Observation 94708: Amanita Pers. sect. Amanita
When: 2012-05-14
Herbarium specimen reported

Notes: spores 10.0 × 7.0

Images

219268
219269
219270
219271
219478
spores 400x
219479
spores (oil)
219480
spores (oil)
219481
spores (oil)
219482
spores (oil)
219483
basidia (oil)
219484
basidia (oil)
219485
basidia (oil)
219487
basidioles 400x

Proposed Names

29% (1)
Eye3
Recognized by sight
ret
54% (1)
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
lol.
By: Richard and Danielle Kneal (bloodworm)
2012-05-15 19:16:31 PDT (-0700)

:-)

“i was shocked to see it just sitting there.”
By: vjp
2012-05-15 19:15:23 PDT (-0700)

they don’t run very fast

thank you.
By: Richard and Danielle Kneal (bloodworm)
2012-05-15 19:13:40 PDT (-0700)

i thought this might be the case.
it was found at the edge of a muddy swamp (bog like area).
i was shocked to see it just sitting there.

Hello, Gainesville.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2012-05-15 07:22:36 PDT (-0700)

I think that some of the spores in the spore photographs have length/width of 1.50 or more. It would be useful to measure, say, 20 spores in lateral view and compute the Q values to get a range of Q and an average Q. With ranges of length, width, and Q, you can try using the sporographs on www.amanitaceae.org.

Given the spores in your photographs, this mushroom might end up in the “Amanita russuloides group.” Maybe Amanita sp-S01?

http://www.amanitaceae.org?Amanita+sp-S01

R

Created: 2012-05-14 15:13:38 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2012-06-06 13:28:06 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 77 times, last viewed: 2014-05-26 09:48:12 PDT (-0700)
Show Log