Observation 100132: Amanita sect. Lepidella sensu Bas
When: 2012-07-12
Herbarium specimen reported

Proposed Names

56% (1)
Recognized by sight
77% (2)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight
30% (2)
Recognized by sight

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Understanding your struggle…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2012-07-13 07:58:53 EDT (-0400)

Steve,

I’m about to leave the office for a few days, and this may be the last note I can post on this subject for a bit. In response to your question, I went back to Dr. Bas’ 1969 discussions of the two species. He notes their similarity as you have done. There are even more similarities; for example, they both have clamps at the bases of their basidia.

Bas’ grouping of species into stirpes (singular, “stirps”) and of stirpes into subsections is based on characters such as clamps, microscopic structure of the volva, size and shape of spores, nature of the pileipellis, macroscopic form, etc. He gave a great deal of attention to the structure of the volva in his groupings of species.

In the present cases, he notes several differences and, in the end, falls back on microscopic examination of the volval structure: “In cases of doubt the microscopical structure of the base of warts has to be studied; in A. ravenelii the tissue there consists nearly completely of hyphae and only scattered, sometimes very large, inflated cells.” He previously mentions that rhopalopus has no clearly segregated base in its warts which comprise hyphae and inflated cells that are soon disordered and, hence, may form warts but not cleanly pyramidal ones.

I am going to post all of Bas’ microscopic information for ravenelii on the web site. I will also post his comments on both species. I don’t know if I am going to get to this action this morning before I have to leave. I did notice these points, which have not come up in our discussion (and which I’ve never used myself…to date, but will check into): (1) A. rhopalopus is described as having a rather thick pileipellis that sooner or later gelatinizes at the surface. (2) The fibrillose base of the warts in A. ravenelii is said to be intimately connected (by continuous hyphae) to the flesh of the cap (apparently passing through the pileipellis, which is mentioned as present but without a described thickness). Yes, the pileipellis descriptions are not point-to-point comparable as Bas recorded them.

In summary, at present we are reliant upon Bas’ 1969 monograph (which is ground-breaking and brilliant in my opinion) and, hence, we are dependent on microscopic analysis of the bases of the warts. And this holds even if (as is possible) that Bas (working only with dried material in the relevant case) mixed rhopalopus with the provisionally named taxon “A. magniradix,” which may have been true.

Your last photograph (of warts near the cap margin) is consistent with Bas’ remark regarding ravenelii that the volva consists more prominently of the lower fibrillose layer when you observe it closer to the cap’s margin.

In your material, it appears to me that the drying of the volva collapsed the tissues in the warts near the center of the cap, but the lower level of the volva seems to be distinct, especially near the margin. Without a microscopic “check up,” I’m inclined (like you) to consider ravenelii as more probable than rhopalopus and am now going to adjust my votes on the various names.

Very best,

Rod

Are there any other…
By: Stephen Russell (Mycota)
2012-07-13 03:37:16 EDT (-0400)

good characteristics to look for besides the fibrillose warts with A. ravenelii and A. rhopalopus?

It seems that the bulb style is somewhat interchangeable between the two. Both can have a narrower and/or dogleg bulb. Size and shape of the fruitbody is similar. Spore size is roughly similar. Similar odor and annulus.

Red staining on bulb. Relevant for differentiation? Mentioned in A. rav but not A. rhop.

Back to the warts…A. rhopalopus does not mention pyramidal warts. How significant of a distinguishing feature is that between the two? (Id prolly say both can have them). Same with the floccose scales. This specimen appears to have them and there is not mention of that potential in the A. rhopalopus description.

Can you make any kind of determination with the final picture of the warts on this specimen? It is probably as micro as I can get. My thought is more towards A. ravenelii.

These large, pungent Lepidellas are fairly common in our area, and we have been calling most of them A. rhopalopus. Id like to learn a bit more about distinguishing them.

attempt at clarification… In A. ravenelii, …
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2012-07-13 00:20:03 EDT (-0400)

the upper parts of the warts have striations on their faces/sides suggesting ravines running down the sides of a hill. The fibrillose bases extends outward from the warts in all directions (approximately radially (but imperfectly so) from the approximate center of each wart. Toward the cap edge upper parts of the warts are smaller and fibrillose bases are more exposed.

I have tried to rewrite the description of the warts on the techtab of A. ravenelii to make it clearer. This is a dangerous thing to do at this hour of the night. I expect that I will be advised if I’ve managed to make it worse.

R

To clear up something…
By: Stephen Russell (Mycota)
2012-07-12 21:10:06 EDT (-0400)

on the A. ravenelii page it says:

However, examination of the base of the warts (often, even without a hand lens) will show that the warts rest on a base of pallid, radially fibrillose material.

on the A. rhopalopus page it says:

In the field, a hand lens will quickly reveal the radially oriented nature of grooves and fibers on the warts of A. ravenelii that is illustrated on the page for that species. The warts of A. rhopalopus are more nearly formless.

Without a good closeup of A. rhopalopus handy, am I looking for warts on a radially fillabrose base, or radially fillabrose warts, or both?

No macro lens
By: Stephen Russell (Mycota)
2012-07-12 18:23:14 EDT (-0400)

and the hand lens trick wont work on my normal camera. Seemed to work ok with the cell phone camera tho.

I wish we could get a bit more…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2012-07-12 18:04:01 EDT (-0400)

magnification on the warts. The warts seem to have dried out quite a bit.

R

Created: 2012-07-12 16:42:08 EDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2012-07-13 07:59:14 EDT (-0400)
Viewed: 173 times, last viewed: 2016-10-23 21:45:24 EDT (-0400)
Show Log