Proposed Names

91% (2)
Based on chemical features: Two gene sequences as noted below.

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
Great historical research, Garret.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2016-12-25 10:57:42 CST (-0600)

Now I’ve got to be sure that we have the second MO voucher in our queue.

Very best,


OK, all clear here!
By: Garrett Taylor (cappy)
2016-12-25 09:14:49 CST (-0600)

I see that I posted that I was sending more than just the pictured specimen taken from this location while the other observation I had also collected more than just the one specimen and was sending them along separately.

If they were in the same baggie
By: Garrett Taylor (cappy)
2016-12-25 09:07:06 CST (-0600)

they would have been from the same location. The other observation # was pretty far away it seems. If I recall the other one or two was (were) collected just a little further down the trail from this one. I think I passed that information along to Naomi. I will check my communications.

I see the clues are on MO.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2016-12-25 08:01:18 CST (-0600)


Yes, the two specimens were in the same bag.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2016-12-25 07:58:01 CST (-0600)

There was no indication which was which or that they had two associated MO numbers. I’ll see if we can figure out which specimen goes with which MO number. ??? Any hints?

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Very best,


Or maybe
By: Garrett Taylor (cappy)
2016-12-24 22:24:46 CST (-0600)

it was from material that I sent in the same baggie as this one? I see my other observation 208375 was collected quite some distance away.

Wow, very cool
By: Garrett Taylor (cappy)
2016-12-24 22:20:52 CST (-0600)

I assume the other sequence was from my other observation of the same date, 208375?

We have received DNA data for this observation.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2016-12-23 22:06:53 CST (-0600)

We sampled both specimens that you sent. They are conspecific. I have seen the species once before in the Great Smokies. The species falls under the temporary code Amanitasp-GSM05.” We were able to obtain both the “proposed fungal barcode” (nrITS) and nrLSU sequences from your material.

Thank you very much for sharing the voucher collection for this observation.

Very best,


Thanks Garrett,
By: groundhog
2015-07-28 10:44:33 CDT (-0500)

We have received this material and it has been accessioned to Rod’s herbarium. We have scheduled it for DNA sequencing.

You’re welcome, Garrett
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2015-07-02 08:45:29 CDT (-0500)


Thanks again
By: Garrett Taylor (cappy)
2015-07-02 08:07:55 CDT (-0500)

I haven’t looked yet, unfortunately I have been relying on my memory for the pictures I have taken. I need to find a way to take some notes to the pictures I have taken. I don’t remember taking that many spore prints.

I included possible doubles of this observation, they were found on the same hilltop, and had the same coloration as this one. I also included possible doubles of the other one that looks similar to this one, from a lower location down from the same ridge this one was found, but with Red Oak primarily, 208375.

If the spores are mounted in Melzer’s and the darkness…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2015-07-01 20:26:59 CDT (-0500)

of the decorations are due to an amyloid reaction, then they might be spores from a species of the Russulales.

If there is no amyloid reaction involved, then Strobilomyces is one possibility.

Very best,


By: Garrett Taylor (cappy)
2015-07-01 18:18:15 CDT (-0500)

Could it be that I had mounted them in Melzer’s? It’s likely I would have if so.

By: Garrett Taylor (cappy)
2015-07-01 18:17:16 CDT (-0500)

I guess I need to look back at my pictures again and see where those spores are then!

I’ll be happy to get the material. Thank you.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2015-07-01 17:39:31 CDT (-0500)

But I don’t think that the spores can be those of an Amanita. They seem to have dark pigment in the walls and spines. Neither are present in amanita spores.

Very best,


Created: 2015-07-01 14:17:00 CDT (-0500)
Last modified: 2017-12-29 12:26:59 CST (-0600)
Viewed: 180 times, last viewed: 2020-02-03 04:20:33 CST (-0600)
Show Log