Observation 203724: Morchella sextelata M. Kuo
When: 2015-05-03
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Growing in 6/2014 burn area at about 7000’-7500’ elevation. In moist soil (with moss and Geopyxis carbonaria) under douglas fir and ponderosa pine.

Based on 100% match of ITS sequence with JQ723034. Tested by Alvalab- sample labelled 122330_E8_C4+6580_1F+ITS4 Results reported 1/7/16.

Proposed Names

14% (4)
Recognized by sight
81% (4)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight: black fire morel with flattened black ridges in age, vertically arranged pits/ridges, groove where cap meets stem
-34% (3)
Recognized by sight: black fire morel with flattened black ridges in age, vertically arranged pits/ridges, groove where cap meets stem

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Thanks, Debbie for your comments,
By: Terri Clements/Donna Fulton (pinonbistro)
2016-01-08 20:45:59 CST (-0500)

all useful especially the last one.

Terri

sounds like the price has dropped!
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2016-01-08 11:49:57 CST (-0500)

still, I have over a thousand specimens in my home herbarium. It would be prohibitively expensive to run them all, every time I was curious about an exact name.

Morels of course are particularly difficult to get to species, and those almost unidentifiable in hand black western burn morels are the worst!

We are attempting to do a NA Fungal Survey, but DNA is just one part of the mix. In addition to a well-preserved specimen in an herbarium, minimum standards are good photos of the fresh material, macro descriptions and best case, micro descriptions. A Bar Code alone just won’t cut it. It is a huge amount of work, and rather daunting.

Christian was attempting this in Santa Cruz, with some major DNA funding for local Santa Cruz collections from the fine folks at the FFSC, and the first dozen or so examples were nicely done, with description and photos and not merely bar codes. If it is now just down to bar codes alone, not so useful to future data seekers, which is after all the entire point of this.

And then, of course, the whole problem about just how reliable it is to use DNA, a new field of research and data, to determine species. Does one make the break at an 100% match? 97%? 96%? Are we really using the right, best snippet of DNA for our analysis? And then how good is the data already up on Genbank to which you compare? Many of those specimens were wrongly IDed from the get-go. You can see the problem.

Best to get lots of data from lots of ways (macro, micro, habitat, and then DNA) to make your determinations. And even then, the mushrooms can fool you!

About $25 including shipping of the sample to Spain
By: Terri Clements/Donna Fulton (pinonbistro)
2016-01-08 11:26:55 CST (-0500)
just for curiosity …
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2016-01-08 11:17:04 CST (-0500)

what did it cost to satisfy yours?

These are M. sextelata
By: Terri Clements/Donna Fulton (pinonbistro)
2016-01-07 20:36:49 CST (-0500)

according to a recent DNA analysis by Alvarado Labs in Spain. Thanks Alan for referring me to Pablo.

Terri

impossible to tell those two sp. apart w/out DNA.
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2015-05-07 00:11:31 CDT (-0400)

if it is the equally morpho-identical M. exuberans, though, that one will have capitate cells on the ridges.

Created: 2015-05-03 22:16:54 CDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2016-06-26 19:24:38 CDT (-0400)
Viewed: 141 times, last viewed: 2016-07-17 19:05:15 CDT (-0400)
Show Log