Lichenomphalia Meridionalis Comb. Nov., a Common and Frequently Misidentified Species in South-Western Europe
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Lichenologist 41(2): 203–207 (2009) © 2009 British Lichen Society doi:10.1017/S0024282909008147 Printed in the United Kingdom Short Communications Lichenomphalia meridionalis comb. nov., a common and frequently misidentified species in south-western Europe Based on molecular and morphological data characteristics: mainly fresh basidiomata (Lutzoni & Vilgalys 1995; Lutzoni 1997; colours (pileus and lamellae), pigment type Moncalvo et al. 2000), it has been shown that of pileipellis and spore shape. We therefore lichenized species of the genus Omphalina consider L. meridionalis and L. velutina as two Quél. (Tricholomataceae R. Heim ex Pouzar different species, with a similar bulbilliferous now. cons.) constitute a monophyletic group vegetative thallus, and consequently the new that should be included in a separate genus combination L. meridionalis is formally pro- Lichenomphalia Redhead, Lutzoni, Moncalvo posed here. & Vilgalys (Redhead et al. 2002). The genus Twenty-one fertile specimens of L. meridionalis (includ- was proposed for eight species with vegeta- ing type material) and eleven of L. velutina from AH, BCC, tive lichenized thalli ranging from a bulbil- GDA, IB, LISU and MAF herbaria, have been studied for liferous (Botrydina type) to a squamulose comparison. The colours of the basidiomata are according (Coriscium type) thallus, with Coccomyxa to terminology of Munsell (1994). For comparison of spore shape between taxa, we followed the terminology algae (Redhead & Kuyper 1987). Barrasa & and corresponding length:breadth ratio (l:b) and mean Rico (2001) studied in detail four lichenized value (l:b mean) as defined by Bas (1969: 321–322). Omphalina species from the Iberian Penin- sula: Lichenomphalia umbellifera (L.: Fr.) Redhead, Lutzoni, Moncalvo & Vilgalys [as Lichenomphalia meridionalis (Contu & Omphalina ericetorum (Fr.) M. Lange ex La Rocca) Barrasa, Esteve-Rav. & V. J. H. E. Bigelow], L. hudsoniana (H. S. Jenn.) Rico comb. nov. Redhead, Lutzoni, Moncalvo & Vilgalys [as O. hudsoniana (H. S. Jenn.) H. E. Bigelow], Omphalina meridionalis Contu & La Rocca, Fungi non Delineati 9: 32–33 (1999) (basionym).—Lichenomphalia L. velutina (Quél.) Redhead, Lutzoni, meridionalis (Contu & La Rocca) Barrasa & Esteve-Rav. Moncalvo & Vilgalys [as O. velutina (Quél.) in Esteve-Raventós, Llistosella & Ortega comb. inval., Quél.] and L. meridionalis (as O. meridion- Setas de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares: 539 (2007) alis), the last being the new combination [Art. 33.2, reference omitted]; type: Italy, Sardinia, proposed here. Omphalina meridionalis was Prov. Sassari, M. Limbara, loc. Monte Moroni, zona parafuoco, 10 i 1999, M. Contu (IB 1999/0879— originally found in Italy (Contu & La Rocca holotype!). 1999) and the original description has been Omphalina hiemalis Barrasa & Esteve-Rav., Book of revised by Barrasa & Esteve-Raventós (2000) Abstracts, XIII Congress of European Mycologists:10 to demonstrate the absence of clamps, a fea- (1999) [inval. ad int.]. ture that characterizes all lichenized species of Lichenomphalia. (Fig. 1A) Redhead et al. (2002) considered Om- phalina meridionalis to be a probable synonym Selected descriptions and iconography. Barrasa of L. velutina. However, our previous studies & Esteve-Raventós (2000: 275 desc., 276– (Barrasa & Esteve-Raventós 2000; Barrasa & 277 icon. (figs. 1–2 and 3–7); sub Omphalina Rico 2001) revealed that both species can be meridionalis); Barrasa & Rico (2001: 379 clearly differentiated by their morphological desc., 380–381 icon., (figs 5–6); sub O. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Athens, on 06 Oct 2021 at 16:16:53, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0024282909008147 204 THE LICHENOLOGIST Vol. 41 F. 1. Habit. A, Lichenomphalia meridionalis (AH 32757); B, L. velutina (AH 32758). Scales = 5mm. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Athens, on 06 Oct 2021 at 16:16:53, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0024282909008147 2009 Short Communications 205 mendionalis); Esteve-Raventós et al. (2007: white lamellae and encrusting non-zebroid 539 desc. and icon.). pileipellis pigments. In agreement with this original description, Barrasa & Rico (2001: Notes. Molecular studies carried out in 380–381, figs 5–6) clearly distinguish L. lichenized and non-lichenized species of meridionalis from L. velutina (Table 1) by its ‘omphalinoid’ agarics, revealed that Lichen- yellowish red, light brown to reddish yellow omphalia velutina constitutes a complex and pileus (Munsell 1994: 5YR5/6, 5YR5/8, variable taxonomic group, in which more 7.5YR6/4, 7.5YR6/6), white lamellae (Mun- than one species can be recognized (Lutzoni sell 1994: 5YR8/1, 7.5YR8/1) and encrust- 1997). Accordingly, Redhead et al. (2002) ing non-zebroid pigments of pileipellis recognized L. grisella (P. Karst.) Redhead, hyphae. Lichenomphalia velutina shows a dark Lutzoni, Moncalvo & Vilgalys as a different grey to grey pileus with brown to light brown species from L. velutina, but considered L. tinges (Munsell 1994: N4, N5, N6, 7.5YR4/3, meridionalis (sub Omphalina meridionalis)to 7.5YR5/3, 7.5YR6/3), dark grey to grey be a probable synonym of L. velutina. How- lamellae (Munsell 1994: N4, N5, N6) and an ever, Redhead et al. (2002) indicated that encrusting pigment of pileipellis hyphae maintaining this synonymy and delimitation forming ‘zebra stripes’. Pigment of pileipellis of both species remains debatable. A number hyphae is considered a noteworthy character of names and species with bulbilliferous in other groups of agarics [i.e. Entoloma (Fr.) lichenized thalli (Botrydina type), have been P. Kumm. (Noordeloos 1992) and Corti- proposed and described: L. grisella, Ompha- narius (Pers.) Gray subgenus Telamonia (Fr.) lina rustica (Fr.) Quél, sensu Singer & Wünsche (Niskanen 2008)]. After an ex- Clémençon and O. pararustica Clémençon haustive revision of fresh and herbarium (cf. Singer & Clémençon 1972; Clémençon material from the Iberian Peninsula, Barrasa 1982). All of them are now considered as & Rico (2001) observed that several collec- synonyms of L. velutina, as was already indi- tions with ochraceous pileus and lamellae cated by Barrasa & Rico (2001). Further- had been misidentified as L. umbellifera (=O. more, the name O. rustica (Fr.) Quél. was pseudoandrosacea (Bull.) M. M. Moser), L. also used for non-lichenized species, mainly velutina or Arrhenia rustica (Fr.) Redhead, after Lange (1930). This non-lichenized Lutzoni, Moncalvo & Vilgalys, and no species [O. rustica (Fr.) Quél. sensu Lange], references to the presence or absence of has been recently transferred to Arrhenia the lichenized state had been made (see L. (Redhead et al. 2002). meridionalis specimens examined). A number of extra-European lichenized In agreement with Lutzoni (1997), L. ve- taxa that could not be revised in this work lutina constitutes a complex taxonomic (Omphalina oreades Singer, O. defibulata group, in which more than one species can be Singer, Clitocybe borealis Bigelow, C. solu- differentiated at the molecular level. In the mophila Bigelow and C. payattensis Bigelow), present work, macroscopic differences be- have been described from North and South tween L. meridionalis (Fig. 1A) and L. velu- America and included as probable synonyms tina (Fig. 1B) are also emphasized (Table 1), of Lichenomphalia velutina (Redhead et al. and more collections have been studied for a 2002). Moreover, the possibility that one or better diagnosis and delimitation of both more of these names takes priority over L. species. Therefore, it is very important (as in meridionalis cannot be rejected. An exhaus- non-lichenized agarics) to use fertile and tive revision of the type material of all these fresh material for a correct identification. In taxa (including molecular analyses) will be this way, basidiomata of L. velutina (particu- necessary for further studies. larly lamellae) becomes light-coloured in dry Lichenomphalia meridionalis was described material, causing frequent confusion with by Contu & La Rocca (1999: 33, tab. XI-B, L. meridionalis. These macroscopic features sub O. meridionalis) as a species with pale together with the microscopic differences ochraceous to weakly-whitish pileus, pure observed by Barrasa & Rico (2001), justify Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Athens, on 06 Oct 2021 at 16:16:53, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0024282909008147 206 THE LICHENOLOGIST Vol. 41 T 1. Principal characters for distinguishing between Lichenomphalia velutina and L. meridionalis. Pileus and lamellae characters must be observed in fresh basidiomata L. velutina L. meridionalis Pileus colours Grey to dark grey, with brown Yellowish red, light brown to tinges in margin reddish yellow Lamellae colours Grey to dark grey White Pileipellis hyphae pigmentation Zebroid encrusting Slightly encrusting, not zebroid Spore shape Ellipsoidal to elongate Elongate to cylindrical Spore 1:b mean 1·6 1·9 the separation of both species and the new Bas, C. (1969) Morphology and subdivision of Amanita combination here proposed for the lichen- and a monograph of its section Lepidella. Persoonia ized species L. meridionalis. 5: 285–579. Clémençon, H. (1982) Kompendium der Blätterpilze Fresh specimens examined. Lichenomphalia meridionalis Europäische