name | Amanita pilosella f. atroconica |
name status | nomen acceptum |
author | Corner & Bas |
english name | "Black-Coned Little Hairs Amanita" |
images | |
cap | The cap of Amanita pilosella f. atroconica is 35 - 70 mm wide, with more regular patches of volva on the outer portion of the cap and conical warts in the center. |
gills | The gill edges are very dark brown rather than white, as in f. pilosella. |
stem | The original descriptions notes no difference from the type of the A. pilosella. |
odor/taste | The original descriptions notes no difference from the type of the A. pilosella. |
spores | The original descriptions notes no difference from the type of the A. pilosella. |
discussion | According to the original description of this form, there are microscopic differences in the volva that segregate it from f. pilosella, namely smaller cells more often in vertically oriented chains and possibly fewer hyphae proportionately.—R. E. Tulloss |
brief editors | RET |
name | Amanita pilosella f. atroconica | ||||||||
name status | nomen acceptum | ||||||||
english name | "Black-Coned Little Hairs Amanita" | ||||||||
etymology | atrus "black" + conicus "conical"; because of the color and shape of the warts on the pileus of this taxon | ||||||||
MycoBank nos. | 349021 | ||||||||
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 | L (in liquid) | ||||||||
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 entirely from the protolog of the present taxon. | ||||||||
pileus | from protolog: 35 - 70 mm wide, umber or fuliginous or grayish brown, paler on expansion especially toward margin, with innate dark fibrillose streaks, minutely dark grayish brown fibrillose-subvillose especially toward margin, convex to planar or somewhat concave, sometimes slightly umbonate, dry (perhaps slightly viscid when old); context white or slightly brownish, 1.5 - 4.5 mm thick in disc, otherwise, thin; margin smooth to faintly striate; universal veil as conical warts (0.5 - 1 mm high and wide) over disc and as thin flat patches (1 - 2.5 mm wide) over remainder of cap, umber, fuliginous or blackish. | ||||||||
lamellae | from protolog: from protolog: free, crowded, white or grayish-white or fuliginous-umber, 50 - 90 primaries, with edges fuliginous or (rarely) white; lamellulae attenuate, (0–) 1 – 3 between each pair of otherwise adjancent lamellae. | ||||||||
stipe | from protolog: 40 - 110 × 3.5 - 6 mm wide (width measured at apex), entirely gray, fuscous-gray, grayish umber or fuscous, with dark fibrillose innate streaks, subfibrillose to subflocculose, with grayish patches above ring from fragmented partial veil, narrowing upward; context solid; bulb subclavate to bulbous, 5 - 12 mm wide; partial veil 15 - 30 mm below apex of stipe, rather narrow, pendent, floccose-membranous, dark to pale gray and striate above, grayish and fuliginous pruinose or flocculose below, with fuliginous to blackish edge slightly thickened and entire and pruinose-flocculose; universal veil as one to several mostly incomplete rows of fuliginous to blackish, minute, pruinose-felted patches on upper part of basal bulb or as entirely fuliginous pruinose-felted covering of upper bulb. | ||||||||
odor/taste | not recorded. | ||||||||
macrochemical tests |
none recorded. | ||||||||
pileipellis | not described. | ||||||||
pileus context | not described. | ||||||||
lamella trama | not described. | ||||||||
subhymenium | not described. | ||||||||
basidia | not described. | ||||||||
universal veil | from protolog: On pileus: filamentous undifferentiatated hyphae rather scarce; inflated cells globose, amaller and darker than in type form, up to 70 μm wide, in central warts mostly disposed in [terminal??] chains with anticlinal orientation. At stipe base: not described. | ||||||||
stipe context | not described. | ||||||||
partial veil | not described. | ||||||||
lamella edge tissue | not described. | ||||||||
basidiospores | not differentiated from those of type variety in protolog. | ||||||||
ecology | from protolog: Solitary. Terrestrial in tropical forest. | ||||||||
material examined | from protolog: SINGAPORE: Bukit Timah, s.d. s.n. (paratype, L; also paratype of type form); unkn. loc., 23.iv.1940 E. J. H. Corner s.n. (holotype, L in liquid, also paratype of type form). | ||||||||
discussion |
from protolog: "[Corner]...separated...[the two] forms in his field notes on account of the difference in colour of the edge of the gills. However, the material available being scanty, the taxonomical importance of these two forms is uncertain." For a bit more detail see the "discussion" data field on the technical tab of A. pilosella. | ||||||||
citations | —R. E. Tulloss | ||||||||
editors | RET | ||||||||
Information to support the viewer in reading the content of "technical" tabs can be found here.
name | Amanita pilosella f. atroconica |
bottom links | [ Keys & Checklists ] |
name | Amanita pilosella f. atroconica |
bottom links | [ 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.