Observation 183350: Amanita sect. Vaginatae sensu Zhu L. Yang
When: 2014-10-12
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Seen at the Patrice Benson Memorial NAMA 2014 Foray display table

Proposed Names

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Thanks, Tim.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-10-17 18:54:52 BST (+0100)


Yes, Patrick Leacock was there
By: Tim Sage (T. Sage)
2014-10-17 18:31:44 BST (+0100)
Was Pat Leacock present at the foray?
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-10-17 18:16:51 BST (+0100)

If the vouchers are still going to the Field Museum, I will inquire with Pat about what showed up in the Museum after that foray.

Very best,


This was theoretically vouchered
By: Tim Sage (T. Sage)
2014-10-17 17:32:55 BST (+0100)

I just snapped quick photos as there was nearly 500 species at the foray, I didn’t always capture the voucher itself or good ID characteristics.

This collection would have been photographed by the NAMA voucher team prior to drying as well.

The problem with a morphological conception of constricta is…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-10-17 17:13:56 BST (+0100)

that it started out in life with an original description of two very distinct species. The original description combines descriptions of collections of (at least) A. protecta < http://www.amanitaceae.org?Amanita%20protecta >, A.crassiputamen” < http://www.amanitaceae.org?Amanita%20crassiputamen >, and material of the entity represented by the holotype, which is a presumably dark brown-capped species with a flimsy, graying, and collapsing-fragmenting volval sac (which, by common sense and nomenclatural rules defines what contstricta must be). Consequently, for example, the cap was originally described as both gray and brown.

The difficulty does not end there because if one looks at all the sequence entries in GenBank associated with the name constricta (and adds all the data that is slowly amassing in my “local database” for sect. Vaginatae), one sees that we (emphasis) are collecting multiple different taxa to which the name constricta is being applied.

So far, attempts to extract DNA from the NY Botanical Garden isotype of the species have indicated that the samples were contaminated. With the permission of the NY curator (Dr. Barbara Thiers), I have scheduled another attempt at extraction from another sample.

I hope that some of the material in the photo was deposited in the Field Museum although I don’t see a NAMA archival number in the photograph.

I think David is correct, there seem to be more than one species involved here.

Very best,


Created: 2014-10-16 22:08:55 BST (+0100)
Last modified: 2014-10-17 17:15:26 BST (+0100)
Viewed: 46 times, last viewed: 2016-10-28 11:58:40 BST (+0100)
Show Log