name | Amanita hiltonii |
name status | nomen acceptum |
author | D. A. Reid |
english name | "Hilton's Lepidella" |
images | |
intro | This description is largely based on (Reid 1980). |
cap | The cap of Amanita hiltonii is up to 60 mm wide, becoming plano-convex, creamy-white or silvery, and completely covered with cottony-floccose volval remnants which may form low, indistinct warts, especially toward the center. |
gills | The gills are off-white, becoming pale yellow in older specimens and on drying. |
stem |
The stem is up to 50 × 20 mm, white, clavate with a slightly rooting base. The ring is distinct, membranous, narrow and easily lost. The volva is not apparent on stem base. This species has a nut like smell. |
spores | The spores measure 7.0 - 9.5 (-10.0) × 4.8 - 6.2 µm and are ellipsoid and amyloid. Clamps are frequent at base of basidia. |
discussion |
This species was originally described from Perth in the state of Western Australia. This species occurs in laterite soil. Reid knew this species from two collections. Among the stirpes designated by Bas (1969) the present species is most likely to fall in stirps Grossa. It appears somewhat close to A. grossa (Berk.) Sacc. and to A. subalbida Cleland, but it's spores are smaller than in either of these species.—R. E. Tulloss< |
brief editors | RET |
name | Amanita hiltonii | ||||||||
author | D. A. Reid. 1978. Victorian Naturalist 95: 48. | ||||||||
name status | nomen acceptum | ||||||||
english name | "Hilton's Lepidella" | ||||||||
etymology | genitive of a Latinized name; hence, "of Hilton" or "Hilton's" | ||||||||
MycoBank nos. | 308558 | ||||||||
GenBank nos. |
Due to delays in data processing at GenBank, some accession numbers may lead to unreleased (pending) pages.
These pages will eventually be made live, so try again later.
| ||||||||
holotypes | K | ||||||||
selected illustrations | Reid. 1980. Austral. J. Bot., Suppl. Ser. 8: figs. 34, 21(a-d), 69-70. | ||||||||
intro |
The following text may make multiple use of each data field. The field may contain magenta text presenting data from a type study and/or revision of other original material cited in the protolog of the present taxon. Macroscopic descriptions in magenta are a combination of data from the protolog and additional observations made on the exiccata during revision of the cited original material. The same field may also contain black text, which is data from a revision of the present taxon (including non-type material and/or material not cited in the protolog). Paragraphs of black text will be labeled if further subdivision of this text is appropriate. Olive text indicates a specimen that has not been thoroughly examined (for example, for microscopic details) and marks other places in the text where data is missing or uncertain. The following material is derived from the protolog and from (Reid, 1980). from protolog: Basidiome short and thick-est. | ||||||||
pileus |
from protolog: up to 60 mm wide, creamy white or silvery, becoming plano convex; context not recorded; margin not recorded; universal veil as low, indistinct warts, mostly present toward center, cottony-floccose. non-type (Reid 1980): up to 180 mm wide, plano-convex; context off-white; margin not recorded; universal veil as white floccose scales. | ||||||||
lamellae | from protolog: off-white, beocming pale yellow in older specimens and on drying. | ||||||||
stipe |
from protolog: up to 50 × 20 mm; bulb slightly clavate, rooting; context not recorded; partial veil distinct and membranous, but narrow and "poorly formed"; universal veil reportedly absent. non-type (Reid 1980): partial veil lacking. | ||||||||
odor/taste | from protolog: Odor nutty. Taste not recorded. | ||||||||
macrochemical tests |
none recorded. | ||||||||
pileipellis | not described in protolog. | ||||||||
pileus context | not described in protolog. | ||||||||
lamella trama | not described in protolog. | ||||||||
subhymenium | not described in protolog. | ||||||||
basidia | from protolog: 48 0 55 × 7 - 10 μm, 4-sterigmate; clamps present. | ||||||||
universal veil |
from protolog: On pileus: having hyphae and inflated cells in about equal proportions; hyphae 2 - 4 μm wide, thin-walled, hyaline, branched, often becoming variously inflated; inflated cells globose or ovoid or clavate, up to 40 μm wide; clamps frequent. non-type (Reid 1980): "as in type with frequent clamps." | ||||||||
stipe context | not described in protolog. | ||||||||
partial veil | not described in protolog. | ||||||||
lamella edge tissue |
from protolog: inflated cells clavate, up to 12 μm wide, often constricted below apex, "with a rather broad stalk." [Note: originally misdescribed by Reid as "cheilocystidia."—ed.] non-type (Reid 1980): "as in the type but up to 15μm wide." [Note: ditto.—ed.] | ||||||||
basidiospores |
from protolog: [-/-/1] 7.0 - 9.5 (-10.0) × 4.8 - 6.2 μm,
(est. Q = 1.45 - 1.55), amyloid, ellipsoid; apiculus not recorded; contents not recorded; color in deposit not recorded. non-type (Reid 1980): [-/-/-] 8.5 - 10 × 4.8 - 7.0 μm, (est. Q = 1.40 - 1.80), amyloid, ellipsoid to elongate. | ||||||||
ecology |
not recorded in protolog. non-type (Reid 1980): In laterite soil along track through forest. | ||||||||
material examined |
from protolog: AUSTRALIA:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA—City of Perth - Dale Forest, Brookton Hwy. [32°15' S/ 116°25'E], 9.v.1976 D. A. & D. G. Reid & N. Brittan s.n. (holotype, K). non-type (Reid 1980): AUSTRALIA: WESTERN AUSTRALIA—Unkn. LGA - ca. Walpole, 5 km from Hwy. 1 on Franklin Rd., Karri Forest, 13.v.1976 D. A. Reid s.n. (K). | ||||||||
citations | —R. E. Tulloss | ||||||||
editors | RET | ||||||||
Information to support the viewer in reading the content of "technical" tabs can be found here.
name | Amanita hiltonii |
bottom links |
[ Section Lepidella page. ]
[ Amanita Studies home. ]
[ Keys & Checklists ] |
name | Amanita hiltonii |
bottom links |
[ Section Lepidella page. ]
[ Amanita Studies home. ]
[ Keys & Checklists ] |
Each spore data set is intended to comprise a set of measurements from a single specimen made by a single observer; and explanations prepared for this site talk about specimen-observer pairs associated with each data set. Combining more data into a single data set is non-optimal because it obscures observer differences (which may be valuable for instructional purposes, for example) and may obscure instances in which a single collection inadvertently contains a mixture of taxa.