Observation 49842: Boletus vermiculosoides A.H. Sm. & Thiers

When: 2010-08-07

Collection location: Hadlyme, Connecticut, USA [Click for map]

Who: Bill (boletebill)

No specimen available


[admin – Sat Aug 14 02:00:59 +0000 2010]: Changed location name from ‘Hadlyme. CT’ to ‘Hadlyme, Connecticut, USA



Proposed Names

28% (2)
Recognized by sight: Old cap cracked, pores red/brwn when young, red flesh in stipe cortex
Used references: Smith, Boletes Michigan, B-B-R NAB.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Scott, looking at my own…
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2017-06-13 21:33:37 PDT (-0700)

observations for vermiculosus and vermiculosoides makes me wonder about these IDs. Yet another point of emphasis… devote more time/care to evaluating these types of collections. I’ve noticed significant variability in the amount of red pigment on the internal stipe context for these reddish-brown pore types. Maybe some of them are subgraveolens? A similar issue appears in the subvelutipes discussion… variable amounts of red context inside the stipe.

Dave, you have one up on M.O.
By: Scott Pavelle (Scott Pavelle)
2017-06-13 19:58:19 PDT (-0700)

Having just looked over the BENA description in detail I’m wondering about my own Observation 249571. The key tells for this mushroom seem to be yellow/brown pores, a powerful odor, and a bright red color at the base of the stem. These were a bit older and there are some questions about whether the cap flesh could be considered “yellowish white”. I also note that the red color rides up a good deal higher than just in the base, and the blue staining is marginal in the cap. But the combination of red on the inside with that remarkably over-the-top odor… It’s pretty striking.

I think I’ll go back and add the name as a possibility just to get some discussion going again. That obsie had people stumped.

I think I have found subgraveolens two times.
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2017-06-13 19:43:05 PDT (-0700)

Both were in the same location, obs 170348 . But I’m not very confident about identifying this uncommon species that apparently doesn’t look all that different from vermiculosus/vermiculosoides.

So… should I remove this one from the Bolete Filter?
By: Scott Pavelle (Scott Pavelle)
2017-06-13 19:35:29 PDT (-0700)

There are a few other photos – just none that are nearly this pretty. Your camera serves you well.

I wouldn’t give this ID…
By: Bill (boletebill)
2017-06-13 19:25:23 PDT (-0700)

…too much weight. This was the only time I ever found this (although I look every year) and since that time I’ve come to realize there are great differences in the WRITTEN description of the pore color(bright yellow brown) and the color I see when I look at photos (deep, dark, reddish brown). My impression at the time was of a bolete with pores the color of the series of vermiculosus, vermiculosoides, fagicola, but now I doubt that the color of the boletes I saw were in any sense “bright yellow brown” IF THAT’S AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION, so I doubt the accuracy of my ID and I await an ID that makes sense with the written description.

Is this ID still as confident?
By: Scott Pavelle (Scott Pavelle)
2017-06-13 15:38:07 PDT (-0700)

I’m going through BENA and got up to subgraveolens. The pores are described as “brownish yellow when very young, soon becoming bright yellow brown and then paler in age…”

Bright red seems wrong unless there’s something else going on.

OTOH, the comparison to vermiculosus and vermiculosoides might support something a bit redder… But this much?

Created: 2010-08-07 18:45:26 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2017-06-13 21:43:08 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 109 times, last viewed: 2018-01-24 13:15:50 PST (-0800)
Show Log