Observation 181603: Amanita sect. Vaginatae sensu Zhu L. Yang
When: 2014-10-02
(39.776° -74.5354° )

Notes: > A large family of 15 fruiting bodies at different stages of development (from a fully mature basidiome with a cap of 8 cm in diameter and a stipe of 8 cm long to a button just emerging from the soil) growing in pure coarse sand, some on a wide dirt road and some on a median, in the Speedwell section of FPP.
> The caps are off-white or very pale cream with a cream to pale salmon universal veil. The cap color intensifies with age, particularly in the disk area (see photos). Marginal striation are very prominent with age, but not so in young specimens.
> The stipe is covered with a dense, pale salmon “scaly” snake skin. All fruiting bodies had a prominent skirt-like structure on the bottom of the stipe just above the “bulb” area.
> The patch is surrounded by pitch pines with a few oak saplings, but the oaks are too far away to be the host tree.
> This exact spot previously yielded obs 151169, obs 151170, and obs 151171 in early November 2013.
> This material is now in the hands of RET.

As expected, the spores are inamyloid in Melzer’s;
The measured spores came from the largest/oldest basidiome;
[20/1/1]; L x W = (10.7-) 11.2-13.0 (-13.3) x (7.2-) 7.4-9.1 (-9.3) μm;
L’ = 12.1 μm; W’ = 8.2 μm;
Q = (1.28-) 1.33-1.65 (-1.72); Q’ = 1.48; mostly ellipsoid (80%), a few elongate (15%) and rarely broadly ellipsoid (5%)

The reported values for A. “vulpecula” at http://www.amanitaceae.org/?Amanita vulpecula:
(10.6-) 10.8 – 14.7 (-15.5) × (7.2-) 7.7 – 9.0 (-11.5) μm


Details of the cap of the second from the left basidiome from the pic above
Details of the cap of the specimen in the preceding pic.
Details of the cap of the specimen in the preceding pic.
A view of the site with the amanitas visible in the middle of the road and on the left shoulder
Spores mounted in Melzer’s and viewed at x400
Spores mounted in Melzer’s and viewed at x1000

Proposed Names

-28% (1)
Recognized by sight: Could this be an albino version of Amanita “vulpecula”?
55% (1)
Recognized by sight: lack of real bulb, inamyloid spores, striate margin.
Based on chemical features: evidence that similar forms have genetic markers for section Vaginatae.
28% (1)
Recognized by sight
Based on microscopic features

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Thanks Igor,
By: groundhog
2014-10-28 21:11:40 CET (+0100)

This material has been received and accessioned to Rod’s herbarium. We have scheduled it for DNA sequencing.

By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2014-10-06 19:59:21 CEST (+0200)

Fortunately, this road is not frequently traveled on! FPP is gated, so motor vehicle access is limited only to “authorized” visitors, like a few folks from the NJMA. The NJ Conservation Foundation makes sure to keep pineys and their destructive ATVs away from this land…

Thank you, Rod
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2014-10-06 19:47:56 CEST (+0200)

Your kind words are much appreciated….

thanks for that habitat shot!
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2014-10-06 17:16:30 CEST (+0200)

Guess that one has to watch where they drive at the FPP!

Again, thank you for all your work, especially on amanitas from FPP.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-10-06 15:42:43 CEST (+0200)

Yes, we received a large set of material from the collecting at FPP via Nina.

At the moment we are able to work on accessioning one 8 hour day per week. Tomorrow (Tuesday) we expect to go over all the recent accessions, check the sanity of the herbarium labels, and get the “thank you” messages out onto MO.

There were indeed many interesting specimens in the set that Nina brought to Roosevelt.

As I hope you know, I greatly appreciate the role you play in getting these specimens photographed and documented using mushroomobserver.

Very best,


3 Images added:
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2014-10-06 06:57:27 CEST (+0200)

A view of the amanita site and spores mounted in Melzer’s at x400 & x1000.

Hello, Rod
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2014-10-06 06:46:21 CEST (+0200)

Thank you for all your comments in this observation.
Yes I am aware that ITS sequences didn’t separate dulciarii from vulpecula and that you thought that sequencing other genes would support the two species concept suggested by the spore shape/size (Nina B. told me all of this a while back).

I measured the spores from the largest sporocarp and posted them in the notes section. They are in very good agreement with your measurements for all of the logged vulpecula collections posted on your website.

Recently I collected an amanita that I thought morphologically was in line with dulciarii (obs 179833). I’ve been back-logged with spore measurements, so I didn’t get around to measure them for that obs yet. However, I just looked at the spore print at x400 and saw ellipsoid spores again. I am yet to find a specimen in the Pine Barrens of what looks like your “classic” dulchiarii with globose/subglobose spores.

I am readying a package for you that will include the following specimens:
obs 179833
obs 179834
obs 181603
obs 181606

I also hope that you found at least some of the amanitas that Nina brought in a couple of weeks ago useful. I think scalaris was one of them…

Yes, David.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-10-06 06:14:07 CEST (+0200)

We saw the same thing happen with some collections last year. However, with the data then at hand, the genetic sequences did not support the idea that there were two species having different shapes of spores. The issue is still open in my mind. Having fresh material gives us the chance to look at the matter again, with different material.

Very best,


Some of the spores…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2014-10-06 05:07:14 CEST (+0200)

appear to show quotient significantly larger than what is reported for ducliarii.

I just saw your note concerning “vulpecula.”
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-10-05 16:32:32 CEST (+0200)

You caught all the angles.

Last year, when it came down to the DNA, we couldn’t separate “vulpecula” from “ducliarii.” This collection gives us a second chance to try to understand what is going on.

There is a marker that seems present only for section Vaginatae in the segment of the nrLSU gene (“nuclear ribosomal Large Subunit”) that is now commonly being used in fungal genetics. In the material we checked last year, BOTHdulciarii” and “vulpecula” have that distinguishing element.

There are things that could have gone wrong. We could have made some sort of mistake. (All the cards on the table: I don’t think there was a mistake.) Now we have another collection with the pale orange fanciness on the stem and spores of the more nearly ellipsoid form. We can try again. Thank you for preserving the material, which makes trying again possible.

Very best,


Then there is the issue of what is going on with the variable spore shape.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-10-05 16:13:27 CEST (+0200)

Last year I went for two taxa as you know, but that idea was not supported by the DNA. This group with pale orange confectioner’s sugar on the stem is an interesting puzzle.


Oh, boy.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-10-05 16:10:42 CEST (+0200)

A nice looking group with notes on size, etc. I would like to suggest that these are a very pale-capped entity close to A. dulciarii in sect. Vaginatae. Last year some similarly pale-capped material from Franklin Parker Preserve seemed to me to be dulciarii. We have several examples of dulciarii DNA now; so we can test the hypothesis that this pale-capped material has the same DNA as the brown-capped material that is typical from, say, some areas around Pakim Pond.

Before I read you notes, I saw the material on the stipe surface and thought “dulciarii.”

Very best,


Created: 2014-10-05 08:32:37 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2014-10-26 02:23:56 CET (+0100)
Viewed: 96 times, last viewed: 2016-10-27 15:25:20 CEST (+0200)
Show Log