Proposed Names

27% (1)
Recognized by sight
62% (3)
Recognized by sight: A taxon from this section, as indicated by the combination of the volval sack, partial veil (annulus), and marginal striations. This could be A. spreta, a fairly common species, but the volva looks too robust for it and the cap color is off.
28% (1)
Recognized by sight

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
Thanks for the response and question, Herbert.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2017-12-08 19:31:24 GMT (+0000)

Yes, I see real utility in the various levels of confidence that can be deployed by a user of MO.

The levels of confidence let the users modify their proposed IDs as you have pointed out.

Very best,


ITS for ‘barcoding’
By: Thomas Stoughton (Tstou10)
2017-12-08 18:21:38 GMT (+0000)

Rod— my plan is not to do phylogenetic studies using ITS necessarily, but to create a mycoflora for Langdon Park (at PSU) with herbarium specimens accompanied by silica-dried tissues. ITS will serve to aid accurate ID. I’ll share whatever with whomever, of course!

For my own research, though, I intend to use genomic data for phylogenetics. I have an interest in species-level questions.

Hello, Herbert.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2017-12-08 17:21:56 GMT (+0000)

Up to the present, A. murrilliana seems to have a rather stable morphological description and there is good mutual support of the species concept molecularly and morphologically.

For A. spreta, we have added to the concept that it can have albino fruiting bodies. Other than that, the concept and the molecular data seem pretty stable.

I would rather say, “I don’t know for sure what it is” than speculate about something I can’t recognize in a photo. Mycologists are stirring the pot a good deal with name changes and reclassifications. I don’t want to add to that situation without data. I’d rather wait and see what the DNA and the spore measurements have to say about apparently novel material.

Very best,


Hello, Thomas.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2017-12-08 17:13:58 GMT (+0000)

I would very much like to see your sequences of amanitas in sections Vaginatae and Caesareae at the least. I have local Geneious data base of Amanita by section and locus. These include stuff that is not yet submitted to GenBank. GenBank has had a large burst of ITS and LSU sequences from those two sections in the last few years. This includes sequences of several protein coding genes or gene segments because of the discovery of long branch attraction and other problems with nrLSU (which tends to dominate tree construction no matter what other genes may be in the data set…at least in the Amanitaceae or other “old” genera).

Would be glad to discuss this further.


By: Thomas Stoughton (Tstou10)
2017-12-08 13:30:25 GMT (+0000)

It is neat to hear that we might have a ‘different’ Amanita on our hands. We’ll definitely be making collections next year! Also, by this time next year, my course will have fees to cover ITS sequencing, which we can easily do in the Jolles/Stoughton lab at PSU.

It is possible that a new concept of murrilliana is being introduced in recent days.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2017-12-08 04:48:24 GMT (+0000)

This material and other collections with robust caps that have fairly extensive pigmentation and or short marginal striations should be evaluated genetically and morphologically. It may be we are seeing something else.

I would be glad to review some of these recent collections if any have been saved and dried.