Limacella alachuana

This description is just one illustration of the annoying state of affairs in Limacella taxonomy.

One major problem is that complete inadequacy of the original descriptions.

Another is the lack of revisions of the types using methodology that benefits from the advances in Amanita studies since Corner and Bas (1962) and Bas (1969).

A third problem is the poor quality of many exsiccata that often were dried under extremely challenging conditions.

A fourth problem is the lack of annotation and illustration of fresh material.

A fifth problem is that many of the types are deposited in herbaria in subtropical and tropical herbaria that have at least for some period of time, not had the facilities for preservation in dry, cool, insect-free conditions; and this has resulted in destruction in part or in toto of the original material.

The study of Limacella requires that widely distributed collectors take up the cause and, this time around, produce sets of well-collected, well-dried, and well-documented material.—R. E. Tulloss

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.

"Pileus 3–6 (–8) cm diam., fleshy, convexo-campanulate, broadly umbonate, expanding; surface light grayish brown to dark brown, covered with a thick gluten which rapidly dries, rugulose-scrobiculate over the disk, smooth elsewhere; margin entire, concolorous.  Lamellae adnexed to almost free, whitish to pale cream, more or less ventricose, moderately distant but with numerous lamellulae.  Stipe 4.5–5 (–8) × 1.2–1.5 cm, cylindric, solid; surface white and dry above the annular zone, strongly glutinous forming a greyish fibrillose annular zone but never a membranous annulus.  Context moderately thick, soft, fragile soon decaying, white, unchanging, of very thin-walled, inflated hyphae, 5–30 µm diam., with clamp-connexions; odour and taste strong and unpleasant, earthy, not farinaceous.  Spores 5.5–6.5 × 4.5–6 µm, (L’ = 6.0 ± 0.4 µm; W’ = 5.3 ± 0.3 µm; Q’ = 1.16), subglobose to globose [to broadly ellipsoid], inamyloid, hyaline, [colorless,] thin-walled, finely verruculose.  Basidia 25–30 × 7–8 µm, clavate, bearing four short sterigmata. Lamella-edge fertile.  Cheilocystidia and pleurocystidia absent.  Hymenophoral trama distinctly bilateral, hyaline, with thin-walled, inflated hyphae, 5–15 µm diam.  Subhymenial layer 15–24 µm wide, pseudoparenchymatous.  Pileipellis [sic] an ixocutis [sic] of erect narrow, thin-walled hyphae, 2–3.5 µm diam., embedded in a glutinous matrix, 50–130 µm thick, and arising from a brown hypodermial[sic] layer...."

Material examined: FRANCE: MARTINIQUE—La Caravelle, 1.xi.1975 Fiard 440 (K??); 2.x.1977 Pegler 2924A (K).

"This species was previously known only from Florida, U.S.A.  It belongs in the Sect. Lubricae, differing from L. floridana (Murr[ill]) H.V. Sm. in the absence of a persistent annulus, the unpleasant odour and the larger spores.  It probably grows in association with Haematoxylon campechianum L. in the Lesser Antilles."