Notes: Collected at the NJMA foray.
The specimen is preserved for the NJMA herbarium.
DNA Sequencing Discussion:
> A clean and contiguous 1445 bp nrLSU sequence was obtained for this material.
> As expected, the full length sequence did’t return any meaningful hits from a BLAST nucleotide search in GenBank (bolete sequences posted there are much shorter).
> A BLAST search of the 1051 bps sequence fragment (41—>1091) yielded a nearly perfect match (1050/1051 = 99.9% identity; no gaps) with Boletus subvelutipes voucher RV98.102 [GenBank accession #AY612804].
> The second best match that made sense (871/879 = 99.1% identity with 1 gap) was with Boletus vermiculosus strain 222/97 [GenBank accession #DQ534646]. In this case, the overlay region corresponded with the 67—>945 bps fragment of my sequence.
In my understanding, the mushroom in this observation doesn’t really fit the morphological species concept of B. subvelutipes, so I am willing to bet that RV98.102 is likely to be a misidentification.
|I’d Call It That||3.0||0.00||0|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
I am just a messenger — all the kudos should go to Dr. K who made all of this possible…
Martin, I agree. However, I don’t know how to make this info more visible to folks from the academia. The vouchers, raw data and annotated sequences for all the shooms I post on MO are available for anyone who is interested.
It’s great to see this type of work on MO. We should figure out a way to share this observation with the folks you submitted the samples you compared with on GenBank. They need to document their morphology in this way.
I am glad you are getting good results.
Created: 2015-07-19 23:31:02 CDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2016-11-24 21:38:37 CST (-0500)
Viewed: 96 times, last viewed: 2016-11-29 00:33:14 CST (-0500)