|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||0.00||0|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
|I’d Call It That||3.0||9.31||2||(nathan)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
This material has been received and accessioned into Rod’s herbarium.
Naomi (working with Rod)
It’s important to realize that from all of Europe, I have personally collected only in Les Landes, England, Scotland, the Netherlands, and Norway.
I have had generous correspondents send me many collections from (for example) Italy, France, Finland, Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, and the Czech Republic. I have also had the opportunity to work in a few European herbaria (principally, in the Netherlands National Herbarium (Leiden) as a guest of Dr. Bas.
The people with whom I have corresponded over the past 30+ years have known that my interests were (at varioius times) largely focused on sections Amidella, Vaginatae, Caesareae, and Lepidella; and so many of the collections sent to me were from those sections. For one reason or another I have never received many collections of gemmata and usually have seen the species only in the literature or dried in a herbarium.
I was very happy to see the picture on which I commented because it so uncommon for me to I see new a picture of the species. I think it is probably true that I have seen more material of some species from India and Pakistan than I have seen of the southern European gemmata. (I did see some beige specimens that were very much like gemmata in Norway, and I received one white specimen that was very much like gemmata from Turkey.)
I would like to have more personal knowledge of the species, and maybe I will get another chance to collect in Europe. In the meantime, it is good to see pictures of the species of which my knowledge is limited to literature.
Thanks for posting.
It is my pleasure to share opinions, comments and observations with someone that I much respect and admire and to whom I recognize his outstanding contribution for the knowledge of Amanita sp. in the world. If someone can teach me in this matter is you.
Concerning this observation, I felt a bit strange that it was not recognizable by the pictures that only one species was in question. But, I have to understand that people are looking to the photos for the first time and, moreover, these people were not with me in the field, thus all the details and thoughts can’t be shared.
About your last comment, at first I didn’t understood quit well what you want to say by “pale”, because almost all the specimens that I have collected so far have that appearance. But, you are right they seem a bit discoloured. I don’t know the reason: I know nothing about the pigmentation of the cap of mushrooms. Is it possible that environmental conditions have influence?
In relation to the existence or not of a ring, my experience with this species is that is very rare to find a mature specimen with a ring or traces of its previous existence. Only some young specimens (like those in the last two photos) seem to have one, while the others seem that never had it.
I did not mean that the photographs with pale caps were not A. gemmata. I meant that I lacked the experience and information to identify them. I have no personal experience with the variation of A. gemmata, and I don’t recall ever reading that they become very pale under some conditions.
Could you tell me what happened to make them pale?
The image at the bottom certainly explains why the name var. exannulata would have been created. My point regarding that name (name NOT mushroom) is that the varietal name is not a taxonomically meaningful name because the name was created to apply to a specimen of A. gemmata that happened not to have retained its annulus at the time it was seen, painted, or collected.
Specimens with rings and specimens without rings appear to belong to the same species in my understanding of the literature.
The new picture that you added emphasizes how fragile the ring is in A. gemmata.
As you know my knowledge of Amanita sp. is very limited and I’m trying to improve it. Concerning this observation I can’t agree with you when you say that
“I think there is a good chance that this is a picture of Amanita gemmata in its “normal” condition. The other images are not so easily identifiable for me.”
My point is that: all the specimens shown in this observation belong to the same species, be it A. gemmata or one of its varieties. As far as I can understand, in this species of Amanita the ring is extremely elusive or fleeting and can disappear at any time. That was the meaning of my comment at the last photograph. To support this conviction I upload another photograph in which one can observe a specimen, collected in the same zone two weeks later, with a ring that is attached to the stipe only by a thread and that, after the broken wire, it would surely look like the first three of this observation.
The last photograph shows an annulate specimen of an Amanita species with a submembranous limb of the volva slightly separated from the basal bulb on the stipe. Another piece of the volva is hang from the annulus on the viewer’s left. I think there is a good chance that this is a picture of Amanita gemmata in its “normal” condition. The other images are not so easily identifiable for me. Speaking of the last image alone, I suggest changing the identification by removing “var. exannulata”.
By the way, strange as it may seem to a European mushroomobserver, I have very little dried material of this species and (if memory serves) no picture of the species for the Amanita Studies website.
To all concerned: Good pictures of A. gemmata accompanied by well-dried specimens are welcome at:
Herbarium Amanitarum Rooseveltensis
P.O. Box 57
Roosevelt, New Jersey 08555-0057
Created: 2010-06-09 06:52:54 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2011-12-15 07:16:00 PST (-0800)
Viewed: 120 times, last viewed: 2016-10-22 10:50:35 PDT (-0700)