Observation 20391: Austroboletus lacunosus (Kuntze) T.W. May & A.E. Wood
When: 2009-04-16
No herbarium specimen

Notes: This was a sole fungi, well camouflaged, and looks and reads like the reference used. I would like to mention two things here. The second image was taken with “fill flash” and all other images for this fungi were shot at ISO 100 using ambient light. Exposures times were at least 25seconds min.
The other thing I would like to pooint attention to is that when I removed the Boletus I was surprised to see how much root system was intact.

Images

41396
Copyright © 2009 Ian Dodd Kundabung NSW Australia
41397
Copyright © 2009 Ian Dodd Kundabung NSW Australia
41398
Copyright © 2009 Ian Dodd Kundabung NSW Australia
41399
Copyright © 2009 Ian Dodd Kundabung NSW Australia
41400
Copyright © 2009 Ian Dodd Kundabung NSW Australia

Proposed Names

55% (5)
Used references: B. Fuhrer P187 image 285
92% (2)
Eye3 Eyes3
Used references: See Roy’s comments on the nomenclature for A. lacunosus.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Definitely of interest
By: Roy Halling (royh)
2009-05-10 00:12:02 BST (+0100)

I went to that site when you mentioned it earlier Clive in another observation. And many thanks for mentioning it. The spores have the isolated stump-like pegs that matches novaezelandiae as seen in the type study by Wolfe. I have not seen the type of novaezelandiae or lacunosus, but based on Wolfe’s study they are different.

lacunosus vs novaezelandiae
By: Clive Shirley (myxo)
2009-05-09 20:09:23 BST (+0100)

There is a photo of the spores of lacunosus from New Zealand on my website here

http://www.hiddenforest.co.nz/...

Should this be of any interest.

lacunosus vs novaezelandiae
By: Roy Halling (royh)
2009-05-09 15:34:35 BST (+0100)

Based on type studies by C.B. Wolfe, there is a difference in spore morphology. I have not collected boletes in new Zealand, so i cannot comment on what grows there. However, E. Horak HAS and base on his observations, this morpho-entity would fit that concept. Australian lacunosus appears to be a different organism at present.

Comment

My reference (B.Fuhrer.) shows a distinct different pattern on the stipes. That is the only reason I chose novaezelandiae. One could also presume though that the image comparison for the stipe of Austroboletus novaezelandiae could have been a more fully mature specimen, and that the stem had begun to dry out. The cap in Bruce’s image for Austroboletus novaezelandiae certainly looks like the specimen is not a young specimen. (my opinion only)

What about
By: Clive Shirley (myxo)
2009-05-09 07:41:46 BST (+0100)

I too are a little confused over the names for these two species particularly when our local fungi DB has Austroboletus novaezelandiae as a synonyms for A. lacunosus

http://nzfungi.landcareresearch.co.nz/...

Yet Species Fungorum does not

http://www.indexfungorum.org/...

What about Austroboletus lacunosus?
By: Nathan Wilson (nathan)
2009-05-09 05:29:35 BST (+0100)

I’ve just been reviewing the descriptions of Austroboletus that Roy Halling put in. Based on those would it make sense to call this A. lacunosus? I’ve never collected these species and they may be synonymous, but it seems that the tradition is to separate them based on whether they are from Australia or New Zealand.

Created: 2009-04-18 05:44:41 BST (+0100)
Last modified: 2013-05-20 02:39:19 BST (+0100)
Viewed: 131 times, last viewed: 2016-03-21 12:38:02 GMT (+0000)
Show Log