Observation 191748: Xerocomellus Šutara
When: 2014-12-04
( 13m)
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Probably growing with an ornamental conifer tree, though there were some other trees nearby as well.

Spore measurements:

8.1 [9.5 ; 11.5] 12.4 × 4.1 [4.4 ; 4.6] 4.7 µm
Q = 1.7 [2.1 ; 2.4] 2.8 ; N = 17 ; C = 95%
Me = 10 × 4.5 µm ; Qe = 2.2

11.47 4.40
9.57 4.37
11.52 4.73
9.19 4.58
8.68 4.79
10.64 4.78
9.67 4.54
10.33 4.63
8.19 4.31
8.27 4.51
12.80 4.33
9.52 3.93
10.47 4.22
10.45 4.48
9.59 4.46
10.32 4.89
9.79 4.48

Images

488783
IMG_4553.JPG
488782
IMG_4550.JPG
488784
IMG_4556.JPG
488785
IMG_4557.JPG
488786
IMG_4558.JPG
488787
IMG_4590.JPG
Possible host tree 1
488788
IMG_4597.JPG
Possible host tree 1
488789
IMG_4598.JPG
Possible host tree 1
488790
IMG_4599.JPG
Possible host tree 1
488791
IMG_4596.JPG
Possible host tree 2
488820
IMG_4646.pixi.jpg
Spores 400x

Proposed Names

28% (1)
Recognized by sight: would be an atypical fruitbody – lack of strong bluing extensively yellow stipe, and paler cap. Lack of truncate spores is especially odd… But there is a certain percentage of non-truncate spores even in more typical truncatus, so…
55% (1)
Eyes3
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
You could
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2014-12-05 14:01:33 EST (-0500)

but the reason I would not call it that is that I find the concept of X. chrysenteron sensu CA to be even weaker than that of X. truncatus.
Jonathan Frank and Noah and I have been sequencing and studying these Xerocomellus for a year and the emerging picture is very complicated…

Truncate spores
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2014-12-05 13:47:26 EST (-0500)

None of the spores were truncate.

There was very slight but definitely noticeable bluing on the pores and context.

The mushroom is in the dehydrator.

Is there any reason not to call it Xerocomellus chrysenteron sensu CA?

Interesting
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2014-12-05 13:37:34 EST (-0500)

none of the spores in the photo appear truncate. I suspected this might not be X. truncatus sensu CA due to the lack of apparent bluing. It would be good to get a sequence for this one.

The mycorrhizal hosts
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2014-12-05 01:28:55 EST (-0500)

(if this mushroom is indeed obligately mycorrhizal) seem limited to the conifer – which looks like Cedrus atlantica var. glauca. The other one is a fern pine (Podocarpus) and I don’t think they form EM symbioses.

Created: 2014-12-05 00:59:41 EST (-0500)
Last modified: 2014-12-05 14:05:17 EST (-0500)
Viewed: 41 times, last viewed: 2016-10-26 14:05:02 EDT (-0400)
Show Log