Please do not re-click a link while waiting for a page to load. (It’s slower and degrades site speed for all users.)
To get images for machine learning, see MO Images for Machine Learning

 

Notes:
Growing near conifers @ ~5000ft.
Single specimen with cap 8.0 cm across and a stubby stipe ~ 4 X 4 cm.
Spore print rusty and spores ~ 7.9-9.1 X 4.8-5.1 microns and slightly rough.
No strong odor and taste was mild.
Didn’t have my KOH with me before I dried it.

Images

Proposed Names

57% (1)
Recognized by sight
90% (2)
Based on chemical features: Sequence 100% match with type material on Genbank(NR_130189). Result reported by Shannon Adams.

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
if you have two out of three matches …
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2018-03-20 10:59:35 MST (-0700)

(DNA and micro) you are at least in the right ballpark.

No French language skills
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2018-03-20 10:12:05 MST (-0700)

in my corner but I would not place a lot of emphasis on the stature difference when there is only one fruit body from each side to compare.
I think it is significant that they emphasize the lack of a rimmed bulb for a glaucopus type species. Also the spores are in the same range;“(7.5)8-10(10.5) X 4-5” microns.

Doesn’t look like illustration
By: Shannon Adams (Sulcatus)
2018-03-20 09:27:39 MST (-0700)

I remain puzzled. The sequence, comes back at 99% Query cover and 100% ident for sequence of C.alticaudus type material, with 654 base pairs matched. Ref Genbank NR_130189.

However, when I look at the illustration of C.alticaudus in Atlas de Cortinaires, it is a long stiped and more slender, without lilac. Interestingly, it notes that this is an unusual glaucopus species for having no bulb (at least that matches). Thanks so much for sharing this collection from your well-documented herbarium, Ron.

Will keep you posted. I shared the pages from ADC with Ron, who may be able to compare micro.

I’m hoping Shannon will be able
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2018-03-18 14:45:21 MST (-0700)

to perform that task at some point.

Will you be adding the sequence?
By: Terri Clements/Donna Fulton (pinonbistro)
2018-03-18 14:19:27 MST (-0700)
The group is very diverse
By: Dimitar Bojantchev (dimitar)
2013-10-20 16:41:37 MST (-0700)

Good points on the morphological considerations — with C. glaucopus though one quickly sees a rather inconsistent outside features, there usually is a small rimmed bulb, but not nearly mandatory as is the case with the calochroid clade where it is always present. I can show many photos. I could have easily seen something in the Variecolores group, but the spores there are large. Looking at the spores here, being that small, I see the glaucopus gr. Single fruitbodies are never optional to id, but I said I see glaucopus more than anything else.

other possibilities?
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2013-10-20 08:30:29 MST (-0700)

I am not seeing a radially streaked, viscid cap (altho it is a bit shiny, no stuck debris, tho) and there is certainly no rimmed basal blub here.

What are the unifying features for “glaucopus group” designation?

I think more C. glaucopus gr.
By: Dimitar Bojantchev (dimitar)
2013-10-19 10:33:18 MST (-0700)

Hi Ron,

I think this is in the C. glaucopus gr. C. ponderosus usually has that strong smell and the spores tend to be a bit longer.

Dimitar
so stocky!
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2013-10-18 19:49:29 MST (-0700)

nice contrast with delicate purple gills.