Bibliographic record
Abstract
19. Licea pusilla Schrad., Nov. gen. pl. 19 (1797) Figs. 16A–P Sporophores sporocarpic, gregarious, sessile. Sporocarp globose-pulvinate, 0.2–1.5 mm diam., ridged, purplish brown to blackish. Peridium double, outer layer gelatinous, dull, inner layer thin, translucent, shiny, the inner surface smooth; dehiscence into few lobes leaving a cup continuous at the base. Spores free, black to dark olive in mass, light olive brown by TL, with a paler area, globose, 15–17(–20) µm diam., densely warted. By SEM the inner peridium surface is densely and evenly warted (Figs. 16M–O), right up to the platelet margins, with prominent outgrowths (Fig. 16 O) mostly in a single row, but several deep in places; the epispore is densely covered with bacula (Figs. 16 N, P). Material examined: Lectotype (designated here). Illustration of the Tab. 6, f.4 of the Schrader, Nova genera plantarum 19 (1797)!. Mycobank: MBT 10016510. Epitype (designated here). SPAIN. Madrid, Puerto de Canencia, km 9,700, 30TVL3425, tronco de Pinus sylvestris, 26-VII-1980, leg. C. Lado, 331 Lado, MA-Fungi 20548!. Rev. NENB 13127 (BR5020065643719, Isoepitype). Mycobank: MBT 10016508. Habitat: on bark of living and dead trees, trunks and stumps of angiosperms and gymnosperms. Distribution: Norway, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Russian Federation, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Poland, United Kingdom, France, Spain, Switzerland, Austria, Ukraine, Turkey, Kazakhstan, India, Japan, Congo Democratic Republic, Canada, USA, Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Panama, Jamaica, Colombia, Australia, New Caledonia, New Zealand. Icon.: Schrader (1797: pl. VI: 4), Lister (1925: Pl. 149a–c), Nannenga-Bremekamp (1965: 139, Figs. 6 A – B; 140, Fig. 7 A; 1975: 65; 1991: 44), Martin & Alexopoulos (1969: 481, Figs. 12a–d), Neubert et al. (1993: 283, Fig. VI: 6), Mazelaitis (1995: 19, Figs. C 1–2), Eliasson & Gilert (1982: 253, Figs. 4 A – F), Gilert (1996: 517, Figs. 3–4; 519, Figs. 9–10; 520, Figs. 13, 15–16), Lado & Pando (1997: 129: Figs. 36a–b), Yamamoto (1998: 133, Figs. A – B; 2002c: 22, Figs. 3 A – C; 2021: 147, Figs. A – C), Härkönen & Sivonen (2011: 56, Fig. 72), Poulain et al. (2011: 69), Härkönen & Varis (2012: 150, Fig. 223), Ronikier et al. (2017: 253, Figs. 4 A – F), Bortnikov et al. (2022: 37, Figs. 14a–k). Notes. No type collection was mentioned in the original description. The illustration by Schrader (1797, Tab. 6, f.4) reproduced here Fig. 16A is the primary type of L. pusilla, and is selected as the lectotype. In addition, as no specimen exists, an epitype has been selected to facilitate future study and comparisons. We selected material from MA-Fungi and used it for the other images by TL and by SEM. On p. VIII of the book preface, Schrader states that the material sketched and described originated “in the lands near Goettinga, especially in Hercynia and some forests of the Duchy of Brunswick, well known by the names of Hils and Sollingerwald”. Licea pusilla is a common species and is the type of the genus Licea. In the SEM micrographs of the epitype, the inner surface of the peridial platelets are densely but evenly warted, not smooth as they have been described by other authors (Nannenga-Bremekamp 2022). Ing (1982) raised Meylan’s var. pygmaea Meyl. to the specific rank [see below L. pygmaea (Meyl.) Ing], but some authors still consider the differences between L. pusilla and L. pygmaea are insufficient to consider them as different species. Bortnikov et al. (2022) provided a detailed comparison of specimens collected by them of what they considered to be both L. pusilla and L. pygmaea and concluded that there is an overlap in the characters but stated the need for further study. We maintain these two taxa as separate species, pending further investigation, since the size and colour of the spores, as well as markings of the surface and margins of the inner peridium differ between specimens included in this study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.050 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".