Notes: I didn’t recognize this when I found it. Marginal striations short and fairly faint. I don’t see this species in my local woods (PA). Recognized immediately by Rod Tulloss.
|User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote.|
|I’d Call It That||3.0||6.30||1||(Dave W)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
One thing I forgot to mention is the stipe base. That traits is very useful, if not critical, but it’s frequently overlooked for obvious reasons. Yes, Melzer’s or even Lugol’s can be very handy, especially when separating sect. Amanita from sect. Validae. That’s where most of the confusion takes place, as some species in the the former one don’t have marginal grooves and the UV appearance/structure can also be not so obvious.
And a saccate volva can adhere to the stalk, or even be (partially) lost in the soil or due to rainfall.
In some cases, there’s just no substitute for Meltzer’s.
…in Amanita sometimes has to go through ID to sections first. Spreta is in sect. Caesareae, so it must show striations, PV and saccate volva. Here the striations are very short and not well pronounced. Yet they appear as a very natural trait, as opposed to some of those “pseudo-striations” caused by the withering of the cap margin in species from sects. Phalloideae and Validae.
Actually, I remember now that I originally suspected submaculata for this one.
This has been an interesting comparison of spreta, phalloides, and submaculata here at MO. Although I very rarely see the spreta, I feel like I now understand it pretty well.
thanks for sharing, again.
hey, by the end of this week, I might just be a “spreta” expert, too! :)
Created: 2015-08-12 02:00:17 BST (+0100)
Last modified: 2015-08-12 02:00:20 BST (+0100)
Viewed: 70 times, last viewed: 2017-02-19 18:48:51 GMT (+0000)