The Lab stumper

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

The daedalea is a funny old bracket, does some odd tricks! those lumps on top of mine, look at the orientaion of the secondary spore layer! vertical!

 

also those lumpy "warts" on its upper serface now appear to be forming into new brackets atop the old origional, and its definatley not as anal about its spore layer orientation, so yours doesnt suprise me at all.

[David Humphries]

Think I may go cut me a slice out of another Daeldalea later today to compare.

 

As not seen inside a definate one before.

 

 

 

 

.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

let me know! I have got to see too!

 

Ive got to get over this not wanting to disrupt brackets thing, its all important learning

[David Humphries]

let me know! I have got to see too!

 

 

The problem here is that the only site I've got with Daedalea, they're true to type and are in very thin tiered brackets.

Not particularly good depth of annual incremental growth to compare.

 

These wedges from a few FB's of Daedalea this morning, aren't very helpful.

 

.

[David Humphries]

again, here's a couple of shots of the original un-Id'd one.

 

Flesh looks similar in colour in all these samples.

 

 

.

[Bundle 2]

Mmm.Interesting markings on the outer surface of the last (white) FB ? And it is dissected top to bottom right? ( Im on about the post b4 last..)

Its almost as if the fungus lost interest whilst forming. And the same thing again ( if you accept that the fb shows two annual seasons..) Resulting in the pattern distributed as it is...

I am wondering what cell differentiation there is within the FB itself?

 

Sorry...yeah, color looks pretty consistent.

[David Humphries]

Tim, here's the same body from last year, and again from this morning.

 

It's still taking the same form and adding another layer of incramental growth.

 

.

[Bundle 2]

Fairly clearly the Oak mazegill from that angle David - good.

So then I am tending to concur with the Daedalea consensus atm!

And the idea that it is not too concerned about it's pore layer....

Andy Summerley made a comment I remembered for some reason about pore layers and their orientation. ( Basically cos I didnt agree with him - lol ) He seemed to suggest that protection from water ingress was the only "valid" reason they should be so often (in most cases infact ) on the underside of the FB.

 

opps.. actually, andy contends that gravity is the only reason for their orientation. The ingree of h20 was why I disagreed. Dont want to go misquoting the ,amn now do we...!

Edited August 20, 2010 by Bundle 2

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

argh, but unlike pores/tubes, slits like the maze gill can be much cleverer at this, the basidia on the walls of the slit can still drop by gravity within the chamber and be drawn out by the slightest drafts.

 

Ive seen pore layers on the vertical lots of times with daedalea.

[Bundle 2]

Cool...but in most cases ( exceptions prove the rule ) they prefer a specific and it should be said, uniform orientation....

What of the cell differentiation Tony. If merisrematic tissue is homologous, then the fungus ,if for some reason cannot fulfil its development, would present with distorted tube layer maybe.

Look at the white FB in D's post. You can just see a tube layer (twice imo) that has "ingrown" if you will. Cant explain it!