Observation 159292: Amanita muscaria (L.) Lam.
When: 2014-02-07
No herbarium specimen

Proposed Names

51% (6)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight
49% (4)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
so basically…
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2014-02-13 14:14:41 PST (-0800)

we don’t know how it happened, exactly. If ONLY seed from NA was imported to NZ, obviously it wouldn’t have a MR partner. If seedlings were brought in from P. radiata grown in England, then indeed that could have been the source of the EU muscaria.

Muscaria is certainly a host jumper, but how this all came about in NZ is not completely clear.

On the other hand, sounds like we CAN safely label this obsie as plain old muscaria.

They came on the roots of EU trees,
By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2014-02-13 13:54:44 PST (-0800)

Could have been a host of different trees and different times and then jumped to the CA pines that were mostly planted from seeds.

But,like I said your statement “wherever the pines came from… that’s where the muscaria came from” should not be said in this case.

so…how did they get there?
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2014-02-13 13:40:01 PST (-0800)

one NZ botanical garden site claims that trees and seedlings of Pinus radiata were imported from England in the 1800s, where they had started pine plantations from species from NA. If that is true, that would explain the European muscaria on the Pinus roots: the species might be native to the US, but was originally grown in England.

Your explanation?

CA pines in NZ
By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2014-02-13 13:25:54 PST (-0800)

There is a paper outlining the history of P. radiata in NZ, but it’s been a while since I have read it. I think a Rhizopogon was the primary ECM associate in the beginning, but Amanita muscaria quickly moved in. There are vast plantations P. radiata in NZ; around 1.7 million hectares! And muscaria is the most common fungus (you see) in them.

By: Parker V
2014-02-13 13:18:51 PST (-0800)

might also be of some interest.

“Beringian origins and cryptic speciation events in the flyagaric (Amanita muscaria)”

“Characterisation of ectomycorrhizal formation by the exotic fungus Amanita muscaria with Nothofagus cunninghamii in Victoria, Australia”

“Genet size and distribution of Amanita muscaria in a suburban park, Dunedin, New Zealand”

Also check out
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2014-02-13 13:06:54 PST (-0800)


Where collection 30987 from New Zealand clades out into the Eurasian part of the tree.

By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2014-02-13 13:00:20 PST (-0800)

unpublished. But not entirely.

For some published sequences of Amanita muscaria from Pinus radiata in New Zealand are available on genbank under these accession numbers:

pretty unlikely if you think about it…
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2014-02-13 12:50:08 PST (-0800)

were the trees shipped from Europe, or the USA? How many generations had they grown in Europe, if Europe was the latest source of these trees?

It makes absolutely NO sense that European mushrooms were on North American material shipped from NA.

If unpublished, this is also unverifiable by others, eh?

Who ran the sequence, and who determined where the trees were living prior to their arrival in NZ?

This is not true…
By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2014-02-13 12:02:14 PST (-0800)

“wherever the pines came from…”

In New Zealand most of the pines are Californian, (Pinus radiata) but based a large number of (mostly unpublished) sequences, the muscaria growing with them is the real European A. muscaria.

The same is true for AU, although I only know of a smaller sample size.

wherever the pines came from…
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2014-02-13 11:53:05 PST (-0800)

that’s where the muscaria came from. There were no native muscaria in the southern hemisphere prior to human introductions of their host trees. Muscaria is the second most successful introduced MR species n the world. Amanita phalloides is number one.

A. muscaria
By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2014-02-13 08:55:12 PST (-0800)

Here’s a recent paper from Brazil. http://www.scielo.br/...

Although it’s slightly possible that the “flavivolvata” clade has been introduced to Tasmania, it would be less likely to be found compared with the Eurasian species. Even less likely, is that this is a new cryptic “undescribed” fly agaric in Tasmania. Maybe after a million more years of geographic isolation down-under.

I see two choices here, A. muscaria or A. muscaria subsp. flavivolvata with about a 90% chance of it being the former.

what other countries?
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2014-02-12 12:49:04 PST (-0800)

are any of them Latin American? is there any published data to support this?

By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2014-02-11 09:48:54 PST (-0800)

Yes. However, it’s not native. It has been introduced to several countries south of the equator.

By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2014-02-10 11:08:43 PST (-0800)

is the true Siberian/Nordic/Alaskan A. muscaria also known from Tasmania?

Created: 2014-02-07 06:30:16 PST (-0800)
Last modified: 2014-02-13 14:14:57 PST (-0800)
Viewed: 124 times, last viewed: 2016-10-27 06:55:50 PDT (-0700)
Show Log