Pachypeltis pachythallina (Poelt & Hinteregger) Vondrák

Vondrák, Jan, Frolov, Ivan, Davydov, Evgeny A., Yakovchenko, Lidia, Malíček, Jiří, Svoboda, Stanislav & Kubásek, Jiří, 2019, The lichen family Teloschistaceae in the Altai-Sayan region (Central Asia), Phytotaxa 396 (1), pp. 448-450 : 448-450

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/phytotaxa.396.1.1
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13718246
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039D87D1-1A11-FFB8-B2CB-1B48CA4CE196
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Pachypeltis pachythallina (Poelt & Hinteregger) Vondrák
status

Treatment

Pachypeltis pachythallina (Poelt & Hinteregger) Vondrák View in CoL , combinatio nova

MycoBank: MB826777

Figs: 7D, 8.

Basionym: Caloplaca pachythallina Poelt & Hinteregger in Bibliotheca lichenologica 50: 169–170 (1993). Type :— CHINA. Xinjiang, Karakorum , Siang-Tal (right side of valley below glacier K2), alt. 4180 m, 36°03’N, 76°28’E, on noth-exposed granite rock with loess dust in crevices, collected by W. Bernhard Dickoré, 28 September 1986 (holotype GZU!) GoogleMaps .

Taxonomy: Described by Poelt & Hinteregger (1993) from a single but fertile fragment of lichen. Morphologically the type specimen resembles the lichenicolous P. insularis or P. invadens . The species was not considered lichenicolous by the original authors, but the thallus of the type is in contact with Glypholecia scabra and Lecidea tessellata var. caesia . The original authors noted that obviously lichenicolous sterile squamules in adjacent sites may belong to the same species. Our specimen from Altai (Vondrák 12649) matches the type in distinct cortex (c. 20–40 μm) extended to bases of squamules, in very thick medulla and in brown-red pycnidia (typical for Pachypeltis ) and in size of conidia, c. 4–5 × 1.5–2 μm.

Recorded from two localities at altitudes 1600–3050 m (specimens Vondrák 12649, 12706) in arid alpine sites. Substrate: limestone, lichenicolous on Calogaya biatorina subsp. asiatica and Gyalolechia lenae . Both the type of Caloplaca pachythallina and our own specimens definitely belong in Pachypeltis , but we are not certain that the two are conspecific, and here we refer to our specimens as Pachypeltis cf. pachyhthallina ( Table 1, Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 ); further study of material from Karakorum is desirable.