Diane - email
Definitely not the delicious chanterelle which has decurrent (sp.) gills. It does look like chicken of the woods which is abundant in Rhode Island. Unfortunately I don't care much for the flavor. Worth a try if you get a certain i.d. though because a lot of people find them tasty. I know what you mean about them not looking like any of the variations in the books. Elimination of other possible species is sometimes the only way to be sure. Or going for a walk with an expert.
Wednesday: 4 November 2009 @ 19:44:26
Wayne - email - url
Diane - I was pretty sure that it wasn't a chanterelle - besides its growth habit it just didn't work for me. The variation in coloration and location is interesting. I wonder how much location is informed by the much more visible startlement of seeing a huge outgrowth on a tree, while missing the outgrowths on the ground?
I have to find an expert. We used to have one but he retired and is no longer around.
Roger - I didn't do a spore print. Those are quite useful, but when it comes to fungi I often neglect even the most basic of observations other than general appearance. A lot of identification has to do with color changes when broken, treated with hydroxide and other chemical tests, etc., and I haven't yet gotten into all that.
Saturday: 7 November 2009 @ 12:42:16
bev - email - url
Wayne - It looks like Chicken of the Woods to me, but you're right, the growth habit is very curious. I don't think I've seen one just sitting on the ground like that, although I'm guessing it is attached to some rotting wood in the soil. I've never tried eating one. I once wrote to George Barron about one and he replied something along the lines that some people like them, but he never found them to his liking. They're certainly a beautiful colour thought, so just nice to enjoy as eye candy.
Sunday: 8 November 2009 @ 13:51:21
[powered by b2.]