Keizer's Fungi Q & A.

[Fungus]

so are we suggesting that trees can compartmentalise K deusta? I was under the impression it was fairly invasive?

 

Some trees (beech, ash) can for a while as long as the radial rays are shut down by the tree to keep the mycelium of K. deusta entering and using the rays to reach and invade the living tissues. IME for instance Tilia, Acer, Betula and Quercus rubra can not compartementalise K. deusta effectively.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Some trees (beech, ash) can for a while as long as the radial rays are shut down by the tree to keep the mycelium of K. deusta entering and using the rays to reach and invade the living tissues. IME for instance Tilia, Acer, Betula and Quercus rubra can not compartementalise K. deusta effectively.

 

Do you think that K deusta which is most common on beech proves that the two have a close relationship and hence the beech is more adapted to slowing the decay? what is it that makes beech rays so fundementaly different to tilia, betula or acer for example? beech have a high ray count dont they, they are small and numerous in comparison?

 

K deust has not the capacity to generate bore holes in the lumina walls, so I assume it is more progressive in Tilia etc because it can bypass through rays into the new rings as opposed to boring through the walls of the vessels or lumina? as it cannot degrade the pectin in the middle lamella as an alternative route?

[Fungus]

Do you think that K deusta which is most common on beech proves that the two have a close relationship and hence the beech is more adapted to slowing the decay? what is it that makes beech rays so fundementaly different to tilia, betula or acer for example? beech have a high ray count dont they, they are small and numerous in comparison?

 

K deusta has not the capacity to generate bore holes in the lumina walls, so I assume it is more progressive in Tilia etc because it can bypass through rays into the new rings as opposed to boring through the walls of the vessels or lumina? as it cannot degrade the pectin in the middle lamella as an alternative route?

 

I agree on both accounts.

[sloth]

Gerrit, do you know what physical difference between Ganoderma lipsiense and australe Agathomyia wankowiczii (spelling?) looks for? I presume it knows, somehow, which is which before laying its eggs; or does it lay eggs in both but they only grow on the one sp?

I wonder if it was known what the fly looks for, if the information could be used to devise/create a field test to distinguish them. Or is this a late night fantasy?!

Thanks as always, Kev

[David Humphries]

Gerrit, do you know what physical difference between Ganoderma lipsiense and australe Agathomyia wankowiczii (spelling?) looks for? I presume it knows, somehow, which is which before laying its eggs; or does it lay eggs in both but they only grow on the one sp?

I wonder if it was known what the fly looks for, if the information could be used to devise/create a field test to distinguish them. Or is this a late night fantasy?!

Thanks as always, Kev

 

I'm not entirely sure where the evidence is, but I understand both the BMS & the Suffolk Mycological Society found & identified Agathomyia wankowiczii on G. australe in 2008.

 

EXCLUSIVE to WAB readers. - Wild About Britain

 

Which if true, makes the above pointless.

 

Perhaps Gerrit can enlighten us more.

 

 

 

.

[Fungus]

what physical difference between Ganoderma lipsiense and australe Agathomyia wankowiczii looks for? I presume it knows, somehow, which is which before laying its eggs; or does it lay eggs in both but they only grow on the one sp? I wonder if it was known what the fly looks for, if the information could be used to devise/create a field test to distinguish them.

 

Kev & David,

 

The female fly doesn't look for anything, she "smells" (pheromones) the difference between the two species (and all other species) of Ganoderma and is very accurate at it. So I'd sooner rely on her "nose" than on Neil's observation of a Ganoderma species that was covered with a resupinate Sistotrema sernanderi, that could have been responsible for the abnormal size of the spores for a G. lipsiense or his sample of the spores was not accurately selected, i.e. there were to many not completely ripened spores in his sample. And then there is the medium in which the spore size was checked that could have been responsible for shrinking or swelling of the spores. Besides, his find was never officially published and the other "maybe" finds on G. australe were never microscopically checked.

[sloth]

Both interesting, thank you. Now that I think of it, didn't Hama think he'd found galls on australe?

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Both interesting, thank you. Now that I think of it, didn't Hama think he'd found galls on australe?

 

No, he thought he found them on Pfeifferi, but on a return visit the yellowish tint had vanished and revealed a much more obvious Applanatum group.

 

I am inclined to run with Gerrit as I know two sites that are very very well populated by flat foots and they do not touch the brackets that have the form I associate with australe

[Taupotreeman]

Not sure if this is the right thread so apologies if it isn't. Can you guys ID these for a colleague of mine? We're having difficulty navigating around some of the fung ID sites so it's often easier to ask on here. They're growing out of some mulch apllied to the gardens.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

I would guess at a hypholoma of some sort, but pure guess!