|User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote.|
|I’d Call It That||3.0||0.00||0|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
This material has been recieved and accessioned to Rod’s herbarium. We have scheduled it for DNA sequencing.
Thank you very much, Eric…as always.
Interesting as always. These are packaged and ready to go. I have a few more things I want to add to the collections before I mail them out to you. I saw the first “citrinas” of the season the other day.
At one of the first NEMF forays that I attended, Alexander Smith said that two-spored specimens of bisporigera were more gracile than 4-spored specimens of what, at that time, we called A. virosa. However, both taxa were KOH positive. This is the second or third time in recent years when I have heard of (or seen myself) a KOH negative specimen of a white destroying angel. It will be interesting to find out if there is a genetic difference between the KOH negative specimens and KOH positive specimens. In China, a KOH negative species of white destroying angel has been found if memory serves this morning. In the eastern U.S., we know that the ellipsoid-spored destroying angels don’t respond to KOH; and they also tend to have an upstanding volva that doesn’t collapse on the stipe as in bisporigera.
We have some preliminary sequences of destroying angels suggesting that there are more sequences than there are names. So more study really does have to be done. I think your material may be helpful.
I was pretty surprised myself.
On a side note, I found another specimen of what I assumed was the same thing not too far away that had a strong reaction to KOH. Not much different visually except that it was a little smaller and more gracile. All specimens in this collection had a negative reaction.
That’s a surprise. I hope you are able to dry a specimen of the unreactive mushrooms.
Created: 2013-08-21 03:24:04 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2013-09-02 02:27:45 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 58 times, last viewed: 2017-02-04 10:39:09 CET (+0100)