Created: 2008-04-21 07:28:06
By: Rod Tulloss (ret)
Summary: For the moment, I'd go for the "protecta" hypothesis...

The chunky specimen has the look, color, staining, habit or A. protecta. The colors of the cap and stipe are protecta-like, the ochraceous staining in of the volva is also very much like that of protecta in two ways—-the color and the plenitude of the staining reaction over all of the volval bits on the cap. In my limited experience, the color in the volva of A. constricta is more of an orangish rust color and is in scattered spots. Constricta’s entire universal veil can become dominantly darkish gray on the exterior. While the original descript of A. constricta included both the colors brown and gray for the cap, at least some of the gray capped material was A. protecta (which also was called “A. inaurata” at times by Dr. Thiers and his students). These comments are based on my study of the materials cited (type included) in the original description of A. constricta and of the materials originally labeled “inaurata” at SFSU (thanks to Dennis Desjardin for permission to borrow material and visit the herbarium!). In other words, I’m inclined to believe that the type of A. constricta was a brown-capped specimen. In support of this, all the material that has been sent to me over the years by Jan Lindgren and others that I thought belonged in A. constricta has had a brown cap. In addition, a collection that I retained from the SOMA camp foray of a couple of years back, was brown-capped and exhibited all the macrocharacters of constricta. I agree with Debbie about the state of sect. Vaginatae. I’ve been working on it when I can for about 15 years. I have just shy of 100 taxa treated in a key, which mostly includes species that have been revised by Dr. Yang or myself. Let me know if you’re interested in a copy. I’ll see what I can do about posting a draft…. Remember, it’s a draft.

Created: 2008-04-20 17:20:14
By: debbie viess (amanitarita)
Summary: not protecta, IMO

Protecta will usually yellow after handling or with age. Veil material on the cap of protecta can be thin and pulverulent, and often covers much of the cap, in addition to forming warts; in this mushrooms case, it is merely a stretched and broken membranous volva. Protecta has a crumbly sort of indistinct or cup-like volva at its base, but not with a close adherance to the middle of the stipe base and a flaring, membranous apex. Constricta shares the protecta characteristics of marginate gills, reddening of the volva warts and sometimes gray ornamentation on the upper stipe (altho in protecta this gray ornamentation is much darker). Protecta tends to have a generally thicker, more ponderous fruit body than that of constricta.

In fact, according to Tulloss, a few individuals of protecta were described in the original sp. description for constricta, which makes separating these species all the more confusing. I did at first think that this mushroom was protecta (as I mentioned on the BAMS list), but at this point I think not. What is your reasoning, Darv?

On the other hand, maybe it is none of the above. Somebody really needs to work on all of the Western grisette species. They are a confusing mess!

Here is Rod’s technical description of protecta: http://pluto.njcc.com/~ret/amanita/species/protecta.pdf