Notes:
Collection_#: OMS 300514
Collector: Richard Tullis
Identifier: Sava Krstic

Species Lists

Images

DSC05887-1.jpg
Copyright © 2017 Sava Krstic, Richard Tullis
OMS 300514.jpg

Proposed Names

56% (1)
Used references: Aldrovandi et al, 2015: “The Xeromphalina campanella/kauffmanii complex: species delineation and biogeographical patterns of speciation” – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26297781
73% (3)
Used references: Aldrovandi et al. Mycologia, 107:6, 1270-1284 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3852/15-087
Based on chemical features: ITS. See Comment below.

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Pretty clearly X. enigmatica I think
By: Terri Clements/Donna Fulton (pinonbistro)
2018-12-05 12:38:14 MST (-0700)

as the blast results with curated sequences of PNW X. enigmatica from the referenced paper are 99.9%-100% whereas the match with curated sequences of X. campanella from the same area are only 96.5%. According to the paper: “Average ITS base-pair variation within X. enigmatica was 1.52%.” And “Barcode gaps (average percent divergence (Hebert et al. 2003)
among X. campanella, X. enigmatica and X. kauffmanii exceed 3%, often considered an indication of separate taxa (Hughes et al. 2009).”

Good detective work Joseph!
By: Terri Clements/Donna Fulton (pinonbistro)
2018-12-05 10:11:48 MST (-0700)

The toughest job after blasting is verifying that the GenBank sequences are properly labeled. I would love a copy of this paper if you wouldn’t mind emailing it to me. I will be sequencing material in this group would love to have it as a resource.

Thanks,

Terri

Comparing sequences to Aldrovandi et al. [edited]
By: Joseph D. Cohen (Joe Cohen)
2018-12-04 20:50:53 MST (-0700)

After Pulk’s Comment below, Matt Gordon’s ITS sequence was posted. I just BLASTed it.
Here’s how the highest scoring hits match with Aldrovandi et al.1


Hit #

GenBank

similarity

cover

Genbank name
Aldrovandi
species

Fig

subclade
1 AB711999 99% 100% Basidiomycota enigmatica 4 PNW 3
2 HQ604741 99% 100% X. campanella enigmatica 4 PNW 3
3 HQ604742 99% 100% X. sp. enigmatica 4 ENA 1
4 KC581312 99% 94% X. campanella enigmatica 4 PNW 3
5 HM240545 99% 94% X. campanella enigmatica 4 PNW3
6 KC581311 97% 94% X. campanella campanella 3 n.a.

So, based on Aldrovandi’s trees and only ITS, this Observation is more likely Xeromphalina enigmatica than X. campanella. But is barcode alone reliable: hit #6 is pretty close. Probaly closer than other ITS sequences ID’d by Aldrovandi as X. enigmatica, but I don’t have time to run that down.


1 Matthew S. P. Aldrovandi, James E. Johnson, Brian O’Meara, Ronald H.
Petersen & Karen W. Hughes (2015) The Xeromphalina campanella/kauffmanii complex: species delineation and biogeographical patterns of speciation, Mycologia, 107:6, 1270-1284 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3852/15-087

X. campanella indistinguishable from X. enigmatica without mating studies or DNA
By: Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
2017-12-14 13:42:59 MST (-0700)

Xeromphalina campanella can be distinguished from X. enigmatica only by mating studies or DNA sequencing. They’re effectively identical in macroscopic features, microscopic features, chemical features, geographic location, and substrate preference.

Created: 2017-11-13 19:59:32 MST (-0700)
Last modified: 2018-12-05 12:38:30 MST (-0700)
Viewed: 98 times, last viewed: 2019-07-21 17:58:49 MDT (-0600)
Show Log