When: 2018-09-27

Collection location: Flemming Park, near Shreveport, Louisiana, USA [Click for map]

Who: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)

Specimen available
Collection number: Ron Pastorino RLP9-27-18E

Single FB growing near mixed woods.
Cap 7.7 cm across.
Pores slowly bruised brownish.
Odor not distinctive and taste was mild to slightly tart with time.
Did not get a good spore print but they appeared to be brownish and were yellow brown in 1% KOH under the scope.
Spores ~ 13.9-16.0 X 6.0-7.0 microns, fusoid and smooth.
Fb cap and pores dried to a dark brown.


Spores in KOH @ 1000X

Proposed Names

29% (1)
Recognized by sight
28% (1)
Recognized by sight: Closest match by morphology; could be related to UB-6 in BENA and/or Logan Wiedenfeld’s LA collections, e.g., obs 248795

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2018-10-26 22:19:08 MST (-0700)

Fat spores, working too fast… The next thing you will be accused of is thinking too much. :-) Still, not as bad as being accused of making stuff up…
Well, longicurvipes it is. Maybe we can unofficially elevate this particular collection to “var. brevicurvipes”.

Et Tu Igor?
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2018-10-26 21:13:24 MST (-0700)

Actually I’ve also been accused of working too fast, so no, they don’t stay in the mounting medium too long.
And I’ve not proposed L. longicurvipes as yet for no particular reason….

Bloated spores
By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2018-10-26 20:44:31 MST (-0700)

To be honest with you, Ron, I’ve seen some of your other bolete posts with fat spores pix for known taxa, but didn’t want to “accuse” (confront) you. :-) Do you let your spores sit in the mounting medium for too long before measuring them?
From your notes one can infer you didn’t see spores below 6 microns in width. Do you think it’s a valid enough reason for not proposing longicurvipes?

The cap was just a tad sticky
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2018-10-26 20:31:50 MST (-0700)

according to my meager notes.
I’ve been accused of getting fat spores on other genera but the photos speak for themselves I think. Also, Kuo’s numbers are close to mine and it doesn’t look like many folks have tried to recheck the original spore data.
So L. longicurvipes is quite possible.

By: I. G. Safonov (IGSafonov)
2018-10-26 20:01:40 MST (-0700)

Was the cap sticky? Did you apply KOH to it?
Longicurvipes is a possibility, as it’s known from the south, and some MO observations place it in your “neighborhood”, but the fatter spores are a problem. Maybe it’s a doppelganger. :-) Separans has one, right? Who knows, maybe there are southern lookalikes for many northeastern boletes out there. :-)

it does look very similar to
By: Ron Pastorino (Ronpast)
2018-10-26 19:39:20 MST (-0700)

Leccinum longicurvipes except for the somewhat fatter spores and the stunted curve.
While most references cite the same spore measurements(for L. longicurvipes) as “13-17 X 4-5” microns, Michael Kuo(Mushroom Expert site) records “13-18 X 4-6.5”.

Created: 2018-10-26 10:19:12 MST (-0700)
Last modified: 2018-10-26 22:19:09 MST (-0700)
Viewed: 72 times, last viewed: 2019-07-01 17:29:47 MST (-0700)
Show Log