Possibly Clitocybe dilatata. Though the gill attachment to stem looks a bit different. Was it at roadside? -frog
what's the white stuff in the left of the picture - is that snow or ice? that will change our species recommendation but I agree that it's a Clitocybe.
That's just the sun reflecting of moisture on the ground .... These were only seen a couple of weeks ago.
Definitely not a Clitocybe! Looks somewhat strange; maybe a species of Gymnopus (Collybia)? (By the way, actually "Clitocybe dilatata" of N.A. usage is Lyophyllum connatum). Cheers, Harri Harmaja http://www.luomus.fi/users/harmaja/index.htm
Greetings Harri! Would you describe what it is about the photo that says not-Clitocybe to you? Gill attachment maybe? Regarding names - "Clitocybe dilatata" is the current name used in this area for the organism that I am referring to, (regardless of whether that is the correct ID for the specimen in the photo or not). So now I'm curious to look up what that name is used to reference in other areas <grin>. I googled for a photo of Lyophyllum connatum - the species name is not familiar, so I'll pursue whether this critter has been found in this area or not. In general though, I think the specimen in the photo looks more Clitocyboid than Lyophyll-esque ( ...starting to hear a Gilbert & Sullivan tune to go with that :-). cheers, -frog
Well in my opinion (for what it's worth) I think it is much closer to Clitocybe dilatata than anything else I've been able to find. Thanks for the input ....
On C.dilatata & L. connatum: My taxonomically inclined friend and fellow mycophile Kent kindly traced this Lyophyllum connatum relationship with Clitocybe dilatata, discovering that these were determined to be synonymous in 1995, in Seattle, by Scott Redhead, noted Canadian agaricologist. Scott noted that this information has circulated around the PNW. ... It had not, however, circulated around to me yet <grin>, so thank you Harri for bringing this up. -frog