|I’d Call It That||3.0||0.00||0|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
It’s important to understand that there are many gaps in our knowledge of lots of species. We stumbled upon cruetilemurum in material sent to us from New Mexico and California over the last few years.
We know that the bright red staining of the stem base in cruetilemurum seems to occur rather early in the mushroom development. On the contrary the first staining seen in novinupta is on the cap and seems to be below the surface—as if there was a pane of frosted glass between one’s eyes and the source of the bruising reaction. So, based on what we know so far (NOTA), the appearance of the staining reaction seems to be different in the two taxa.
Photographs help. Written description are also very important.
Your offer of future collections is very generous.
I can send you a workbook with information about collecting and drying amanitas, if you would like.
Please email me via the MO email capability (on the upper right of an MO user’s page). That will give me your email address, and I can send you a PDF of the workbook.
Thanks so much for all the info!! Its very interesting. Sounds like the main differences are in the genetics. Let me know if you would like any samples from California. I can always send you some if I find any more.
Amanita “cruetilemurum” is commonly found with oak in Arizona. It is not uncommon for many (not all) amanitas to occur with multiple host trees and to be able to shift host trees. On the technical tab of the A. cruetilemurum page of the “Studies in Amanitaceae” site the data field labeled “ecology” contains all the information that we have about known or possible hosts.
The “blood-stained ghost amanita” was discovered through an on-going project to extensively sequence DNA of material in the herbarium here in Roosevelt, NJ. This herbarium has been built up over 37+ years and is concentrated on the Amanitaceae. As you can see on the afore-mentioned page, we have 21 sequences derived from two genes of “cruetilemurum.” These two genes are commonly used in attempts to segregate species of fungi. Because of the time required for editing and review of sequences submitted to GenBank, the sequences (for which GenBank accession numbers have been obtained) are not yet publicly available from GenBank. We can supply sample sequences on request in the meantime.
Amanita “cruetilemurum” is a member of the subgroup of Amanita called Amanita section Validae. This is a group that includes novinupta, augusta, flavoconia, rubescens, flavorubens, submaculata, and many other taxa with general appearance of those species. They all have a friable universal veil that can leave little bits and pieces on the cap. These same bits and pieces can be washed away in rain or scraped off by soil when the mushroom is expanding from its “button” stage underground. All members of this group of amanitas have a membranous, skirt-like annulus (ring, partial veil). There are currently 121 taxa known in section Validae and listed on the “Studies in Amanitaceae” website:
The program to get more information on “cruetilemurum” includes sampling probable collections of the species from Arizona and central Mexico. We are working toward the goal of a web page and a formal publication of the species. We believe in sharing data as we obtain it and working with collectors all over the world to better our collective knowledge of the Amanitaceae.
Mushroomobserver.org and its observers play an important role in what we do. Thank you for your postings, your images, and your questions.
From looking at the 2 links you sent I am slightly confused . The description of Amanita creutilemurum says that it grows under Picea sitchensis (sitka spruce) however, the ones I found were under live oak. Also the picture of creutilemurum in the link you provided seems to have a rather smooth cap where the ones pictured here were rather scaly. How are you determining that these mushrooms are Amanita creutilemurum not Amanita novinupta? Thanks for any info!!
is the only page on the web for “creutilemurum”…a provisional name.
includes the original description for novinupta.
Since the latter was formally published, there is much more data on the “new bride” than on the provisional species.
We have good geographic distribution information in both cases. We have more genetic information on “creutilemurum” because it was pinned down recently in an age when sequencing is easier to accomplish than it was when novinupta was originally studied.
Where can I find more information about Amanita “creutilemurum”? There isn’t much on google, is there a paper? Or can you tell me more about the differences between Amanita “creutilemurum” and Amanita novinupta?
Created: 2015-03-11 04:27:31 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2015-03-11 04:27:34 CET (+0100)
Viewed: 115 times, last viewed: 2017-06-20 06:03:05 CEST (+0200)