Hi,
Anyone have a suggestion?
Thanks!

Hi Dartanha,
please compare with this species. I found it in rotting Trametes and in Acer wood.
Greetings
Peter.

I agree with Peter, but could you check the length of gelatinous appendages and the presence and type of hair.

Michel.

Dear Peter and Michel,
Thank you for your comments.

I have only the Ellis & Ellis description of C. caudata, and I think the description doesn't match, mainly because of the lack of hair in the perithecia neck (however, I dont know if this is a strong characteristic) and also because the ascospores are larger. In fact, based on Ellis & Ellis, the ascospore size (apical dark cell) and filamentous appendage of this specimens seems to fit with C. coprophila (?????).

The filamentous appendages of the young, sigmoid, ascospores are most 20-35, but reached up to 50 microns long (see figures H and I, on the plate). I was unable to obtain the size of such appendage from the mature ascospores because in most cases they vanished.

In my new attempts I did not get a good section of the perithecium, but seems to me that it is glabrous, or with flexuous brown hairs (half bottom) (see figure E on the plate). After 12 hours on dew chamber a white tomentum was present (figure attached here).

So, what do you think?

Thanks again,

Dartanha

The hair is of course a major character; you speak of "globulus" but normally this applies to globulus who is or is not at the top of the ascus apical under the appliance. On your photos can not be distinguished whether it is present or not. Is it smooth or decorated? It is also an important character.
C.coprophila only grows on dung.

Michel.

Hi,
Sorry for the misuse of "globulus". I made an update in the previous post to remove that term, because, in fact, I didn't saw it.
I tried to do new slides to look for the presence of the globulus in the tip of the ascus. I used only water and MLZ, but as before I didn't saw it. Is its presence/absence an important characteristic? I need to use a specific mounting medium?
Definitely the tomentum of C. coprophila is very different from what I saw.
During the last weekend, after read some posts here in the forum about Cercophora, I found the Hilber & Hilber pdf file, but unfortunately my german is null! So, it is probable that this specimen remains as "Cercophora sp.", unless you have another suggestion.
Well, thanks again for your comments, I really appreciated.
Dartanha

The presence or absence of blood cell on top of the ascus is an important character. You can also try to observe it in the blue cotton. also the hair, shape and distribution and the structure of the wall of perithecium are important.
I have no translation of the work Hilber, but I send you another paper directly ( Lundqvist ), hoping that it might help you.
Regards.
Michel.

Hi Michel,

Thanks a lot for the Lundqvist's paper, I pretty sure it will be useful
Merci beaucoup! :@)

I observe a lot with CR, watery solution. This is not so aggressively.
Michel, have You the Lundquist- paper for me ?
Thanks in advance.
Peter.

Hi all,

In Lundqvist's description of C. areolata (pag.105) he mentions: "Pedirium ... areolate, cracking in 50-100 u broad polygones when crushed;"
In his comments he says that this trait is present in very few species of the genus, and all species listed, but C. striata, are coprophilous.
I found a full description of C. striata in "Miller, A. N. & S. M. Huhndorf (2001). Neotropical Ascomycetes 10. New and interesting Cercophora species. - Sydowia 53(2): 211-226." and I think that my specimen is close related with C. striata.

However, I didn't saw the presence of the "white to grayish granules or crystalline flakes below the neck" as illustrated in figures 41 - 43 of Miller & Huhndorf work, and the asci are shorter and wider (up to 260 long x 11-18 wide - see figure attached) when compared with C. striata that has "asci (278-) 305-384 (-413) x 4-9.5".

An additional information not mentioned before is that the sample was collected in Southeast Brazil. I also made an additional slide using cotton blue and the subapical globulus was absent.
So, the absence of the globulus plus the areolate peridium surface, that cracks when crushed, and its habit fits with C. striata. What do you think?
Thanks again,
Dartanha

Hello Dartanha

I do not know the article you speak (if you can send it to me, thank you), but it seems that your fungus is still different from C.striata. I read that some Cercophora of America (C.appalachianensis and C.californica) have cells that have Munk pores. Would you have seen this character on your mushroom? This could be a track for you, at least Andrew is an idea.

Michel.

Hi Michel,

I sent the article to your email.

No, I didn't saw the Munk pores, I had some difficulties to obtain a good section of the peridium wall. I need to try again.

Dartanha