name | Amanita sponsus | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
author | Tulloss et al. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
name status | nomen provisorum | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
etymology | sponsus - "groom"; because of this unblushing species' otherwise phenetic similarity to A. novinupta, "the new bride." | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
intro |
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 based on the photographs and field notes of Ron Pastorino, DNA sequencing is from the labs of Drs. Karen Hughes and Linas Kudzma, and other original research by R. E. Tulloss. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pileus | 28 - 90 mm wide, white, with some brown stains (from soil?), convex; context ??; margin nonstriate, not appendiculate, apparently with short sterile extension; universal veil as dense small warts, granules, and pulverulence (toward margin), white, brownish on wart tips. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lamellae | adnate, close, white in mass and in side view, ??; lamellulae attenuate, of diverse lengths, unevenly distributed, common. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
stipe | 45 - 85 × 10 - 21 mm, white, scaly-subfibrillose below partial veil, deeply inserted in substrate; bulb napiform to clavate, with brown stains; context solid; partial veil superior, membranous, proportionately large, persistent, striate above, with ochraceous staining irregular ring of universal veil on underside at edge; universal veil ??, white at first, liable to ochraceous staining. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
odor/taste | Odor not distinctive. Taste not recorded. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macrochemical tests |
none recorded. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lamella trama | bilateral, divergent; t.b.d. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
basidia | 35 - 47 × 9.0 - 11.3 μm, dominantly 4-, infrequently 2-sterigmate; with sterigmata ??; clamps not observed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lamella edge tissue | sterile. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
basidiospores | [40/2/1] (7.5-) 8.0 - 10.5 (-13.7) × 5.0 - 7.0 (-7.5) μm, (L = 9.2 μm; L' = 9.2 μm; W = 5.7 - 5.8 μm; W' = 5.7 μm; Q = (1.38-) 1.40 - 1.83 (-2.14); Q = 1.61 - 1.64; Q' = 1.62), hyaline, colorless, smooth, thin-walled, amyloid, ellipsoid to elongate, rarely cylindric, adaxially flattened, sometimes swollen at one end, with giant spores present early in sporulation; apiculus sublateral, cylindric; contents granular or monoguttulate with or without additional small granules; white in deposit. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ecology | In groups. At ca. 190 m elev. In dry soil with Pseudotsuga mendiesii and Umbellularia californica or in Quercus agrifolia woodland. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
material examined |
U.S.A.: CALIFORNIA—
Alameda Co. - Berkeley, Univ. of Calif. [37.8803° N/
122.2465° W, 347 m], 6.xii.2009 unkn. coll. s.n.
[mushroomobserver
#29891
(RET 689-5, nrITS seq'd.).
Marin Co. - Alpine Lake [37.948º N/ 122.628º W,
198 m], 25.xi.2016 Ron Pastorino s.n. [mushroomobserver
#262749]
(RET 745-4, nrITS seq'd.); Lake Lagunitas, 27.ii.2016
Ron Pastorino 2-27-16A) [mushroomobserver
#233745]
(RET 860-1, nrITS-LSU seq'd.).
Mendocino Co. - Albion, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
discussion |
This species lacks the distinctive subsurface
"blushing" of
A. novinupta although it may
blush in age. It has a more distinctive bulb,
and has
narrower spores. The following sporograph
comparison illustrates the last point: Although their bruising is different and they can be distinguished genetically, the spores of the present species are very similar to those of Amanita cruentilemurum. The material examined to date has been somewhat immature, which may account for the presence of giant spores and 2-sterigmate basidia. This species has been mistaken for "Amanita cokeri sensu Thiers" in the field. The taxa can be differentiated easily by the great thickness of the universal veil in the latter entity and its lack of a well-developed pileipellis. RET considers it probable that Thiers' concept of cokeri is based on immature material of A. magniverrucata of section Lepidella. The name Amanita sponsus replaces the temporary code Amanita sp-C20, which was previously treated in these pages. This species was designated Amanita “sp. C4” by RET in the 1980s. The temporary code was based on a single collection (RET 081-4) that was a gift from the herbarium of Greg Wright, who had recognized the material as representing a new species. Also, this species was briefly called "A. sp-C30" on the present site. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
citations | —R. E. Tulloss and R. Pastorino | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
editors | RET | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Information to support the viewer in reading the content of "technical" tabs can be found here.
name | Amanita sponsus |
name status | nomen provisorum |
author | Tulloss, C. F. Schwarz & N. Siegel |
images |
1. Amanita sponsus, Annadel St. Pk., Santa Rosa, Sonoma Co., California, U.S.A. (RET 585-7) 2. Amanita sponsus, Annadel St. Pk., Santa Rosa, Sonoma Co., California, U.S.A. (RET 585-7) 3. Amanita sponsus, Annadel St. Pk., Santa Rosa, Sonoma Co., California, U.S.A. (RET 585-7) 4. Amanita sponsus, Annadel St. Pk., Santa Rosa, Sonoma Co., California, U.S.A. (RET 585-7) 5. Amanita sponsus, Tecolote Canyon Nat. Pk., San Diego Co., California, U.S.A. (RET 863-4) 6. Amanita sponsus, Tecolote Canyon Nat. Pk., San Diego Co., California, U.S.A. (RET 863-4) 7. Amanita sponsus, Tecolote Canyon Nat. Pk., San Diego Co., California, U.S.A. (RET 863-4) |
photo |
Ronald Pastorino - (1-4) Annadel St. Pk., Santa Rosa,
Sonoma County, California, U.S.A.
(RET 585-7) [Note: These images can be viewed in
their original size and format on
mushroomobserver.org
here.]
Cindy Trubovitz - (5-7) Tecolote Canyon Natural Park, San Diego County, California, U.S.A. (RET 863-4). [Note: Original unedited and uncut images can be found here.—ed.] |
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.