Cantharellus tomentosoides Buyck & V. Hofst.

Buyck, Bart, W. Henkel, Terry & Hofstetter, Valerie, 2019, Epitypification of the Central African Cantharellusdensifolius and C. luteopunctatus allows for the recognition of two additional species, MycoKeys 49, pp. 49-72 : 49

publication ID

https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/mycokeys.49.32034

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/4DE971CA-F244-DB6D-9DE2-22B98C5A06E7

treatment provided by

MycoKeys by Pensoft

scientific name

Cantharellus tomentosoides Buyck & V. Hofst.
status

sp. nov.

Cantharellus tomentosoides Buyck & V. Hofst. sp. nov. Figs 7, 8

Diagnosis.

Cantharellus tomentosoides is similar to C. densifolius in its low, blunt and crowded gill folds, overall yellowish brown color, identical basidiospores, and same habitat, but differs in its mostly smaller basidioma size, pileus surface texture, slightly more yellowish olive hymenophore color, and less thick-walled, less sinuous pileipellis extremities.

Gene sequences ex-holotype.

MG450685 (tef-1).

Etymology.

In reference to the species’ resemblance to its woodland sister-species, C. tomentosus .

Holotype.

CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC. Dzanga-Sangha Forest Reserve, near Bayanga, close to Bai-Hakou base camp, 02.859934N, 16.467492E, in monospecific Gilbertiodendron dewevrei forest, on bare sandy soil along trail at the entrance of the camp, 14 May 2016, Buyck 16.007 (PC0142485). MycoBank MBT 828890.

Description.

Basidiomata in small clusters, up to 40 mm high. Pileus 20-30 mm diam., thin and leathery, wavy with inrolled margin, young entirely hirsute-rugose, remaining lacerate-fibrillose to cottony in the center, elsewhere slightly rugose but lacking well-defined appressed scales, overall pale grayish brown with dark brown center, very early on becoming narrowly but strongly depressed centrally. Stipe slender, 6 mm diam., 20-30 mm high, rapidly elongating while pileus is still small, paler to concolorous with pileus margin, occasionally white at base; interior distinctly fistulose. Hymenophore composed of very crowded (up to 40/cm), low but comparatively thick and blunt gill folds, these 1 mm high, repeatedly forking, frequently fissuring over their full height, yellow with brownish tint, transitioning to warm egg-yolk yellow near extreme margin. Context leathery, whitish in the pileus, almost concolorous with the stipe surface, yellowing slowly. Odor agreeable, typical. Taste mild. Spore print not obtained.

Basidiospores short-ellipsoid to ellipsoid, (5.8 –)6.0–6.36–6.7(– 7.1) × (3.9 –)4.0–4.27–4.5(– 5.0) µm, Q = (1.3 –)1.4–1.49–1.6(– 1.7), smooth, hyaline. Basidia short and narrow, 30-38 × 6-8 µm, mostly five-spored. Subhymenium pseudoparenchymatous, composed of short, barely inflated cells that are slightly wider than the basidium base. Cystidia none. Pileipellis composed of almost thin-walled to slightly refringent hyphal extremities, mostly 4-8 µm wide; terminal cells rather short, mostly 20 –40(– 50) µm long, subcylindrical, regular in outline, broadly rounded at the apex; walls refringent, not thickened. Clamp connections absent.

Discussion.

Cantharellus tomentosoides is a rain forest species that is phylogenetically sister to C. tomentosus Eyssart. & Buyck (Fig. 1), for which it was initially mistaken in the field. The latter species was described from miombo woodland in Tanzania and was documented from Burundi by Buyck (1994) under the local name ‘nyarumpu’. Apart from its different habitat, C. tomentosus differs from C. tomentosoides in its slightly narrower basidiospores (6 –6.98– 8 × 3.5 –3.92– 4.5 μm, Q = 1.5 –1.79– 2.1), narrower hyphal extremities of the pileipellis, more brownish gill folds, and its nearly smooth to faintly squamose pileus surface ( Buyck et al. 2000).

Cantharellus tomentosoides resembles C. densifolius in its similarly crowded gill folds, overall yellowish brown coloration and identical basidiospores, but differs in its mostly smaller size, different texture of pileus surface, slightly different color of hymenophore, and thinner-walled hyphal extremities at the pileus surface. Additionally, these two species are phylogenetically distinct (Fig. 1).