English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the course of my studies on the genus Gyromitra I have found it unavoidable to expand the concept of that genus so as to include three genera usually considered separate, essentially because of differences in spore characters. Modern authors have treated Pseudorhizina J acevski j (Helvellella Imai ), Neogyromitra Imai (Maublancomyces Herter) and the old genus Discina (Fr. ) Fr. as independent genera beside Gyromitra Fr. EcKBLAD ( 1968 ) too, maintains these genera except for Neogyromitra which he groups with Discina. On the other hand he writes that «smooth versus ornamented spores is a character o.f differentiating value on specific level only«. BENEDIX ( 1962 ) has even established for N eogyromitra and Discina a family of their own. When delimiting the genus Helvella [L.J St.-Amans, Nannfeldt and Dissing (see DrssrNG, 1966) have emphasized the uniform anatomy of the excipulum together with the characters o.f the spores as the uniting characteristics of that genus. The form of the ascocarp is, on the contrary, most variable in the genus, from subsessile to ones with a very distinct lacunose stipe and a mitrate fertile cap. I have found their ideas to be valid and adaptable also in the delimitation of Gyromitra. According to my studies, in Gyromitra, Pseudorhizina, Neogyromitra and Discina the anatomy of the excipulum (as observed by EcKBLAD, 1968, too) and the paraphyses are much alike, and to a high degree the spores, too. Pseudorhizina Jacevskij . This monotypic genus has been established for H elvella sphaerospora Peck because of the spherical spores of the latter. Subsequent authors (e.g. EcKBLAD, op. c.) have not observed any other «significant« difference between it and the Gyromitra species. Though EKCBLAD in his revision of the genera o.f operculate Discomycetes writes that «in no case is it obvious that a genus should be separated on spore form alone« he still acknowledges the genus. I have studied the lectotype of Gyromitra gabretae Kavina, which belongs to P. sphaerospora and found the excipulum to be composed of textura intricata as described by EcKBLAD ( op.c. ). The spores are small and completely spherical and a perispore cannot be distinguished. The spore wall is about 0,5 flm thick as in species of Gyromitra. Many spores seem to be completely devoid of oil drops but probably most of them, however, contain one (some contain two or more) very small eccentric drop. The various species of G'yromitra s.lato have a characteristic number and size of oil drops in most of their spores but the drops can be lacking in a number of even mature spores. The fact that I have not observed any perispore in P. sphaerospora does not necessarily exclude the possibility of its existence. It may well be so thin and tightly appressed to the spore wall that other means than passive studying under the microscope are needed to detect it. I have studied some specimens of Gyromitra californica (Phill.) Raitv. from Cali-

A wider and more natural concept of the genus Gyromitra Fr.