Observation 84611: Amanita sect. Vaginatae sensu Zhu L. Yang
When: 2011-12-13
Herbarium specimen reported

Notes: These were growing near Live Oak but in an area of mixed woods.
The spore print was white, non-amyloid and spores were ~ 9.6-13.1(14.0) X 9.2-12.5(13.4) microns. (12 measurements). Q(ave.) = 1.048.
The overhanging veil tissue on the cap of the larger specimen looks a little strange. However, the overall gray colors and lack of a definitive volva limit my choices.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
The material arrived some time ago. Thank you.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2012-01-25 08:32:59 PST (-0800)


I’m way behind on my correspondence. This is to acknowledge that I received your collection (several weeks ago) in good order with your notes.

Thank you, again.

Very best,


Yes, I had/have my doubts about these being A. protecta also.
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2011-12-16 15:54:04 PST (-0800)

I did take pains to try and make sure I got the complete bases.
I did not see any sac remains but the base of the smaller one was decaying and the larger one wasn’t in the best of shape either.

Amanita vaginata gr.
By: Dimitar Bojantchev (dimitar)
2011-12-16 11:02:53 PST (-0800)

Ron, this reminds me strongly of the common California version in the Amanita vaginata gr. I agree with Rod in doubting the A. protecta affinity. Our California A. vaginata material is very close genetically to some Swedish material in the public databases, as well as some Eastern North American material. This group is a bit of a mess, starting with Europe. I have all kinds of material from there that could pass as the true A. vaginata…, but who knows. It is nowhere near a priority of mine to worry about, but a ground up rework of this group might be wise starting in Europe. The general spore Q-ratio in the group is 1.0-1.1


A. vaginata gr.

Ron already knows, but…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2011-12-15 03:41:44 PST (-0800)

for others who come to this observation and may not know…

An expansion of the original description of A. protecta is available at



I’m interested, certainly.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2011-12-15 03:10:12 PST (-0800)


The marginal striations on the cap seem longer than I remember for protecta, and the ochraceous staining of everything hasn’t developed so far as I can see in the picture (hmmm, maybe in the damaged area near the bottom of the stem). In species with low average Q, Q doesn’t vary very much. So it would be just a bit unusual for a species with an established average Q around 1.14 to have a specimen come in with an average Q around 1.05. So I have questions that would be answered by material in hand.

As always, thank you for the offer of material.

Very best,


You’re exactly right Rod,
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2011-12-14 22:14:34 PST (-0800)
the Q range was from 1.0 to 1.10. I did not save the individual measurements, but as you can see from the one spore shot there was quite a range in size so 12 measurements may not be representative enough. Vouchers are available if there is any interest.
Interesting, Ron.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2011-12-14 19:12:50 PST (-0800)

What were your largest and smallest Q values. From your average, I’m guessing their in the neighborhoods of 1.0 and 1.10+. I tried a sporograph with those estimates, but it would be better to have your real data.


Created: 2011-12-13 21:22:30 PST (-0800)
Last modified: 2012-03-25 08:55:17 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 131 times, last viewed: 2016-10-25 15:34:06 PDT (-0700)
Show Log