Help! ID Please.

[Mr Org]

Anyone know what this is? Apologies for the poor mobile phone pic.

 

I thought it could be Ganoderma adspersum or G. applanatum. It actually looks like a birch polyspore Piptoporus betulinus but with a conicle stem, when I tell you its on a huge cherry trunk (1m+ diameter) it rules this out. It has been on the main trunk for around 1 year, approx 600mm up, 2 fuiting bodies one above the other. The cherry is seriously old and begining to show signs of reduced vigour, customer wants it reduced but I am hesitant until I can ID the fungi.

 

Thanks for your opinions

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Its a tough call from this image, but if I was forced to give an answer, my guess would be igniarius. The form of the two annual layers with that third forming in alignment with eachother is a big indicator.

 

Im guessing the bracket is three years old.

[Mr Org]

Thanks for the reply, (just remembered where my Roger Phillips book was so checked in that as well). Underside is almost pure white, is this common for this fungus - I thought it could be Phellinus nigricans until again discovered that it is birch specific.

 

If it is a Phellinus I assume it will be spreading white rot within the trunk so the tree is in a slow decline and needs monitoring rather than reducing I assume.

 

From your picture hamadryad you must be quite into your fungi, any suggestions on good id books? I only have the Diagnosis of ill health in trees and the Roger Phillips Mushrooms book.

 

Thanks for any assistance

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Thanks for the reply,

 

From your picture hamadryad you must be quite into your fungi?

 

Thanks for any assistance

 

It has been said before!

 

If theres one thing I would suggest on Ident books is have as many as you possibly can, fungi are VERY variable and one reference in one book can trip and mislead you into a poor identification, the phelinus igniarius being one of the prime examples, check it out on the google!

 

Igniarius is an intense white rot, and in all the cases ive seen thus far the long term prognosis is not good, if the form of the tree allows one may be able to reduce the wieght and loads to a minimum and increase longevity.

 

However, in cases where the reduction points needed to alleviate the loads are so beyond the point where sufficient foliage can be retained I suspect the lack of carb production may lead to an increase in the rate of colonisation and progression of the decay.

 

Long term retrenchment may be an option, but this would really only be viable if this is a specimen tree in a prime location and seriously worth retaining, got any more images?

[Mr Org]

Thanks for this. I don't have any good pictures but we are working only a mile away from the tree on MOnday so will take my decent camera and post pics of the tree and decent shots of the fungi.

 

Like your web site profile by the way, I am probably coming from a similar arb direction as yourself (got an environmental science degree almost some 20 years ago). Only just starting to get into IDing fungi and trying to tailor our work accordingly, it is the way forward but I find a wealth of knowledge is needed to persuade customers if the tree is in an urban setting.

 

Hopefully will post pics on Monday. As it is a cherry we will not be booking the work until after it has flowered and is active so have time to decide.

[David Humphries]

I think it to be - G. applanatum

 

 

 

 

I've heard the Fungi resource here at Arbtalk is kinda Ok Mr Org.

 

May be worth checking out

 

.

[Mr Org]

Thank you Monkey-D, the G Applanatum was my original ID but wasn't sure as the FC diseases book and Roger Phillips pics look very different with uneven edges.

 

Thanks for all the replies I think I will go with my original ID (but will post pics as promised)

 

Yes, should have checked pics on here first ( I did search but 'foolisgly' spelt it wrongly) - Nice pictures Monkey-D Thanks

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I think it to be - G. applanatum

 

 

 

 

I've heard the Fungi resource here at Arbtalk is kinda Ok Mr Org.

 

May be worth checking out

 

.

 

rather too "broadly sessile" at the attachment point dont you think?

 

more reminiscent of G australe than applanatum which has a very flat underside, especialy when developed, the upper surface is also rather "lumpy" for the smoother hymenium of the applanatum, which would also indicate australe over applanatum.

 

but all of total irellevance given the almost certain ignarius!

 

what what!

[Mr Org]

Well, the base did look more like this

 

http://http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/4462255960_dfd89af5dc.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.flickr.com/photos/ressaure/4462255960/&usg=__h9-zWqBwN1YAXf3H7lOOm-yDh9M=&h=333&w=500&sz=140&hl=en&start=57&zoom=1&tbnid=rm6IVVg1rpPRnM:&tbnh=131&tbnw=187&ei=7FFVTcndGYe94Aa45PGXBw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dphellinus%2Bigniarius%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DX%26biw%3D1265%26bih%3D577%26tbs%3Disch:10%2C1320&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=949&vpy=179&dur=3451&hovh=183&hovw=275&tx=178&ty=120&oei=qVFVTfa9F4SGhQeTptDUDA&page=4&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:5,s:57&biw=1265&bih=577

 

Blimey, not sure that the above link is supposed to do that!

 

I will call by and photograph on MOnday and re-post (don't want to dig a deep hole for myself and attract a G. ignoramus joke........

[David Humphries]

rather too "broadly sessile" at the attachment point dont you think?

 

more reminiscent of G australe than applanatum which has a very flat underside, especialy when developed, the upper surface is also rather "lumpy" for the smoother hymenium of the applanatum, which would also indicate australe over applanatum.

 

but all of total irellevance given the almost certain ignarius!

 

what what!

 

 

 

you're 'guessing', i'm 'guessing'.................who knows .

 

will be interesting to see a set of clearer shots

 

 

 

 

.