Observation 242666: Boletaceae Chevall.

Species Lists



Proposed Names

61% (2)
Recognized by sight
-56% (1)
Recognized by sight

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
Never mind…
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2018-05-29 12:52:43 AEST (+1000)

No need to sequence rubricitrinus, for a paper transferring it to Pulchroboletus has been recently published. The ITS and LSU accessions of rubricitrinus in GenBank from that publication don’t match those of Dario’s bolete.

By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2018-05-29 12:43:34 AEST (+1000)

If you send me a bona fide collection of rubricitrinus from LA, I will submit it for sequencing/DNA barcoding.

By: Logan Wiedenfeld (LoganW)
2018-05-29 12:27:53 AEST (+1000)

looks a lot like B. rubricitrinus.

DNA sequencing results & discussion
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2017-04-13 07:18:22 AEST (+1000)

> A 1301 bps nrDNA sequence was obtained from this material (see the comment below).
> A BLASTn search of the nrITS sequence (with or without the 5.8S fragment) didn’t return any meaningful results, as similarity was below 95%.
> A BLASTn search of the nrLSU sequence was more successful. The top two hits were two boletes from China, HKAS-63598/#KF112317 and HKAS-59660/#KF112358, at 99.4% and 99.1% similarity, respectively. A further search into these two entities showed that they form unnamed ‘Clade45’ in the humongous Boletaceae trees in Wu et al. (2014 & 2016). There are no other boletes in that clade at this time. Clade 45 resides in the ‘Pulveroboletus Group’, meaning that its position in the Boletaceae is unresolved. I couldn’t find any pix or any discussion of these two Chinese collections in the papers or elsewhere online.
Neoboletus sp. ‘vividivelutinus’ #KU160161 was hit #3 at 98.7% similarity. It’s a red-pored bolete from Western USA, resembling the European Sutorius luridiformis.