Observation 110668: Amanita sect. Vaginatae sensu Zhu L. Yang
When: 2012-09-15
No herbarium specimen

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
probably not boreal
By: Rob (gourmand)
2012-09-22 03:01:29 CEST (+0200)

I don’t think this would count as boreal, although we do have areas like that in Nova Scotia. I just moved here so I’m not entirely sure. When I think of boreal, I think predominantly pine and other evergreens. This had a fair amount of that, but certainly not exclusively so. It might have been more of a boreal microhabitat, if that is possible. I don’t remember specifically where I found it. We are fairly close to NL, so I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some overlap in species.

I didn’t preserve, I’m afraid I don’t know how to do that! Thanks for your interest though.

Thank you, Rob.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2012-09-21 13:46:49 CEST (+0200)

It sounds like a different forest type from that in which all known collections of A. daimonioctantes come. The latter is known from Atlantic coastal boreal forest in Newfoundland.

Did you happen to preserve the specimen shown in your pictures?

Very best,

Rod

Trees
By: Rob (gourmand)
2012-09-21 12:45:24 CEST (+0200)

The area I was in was mixed hardwood. It was predominantly oak-maple, with some pines and hemlocks mixed in. I’m afraid I can’t be any more specific about the area where I found this particular mushroom. Hope that helps!

Possibly A. daimonioctantes?
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2012-09-21 04:39:04 CEST (+0200)

The observation locality is in Prov. Nova Scotia, right? Can you tell us anything about the trees in the locality of your observation?

Very best,

Rod

Created: 2012-09-21 03:44:57 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2012-09-21 04:41:49 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 31 times, last viewed: 2014-03-08 18:12:12 CET (+0100)
Show Log