> Two fruiting bodies growing next to each other in mixed deciduous woods; the surrounding trees are maples and a single hickory, with oaks ~15-20 yards away. I’ve been visiting this spot for over a decade, but have never seen these boletes there before.
> The colors are presented accurately in the pix. Interestingly, the older fb had a richer, brighter pileipellis color than the younger one. The pore surface is dingy yellow to greenish-yellow in the older fb over time. The pore surface of the older fruitbody appeared to have bruised very faintly grayish-blue when fresh, resolving faint brownish. The stipe is light lemon-yellow, with some burgundy at the base and where the slug damage occurred in the large fb. Other than that, there is absolute no hint of red in the stipe. There is no bluing on the stipe surface upon handling or injury. The exposed context is whitish to pale yellow in the cap context and light yellow in the stipe, appears to be unchanging in the first 10-15 min. However, a narrow band of very faint and diffuse bluing was observed directly above the tubes only, resolving to faint grayish and then back to the original context color.
Large fb: Cap = 12-13.5 cm wide and up to 2 cm thick; tube layer = up to 1 cm thick; stipe = 6.5 cm long and uniformly 2.5 cm wide.
Small fb: cap = 3.8 cm wide and up to 1 cm thick; tube layer = 2.5 mm thick; stipe = 6.2 cm long and uniformly 1.2-1.4 cm wide.
Chemical Tests (performed on the small fb, unless stated otherwise): KOH = mustard yellow on pileipellis; pale orangish on context; brownish on tubes (larger fb only). NH4OH = mustard yellow on piliepillis (a bit paler than KOH); no reaction on context. FeSO4 = medium brown, resolving bluish on pileipellis; pale slate on context.

DNA Sequencing Results & Discussion (last updated on 20-Feb-20):
> A clean and contiguous nrDNA sequence was obtained by Dr. Kudzma from this material. The full-length nrITS region in this species/organism is 707 bps long (ITS1= 225 bps, 5.8S = 161 bps and ITS2 = 321 bps). There are 3 ambiguities — 2 x “R” and a “Y”. The nrLSU sequence consists of the first 1441 bps of the locus. No ambiguities were detected in this sequence.
A BLASTn search of the first 978 characters (the most commonly sequenced region) returned a hit list consisting of taxa from different corners of the Boletaceae and lacking hints of a phylogenetic structure. At its face value, this result is consistent with the overall morphological profile of this bolete, though to the inexperienced eye roodyi may look similar to members of such genera as Baorangia, Lanmaoa and Pulchroboletus. Sequence similarity didn’t exceed 97% with even for the top-scoring hits (Pulchroboletus sclerotiorum). Attempted tree-building in GenBank met with failure due to a confused topology and a strange selection of the outgroup by the program, meaning that other loci would be required for establishing a meaningful phylogenetic inference. However, there were indications that B. roodyi could clade in the subfamily Xerocomoideae. Indeed, this notion was confirmed by phylogenies derived later from a TEF-1 sequence (see below).
> The TEF-1 sequence is 930 base pairs long. The sequenced region is between the EF1-983F and EFgr primers, which were seen but edited out. There are a total of 6 miscellaneous ambiguities present in this stretch of the gene.
Extensive experimentation with phylogenetic trees built in GenBank from the relevant BLASTn hits strongly indicates that B. roodyi is a member of Xerocomoideae. Since inclusion of accessions from other Boletaceae families intermixing with those of Xerocomoideae don’t alter this placement and only complicate the overall picture, the final phylograms focus solely on the representatives of Xerocomoideae.
Fig.1 was built in GenBank from a BLASTn of the first 583 characters of the sequence (the most commonly sequenced region of TEF-1), whereas Fig.2 – derived from a BLASTn of the entire sequence – was generated in in the “one click” mode.1 In the latter, unrooted tree, B. roodyi (yellow highlight) is placed with moderate support next to Pulchroboletus and Boletellus. It appears that B. roodyi and B. miniato-olivaceus (blue highlight) could represent two distinct monotypic genera. The overall morphological gestalt of these taxa is in line with this phylogenetic inference.

Proposed Names

-14% (2)
Recognized by sight
96% (4)
Based on chemical features: ITS & LSU sequences match those of the type material (see comment below)

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
DNA confirms B. roodyi
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2017-02-01 17:25:01 -05 (-0500)

Here is a comment I just received from Dr. Ortiz-Santana:
“Yes, I do have ITS and LSU sequences of Boletus roodyi, and after comparing them, they do match, LSU are identical and the ITS only varies in the ambiguities, so I will said that your collection is B. roodyi. Based on your finding it looks like the distribution of the species extends more into the north eastern USA.”

Thanks for the info, Noah
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2017-01-31 12:39:33 -05 (-0500)

In their B. roodyi Mycotaxon paper (2009), Ortiz-Santana et al. point out the similarity between roodyi and Peck’s roseotinctus. Furthermore they add: “Unfortunately, the type of B. roseotinctus appears to be lost and no other collections are known to exist (Both 1993)”. I wonder if problems with typification of old taxa may invalidate their names so that the species can be described as new.
Yes, most boletes have unstable pileal pigments and lose their brilliance in age. By the way, I am in possession of Geoff Balme’s obs 243414 and obs 248436, that could very well be either of the boletes discussed herein, and I should sequence at least one of them… Looking forward to your roodyi sequences.

By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2017-01-31 10:39:07 -05 (-0500)

Nice write-up. This is a species I have collected twice (in Ohio and North Carolina). I have wondered if it was Peck’s Boletus roseotinctus.
They can get deep rosy-red in age. As you know, starting off paler and darkening is quite unusual with bolets.

I do have B. roodyi collections (and I think they have been sequenced). I’ll see if they have, and send you that to compare.

By: Robert(the 3 foragers) (the3foragers)
2017-01-31 09:23:33 -05 (-0500)

we do!

Thanks, John
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2017-01-30 23:15:14 -05 (-0500)

Do you ever find anything like this one in your neck of the woods?

excellent work
By: John Plischke (John Plischke)
2017-01-30 23:03:34 -05 (-0500)

Excellent work

By: Scott Pavelle (Scott Pavelle)
2016-07-16 21:31:27 -05 (-0500)

I want to give you a shout-out. We’ve all started to include notes on the color accuracy of the pics. It’s really useful to know, e.g., that Igor is sure about the shades of yellow and red in this obs. I’ve started including white paper as a background to give a reference point. Your comments last month about this issue have made a difference.

Fair is fair. Nice work.

Oh yes. I have ZERO input to give on this particular mushroom.

Not “mini-o”
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2016-07-16 21:19:00 -05 (-0500)

The cap/stipe colors are off. The cap color of my bolete doesn’t change as fbs age. The stipe of “mini-o” should be very pale yellow with flushes of pink. Also, wrong woods for “mini-o”. However, I must admit, the chemical tests are for the most part in line with those reported in NAB for “mini-o”. This should be sequenced.

By: Robert(the 3 foragers) (the3foragers)
2016-07-16 21:10:53 -05 (-0500)

We go again. Looks and sound like B.miniato olivaceus. Very good observation.