Observation 22515: Boletus L.
When: 2009-06-22
No herbarium specimen

Proposed Names

61% (2)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight
64% (6)
Recognized by sight: This is one of the several Eastern members of the erythropus group.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
white velvetiness but no red hairs
By: Dan Molter (shroomydan)
2009-06-26 04:02:33 CEST (+0200)

I often leave blue fingerprints in the fuzz at base of these mushrooms when I pick them.

I think
By: Dave in NE PA
2009-06-26 03:23:14 CEST (+0200)

the stalk base thing may correlate better with the word “bloom” or “frosting” than “hair”, except maybe if you’re looking thru a lens, which I haven’t done with this one. (Actually, I need to get myself a pocket lens.)

Yes, how about them hairs…
By: Dimitar Bojantchev (dimitar)
2009-06-25 21:25:12 CEST (+0200)

Yes, thank you Roy, which brings a question that I’ve had for awhile
to someone who collects in the East. I have examined numerous
collections last year, mine as well as those at NEMF in order to see
those “short, stiff, dark red hairs of the base of mature specimens”
[quoting Bessette et al], but I didn’t see any. Saw just yellowish to
reddish pubescence at most… Still, alleged Eastern experts were
jotting the name subvelutipes joyfully and without any second

Also, B. subvelutipes is the most commonly applied name in the field
guides that I have accessed and none of them features prominently that
defining feature of subvelutipes.

So, how often are those hairs really there and are they so definitive
for the species — here I want to hear from someone who has sufficient
Eastern experience, like you Roy.

B. luridiformis is another option, but Bessette applies this one to
something that includes our Western erythropus species, which really
doesn’t exhibit any hairs.


Bessette et al. also suggest Boletus discolor as one of the species
options (or rather B. erythropus subsp. discolor or B. queletii
var. discolor), but it sounds like some kind of an obscure European
name that they don’t know very well themselves, while we probably have
no business using on our side.

Some of our material seems to come close to Boletus queletii indeed,
without being exactly the same, of course.

Anyway, it may sound like a cliché by now, but this group does need
some tender and loving mycological care in North America. For now I
will follow the general classification of subvelutipes s.l. for my
collections, similarly to the MushroomExpert who has chosen the same


Very best wishes,

Could be
By: Roy Halling (royh)
2009-06-25 15:38:16 CEST (+0200)

B. subvelutipes, but one of the distinguishing features (subvelvety stipe base and the reason it got the species name) is missing.

Most likely…
By: Dimitar Bojantchev (dimitar)
2009-06-25 05:28:17 CEST (+0200)

Yep. There are other options too, but subvelutipes is the most
commonly applied name.

My guess
By: Dave in NE PA
2009-06-25 05:13:20 CEST (+0200)

would be Boletus subvelutipes. Here in NE PA this is generally one of the earliest occurring large boletes. B. discolor is also a possibility, among others.

Created: 2009-06-25 02:33:30 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2009-06-25 02:33:30 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 148 times, last viewed: 2016-10-26 00:15:06 CEST (+0200)
Show Log