Observation 49797: Amanita daucipes (Mont.) Lloyd
When: 2010-08-06
No herbarium specimen

Notes:

[admin – Sat Aug 14 02:07:47 +0000 2010]: Changed location name from ‘Westmoreland County, PA’ to ‘Westmoreland Co., Pennsylvania, USA

Proposed Names

ham
85% (1)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Don’t knock yourself.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2010-08-07 21:08:15 CEST (+0200)

There’s a short paper written in the late nineteenth Century by a woman who we only know by her husband’s initials, Mrs. E. M. Williams. She wrote a couple of articles for the Asa Gray Journal from the point of view of a self-educated student of Amanita. In one of the papers she said something like this:

Every year I love to see the amanitas come out, but I dread trying to identify the big white ones (i.e., the lepidellas). Every year it seems that I have to learn them all over again.

Now she had no internet support group! I think her husband had something to do with the New York Botanical Garden; so I hope she had some friendly mycologists around for her support group. When I found these little articles, I thought to myself, now there’s a lady who had it right. What a pain these big white amanitas are. And I was sitting there with my (then) rather new and unbattered copy of Dr. Bas’ thesis/monograph on section Lepidella and thinking how I struggled with these white species every year. That was probably about 25 years ago or so…about eight years onto the slippery slope of Amanita.

People have been where you are before. Relax and keep your eyes open.

Very best,

Rod

Rod…
By: Hamilton (ham)
2010-08-07 19:43:46 CEST (+0200)

My hurried half-assed observation led me to where I am now. I’m not so good with Amanita to begin with.

Yeah I wasn’t sure if it was red staining or rot. Thanks for your help. I think I just learned something here.

thought…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2010-08-07 17:02:59 CEST (+0200)

That’s a cool way of putting it.

I think they probably belonged in Amanita subsection Solitariae, which means they were close to subcokeri and cokeri. In Pennsylvania, the higher probability is probably with subcokeri and I did see some reddish or pinkish staining spots on one or more pictures (right?). I’d give it a vote of “possible” for subcokeri…after some thought.

R.

Ok…
By: Hamilton (ham)
2010-08-07 09:52:41 CEST (+0200)

I removed the ones under scrutiny.

I think this may be a mixture…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2010-08-07 06:42:22 CEST (+0200)

The fourth image (97065) seems most like daucipes. The recurving scales on the stem bases and bulbs in the other images suggest they depict a different species.

R.

Created: 2010-08-07 03:17:08 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2010-08-14 20:31:39 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 70 times, last viewed: 2016-07-17 18:18:40 CEST (+0200)
Show Log