Proposed Names

28% (1)
Recognized by sight
54% (1)
Based on chemical features: My hesitancy here is because we don’t know enough about the amount of variation (heterogeneity) in the nrITS of “sp-T06.”
82% (1)
Based on chemical features: separated from sp-T06 genetically

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
Well, it seems that the Missouri material originally signed to sp-T06 is VERY
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2017-01-28 14:17:10 EST (-0500)

distinct genetically from the Texas material assigned to the same taxon. Moreover the Texas material may include more than one species. So, I have been peeling onions to get to the concept of the Missouri material alone. I created a new name as you can see above. The Missouri taxon (collected in Camden and Jasper Counties) has the __penetratrix like “preamble” to nrLSU. The Texas material does not and may, actually be more than one taxon. I went back over all the data. The variety in the sequences is the reason that I never posted any of them to GenBank. They just didn’t seem to belong to one taxon. Now that I have gotten a slightly clearer idea of the provisional series Penetratrices, it is very clear that the former sp-T06 sequences fell on “both sides of the dividing line.”

I have decided to maintain the sp-T06 Texas collections in a single group for the time being, but I think it is very likely that that the concept will break up further.

I emphasize that only the Missouri material that was field-assigned to sp-T06 is included under the new name.

It will take me awhile; however, I have started splitting the old sp-T06 web page. The new justicei page is being assembled here:

Very best,


After a more detailed analysis, I am convinced that the large subunit…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2017-01-28 12:01:17 EST (-0500)

sequence from this material matches precisely the one we have from an earlier attempt to derive that sequence from Missouri material of sp-T06 from Ha Ha Tonka.

Very best,


Very cool. The landowner will be fascinated by this info Dr. T!
By: Jon Shaffer (watchcat)
2016-12-23 21:30:40 EST (-0500)
Thanks for sending the voucher material, Jon.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2016-12-22 13:39:33 EST (-0500)

Very best,


Unfortunately, the “proposed fungus barcode” gene is in three pieces….
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2016-12-22 13:31:56 EST (-0500)

However…the species is another member of the __penetratrix_ group with its odd “preamble” to the large subunit sequence. The closest thing on the MAO website is Amanitasp-T06,” and this might even be that species.

If it is “sp-T06,” then it is another species shared by Missouri and east Texas:

See what you think:

Very best,


We have DNA. A long sequence from the nrLSU region.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2016-12-22 12:42:25 EST (-0500)

Looks to be interesting data.

More in a bit.

Very best,

Rod Tulloss

Thanks Jon,
By: groundhog
2015-06-23 17:01:45 EDT (-0400)

We have recieved this material and it has been accessioned to Rod’s herbarium. We are scheduling it for DNA sequencing.

Created: 2014-06-14 20:21:18 EDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2017-01-28 13:58:28 EST (-0500)
Viewed: 151 times, last viewed: 2019-09-15 07:31:58 EDT (-0400)
Show Log