Found in the Big Sandy Creek Unit of the Big Thicket National Preserve.
Growing singly in mixed woods.
Caps up to 5.5 cm across, somewhat zonate with striations ~ 35-40% of the cap radius.
Spore print was white and spores not amyloid.
Spores ~ 9.2-13.3 X 9.0-13.3 microns, globose to subglobose and smooth.
Q(range = 1.00-1.12. Q(ave) = 1.04.
These look similar to MO#168179 and perhaps Amanita sp-T06.
I’m getting some larger spores but the coloring, cap and stipe features look very similar.

Species Lists


Spores in Congo red & KOH @ 1000X.
Spores in Congo red & KOH @ 1000X.

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2018-03-10 23:30:25 CST (-0500)

I have a hope for coherence. :)

Thank you very much for your continuing support. It means a lot to me.

With time and more sequences…., etc.

Very best,


The A. “sp-F10” could well be the same,
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2018-03-10 19:40:56 CST (-0500)

although the spores seem a little more elliptical per your measurements, Rod. However, I have had occasional problems matching your #’s with mine historically.

At least it looks like there are a couple more collections that might qualify…MO#168179 and

The puzzle may eventually become a coherent picture.

As time passes, I go back and check “mystery” DNA with sequences that have been…
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2018-03-10 14:17:33 CST (-0500)

recorded after the “mystery” was recorded.

The DNA of this sequence is remarkably similar to that of Amanitasp-F10”. I wonder if the material of sp-F10 was a faded version of the present species???

The two possible species differ in one character position in ITS1 and There is longish “CA” repeat in both that has one more in “CA” in “sp-F10”…usually something discounted as copying error (either in nature or the PRC process) and, hence, not a distinguishing feature. So one difference in over 770 characters.

We only have the one sequence at present.

The puzzle goes one.

Very best,


This material is genetically distinct from Amanita justicei.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2017-02-01 19:02:00 CST (-0500)

Hence, it is belongs to one of the two genetically defined groups of specimens that remain for the moment in sp-T06. Why leave them both there? Because we don’t have enough supporting evidence from other material called “sp-T06”. A list of all such material is already in the queue of material to be sequenced. With any luck, we will learn more about how sp-T06 should probably be subdivided. With all the other taxa contesting for sequencing time, this will take a while. We are looking for more sequencing capacity to address the problem.

Very best,


Thanks Ron,
By: groundhog
2014-08-14 09:00:06 CDT (-0400)

This material has been accessioned and scheduled for DNA sequencing.

Hello, Ron.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-07-06 10:26:30 CDT (-0400)

The dried material has arrived in Roosevelt.

Thank you very much.

Very best,


Thank you, Ron.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-07-02 17:55:43 CDT (-0400)


OK Rod,
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2014-07-02 15:01:24 CDT (-0400)

These are now in the competent hands of the USPS.

Very interesting, Ron.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2014-07-02 08:11:16 CDT (-0400)

I would like to have look at the material.

Sorry for the short note. I’m rushed today.

Very best,


Created: 2014-07-01 22:15:52 CDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2018-03-10 23:30:26 CST (-0500)
Viewed: 204 times, last viewed: 2019-12-03 04:47:16 CST (-0500)
Show Log