Observation 205357: Amanita “sp-S01” Tulloss
When: 2015-05-30
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Compare 205356:
205357: cap 2.2 cm, stem 7 cm x 4 mm
205356: cap 5 cm, stem 9 cm x 7 mm


2015-05-30__ga-KR 034.jpg
2015-05-30__ga-KR 035.jpg
2015-05-30__ga-KR 037.jpg
2015-05-30__ga-KR 038.jpg
2015-05-30__ga-KR 039.jpg
2015-05-30__ga-KR 040.jpg
older specimen 40 cm from above one

Proposed Names

28% (1)
Recognized by sight
54% (1)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Thanks for the response, Bill.
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2015-06-01 19:33:52 CST (+0800)

As Dr. Tulloss has proposed and you have suggested within your comments, I agree the three amanitas all represent the same species. The degree of bumpiness on the cap surfaces is very interesting to me. Motivation for me to review my own observations where S01 looks like a possibility.

The last photo
By: Bill Sheehan (B_Sheehan)
2015-06-01 09:52:53 CST (+0800)

was of a separate specimen growing 40 centimeters from the specimen in first 5 photos on this page. It was similar sized and because it was so close to the other, I assumed it was an older specimen of the same species.

The specimen in 205356 was collected about 200 m from the two in 205357. It was substantially larger per dimensions noted, so I posted it separately.

I’m wondering if the last photo…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2015-06-01 07:27:59 CST (+0800)

shows the same mushroom as in the previous ones. An amanita may continue to develop after being harvested. Transplant?

I’ve been trying to understand this S01 for a couple years now. The tuberculate cap surface (bumpy) seems to be a key trait. Looks here like this may be something that develops and is readily apparent only in a mature example.

Created: 2015-05-31 12:05:07 CST (+0800)
Last modified: 2015-05-31 21:02:24 CST (+0800)
Viewed: 57 times, last viewed: 2016-10-25 17:22:24 CST (+0800)
Show Log