Observation 175726: Amanita fulva group
When: 2007-10-08
No herbarium specimen

Proposed Names

28% (1)
Recognized by sight: Found on a series of forays in the Lombardy, Italy region led by Pierino Bigone and other mycologists in gruppo micologico Bresadola di Villa D’Ogna who also identified the mushrooms.
Used references: See- http://www.funghiitaliani.it/index.php?showtopic=15939
or the English translation here -
https://translate.google.com/...
56% (1)
Eyes3
Used references: See comment by RE Tulloss below

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Thank you, James.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-09-01 10:39:17 CDT (-0400)

I would be interested in anything that you can send. At present, I’m working on projects in mutliple sections with diverse folks. Section Vaginatae has been a source of fascination to me since I was working on the Colombian amanitas in early 1990s. More recently, I’ve collected a lot of data on the rubescent taxa and the citrina-like taxa. Presently, I am participating in several Amanitaceae-wide projects. So I would be interested in, and enlightened by, most European material in either Amanita or Limacella.

Very best,

Rod

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and findings from your studies Rod!
By: James Baker (cepecity)
2014-09-01 03:15:32 CDT (-0400)

The reason that I went back and dredged up this photo of my 2007 trip to the Lombardy, Italy region is to prepare for a return trip to that area in a little over a couple weeks with the same mycologists of gruppo micologico Bresadola di Villa D’Ogna. So if there’s enough rain I’ll have another chance to find this Amanita. If I do find interesting Amanitas on this mid-Sept trip, I’ll try to find a way to dry them and send them to you.

Also found a couple more photos from my 2007 trip of Amanita mushrooms similar to the ones in this photo that I’ll try to post tomorrow.

Thank you for your note, James. EDITED
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-08-31 20:48:21 CDT (-0400)

I do not have personal knowledge of a taxon that I could consider close to what you have depicted in this interesting photo. I don’t know how many dark brown species there may be in Italy or in Europe as a whole. There is a large collection from Bayern in Germany that has been examined in some detail and has been sequenced for at least one gene. This collection was considered by Bas to represent Schaeffer’s Agaricus fulvus (Amanita fulva). This position was accepted by Dr. Z.-L. Yang and by me. The entity in you picture is different from the Bavarian collection in cap color, in having a volva without exterior orange stains, in having a proportionately shorter volval sack, in having dark fibrils on the stipe, etc. So I think that this material may not be the “fulva” that is represented by the collection (deposited in Leiden) that I mentioned above.

I have examined a number of types of more recently described European taxa of the Vaginatae since the early 1990s. Your picture does not appear to depict any of those taxa. I have examined material of other European taxa that lack types, but for which Bas, and other European authors, share common views. None of those taxa match the one you have photographed.

Over many decades various old names have been resurrected and attached to photographs of contemporary collections. A thorough study of the Vaginatae is lacking everywhere. It seems to me that a number of species have accumulated more than one name in recent decades. No studies are complete enough to say that the species hypotheses in the Vaginatae are anywhere near stable.

I’m working on that now. If you can get a dried specimen of the species illustrated in your picture, I would be glad to include it in my studies. Whatever I find out (if anything can be said definitively), it will eventually appear on the WAO website (sequences will be in GenBank). Hence, what I don’t finish will have all its available data accessible to others.

Very best,

Rod

I destroyed my earlier comment because it was incomplete and I’m too tired to be…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-08-31 20:31:48 CDT (-0400)

talking about nomenclature at this time of night.

Persoon defined spadicea to include both fulva and badia.

Both of those name were proposed in advance of Persoon’s proposal of spadicea.

Amanita spadicea is either a dubious name (because it refers to a mixture of species) or it is a posterior synonym of whichever name were to be used for the single species if fulva and badia could somehow be demonstrated to be synonymous.

At any rate, spadicea seems to be a name that cannot be declared to be correct.

Very best,

Rod

Created: 2014-08-31 15:30:26 CDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2014-09-13 04:23:15 CDT (-0400)
Viewed: 55 times, last viewed: 2014-09-23 01:29:41 CDT (-0400)
Show Log