Observation 174550: Amanita rhacopus Y. Lamoureux nom. prov.
When: 2014-08-08
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Mixed coniferous forest with birch.

Proposed Names

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Sounds good to me, David.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-08-20 14:39:56 SAST (+0200)

R

I think the large one mentioned in the previous comment…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2014-08-20 07:08:04 SAST (+0200)

is the same as this one. The cap broke off not long before I handed it to you. Glad to hear you got some useful photos. The pics seen here are a bit lacking in color, and the stipe is a bit washed-out.

I remember this.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-08-20 05:04:44 SAST (+0200)

The cap was about 110 mm wide and the stem about 200 mm long. The cap broke off just before you got it to me. Mary and I got a picture. we show richer brown on the cap and brown fibrils on the stipe.

Does that seem about right to you?

Very best,

Rod

Both the collections are from Reid St. Pk.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-08-20 03:52:26 SAST (+0200)

R

I have two collections made by you at NEMF 2014.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-08-20 03:51:42 SAST (+0200)

One of them has the annotation “zonate cap,” which might be this one. I have a photograph which (I think) includes a ruler; so I should be able to compare the size of the specimen with the size in your photos…. I hope.

The material is accessioned in the herbarium here and scheduled to be sampled for sequencing.

Very best,

Rod

For the time being…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2014-08-20 03:15:30 SAST (+0200)

I should probably adopt the practice of posting these as “rhacopus group.”

Rod, this large specimen had fallen apart by the time I handed it to you at NEMF. But the material seemed to be in generally good condition.

Certainly in the “rhacopus group.”
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-08-19 14:55:49 SAST (+0200)

At NEMF I obtained three relevant parts of collections of the “rhacopus group.” One was more like Amanitaxanthomitra”; however, the other two were “cf. rhacopus.” Hopefully, the present taxon is represented by one or both of the latter collections.

Very best,

Rod

Created: 2014-08-19 13:57:05 SAST (+0200)
Last modified: 2014-08-19 13:57:20 SAST (+0200)
Viewed: 30 times, last viewed: 2016-10-27 09:05:58 SAST (+0200)
Show Log