« Previous Day: Xanthoria elegans |
Main
| Next Day: Acer griseum »
May 13, 2008: Boschniakia strobilacea
May 13, 2007:
Rosa 'Ausmas'
May 13, 2006:
Lobelia tupa
May 13, 2005:
Enkianthus campanulatus
November 10, 2005 : Mycena sp. and Hylocomium splendens
Keywords: Tricholomataceae | Mycena sp. | Hylocomiaceae Hylocomium splendens (Hedw.) B.S.G. | Bridal Veil Falls Provincial Park
I think the mushroom is one of the over two hundred species of the genus Mycena, but after reviewing a number of books, I still can't be absolutely certain. Mushroom identification is perilous without spore prints and other information from the field (does it smell? does it ooze if broken?). If I'm wrong, please add a comment and I'll update.
The moss, however, I'm certain of the identification. Hylocomium splendens, or stair-step moss, really deserves a photograph of its own to reveal its illustrative common name – you only get a hint of its arching main shoots in these photographs. I didn't photograph the moss on its own while at Bridal Veil Falls Provincial Park, but Hylocomium splendens can also be found in UBC Botanical Garden, so watch it for in an upcoming BPotD.
The reason for today's two similar photographs is to illustrate the difference in depth of field by changing the F value via the camera's aperture priority mode (read more in this tutorial). The first photograph was taken at F11 while the other was snapped at F4.5. For my purposes, I consider the first image more technical as it supplies more information about the Mycena's environment, while the second isolates the subject, which I find more aesthetically-pleasing. Finding a balance between providing enough technical detail and making a visually-appealing photograph is one of the challenges of scientific photography.
Meeting that challenge is where having a digital camera shines, because of the opportunity to take multiple images at essentially no additional cost. In almost all of the images shown on BPotD, my method has been to bracket the photographs using changes in F-value, i.e., taking a number of images with different depths of field. I then choose one or two out of a batch of up to a dozen to keep (sometimes at opposite ends of the depth of field spectrum, like these two). Of course, this means making decisions, or else the hard drive quickly fills up. Still, it's a pretty good recipe for success if you're disciplined and ruthless. As an aside, I was inspired to write on this topic because of a posting on one of my favourite non-science weblogs, Creating Passionate Users – read Kathy Sierra's article on “If you could change only one thing...”.
Photography resource link: Science and Photography Through the Microscope, by award-winning photomicrographer Dr. Dennis Kunkel. Plenty of botanical images (and others) under the Search the Image Library link.
Posted by Daniel Mosquin at November 10, 2005 12:00 AM
Read recent comments on all BPotD Entries
Comments
Posted by: Ole Stauning at November 10, 2005 12:36 AM
Interesting - I know where you are going with that (Mnium is another moss genus). It seems Hylocomium (32600 hits on Google) is far more popularly used than Hylocomnium (155 hits), but Google's results are only an indicator of use, not necessarily how the name was originally (and validly?) published. Considering the names of the moss experts using Hylocomium, though, I really have my doubts that it would be anything but.
Posted by: Daniel Mosquin 
at November 10, 2005 2:45 AM
According to the Oxford book of flowerless plant it should be Hylocomium
Posted by: wontolla at November 10, 2005 5:57 AM
This is indeed a Mycena. The color is unusually purple (not exactly a color I associate with local Mycenas). Is it precisely duplicating the natural color? If so, either it is an odd variant of Mycena pura (which is an incredibly variable species), or perhaps Mycena purpureofusca (gill edges should be lavender).
Posted by: Fred Rhoades at November 10, 2005 7:47 AM
Well, it sure looks like a Mycena. The heavily striate cap is a key feature. Some species of Coprinus share that feature, but I don't know of any lilac-colored ones. I've encountered this same mushroom (or something very similar) growing on old logs and stumps here in Washington. Was this growing on or near wood or woody debris?
Matt
Posted by: Matt at November 10, 2005 8:18 AM
Thanks Fred and Matt (should note that Matt didn't know Fred had posted because of comment approval). The colour is very accurate - I was struck by the colour myself, which is why I noticed it amongst the blanket of green. And yes, this was growing on decaying wood.
If anyone feels up for a moss ID challenge, by the way, I only noticed the moss in the extreme bottom centre of the photograph last night. It should be identifiable to genus from either of these photographs.
Posted by: Daniel Mosquin at November 10, 2005 8:41 AM
That moss in the bottom centre looks like a Plagiomnium to me. Does anyone have an alternate opinion?
Posted by: Gillian Gile at November 10, 2005 10:09 AM
According to Arora, Mycena purpureofusca grows "solitary or in small groups or tufts on conifer wood and debris; widely distributed." A possible candidate, but with the myriad Mycena species, hard to say for sure. Other lilac or purplish species: M. pura is a terrestrial species that is more robust than M. purpureofusca, so we can probably rule that one out. M. haemoatopus is a dainty species that grows mostly on decaying hardwood logs and stumps. The stalk and flesh exude a red juice when cut. Also, the stalk of M. haematopus tends to be hairier than the specimen in today's photo.
Matt
Posted by: Matt at November 10, 2005 10:24 AM
Having found and identified Mycena species in the mountains of northern New Mexico, it is not M. haematopus as I know it. In Vol. 3, Fungi of Switzerland, Brietenbach/Kranzlen, p. 268, M. diosma does have violet tones listed, but the photograph does not look at all like the two shown above. Remarks also refer to M. pelianthina, M. pearsonia, M. pura. M. rosea, and M. subaquosa (purae group) as having lilac-pink to violet colors. Without habitat, smell, lamellae description, and certainly most defining--microscopic features, this Mycena becomes one of those mystifying 'little violet' mushrooms.
Posted by: Fran Rogers at November 11, 2005 1:20 PM
Regarding the spelling with and without an "n," the BFNA treatment gives the etymology of the genus name as "Greek hylokomos, thick-grown with wood, indicating a deep forest habitat." Thus, the name appears to be unrelated to the name Mnium.
Posted by: Carl Wishner at January 9, 2006 8:56 AM
Thanks, Carl.
Posted by: Daniel Mosquin at January 9, 2006 9:54 AM
The moss in the center looks like and very likely is Plagiomnium insigne -- a very common terrestrial moss in BC's lower mainland. But you'd need to examine leaf cell and sporophyte structure to be sure.
Artistically I prefer the photo with the higher depth of field. I think it's because in the photo with the shallower depth the "subject" (parts in focus) are entirely in the bottom half of the image making it look unbalanced (to me).
Posted by: Kent Brothers at January 9, 2006 7:45 PM
Just found your blog...what a beautiful little Mycena! Thanks for sharing the photos of fungi and of plants--I'm a mycologist, but am also being thrust further into the world of botany, so am loving this site!
Posted by: Rebecca at May 21, 2006 10:25 AM
Where are these mushrooms found, exactly?
Anonymous
Posted by: Anonymous at June 16, 2007 11:50 PM
Anonymous - the keywords section at the top has the location, plus there is a link to the park in the body of the text.
Posted by: Daniel Mosquin at June 17, 2007 3:19 PM
I found your photo trying to identify the dozen or so mushrooms I found in my front yard this morning - in the Austin, TX area. Based on the photos alone, mine are (were) an exact match.
The puzzling thing tho, is that the mushrooms were there around 8AM and were totally gone by 10:30AM. We've had an exceptional amount of rain this spring - and I did put mulch in my yard. Since I've never seen this type of mushroom in my 12 years of living here, I'm "assuming" they were somehow introduced with the mulch???
Anyway, a beautiful example of the species.
Posted by: Chip at June 28, 2007 9:18 AM
Please share your comments about the photograph(s) and accompanying write-up. Telling a story about the subject of the photograph(s) is also much appreciated! If you have a gardening question, the best place to ask is on the UBC Botanical Garden Forums. Thank you!
Post a comment
XML Feeds: Atom | RSS 2.0 | RSS 1.0 | What is RSS? | RSS Tools
Botany Photo of the Day and all associated images are licensed under a Creative Commons License except when otherwise specified in the accompanying written entry.
About Botany Photo of the Day | Submit Your Photos via Flickr | Submit Your Photos via UBCBG's Discussion Forums
Botany Photo of the Day is a project of the UBC Botanical Garden and Centre for Plant Research, located in Vancouver, British Columbia Canada. UBC BGCPR is a department of the Faculty of Land and Food Systems within The University of British Columbia.
Isn't it Hylocomnium with an n?