| name | Amanita austrobulbosa | ||||||||||||||||||||
| author | Grgur. 2002. Australasian Mycologist 21(1): 35. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| name status | nomen acceptum | ||||||||||||||||||||
| synonyms |
≡Amanita bulbosa (Cleland) Grgur. comb. inval. 1997. Larger Fung. S. Austral.: 406. [Posterior homonym. ICBN §53.1]
≡Lepiota bulbosa Cleland. 1931. Trans. Roy. Soc. S. Austral. 55: 154. The editors of this site owe a great debt to Dr. Cornelis Bas whose famous cigar box files of Amanita nomenclatural information gathered over three or more decades were made available to RET for computerization and make up the lion's share of the nomenclatural information presented on this site. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| MycoBank nos. | 466014, 443365, 259104 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 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. Search:
Showing 0 to 0 of 0 entries | ||||||||||||||||||||
| holotypes | AD | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 is based on the protolog of this taxon and on (Grgurinovic 1997). | ||||||||||||||||||||
| pileus | from Grgurinovic (1997): up to 25 mm wide, pale earthy brown, convex; context not recorded; margin not recorded; universal veil as scattered villose scales. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| lamellae | from Grgurinovic (1997): barely reaching stipe, close, cream-colored, slightly ventricose; lamellulae not recorded. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| stipe | from Grgurinovic (1997): up to 18 [sic?] × 6 mm (length includes bulb), whitish, with brownish tint below; bulb up to 13 mm wide; context slightly hollow; partial veil fixed, supramedian, definite, membranous, striate "from lamella edges"; universal veil absent. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| odor/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 Grgurinovic (1997): [1/1/1] 55 × 11.9 μm, 4-sterigmate, with sterigmata up to 4.8 μm long; clamps not observed. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| universal veil | from Grgurinovic (1997): filamentous undifferentiated hyphae 2.4 - 7.8 μm wide, with average width = 4.9 μm; inflated cells ovoid or obpyriform or sphaeropedunculate, 46 - 53 × 22 - 36 μm; clamps not observed. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| stipe context | not described in protolog. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| partial veil | not described in protolog. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| lamella edge tissue | not described. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| basidiospores |
from Grgurinovic (1997): [32/1/1] 9.6 - 12.8 × 6.0 - 8.2 μm, (L = 11.0 μm; W = 6.9 μm; Q = 1.60), amyloid, ellipsoid; apiculus sublateral [per figure]; contents not recorded; color in deposit not recorded. [Note: We have not estimated a range for Q based on the (Grgurinovic 1997) spore data for this species in order to prevent automatic generation of a sporograph that we believe would be misleading. We evaluated the Amanita spore length and width ranges from (Grgurinovic 1997) in comparison to comparable data published by other authors and often based on revision of the same specimens. This experiment involved a total of 19 descriptions of a total of 13 species from the work of 3 authors. In a range of the form "x - y" of spore length (width) from (Grgurinovic 1997) compared to a range of the form (a-) b - c (-d) of spore length (width) in the other works, the value of "y" was compared to the value of "c" as a ratio. In the case of spore length ranges, on average (per author), the ratio y/c ranged from 1.06 - 1.10 (possibly due to the non-segregation of a "d" value in the ranges of concern). In the case of spore width ranges, on average (per author), the ratio ranged from 1.14 - 1.23 (indicating the probability of compounding causes at play—possibly, the absence of the "d" value in the ranges of concern and failure to restrict spore measurement to spores strictly presenting in lateral view). When sporographs were attempted from the Grgurinovic data, the results were not useful.—ed.] | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ecology | from Grgurinovic (1997): Terrestrial. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| material examined |
from Grgurinovic
(1997):
AUSTRALIA:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA—Hindmarsh Co. - Inman Valley,
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| discussion | Note: The name of this taxon was recombined in Amanita without demonstrating that the material was a member of the Amanitaceae. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| citations | —R. E. Tulloss | ||||||||||||||||||||
| editors | RET | ||||||||||||||||||||
Information to support the viewer in reading the content of "technical" tabs can be found here.
| name | Amanita austrobulbosa |
| bottom links | [ Keys & Checklists ] |
| name | Amanita austrobulbosa |
| bottom links | [ Keys & Checklists ] |
Spore data sets and their composite
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.
Text and User-Generated Sporographs are published under the Creative Commons License.
In the case of a taxon page, image credits are on the 'image' tab.