|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 wouldn’t call this discussion heated (not compared to some of the epic MO battles), but yes it is surprising what small, drab, common, and otherwise unexceptional fungi will draw out the opinions.
Thanks for your post, and good luck in the woods this weekend.
Thank you for all the comments. I never expected that this plain-looking, vanilla Amanita (sorry, Rod, no disrespect meant here) would cause such a heated discussion and make this observation viewed over 60 times in only 24 hours! Next time I encounter a photogenic Amanita species, I will make sure to collect, document and photograph it as per the strict requirements associated the genus [trust me, I’ll dust off my shovel and excavate deep for that darn volva!] :-). After all the rain we had today, I am tempted to revisit the park Sunday — who knows, maybe the Amanita is still there (I remember the spot), albeit older, washed clean and looking as vanilla as ever, and we can finally close this case to our satisfaction.
to my eye, at least.
there is a different texture to the material to the top and right of the cap apex; just plain dirt flecks scattered down towards the cap edge.
criticizing the photo – but the second photo only shows dirt (as far as I can tell) – not fine brown powder.
the mushrooms will always try to fool you, so you need to gather as much information as you can when you can. Too bad you didn’t collect this; it’s interesting!
four inches does sound too small for whetstoneae, altho I have only found it once myself (it’s an eastern mushroom). You can see a bunch of other photos of it here on MO.
I must admit that when I first collected it, I also thought that it was a vaginate amanita! In fact, you can view my whole learning curve right here on MO: http://mushroomobserver.org/8562?q=5PDe
is clearly not my forte even after taking Rod Tulloss’ workshop through NJMA and visiting his website on several occasions. I should better stick to my boletes :-).
I think this specimen was 4 to 4.5 inches tall, with the cap diameter of about 1.75 inches.
judging by the grass, it might be too small for whetstoneae…
more likely an amidella, and quite possibly whetstoneae. Not sure about the presence of “cap powder” with whetstoneae, altho amidellas have multi-layered volvas.
I’m sure that Rod will weigh in once he gets back to a computer.
Picture #2 was taken from this angle on purpose — it shows remnants of the universal veil on the cap (you missed the fine brownish powder) and no apparent volva at the base. I even cleared the leaves and gently poked around the stipal base with a twig looking for the volva — you can see the earth slightly disturbed around the base. It is possible that the volva was brittle to begin with and got washed away by the rain. I don’t know how else to explain it because this looks like Section vaginatae to me.
with that cap color and those long striations (which is actually NOT a vaginate amanita but an amidella), but impossible to tell without seeing the entire mushroom.
There was indeed a volva buried in the ground…you MUST dig up your amanitas for a good ID, other than maybe for our unmistakeable Amanita muscaria (North American names pending).
The second picture shows absence of volval structure above the ground, a surprising observation. I did not uproot the specimen.
what did the volva look like?
Created: 2011-07-08 04:40:39 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2011-07-08 04:40:39 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 118 times, last viewed: 2017-06-09 23:24:23 CEST (+0200)