There are two packets both labelled isotype and they contain 3 separated collections. One packet contains fruitbodies considerably larger than the other two and is labelled 1193 in Colenso's writing (the same as the holotype described by Cooke). Pegler & Young in their 1989 review of Anthracophyllum wrote "Massee (1898) gave a full description of the species, emphasizing the dark discoloration of the basidiome on drying and regarding this to be reason enough for retaining the species in Xerotus. The small, flabelliform basidiomes, however, have a white context, lack any soluble pigments, and the hyphae are not blue-green in alkali. ... The species is better included under Marasmiellus". However, Segedin in her 1994 NZ review wrote, "The characteristic greenstaining pigment seems to emanate mainly from the pileipellis and stains some or all of the context green in some basidiomes. In others the pigment occurs as patches or only as minute specks of green , scattered through the context".
In fact the green pigment in KOH of granules in the pilleipelis is obvious. The lamellae are clay coloured and Colenso notes "light brick red when fresh". Pegler & Young examined the holotype, at Kew, but their report does not agree with the isotype. I believe these isotype collections represent a form of A. archeri and not a distinct taxon. Segedin also annotated the collection in 1993 as A. archeri. However, collections with a paler hymenium should be sequenced. iNaturalist observations suggest variability that may include two taxa. The Kew holotype also requires re-assessment.
J.A. Cooper, March 2024