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:
accession
locus
voucher
source
No data available in table
Showing 0 to 0 of 0 entries
holotypes
in herb. S. Poumarat
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 of the present taxon.
basidiospores
from protolog: [20/-/1] (5.0-) 5.3 - 6.5 (-7.0) × (4.0-) 5.0 - 5.5 (-6.0) μm, (L' = 5.7 μm; W' = 5.1 μm; Q = 1.0 - 1.3; Q' = 1.12), smooth, rarely finely punctate (in bleue lactique), inamyloid, globose to subglobose to broadly ellipsoid;apiculus not described; contents not described; color in deposit not described.
ecology
from protolog: Under Pinus halepensis in sandy, calcareous terrain.
material examined
from protolog: FRANCE: BOUCHES-DE-RHÔNE—Marseille, Parc Pastré, 16.x.1993 D. Villeneuve s.n. (holotype, in herb. S. Poumarat 93.10.09.224).
citations
—R. E. Tulloss
editors
RET
Information to support the viewer in reading the content of "technical" tabs
can be found here.
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.
Spore data sets and their composite