Observation 138243: Cantharellus roseocanus group
When: 2013-06-30
No herbarium specimen

Proposed Names

62% (4)
Recognized by sight
12% (3)
Used references: see MO 136896 for comment by Matthew Foltz regarding similarity to roseocanus

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Could be
By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2014-07-13 13:28:16 MDT (-0600)

.. I’m just presenting information. Our collections in east certainly seem to be smaller and lack the strong purple pigmentation of western collections. :)

and yet …
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2014-07-13 13:21:23 MDT (-0600)

author Foltz of that very paper, published in 2013, stated in January of this year, that a similar collection from Maine was more closely related to roseocanus than to other chanterelle species tested, but not yet determined to be that species. Could there be a bit of back-pedaling as more data is being gathered and analyzed?

See discussion here:

http://mushroomobserver.org/136896?q=24g6a

Debbie
By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2014-07-13 12:28:48 MDT (-0600)

“Our paper shows that norther conifer associated chanterelles seem to all be this species, much more widespread than originally thought.”
Used references: Foltz, M. J., Perez, K., Thomas J. Volk. 2013. Molecular phylogeny and morphology reveals three new species of Cantharellus within 20 meters of one another in western Wisconsin, USA.. Mycologia 105:447-461.

http://mushroomobserver.org/23149?q=24g7H

This is the same exact location as that observation.

yes, roseocanus may be a close relative …
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2014-07-13 12:12:47 MDT (-0600)

but there is currently no evidence that this is actually roseocanus.

Created: 2013-06-30 21:20:46 MDT (-0600)
Last modified: 2014-07-14 19:54:27 MDT (-0600)
Viewed: 92 times, last viewed: 2016-09-26 08:29:18 MDT (-0600)
Show Log