I'm really hoping the new pics I added to the MUSHROOM ID folder under
photos are chanterelles! I *think* they smell faintly fruity and they
seem to be the exact same as the ones you all felt were chanterelles
yesterday. Are there any poisonous lookalikes? Obviously I'm going to
hit the books tonight but without my NJMA friends around it's kind of
scary to eat something without having had someone else ID it for sure
in person. Will they stay in the fridge or can they be frozen? Any of
you pros near West Milford? Any other suggestions for Id'ing them
besides looking through my field guides (which I'll do).

--- In NJMYCO@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <wildwestmilford@...> wrote:
>The spors are produced on the smooth folds that resemble gills. Don't
forget that not all fungi are gilled. Spores are produced in tubes and
pores as well as on teeth. The puffballs produce spores internally and
then expell them as puffs.

> Gotcha on the file names.
> I did a spore print of the small red one and it was white. As far as
> the larger mushroom I thought was the lobster but Carol ID'd as the
> smooth, where are the spores if there aren't gills? Is there any way
to
> get a spore print from them?
>

Gotcha on the file names.
I did a spore print of the small red one and it was white. As far as
the larger mushroom I thought was the lobster but Carol ID'd as the
smooth, where are the spores if there aren't gills? Is there any way to
get a spore print from them?

I agree with both Carols and Jack...these are both the most common chanterelles
in New
Jersey...the yellow one being Cantharellus lateritius, and the small orange one
being
Cantharellus cinnabarinus.

One other thing...You probably shouldn't use "suggestive" names in your photo
titles (such as
"lob", because if you are mistaken, you'd have to go in and edit the filenames
after they're
posted so as not to mislead anyone in the group. I'd suggest numbers instead,
like
"wwm001, wwm002" etc. (Just a friendly hint!)

--- In NJMYCO@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <wildwestmilford@...> wrote:
>
> Hi folks! I added 2 mushrooms to the "MUSHROOM ID" folder under photos.
> I think one is a lobster mushroom and the other some kind of
> chantrelle. The ornagish one  doesn't appear to have any gills or pores
> which is also why I think it's a lobster. The reddish ones are very
> small, the caps are only 1/4 to 1/2" and some appeared to be past prime
> already (drying out and such).
> What do you think?
>

How about the fact the big one has no gills? Also, it does not smell
like apricot.

Well, if one of the two most common ones is cantherellus lateritius, I
think you're right, too. Carol

I agree. These photos appear to be of the two most common Chanterelles
in NJ.
Jack

--- In NJMYCO@yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <carolraine88@...> wrote:
>
>  I think they're all chanterelles. No lobster. Does the big one smell
> like apricots? The little ones look like cantherellus cinnabarinus.
> They're not hard to find in spaghanum moss along stream banks. Lobster
> mushrooms are actually hypomycized lactarius, they're a deeper orange
> on the outside and have sort of a shriveled look to them. I was once at
> a NAMA foray in Minnesota, years ago, and they were everywhere. I think
> they're more common out that way than they are in New Jersey. I love
> this newsgroup! That we can post pictures for everyone to see like this
> is great. Carol
>

I think they're all chanterelles. No lobster. Does the big one smell
like apricots? The little ones look like cantherellus cinnabarinus.
They're not hard to find in spaghanum moss along stream banks. Lobster
mushrooms are actually hypomycized lactarius, they're a deeper orange
on the outside and have sort of a shriveled look to them. I was once at
a NAMA foray in Minnesota, years ago, and they were everywhere. I think
they're more common out that way than they are in New Jersey. I love
this newsgroup! That we can post pictures for everyone to see like this
is great. Carol

Hi folks! I added 2 mushrooms to the "MUSHROOM ID" folder under photos.
I think one is a lobster mushroom and the other some kind of
chantrelle. The ornagish one  doesn't appear to have any gills or pores
which is also why I think it's a lobster. The reddish ones are very
small, the caps are only 1/4 to 1/2" and some appeared to be past prime
already (drying out and such).
What do you think?

Thanks guys, don't know why the links aren't working but I put them in
my photo album on this site. Take a look under photos on the left hand
side there and let me know what you think!

I would confirm that they are Russula sp. I also agree with Jim about
getting the Kiby/Fatto key.



--- In NJMYCO@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <wildwestmilford@...> wrote:
>
> A friend found lots of these mushrooms growing and brought me some.
> The
> gills haven't opened up yet on all but the oldest, and although I
> *think* it's the same species I can't be sure as the cap has really
> faded. Blackish-red russula? The stem is tinted with purplish
though-
> Rosy Russula?
> See pics at these links or in photo album under "Wildwestmilford"
> under
> photos on this site.
>
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/whole2.jpg
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/whole1.jpg
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/gills1.jpg
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/gills2.jpg
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/oldcap.jpg
>
> I'm doing a spore print now. It has attached gills and them stem is
> very hard.
>
> Can anyone positively ID this?
> sorry if this got posted multiple times, I was having trouble with
> the
> links
>

Frank...your links still don't seem to be working.

Russulae are very difficult to ID to species, but in addition to what you've
already done,
there are at least another five things you can do if you suspect they are
Russulae (short of
using a microscope to view the spores and gills):

Note what kind of trees were growing in the immediate vicinity of the find.

Throw one at a tree or a wall and notice if it shatters or just goes "plumph".
Russulae will
generally break into many pieces, much like a piece of shattering chalk.

Are the gills "straight" or do some of them "fork" as they approach the outer
margin of the
cap?

Peel the cuticle (top skin) back from the outer edge and notice how far in to
the center it
peels before breaking (half, three quarters of the way, etc.)

Take a very small nibble of it on the tip of your tongue, and notice the taste.
Spit it right
out after chewing slightly...don't swallow it! Note whether the taste is hot,
mild, bitter, or
any other sensation you might get. (Note to amateurs: DO NOT TRY THIS WITH ANY
OTHER
MUSHROOM TO WHICH YOU HAVE NOT IDENTIFIED THE GENUS...I don't need to tell you
that some Amanita and Gallerina species are deadly poisonous and you don't want
those
in your mouth AT ALL. There are no known toxic Russula species...but some will
make you
sick if eaten in any quantity (one mushroom COULD be enough).)

Also, you might wish to obtain a copy of the Fatto/Kibby Russula Key, which is
available
from club member Herb Pohl, who is our book person. It contains lots of
information on
many known Russula species, including a color reference chart for spore prints
which are
obtained from Russula specimens and spore shapes and sizes for those who have a
microscope.

Do keep in mind that there are probably hundreds of species of Russula, and
probably 75-
80 percent of them are red or some shade of red or purplish-red. At least one of
them,
Russula emetica, will make you sick if you eat it, so ID carefully if you're
intending to
consume your "gift"! Personally, I don't recommend Russula ID to species for
beginners,
and I'm sure many in the club will concur.

Good luck!

--- In NJMYCO@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <wildwestmilford@...> wrote:
>
> A friend found lots of these mushrooms growing and brought me some.
> The
> gills haven't opened up yet on all but the oldest, and although I
> *think* it's the same species I can't be sure as the cap has really
> faded. Blackish-red russula? The stem is tinted with purplish though-
> Rosy Russula?
> See pics at these links or in photo album under "Wildwestmilford"
> under
> photos on this site.
>
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/whole2.jpg
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/whole1.jpg
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/gills1.jpg
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/gills2.jpg
> http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/oldcap.jpg
>
> I'm doing a spore print now. It has attached gills and them stem is
> very hard.
>
> Can anyone positively ID this?
> sorry if this got posted multiple times, I was having trouble with
> the
> links
>

A friend found lots of these mushrooms growing and brought me some.
The
gills haven't opened up yet on all but the oldest, and although I
*think* it's the same species I can't be sure as the cap has really
faded. Blackish-red russula? The stem is tinted with purplish though-
Rosy Russula?
See pics at these links or in photo album under "Wildwestmilford"
under
photos on this site.

http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/whole2.jpg
http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/whole1.jpg
http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/gills1.jpg
http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/gills2.jpg
http://www.santora.com/NewFolder/oldcap.jpg

I'm doing a spore print now. It has attached gills and them stem is
very hard.

Can anyone positively ID this?
sorry if this got posted multiple times, I was having trouble with
the
links

What a great day for a foray.  It was a little warm and the most of the mushrooms weren't in great shape but we found some interesting things. Check out the links below for a few quick snapshots.

Did anyone end up eating any of the boletes? We wanted to stick around and plead with Bob to fry some up but had to run to a family picnic.

http://www.santora.com/chantrelle.jpg

http://www.santora.com/hoffman.jpg

If anyone needs help posting photos to this site you can contact me at
franksantora @hotmail. com (no spaces). There are a lot of other
features to explore such as a recipe section, database, and the ability
to create polls just to name a few.
Let's see some photos of those Meadow Woods finds!

At the foray on Sunday, many forayers saw a tremendous outcropping
of cespitose and very photogenic mushrooms that had taken over a
rotting log.  More than one person tagged the species as Coprinus
quadrifidus.  They were mostly correct, but that name is
not "current".

    The recent issue of the NJMA newsletter published an article by
me about changes in the former family, Coprinaceae.  C. quadrifidus
was effected by those changes.  This taxon has been moved to the
Agaricaceae, although my article showed a table in which quadrifidus
is synonymized with Coprinopsis variegata in the Psathyrellaceae.

    Very confusing.  If quadrifidus = variegata, and variegata is now
in the Psathyrellaceae, why doesn't quadrifidus move with variegata
(us) to Coprinopsis?  Reason: quadrifidus is not an accepted current
name for its taxon; the current name is variegata
(formerly "variegatus").  At Meadow Woods on Sunday we should have
identified the mushroom on the log as Coprinopsis variegata.
Coprinus quadrifidus is still Coprinus quadrifidus, and it is
grouped in the Agaricaceae, and to use the name is to cling to the
past.

     It turns out that C. variegata (basionym, C. variegatus) was
described by Charles Horton Peck in 1873, while quadrifidus was
described, also by Peck, in 1897.  At some point, somebody decided,
and was able to prove to their mycological peers, that quadrifidus
is the same mushroom as variegatus.  Exit quadrifidus.  So far I
have not been able to find out who first synonymized the two.
Nevertheless, since variegatus was the earlier name, it gets
preference over quadrifidus with respect to legitimate updates, like
the change to Coprinopsis and the move to Psathyrellaceae.  While I
could not find who first synonymized the two taxa, they are
synonymized at at least 5 reliable Web sites that I checked,
including the authoritative Chicago Field Museum site, and that
suggests a preponderance of taxonomic opinion.

     If the explanation thus far is acceptable to the reader, read no
further.

     However if the reader is interested, I present below original
Peck descriptions for C. variegatus and C. quadrifidus word-for-word
from the text in which the descriptions were first published,
corresponding volumes of the "Annual Report of the New York State
Botanist".  Can you guess why Peck might have inadvertently applied
another name to a mushroom he had already described and named in
different terms?

     These descriptions are interesting for their omissions as well
as for their similarities.  Notice, for example, that Peck indicated
the substrate for C. variegatus was, "Thin soil and decaying leaves
covering rocks."  The substrate for C. quadrifidus was, "Damp
vegetable mold or much decayed wood under basswood trees."  Not the
same, but we are obliged to forgive Peck for applying the different
names to the same mycological entity, given he didn't do a focused
study from the starting point of either description.  That appears
to be the way a lot of mycologists worked.  Anyway, on Sunday we
found our specimens on wood.  It would be wrong to hold Peck to one
habitat or the other: mushrooms can fool you when you least expect
it.

    Notice also that Peck's type descriptions specifically pinpoint
June as the collection date, and June is just days earlier than our
collection date of July 15.  In short "June" means, "early in the
growing season."  As a matter of fact I remember finding Coprinopsis
variegata once in late May while hunting morels.

    So, here are the historical artifacts, Peck's descriptions for
Coprinus variegatus and for Coprinus quadrifidus.  If you manage to
convert his microscopic measurements to microns, please let me know
what you get!

    C. variegatus: "Pileus fleshy, thin, fragile, oblong-ovate, then
campanulate, obtuse, hygrophanous, pale watery-brown when moist,
whitish or cream color when dry, variegated by scales or patches of
a superficial ochraceous tomentum, the margin finely striate;
lamellae lanceolate, crowded, ascending, free, white then rosy
brown, finally black; stem, equal, brittle, hollow, at first
peronate-annulate, then floccose-pruninose, with white branching and
root-like threads at the base; spores subelliptical, 0.00033' long.
    "Plant densely caespitose, 3-5' high, pileus 1'-1.5' broad, stem
2"-4" thick.
    "Thin soil and decaying leaves covering rocks.  Slope of Crown
Nest near West Point.  June.
    "When young the whole plant is coated by an abundant superficial
floccose-tomentum.  This soon breaks up into loose scales or patches
which peel off in flakes, revealing the smooth pileus beneath.  This
character will readily distinguish this plant from Coprinus
atramentarius to which it is allied.  The slight abrupt annulus soon
vanishes."

C. quadrifidus: "Pileus thin, at first oval, then campanulate,
finally more or less expanded with the margin revolute, when young
adorned with a superficial floccose veil, which soon separates into
evanescent flakes or scales and reveals the finely striate surface
of the pileus, whitish becoming grayish or gray-brown with age, the
margin often wavy or irregular; lamellae broad, thin, crowded, free,
at first whitish, then dark-purplish-brown, finally black; stem
equal or slightly tapering upward, hollow, floccose-squamulose,
white, sometimes with a slight evanescent floccose ring near the
base; spores .0003 to .0004 in. long, .00016 to .0002 broad.
    "Plant gregarious or caespitose; pileus 2-3 in. broad; stem 3-4
in. long, 3-4 lines thick.
    "Damp vegetable mold or much decayed wood under basswood trees.
Portage.  June.
    "When mature the pileus becomes perforated in the center and soon
splits into 3 to 5, commonly 4, segments, the divisions extending a
short distance from the stem.  This remarkable feature of the
species has suggested the specific name.  The plant is referable to
the Tomentosi, but the pileus soon becomes glabrous.  The veil is
whitish or slightly yellowish.  The spores appear at first to be
brownish-black, but they become black after a short exposure."

Well, as it turned out, all of that rain on July 4th didn't do much to bring out
a whole bunch
of mushrooms, but we still did well in the Russula department. One person found
a small
handful of Black Trumpets (Craterellus fallax) and one lucky Hada Parag found a
nice bagful
of small chanterelles, mostly Cantharellus cibarius. Boletes were almost
non-existent,
though Terri Layton did find a nice clump of good-sized Gyroporus castaneus
(Chestnut
Bolete) that I nearly stepped on while walking just ahead of her (I swear I must
be going
blind!). Overall, it was a beautiful day, but it wasn't nearly as productive as
last year was. A
few good, closely-spaced rains should bring some things out there, but right
now, it's way
too dry to encourage many mushrooms to pop.

After the foray, Bob Hosh made two wonderful pasta dishes...one with black
trumpets
(collected last year, dried, and reconstituted) and the other with Lactarius
hygrophoroides
that Jim Barg just collected in the woods adjoining his property. Bob will
probably post the L.
hygrophoroides recipe at www.nymyco.org. It was one of the best preparations
I've ever
tasted using this nice crunchy mushroom!

What did you find at the foray?

It's great to see that you're all interested in sharing on this forum, and thank
you for joining.
I'm hoping to post (at least) my comments on each of our forays right after they
happen, and
if we find anything unusual or notable, I'll try to mention those too.

Off to Meadow Woods in the morning...I'm always excited by this foray, because
even in dry
years, we find a good amount of interesting stuff. I remember a few years back
when Bob
Peabody found Craterellus foetidus, the Fragrant Black Trumpet. This was
exciting for me to
see, especially in this part of New Jersey. It's a great edible, though it does
have quite a
fragrance to it (like a very strong Black Trumpet), and generally we don't find
them in any
great numbers. It's "meatier" than the "regular" black trumpets that many of are
used to. I
hope someone finds it again tomorrow.

If anything, we should find some Cantharellis cibarius and Cantharellis
lateritius, for those
who are into "the edible thing". And, it'll be nice to have Bob Hosh doing the
cooking demo
afterwards...even if we don't find anything edible, I'll be bringing along some
Lactarius
hygrophoroides that I collected this afternoon, and I'm sure Bob can do
something good with
them!

Hi, I'll get some info on joining the Yahoo! group to you as soon as I
can. No worries about who gets the credit just as long as word gets
out. Also, no need to be concerned about IDing mushrooms because you
can restrict who can join the group and who is allowed to post to
certain areas. There are a bunch of other ways to control what actually
is visible too, such as only allowing things to be posted after review
by a moderator. Talk to you soon... did I tell you how much we enjoyed
the morels and asparagus?!!!!!

After trying all that great food yesterday I was thinking to myself how
nice it would be to have the recipes posted to the yahoo site. It's
really easy to post them in the database section, basically just fill
in the blanks.
Have you guys decided whther or not this is useful for us? If there  is
time to include it in the newsletter, I could write a short article
describing the site and how to sign up.

Looks like it is. We didn't have much rain up this way after the heavy rains in
the middle of
April, and their development stopped cold in its tracks. This goes down as one
of the
scantest morel seasons in recent memory, for me, at least.

Normally, the morel season would run to about the third week of May, depending
on when it
started. It started late-ish this year (but only by a week or so based on
averages) and ended
early, most likely because of the dryness.

Hopefully the nice heavy rains of this past week will help with other mushrooms
coming this
year.

How late do we get morels in Northern NJ? Although I know of an old
apple tree in the woods and a group of 4-5 tulip poplars I haven't
found morels under any of them. Conditions seemed either too dry or
cold for most of May and I'm wondering if the window of opportunity has
pretty much closed.

We're looking forward to Saturday's foray!

Check back for photos of some deer mushrooms I found, possibly
including some micro shots of those funky cystidia they have.

Anyone find any morels yet? I haven't seen a single mushroom of any
kind yet!

If have found some please forward to me the exact location. HA!

We had guest speaker David Fischer discuss various local species and
present an outstandingly photographed slideshow. Mr. Fischer uses an
old Sony Mavica to capture his images at about 1 megapixel- yet his
photos are superb. Goes to show you don't need thousands in equipmentto
take great photos, just a camera that can focus to about 1mm.

It was a lot of fun! The salad was our favorite dish. Hope to do it
again next year.