name | Amanita grauiana |
name status | nomen acceptum |
author | Garrido |
english name | "Grau's Amanita" |
cap |
The cap of A. grauiana is 60 - 90 (-200) mm wide, semi-globose, later planar with depressed disc, with a short striate margin extending slightly beyond the end of the gills. The margin is not truly appendiculate but sometimes bears parts of the ring and volva. The cap is approximately gray-brown. The flesh is white and thins evenly to the margin. The volva is present in large plaques which are thickest over the disc and cinnamon to sordid brownish ochre in color. |
gills |
The gills are free, white to pale leather colored, with edges at first concolorous with gill face, later grayish red-brown. |
stem |
The stem is 75 - 135 (-235) × 18 - 24 (-28) mm, bearing mixed colors tinted with lilac, later lilac-red-brown, and linearly striate near apex. The bulb is only slightly broader than the stem at maturity, and the ring is present in young material but may disappear in older material. The flesh is white and solid, rarely hollow. The volva is present as scattered warts near the stem base, poorly developed, as warts or a brief weak limb. |
spores |
The spores measure (9.0-) 10.8 - 16.5 (-17.0) × (7.9-) 8.0 - 10.3 (-14.0) µm and are ellipsoid, occasionally broadly ellipsoid, occasionally elongate and inamyloid. Clamps are present at the bases of basidia. |
discussion |
The following are all reportedly absent from A. grauiana: amanitins, phalloidin, muscimol, and muscarin. Amanita grauiana is solitary and mycorrhizal in forests with Nothofagus glauca or N. obliqua mixed with Chusquea. The present species seems so close to the following that the names may be taxonomic synonyms: Amanita ushuaiensis (Raithelh.) Raithelh. and Amanita merxmuelleri Bresinsky & Garrido. Our studies on this species are incomplete.—R. E. Tulloss and E. Horak |
brief editors | RET |
name | Amanita grauiana | ||||||||
author | Garrido. 1988. Biblioth. Mycol. 120: 136, figs. 77-79. | ||||||||
name status | nomen acceptum | ||||||||
english name | "Grau's Amanita" | ||||||||
etymology | Grau + -ana, suffix indicating possession; hence, "of Grau" | ||||||||
MycoBank nos. | 134818 | ||||||||
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.
| ||||||||
holotypes | ZT (herb. Horak) | ||||||||
type studies | Tulloss, here | ||||||||
revisions | Tulloss, here | ||||||||
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 macroscopic description is largely derived from the protolog of the present species; additional data comes from original research of R. E. Tulloss. | ||||||||
pileus | 60–90 (–200) mm wide, approximately gray-brown, semiglobose, later planar with depressed disc, ?; ??context white, thinning evenly to margin; margin short striate, extending slightly beyond ends of lamellae (Garrido 1988: fig. 77), not truly appendiculate, but sometimes bearing parts of partial and universal veils; universal veil in large plaques, thickest over disc, cinnamon to sordid brownish ocher. | ||||||||
lamellae | ??free, white to pale leather colored, with edges at first concolorous with lamella face (later grayish red-brown); lamellulae not described. | ||||||||
stipe | 75–135 (–235) × 18–24 (–28) mm, bearing mixed colors tinted with lilac, later lilac-red-brown, linearly striate near apex; bulb only slightly broader than stipe at maturity; context white, solid or (rarely) hollow; partial veil present in young material, ephemeral; universal veil as scattered warts near stipe base, “poorly developed,” as warts (Garrido 1988: fig. 77) or as brief weak limb (Garrido 1988: fig. 78). | ||||||||
odor/taste | Odor and taste not conspicuous. | ||||||||
macrochemical tests |
KOH - negative. The following have all been found to be absent from A. grauiana (Garrido 1988): amanitin, phalloidin, muscimol, and muscarin. Lamellae flouresce brownish yellow. | ||||||||
basidiospores | [40/2/2] (9.0–) 10.8–16.5 (–17.0) × (7.9–) 8.0–10.3 (–14.0) µm, (L = 12.8–13.2 µm; L' = 13.0 µm; W = 8.8–8.9 µm; W' = 8.9 µm; Q = (1.23–) 1.30–1.62 (–1.65); Q = 1.43–1.50; Q' = 1.46), hyaline, colorless, thin-walled, smooth, inamyloid, ellipsoid, occasionally broadly ellipsoid, occasionally elongate; apiculus sublateral, cylindric; contents mono- to multiguttulate with or without additional granules or granulate; ?? in deposit. | ||||||||
ecology | Nothofagus glauca or N. obliqua mixed with Chusquea (e.g., C. quila). | ||||||||
material examined | from protolog: CHILE: LA ARAUCANIA—Angol, Parq. Nahuelbuta, 19.v.1982 N. Garrido-G. 468 (holotype, ZT (Horak); ??isotype, M n.v.), 12.v.1984 N. Garrido-G. 843 (paratype, M n.v.). BÍO BÍO—Curanilahue - Parq. Los Hualles, 3.vi.1984 N. Garrido-G. 910 (paratype, ZT (Horak), n.v.; paratype, M, n.v.). MAULE—Cauquenes, Res. For. del Maule, 16.vi.1982 N. Garrido-G. 567 (paratype, ZT (Horak)). | ||||||||
discussion |
??Blaaa... The isotype material reviewed (from ZT) was juvenile and lacked spores. | ||||||||
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.