Armillaria mellea?

[benedmonds]

Saw these today - Armillaria mellea I rekon?

 

Last photo poor quality but shows them when small.

[Tom D]

I'd say not, amarillia usually have a ring around the stem below the cap, Its the remnants from its attachment brfore it opened. Its hard to say from the pics but I cant see any on those. There is a ringless amarillia but I think its less harmful than melllea.

[David Humphries]

I'd say not, amarillia usually have a ring around the stem below the cap, Its the remnants from its attachment brfore it opened. Its hard to say from the pics but I cant see any on those. There is a ringless amarillia but I think its less harmful than melllea.

 

 

 

Yeah, I'm puzzled by the lack of annulus in the pics.

 

But A. tabecens is saprophitic, and when we get it, it's always on dead stumps or dysfunctional wood.

 

http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=3399

 

 

Gonna look further in to possible other Armillarias

 

 

.

[benedmonds]

There is a ring.

[David Humphries]

There is a ring.

 

Ah Ha !

 

 

That little piccy woulda helped earlier Ben.

 

 

 

There are seven known species of Armillaria in Europe, all of which have been noted in the Uk.

 

A. mellea

A. gallica

A. ostoyae

A. borealis

A. cepistipes

A. ectypa

&

A. tabecens

 

We know yours is not tabecens, so were now down to one of six.

 

These all vary in pathogenicity.

For example A. gallica is recognised as a saprophite, but may also actually kill stressed plants.

 

 

So, a positive species id is not coming from this ammatuer, but Armillaria of some form of pathogenicity it surely be

 

 

 

 

.

[benedmonds]

Saw these today on a stump - Is it A. tabecens?

 

No ring on these..

 

Poor quality photos, should get a decent camera phone.

[Bundle 2]

I am guessing the absence of ' gallica' 'borealis' & 'ectypa' from the most popular id source's must have some clue lodged within it as to their occurrence in the uk. That or perhaps it is infact very hard to tell the difference, mostly however these guides are not shy of scientific dissemination as the key to id, how could they be??

Oh. it looks very like tabecens Ben, the distinguishing feature on most occasions that sets the species apart from mellea being the lack of ring.....

 

 

 

( Phillips originally included 'ostoyae' as 'mellea....' Whilst not a betting man, I am not going to suggest that they may be what we are looking at in the first post!!? )

[David Humphries]

Saw these today on a stump - Is it A. tabecens?

 

No ring on these..

 

Poor quality photos, should get a decent camera phone.

 

 

Situation and images, certainly match A. tabecens.

[Bundle 2]

It depends on how you look at it, although I am not disputing your observations David, or for that matter the process by which it is arrived at....but MOST pathogenic fungi can and will persist in their host well after it has died so giving rise to habitat variations...(Mattheck )

[David Humphries]

It depends on how you look at it, although I am not disputing your observations David, or for that matter the process by which it is arrived at....but MOST pathogenic fungi can and will persist in their host well after it has died so giving rise to habitat variations...(Mattheck )

 

 

In both the Salix in my original A. tabecens thread and subsequently the the stump above, both fb's were noted well after the demise of the trees, and no fruiting bodies ( pahogenic or saprophitic of any genus ) appeared on either Tree in the preceeding years before death.

 

 

What d'ya reckon, Tim ?

 

 

 

.