Observation 18524: Austropaxillus statuum (Speg.) Bresinsky & Jarosch
When: 2009-01-27
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Very abundant throughout Nothofagus forests. Clearly associated with the trees, always at base of or near roots of them. Either very shelf-like to nearly symmetrical with central stipe; always with depressed center and margins rolled under. From bright ochraceous to quite brown-fibrillose. Flesh pale yellowish, very firm and solid, bruising rapidly faintly vinaceous. White fuzz at base of stipe (when present). Gills thick, mostly forked, decurrent, generally rather bright ochraceous, presumably with similarly-colored spores.

Proposed Names

30% (3)
Recognized by sight
3% (3)
Eye3
Used references: Again, based on info on the web, this introduced species has become common in southern beech forests of New Zealand and southern South America.
54% (1)
Recognized by sight: Austropaxillus has been separated from Paxillus, because of different pigments, and phylogeny shows that the southern species mycorrhizal with Nothofagus is a distinct group of its own. Forked gills is one of the characters.
I haven’t been able to find keys or any good descriptions of the species.
At least 3 are known from South America: statuum, chilensis and boletinoides.
60% (2)
Eyes3
Used references: [as Paxillus statuum] – Probably in mycorrhizal relationship with all South American species of antarctic beech, occurs everywhere in forests composed of these hosts. This fungus follows its partners into all ecological niches recorded for Nothofagus.
Pileus up to 10 cm, convex when young but center soon becoming depressed, umbilicate or funnel-shaped, margin strongly enrolled, colour ranging from pale yellow to rust brown, fibrillose, squamulose, dry. Lamellae decurrent, often forked, yellow-brown becoming brilliant rust-brown. Stipe -10 x -1.5 cm, cylindric or attenuated towards base, concolorous with pileus, veil remnants absent, dry. Flesh yellowish turning brown on exposure. Odor and taste sour. (Gamundi, I. & E. Horak, 1995. “Fungi of the Andean-Patagonian forests.” Buenos Aires: Vazquez Mazzini Editores, pg. 82)

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Thanks, Irene!
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2009-02-27 01:11:23 CET (+0100)

I’m forced to agree with you. This explains why I’ve been having a really hard time figuring out why everyone says the gills should be easy to peel away from the fruiting body of Paxillus! I haven’t actually been trying it on Paxillus

The few species of Austropaxillus that I can find on the web do look like things I’ve seen (especially the “gills”). I’ve been assuming it’s a single, extremely variable species, but it looks like there are several with at least three quite common. How very complicated.

nice call Irene!
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2009-02-25 16:12:28 CET (+0100)

So, is this genus related to Austroboletus? Or is the moniker more of a reference to the southern hemisphere location?

Too yellow
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2009-02-25 08:57:51 CET (+0100)

to be Paxillus involutus, and the forked gills suggest something else.
Try to get some info about Austropaxillus, I think you’ll find it there.

Created: 2009-02-16 21:59:23 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2013-05-29 08:00:59 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 212 times, last viewed: 2016-07-14 08:14:15 CEST (+0200)
Show Log