Observation 218800: Boletus sensu stricto nom. prov. Dentinger
When: 2015-10-13
Who: JohninENC

Notes: This was found under pines. I could not get a spore print.

Images

564482
DSC03327.jpg
564473
DSC03329.jpg
564474
DSC03319.jpg
564475
DSC03320.JPG
564476
DSC03321.jpg
564478
DSC03322.jpg
564479
DSC03324.jpg
564480
DSC03325.jpg
564481
DSC03326.jpg
564483
DSC03328.jpg
565261
DSC03335.jpg

Proposed Names

77% (2)
Eyes3
Recognized by sight: White partial veil, aka “stuffed” pores, covering in the young specimen’s hymenophore

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Image of cut cap added.
By: JohninENC
2015-10-16 20:12:00 EEST (+0300)

N/T

I have sliced and dried the younger specimen shown.
By: JohninENC
2015-10-15 17:06:13 EEST (+0300)

I would be happy to send some of the material out to anyone interested.

Thank you, John,
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2015-10-15 08:58:12 EEST (+0300)

for the info on trees and staining…
I didn’t think this was B. subcaerulescens, but had to make sure the pore surface didn’t stain grayish-blue.
Your bolete appears to be in the “porcini group” even if you agree with the irate gentleman in that B. sensu stricto is “scientific gibberish”. While porcini is a readily recognized group within Boletaceae, identification to species is far from trivial. The ecology and morphology of your collection suggests that it’s an obscure taxon.
Did you preserve a specimen by any chance?

Found under loblolly pine.
By: JohninENC
2015-10-15 03:00:28 EEST (+0300)

I checked the pines where these were found and as far as I can determine, they were loblolly pines. I initially checked the pores for bruising and there was no blue bruising.

Other than that it’s actually a monophyletic clade,…
By: Django Grootmyers (heelsplitter)
2015-10-14 22:56:25 EEST (+0300)

which Boletus sensu lato isn’t. It’s a lot more scientific than just putting everything that doesn’t look like Leccinum, Tylopilus, Boletellus, Austroboletus etc. in the same genus.

Scientific gibberish
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-10-14 22:12:50 EEST (+0300)

There is nothing scientific in Boletus sensu stricto nom. prov. Dentinger except the look of it.

Because scientific names
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2015-10-14 19:49:11 EEST (+0300)

are currently required on Mushroom Observer.

I don’t read it that way
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-10-14 19:15:54 EEST (+0300)

Why not to call it “porcini group in the sense of Dentinger”?

What is wrong with it?
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2015-10-14 18:58:48 EEST (+0300)

It is the porcini group in the sense of Dentinger.

Boletus sensu stricto nom. prov. Dentinger
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-10-14 18:39:21 EEST (+0300)

This name is nonsense. How do you want advanced amateur and professional mycologists to take Mushroom Observer seriously? Get rid of it!

Stains on pore surface was as pictured.
By: JohninENC
2015-10-14 14:54:23 EEST (+0300)

I’m not an expert on pines but will try to I.D. I bruised the pore surface immediately upon discovery, but could not take a photo until the next morning. Thank you Sir. for your I.D. help.

Interesting taxon…
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2015-10-14 06:03:03 EEST (+0300)

What kind of pines did you find these under? Was there any staining to the pore surface or the stipe?

Created: 2015-10-14 04:18:36 EEST (+0300)
Last modified: 2015-10-16 20:40:59 EEST (+0300)
Viewed: 154 times, last viewed: 2017-09-05 20:16:53 EEST (+0300)
Show Log