| name | Amanita griseovelata |
| name status | nomen acceptum |
| author | D. A. Reid |
| english name | "Victorian Gray-Veiled Lepidella" |
| intro |
Description based on Reid (1980). |
| cap | The cap of Amanita griseovelata is 45 - 55 mm wide, applanate, becoming slightly depressed at the center, slate-gray with pink tints to almost black at the disc, polished to slightly viscid, with a smooth margin. The volva remnants are present as pale gray, felty-pruinose remnants, more obvious toward the center where they form very thin, irregular patches. Near the cap margin the volva is present as web-like minute scales (lens). The flesh is white. |
| gills | The gills are white. |
| stem | The stem is up to 60 × 10 mm, cylindric or narrowing slightly upwards, white, ornamented with minute, scurfy zig-zag bands especially toward the top, sometimes with a short, rooting base. The ring falls away in "snow-like debris." No volval remnants are to be found on the stem base. The flesh is white. |
| odor/taste | Neither odor nor taste was recorded for this species. |
| spores | The spores measure 7.0 - 10.0 (-11.5) x 6.8 - 8.5 (-10.5) µm and are subglobose to broadly ellipsoid, sometimes triangular in top view [Note: spores should not be measured in this view.—ed.] and inamyloid. Clamps are absent at bases of basidia. |
| discussion | This species was originally described from Victoria, Australia. Reid knew this species from two sites. No ecological information was provided. This species does not key out in Bas' thesis (1969). Because of the characteristics of its volva and the lack of clamps in the fruiting body, the present species seems most appropriately placed in Bas' stirps Cinereoconia.—R. E. Tulloss |
| brief editors | RET |
| name | Amanita griseovelata | ||||||||||||||||||||
| author | ("griseo-velata") D. A. Reid. 1978. Victorian Naturalist 95: 48. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| name status | nomen acceptum | ||||||||||||||||||||
| english name | "Victorian Gray-Veiled Lepidella" | ||||||||||||||||||||
| synonyms |
non Amanita griseovelata (Bertault) Massart nom. inval. [See Amanita eliae var. griseovelata.] 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. | 308556 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | K | ||||||||||||||||||||
| selected illustrations | Reid. 1980. Austral. J. Bot., Suppl. Ser. 8: 32, fig. 19(a-e), 67-68, 106. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 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). | ||||||||||||||||||||
| pileus |
from revision of type (Reid 1980): 45 - 55 mm wide, slate-gray with pink tints to almost black at disc, apparing polished to slightly viscid where exposed; contents white; margin not described; universal veil as pale gray felty-pruinose detersile remnants, at least in youth more obvious toward disc and there forming very thin irregular patches, as tiny pruinose flecks toward margin (arachnoid under lens). from non-type material (Reid 1980): 55 mm wide, gray-brown, shallowly convex; context not described; margin smooth; universal veil as off-white pyramidal scales. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| lamellae |
from revision of type (Reid 1980): white. from non-type material (Reid 1980): very pale cream. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| stipe |
from revision of type (Reid 1980): up to 60 × 10 mm, white, ornamented with minute scurfy zig-zag bands, especially toward apex, cylindric or narrowing slightly upward; bulb often short and rooting [Note: slightly broader than stipe per fig. 106—ed.]; context white; partial veil barely cohesive, falling away without trace in snow-like debris; universal veil lacking. from non-type material (Reid 1980): 60 mm high; context not described; bulb lacking; partial veil lacking; universal veil not described. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 revision of type (Reid 1980): 34 - 47 × 10 - 12 μm, 4-sterigmate; clamps lacking. from non-type material (Reid 1980): up to 46 × 11.0 μm, with approximately equal numbers 2- and 4-sterigmate. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| universal veil |
from revision of type (Reid 1980): On pileus: disoriented; hyphae thin-walled, hyaline, branched, 4 - 5 μm wide; inflated cells dominating [per fig. 68], globose (up to 92 μm wide, terminal singly or in short chains, with subtending hyphal segments often somewhat inflated) or elongate (up to 112 × 45 μm); clamps lacking. from non-type material (Reid 1980): On pileus: hyphae, hyaline, branched, up to 5 μm wide, scattered; inflated cells predominating, up to 50 × 40 μm, globose to ovoid; clamps lacking. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| stipe context | not described in protolog. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| partial veil | not described in protolog. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| lamella edge tissue | from revision of type (Reid 1980): inflated cells ovate, up to 21 μm wide. [Note: This tissue misdescribed by Reid as cheilocystidia.—ed.] | ||||||||||||||||||||
| basidiospores |
from protolog: [-/-/-] 7.0 - 10.0 (-11.5) × 6.8 - 8.5 (-10.5) μm, (est. Q = 1.0 - 1.20), amyloid, globose to subglobose to broadly ellipsoid; apiculus not recorded; contents not recorded; color in deposit not recorded. non-type from Reid (1980): [-/-/1] 7.5 - 11.0 (-13.0) × 7.0 - 9.0 (-13.0) μm, amyloid, globose to subglobose to broadly ellipsoid to ovate; apiculus prominent; contents not recorded. "..., the globose or subglobose spores when rolled are seen to be broadly elliptic or ovate in other views. The larger spores are the products of 2-spored basidia." [Note: It seems impossible that Reid would not know that "rolled" spores may have different shapes in different views. We note that he never uses the length:width ratio in describing spores in either (Reid 1978) or (Reid 1980). Apparently, he had not yet realized the value of Bas' introduction of a standardized, quantified approach to spore shape terminology; and, as a consequence, he had not yet drawn the conclusion that a standardized form of measurement in lateral view was desirable. As a consequence, his measurements cannot be read as if they were produced by current methodologies endorsed by the editors. In the case of this non-type material in particular, there seems to be little use in guessing at (or "estimating") Q values for this species; hence, no sporograph can be generated from Reid's data.—ed.] | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ecology | not recorded. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| material examined |
from protolog: AUSTRALIA:
VICTORIA—Unkn. LGA - Fernshaw Reserve, 29.v.1976 D.A.. Reid s.n. (holotype, K). non-type from Reid (1980): AUSTRALIA: VICTORIA—Shire of South Gippsland - Wilson's Promontory Nat. Pk., Tidal River, Lilly Pilly Gully, 2.v.1976 D. A. & D. G. Reid s.n. (K). | ||||||||||||||||||||
| discussion |
The amyloid spores and the highly friable and deciduous partial veil indicate that the present species can be assigned to Amanita sect. Lepidella. Further, it should be placed in subsect. Solitariae. After some consideration, it seems that the best match for this species among the stirpes described by Bas (1969) is stirps Cinereoconia. In his discussion, Reid (1980) compares this species to A. grisella; however, he apprently (because of the content of the discussion) intended to refer to A. griselloides. Indeed, the photographs of the two taxa are strikingly similar (Reid 1980: figs. 106 and 107). Apparently they can be segregated based on spore shape and on the form of the universal veil. The non-type material reviewed by Reid (1980) appears to be (1) a different taxon based on the drawings of the universal veil in the two collections [figs. 67 and 68 in (Reid 1980)] or (2) immature material (many 2-sterigmate basidia present) or (3) material otherwise abnormal due to some unknown factor (because of Reid's report of oddly formed basidia or basidioles in the hymenium). | ||||||||||||||||||||
| citations | —R. E. Tulloss | ||||||||||||||||||||
| editors | RET | ||||||||||||||||||||
Information to support the viewer in reading the content of "technical" tabs can be found here.
| name | Amanita griseovelata |
| bottom links |
[ Section Lepidella page. ]
[ Amanita Studies home. ]
[ Keys & Checklists ] |
| name | Amanita griseovelata |
| bottom links |
[ Section Lepidella page. ]
[ Amanita Studies home. ]
[ 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.