo-fulvus and £1110/oma deplue11s which nowadays are placed in quite different genera and families. Only three of Fries' species belong to the genu Crepidotus as conceived now. T his demonstrates the importance of microscopic characters, neglected by Fries, for the circumscription of species and genera. Staude ( 1857) raised the tribus Crepidorus to generic rank with C. mollis as the sole species. Hesler & Smith ( 1965) dealt with the history of th e genus Crepido111s in more detail. In recent years several regional floras have been published, e.g.
    [Show full text]