|name status||nomen acceptum|
|author||Massee & Rodway|
|english name||"Gray Amidella"|
The following description is based in part on Reid (1980).
|cap||The cap of Amanita grisea is 30 - 50 mm wide, smooth, dull or shining, ash-gray to pale gray-brown, with an incurved margin.|
|gills||The gills are ??, white, ventricose, and adnexed.|
|stem||The stem is 40 - 50 × 10 mm, solid, denser than the cap, and white to pale gray. The annulus suggests a spider's web and eventually disappears. The volva is saccate and gray-brown.|
|spores||The spores measure 9.8 - 14.5 × 6.2 - 8.5 (-9.0) µm and are ellipsoid to elongate and strongly amyloid. Clamps are absent at base of basidia. [Note: My measurement of spores in Kew in 1988 found that many were damaged. Measurements from my best section were as follows (8.7-) 9.6 - 12.5 (-14.2) × (7.0-) 7.4 - 9.8 (-10.5) µm. The spores located were broadly ellipsoid to ellipsoid. Since my measurements of length are similar to those of Reid, it is possible that the difference in width measurements could be attributed to further decay of the specimen or to Reid's greater success in inflating the old spores.]|
|discussion||This taxon was originally described from Tasmania. I have seen the original watercolor of this species at Kew Botanical Gardens and had the distinct impression that the taxon should be assigned to Amanita section Amidella. Among other reasons were that a cross-section in the drawing shows a totally elongating (bulb-less) stem. There is no question that the volva is saccate and not limbate.—R. E. Tulloss|
|author||Massee & Rodway. 1901. Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew: 156.|
|name status||nomen acceptum|
|english name||"Gray Amidella"|
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.
Reid. 1980. Austral. J. Bot., Suppl. Ser. 8: 26, fig. 14(a-b).|
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 not directly from the protolog of the present taxon or from Reid (1980) and not cited as the work of another author is based on original research of RET.
|pileus||from protolog: 38 - 51 mm wide, pale gray-brown (ashy gray in accompanying watercolor), convex, smooth, "dull" [but(?) also "shining"—ed.], with distinct cuticle; context fleshy, hygrophanous; margin incurved; universal veil absent. [Note: Field data is used when it contradicts information supplied elsewhere in the protolog.—ed.]|
|peridium||double click in markup mode to edit.|
|lamellae||from protolog: adnexed, bold white, ventricose, broad; lamellulae not described.|
|gleba||double click in markup mode to edit.|
|stipe||from protolog: 64± × 17 mm, whitish or white, subcylindric; bulb absent [stipe totally elongating per watercolor—RET]; context solid, denser than in pileus; partial veil scant, arachnoid, indicated in watercolor by "faint line"; universal veil well-developed, persistent, saccate, gray-brown. [Note: Field data and data from watercolor are used when they contradict information supplied elsewhere in the protolog. Stipe width derived from stipe length in field notes combined from proportion of width to length in watercolor.—ed.]|
|pileus context||not described.|
|lamella trama||RET: poorly rehydrating in holotype.|
|subhymenium||RET: poorly rehydrating in holotype.|
from Reid (1980): up to 53 × 13.2 μm; clamps not observed.|
RET: up to 72 × 14.2 μm.
|universal veil||not described.|
|stipe context||not described.|
|partial veil||not described.|
|lamella edge tissue||not described.|
1980): [-/-/-] 9.8 - 14.5 × 6.2 - 8.5 (-9.0) μm, (est. Q = 1.55 - 1.70).|
RET: [40/1/1] (8.5-) 9.0 - 12.5 (-14.2) × (7.0-) 7.3 - 9.9 (-10.9) μm, (L = 10.8 μm; W = 8.4 μm; Q = (.105-) 1.06 - 1.49 (-1.53); Q = 1.29), hyaline, colorless, thin-walled, smooth, amyloid, mostly damaged in holotype; apiculus sublateral; contents refractive to granulose; color in deposit not recorded.
|ecology||from protolog: Terrestrial.|
from protolog: AUSTRALIA: TASMANIA—LGA Unkn., loc. unkn., s.d. Rodway 145 (holotype, K, with field notes and watercolor).|
from Reid (1980): AUSTRALIA: TASMANIA—LGA Unkn., loc. unkn., s.d. Rodway 145 (holotype, K, with field notes and watercolor).
RET: AUSTRALIA: TASMANIA—LGA Unkn., loc. unkn., s.d. Rodway 145 (holotype, K, with field notes and watercolor).
from Reid (1980): "Cleland (1934) recorded this species from both South Australia and New South Wales but these records need to be substantiated, especially since Gilbert (1941) stated that some collections so determined by Cleland belong to A. grisella E.-J. Gilbert & Cleland."|
RET's data was collected during a very brief visit to Kew in November, 1988. At that time very little of the type specimen remained, and microscopic examination was limited to examination of the spores and lamellae.
The robust volval sac; the apparent lack of clamps (per Reid); the totally elongating stipe; the evanescent partial veil; and the reportedly ellipsoid to elongate; amyloid spores all suggest that the present species may be placed properly in Amanita sect. Amidella.
It would be very interesting to see new, well-collected, well-annotated, and well-dried material assignable to this taxon.
|citations||—R. E. Tulloss|
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.