Mycol. 21(no. 81): 56 (1991), ≡ Hygrophorus citrinopallidus A.H. Sm. & Hesler, Sydowia (1–6): 327 (1954)]. ≡ Hygrocybe subg. Oreocybe (Boertm.)

Beis., Regensburger Mykologische Schriften 10: 11 (2002). Basidiomes omphalioid (small, with indented pileus and decurrent or arcuate-decurrent lamellae); pigments yellow, buff, orange, and/or lilac to purple; surfaces viscid; lamellar context interwoven, some with a central strand of parallel hyphae; clamps present throughout find more and not toruloid at the basidial bases; basidia short relative to basidiospore lengths (ratio 3.6–5); some basidiospores constricted, Q 1–2.7; ephemeral greenish yellow extracellular pigment bodies present in the pileipellis; growing in soil among grasses, mosses and arctic-alpine plants. Differing from subg. Chromosera in having interwoven lamellar trama and some constricted spores, and terrestrial rather than lignicolous habit. Differing from C. viola in subg. Subomphalia by having viscid pileus and stipe surfaces, yellow to orange pigments, some constricted spores, an interwoven lamellar context lacking a differentiated central

strand, presence of extracellular pigment bodies in the pileipellis, and growing in the arctic-alpine zone. Differing from subg. Chromosera in terrestrial rather than lignicolous habit, lacking dextrinoid reactions in context tissues, and having interwoven lamellar trama and some constricted spores. Differing from Glioxanthomyces nitidus and Rapamycin research buy G. vitellinus in lamellar trama being interwoven rather than subregular with subglobose elements and absence of a gelatinized lamellar margin and cheilocystidia. Phylogenetic support

Subg. Oreocybe appears as a well-supported, short-branched grade that is paraphyletic to the long-branched subg. Chromosera in our LSU, ITS-LSU and ITS analyses. MLBS support for the Oreocybe branch is 76 % in our ITS-LSU, 64 % in our LSU, and 68 % in our ITS analysis by Ercole (Online Resource 3). Subg. Oreocybe has similar topology and support in the ITS analysis by Dentinger et al. (79 % MLBS support for the subtending branch, and 93 % MLBS support for it as sister to subg. Subomphalia, unpublished data). In our Supermatrix analysis and Vizzini & Ercole’s ITS analysis, C. citrinopallida and C. xanthochroa are intermixed with C. cyanophylla, but without support for the internal branches. This cAMP may be an artifact of including the ITS region, which varies little in this group, and editing out variation in order to align sequences across the family. Species included Type species: Chromosera citrinopallida. Species included based on molecular phylogenies and morphology are C. xanthochroa (P.D. Orton) Vizzini & Ercole, and C. lilacina (P. Karst.) Vizzini & Ercole. Comments Subgen. Oreocybe was originally described by Boertmann (1990) as a section in Hygrocybe subg. Cuphophyllus because of the interwoven lamellar trama and decurrent lamellae – a placement retained by Candusso (1997).