Observation 80971: Gastroboletus turbinatus (Snell) A.H. Smith & Singer
When: 2011-10-19
Herbarium specimen reported

Notes: This one specimen was found at ~ 6000 ft growing completely underground.
It was small, ~4.2 cm across.
The spores were ~ 13.0-15.0 X 6.0-7.0 microns.
Having never seen one of these before, I’m guessing Gastroboletus turbinatus based on the bluing of the tubes and the reddish streaks on the stem as well as the spore shape and size.

Species Lists

Images

178237
178238
728425
728474
Spores and tube trama in Melzers @ 1000X.
728475
Spores and tube trama in Melzers @ 1000X.
728479
Spores and tube trama in 5% KOH @ 400X.
728480
Spores and tube trama in KOH @ 1000X.
728481
Spores and tube trama in KOH @ 1000X

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Hello, Jonathan
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2017-05-12 17:29:49 PDT (-0700)

Yes, Neoboletus got collapsed into Sutorius, but Suillellus is still legit. Not entirely sure if this treatment is going to survive the test of time, but that’s the current published phylogenetic hypothesis/understanding that got blessed by peer review. I agree the new Sutorius tree topology looks rather busy in the latest Wu paper. The bootstrap value for the new Sutorius is at 86% and PP values are missing. But I don’t know anything about statistical algorithms to impart an opinion. The bigger question is what new loci and combination thereof are going to resolve the rest of the Boletaceae, i.e. the ‘Pulveroboletus Group’.
I can certainly think of some questions for you and Noah, but maybe I should wait till your western red-poreds paper comes out. I don’t know how many species you have out there but my LSU BLASTs only gave me ‘vividivelutinus’ and ‘glabriceps’. The former one was frequently the top hit for many of my red-pored taxa from the east, but not always. Still NA taxa appear to be more closely related to each other than to European or Asian Neoboletus/Sutorius entities. I have a hunch there are more genera lurking around to bridge the gap between these two.

Can’t speak to the taxonomy of this critter
By: Martin Livezey (MLivezey)
2017-05-12 16:14:09 PDT (-0700)

but it is one awesome organism!

Neoboletus deprecated or Suillellus
By: Jonathan Frank (jonagus)
2017-05-12 10:03:14 PDT (-0700)

Interesting that Neoboletus has been deprecated on MO. That’s putting some decisive “trust” in Gang Wu paper that ignored the ITS! This gastroid bolete is likely in Neoboletus or Suillellus. Igor— yes we have done a bunch of DNA on west coast gastroid and red pored/blue staining boletes— Thanks for the work you are doing and for posting ITS and LSU seq data on MO— I am inspired to post many of my collections here and add DNA data to help progress our understanding of various taxa. Contact me or Noah if you have any specific questions.

Ok…
By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2017-04-04 18:10:44 PDT (-0700)

Back in the turbinatus group…

Added micro photos today of
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2017-04-04 18:03:09 PDT (-0700)

the tube trama and spores in both Melzers and 5% KOH. Neither seems to be amyloid and basically hyaline in KOH.

Spore shape & more
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2017-04-04 17:11:22 PDT (-0700)

Certainly not the typical bolete spores in terms of shape and Q-ratio to say the least. The suprahilar region seems to be non-existent or poorly defined.
Just curious if this and/or any other recently updated WC Gastroboletus collections have been or are going to be sequenced. If I remember correctly this genus is not monophyletic, so species ID is only one side of the story. Also, if memory serves, G. turbinatus falls into the Neoboletus/Sutorius association from the nrLSU perspective.

Created: 2011-10-29 10:07:18 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2017-04-04 18:09:00 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 154 times, last viewed: 2017-05-14 06:51:06 PDT (-0700)
Show Log