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.

Proposed Names

77% (2)
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


Add Comment
Image of cut cap added.
By: JohninENC
2015-10-16 10:12:00 PDT (-0700)


I have sliced and dried the younger specimen shown.
By: JohninENC
2015-10-15 07:06:13 PDT (-0700)

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

Thank you, John,
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2015-10-14 22:58:12 PDT (-0700)

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
2015-10-14 17:00:28 PDT (-0700)

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 12:56:25 PDT (-0700)

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 12:12:50 PDT (-0700)

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 09:49:11 PDT (-0700)

are currently required on Mushroom Observer.

I don’t read it that way
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-10-14 09:15:54 PDT (-0700)

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 08:58:48 PDT (-0700)

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 08:39:21 PDT (-0700)

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 04:54:23 PDT (-0700)

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)
2015-10-13 20:03:03 PDT (-0700)

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

Created: 2015-10-13 18:18:36 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2015-10-16 10:40:59 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 150 times, last viewed: 2016-10-24 08:54:19 PDT (-0700)
Show Log