Observation 137951: Amanita sagittaria Tulloss nom. prov.

Solitary specimen growing in mixed woods in the Turkey Creek Unit.
Cap 6.5 cm across, moderate striations.
Spores whitish and amyloid.
Spores ~ 11.1-16.0 X 3.9-4.6 microns, cylindric to bacciliform.
Q(ave) = 3.09. Q(range) = 2.64-3.64.
This one had some of the longest spores(and variable) I’ve encountered with Amanitas and with the width fairly constant, the Q values were all over the map.
Couldn’t find a match.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
The composite sporograph of section Amidella shows…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-08-23 20:49:04 WIB (+0700)

that the spores of this species are the narrowest in section Amidella. In the figure I am sending to you, the bright orange-red hexagon in the upper left represents sagittaria.

Very best,


Since section Amidella is rather small, it would be interesting to check…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-08-23 20:20:12 WIB (+0700)

the composite sporograph for the section. In North America, the closest spore shape is that of A. peckiana; however, the ranges of spore width in sagittaria and peckiana are almost disjoint as can be seen from the sporograph on the sagittaria techtab on WAO.

I think I’ll see what the composite sporograph looks like. It can be triggered from this page:


Very best,


Thanks Rod,
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2013-08-23 09:57:16 WIB (+0700)
Definitely a rather unique Amanita. Those sausage spores are all about the same width but sure do vary in length. It’ll be interesting to see what it’s closest relative turns out to be.
I got into the spore measurements today and Naomi wrote the basics of a brief tab.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-08-23 00:43:40 WIB (+0700)

Here are my spore measurements: [20/1/1] (12.0-) 12.4 – 15.9 (-18.0) x 4.-0 – 4.5 microns, (L = 13.7 microns; W = 4.2 microns; Q = (2.96-) 3.0 – 3.80 (-4.0); Q = 3.29).

You can see the growing information about spore variation on the WAO taxon page techtab:


Thanks for the field notes. They are very helpful. The recent New Jersey collections have photographs, but not notes.

Thanks again for all you do.

I updated the Texas and Gulf Coast checklist with the new data yesterday. I’ll have to change the spore data slightly now.

Very best,


Thanks for the update Rod,
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2013-08-21 03:35:02 WIB (+0700)

and looking forward to whatever new information can be gleaned from the DNA testing.

Hi, Ron.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-08-21 01:02:36 WIB (+0700)

It seems we have just found a site in New Jersey where this species has been found two years in a row. We’re going to try to compare Florida, New Jersey, and Texas specimens genetically. This may take awhile section Amidella is not a high priority of any of the current DNA-collaborations we’re involved in; but folks are kind and let us slip in some weird things in the sample list once in a while.

Very best,


Thanks Ron,
By: groundhog
2013-07-11 00:07:28 WIB (+0700)

This material has been recieved and accessioned into Rod’s herbarium.
-Naomi (working with RET)

I got so flustered…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-07-04 02:27:58 WIB (+0700)

that I didn’t ask for the material.

We have so much going on here in the last few days, I lost track of my “MO-facing” priorities (as my son’s business partner might say).

Yes, please, I would very much like to examine the specimen in detail.

Very best,


It’s always fun to find something
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2013-07-04 02:09:02 WIB (+0700)

that is a little unusual.
Also Rod, if you want to add it to your herbarium, it is of course available.

I would like to point out to the Florida crowd that I first received material…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-07-04 00:15:35 WIB (+0700)

of this apparent species from the Sunshine State. It may be around you masquerading as volvata or some other Amidella. The bottom of the volva usually has at least a blunt point. The spores are pretty amazing if you have a scope.

I haven’t seen one of these for quite a few years if my memory is supporting me today.

We do have a previous collection from eastern Texas, but not from the location of Ron’s collections.

Very best,


By: Josh M.K. (suchen)
2013-07-03 23:46:29 WIB (+0700)

Cool find!

You’re welcome, Ron.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-07-03 04:26:55 WIB (+0700)

Somehow, I didn’t pick up on the spore measurements when I first saw this observation. It must have been the pictures that scared me off. (OMG another wierd Amidella. Run for the hills.)

Glad I could help.

Very best,


Thanks Rod, Amanita “sagittaria”
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2013-07-03 04:14:29 WIB (+0700)

does look like a good possibility.
The spore measurements look even closer when compared to the overall
measurements on your technical tab for this species.

By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-07-03 04:06:19 WIB (+0700)

I changed the WAO page name and the link from the eastern Texas checklist. Now everything should say “sagitarria.”

Ooops. I better go check to see if any references to sp-F03 are lurking anywhere.


If the volval sack comes to a point on the bottom (and it looks like it does), …
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-07-03 03:44:16 WIB (+0700)

that is a character of “Amanita sagittaria”…and the idea behind the provisional name because the pointed volva suggested an arrowhead to me.

Very best,


The higher the average Q, the wilder the variation in Q. I’ve noticed this for years.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2013-07-03 03:41:03 WIB (+0700)

Maybe the percentage variation is relatively constant, and we should look at that instead of absolute values of variation. Someday I’ll have time to look at that. You are invited to explore the possibilities!

Section Amidella is definitely the right placement. At present sagittaria is in the “eastern Texas” checklist; but it is called sp-F03 on its taxon page on WAO. It has very narrow spores, which seemed to exclude peckiana from being a good interpretation of it. The east Texas material had the following spore measurements: [20/1/1] (10.5-) 11.2 – 13.3 (-14.7) × (3.1-) 3.5 – 4.5 µm; L = 12.5 µm; W = 3.8 µm; Q = 2.95 – 3.50 (-4.29); Q = 3.34).

Could that be a possibility for you?

Very best,


Created: 2013-06-29 23:58:33 WIB (+0700)
Last modified: 2017-12-29 21:35:54 WIB (+0700)
Viewed: 246 times, last viewed: 2018-05-19 15:05:23 WIB (+0700)
Show Log