The following information is based on the original
description of A. arenicola and on RET's study
of the type and other material mentioned in that
The 13 - 55 mm wide cap of A. arenicola is
convex to flat to slightly or strongly depressed in
the center or funnel-shaped, moist to sticky,
smooth, and Drab Gray to Light Drab Gray.
The edge zone of the cap is evenly Pale Drab Gray
and radially grooved The volva remnants on the
cap are flat, pale buff to Chamois to Yellow Ochre
patches of varying size that are easily
The gills of the present species are barely free,
close, white, with an edge of the same color, and 3 -
5 mm broad. Some gills fork near the stem.
Short gills are present in 1 - 2 distinct lengths.
The smooth, exannulate stem of this
species measures 35 - 100 × 3 - 10
mm wide and is dull white, cylindric or tapering
upward, and moist. The stem's
flesh is soft, fragile and white; and there is a
stuffed central cylinder.
A proportionately small, saccate, white volva
is encloses the stem's
base. It is fragile and often has cup-like
basal portion appressed to stipe, with one-half or
more of the sack's height free. Often ragged
fragments of the upper part of the sack are found in
soil around a fruiting body or adhering
to lower stem.
Odor and taste have not been recorded for this species.
The spores of A. arenicola measure (8.5-) 9.0 - 12.7 (-13.8) × (6.0-) 7.2 - 9.0
(-10.9) μm and are broadly ellipsoid to ellipsoid
(rarely subglobose) and inamyloid. Clamps are
lacking from bases of basidia.
Amanita arenicola is found in sand on
ocean beaches in Puerto Rico and the British Virgin
Islands. Its most likely symbiont is reported
Coccoloba uvifera.—R. E. Tulloss
O. K. Mill. & Lodge in O. K. Mill., Lodge & T. J. Baroni. 2000. Mycologia 92: 560, figs. 5-8.
J. Geml et al., Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden
NY 0560911; isotype, CFMR
The following text may make multiple use of each
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
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
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 species and from original research of
R. E. Tulloss.
With regard to RET's study of the original
material, the macroscopic description is based on
original field notes of only those specimens listed
as revised by RET in the material examined data
field (below) as revised. To this information
is added such data as made be derived from
examination under a dissecting scope.
protolog: 35 - 55 mm wide,
strongly depressed to infundibuliform, moist to
sticky, sand covered, smooth, Drab Gray;
context not described; margin evenly
Pale Drab Gray (10YR 8.5/0.5) and plicate-striate;
universal veil as flat, pale buff
(0.9Y 7.77/5.5) detersile patches.
[Note: The Munsell color code for Ridgway's Pale Drab
Gray was replaced by an extended typographical error
in the protolog. The erroneous text has been
with the Munsell equivalent for Pale Drab Gray as
proposed in (Hamly 1949).—RET].
type study of RET: 13 - 27
mm wide, Drab Gray to Light Drab Gray, convex to
planar, slightly to moderately depressed in center;
context not recorded; margin plicate
striate; universal veil as Chamois to
Yellow Ochre, small, flat patches over disc.
protolog: free, close, white, 5 mm broad, with even edges; lamellulae in single tier.
type study of RET: barely free, 1 - 2 per mm, white, 3 - 4 mm broad, with edge even and concolorous, with some forking near stipe; lamellulae in 1 - 2 ranks.
protolog: 95 - 100 × 5 - 10 mm wide, nearly cylindric with “narrowly clavate” base, smooth, moist, dull white; context soft, fragile, white; exannulate; universal veil as small, fragile, white saccate volva, often with cup-like basal portion appressed to stipe, but with one half or more of sac's height free, often with ragged remains of limb found in substrate or adhering in fragments to lower stipe.
type study of RET: 35 - 58 × 3 - 7 mm, cylindric or tapering upward, white, smooth; context with stuffed central cylinder; exannulate; universal veil saccate, proportionately small, short, fragile.
protolog: filamentous hyaline hyphae intermixed with a nearly equal proportion of globose, subglobose to pyriform, hyaline, thin-walled cells. [Location(s) on the basidiome from which a sample or samples were taken in order to produce this unuseful description was/were not specified.—ed.]
lamella edge tissue
protolog: [including] pyriform
to subglobose or globose cells, 18 - 30 × 13 - 17 µm,
thin-walled, hyaline. [Note: Incorrectly
called “cheilocystidia” by Miller in the
protolog: [-/-/-] 9.0 - 12.5 ×
7.0 - 10.0 μm, (Q = 1.11 - 1.43; Q' = 1.25),
hyaline, thin-walled, inamyloid, subglobose to
broadly ellipsoid to ellipsoid; apiculus not
described; contents as "large yellow oil body
in 3% KOH"; color in deposit not
RET and AW (composite):
[150/7/5] (8.5-) 9.0 - 12.6
(-13.8) × (6.0-) 7.2 - 9.0 (-10.9) μm, (L =
10.2 - 11.5 μm; L' = 11.0 μm; W =
7.5 - 8.6 μm; W' = 8.2 μm; Q = (1.08-) 1.17 -
1.48 (-1.56); Q = 1.30 - 1.38;
Q' = 1.33), hyaline, colorless, smooth,
thin-walled, inamyloid, broadly ellipsoid to
ellipsoid, infrequently subglobose, adaxially
flattened; apiculus sublateral, cylindric;
contents granular or monoguttulate;
color in deposit not recorded.
protolog: At 1 m elev. "In sandy soil under Coccoloba uvifera usually on beaches...." "[F]ruiting in wet cool weather...."
type study of RET: In sand, associated with C. uvifera and Pisonia subcorda.
VIRGIN ISLANDS: ANGUILLA—The
Mariners Hotel, 8.vii.1993 D. J. Lodge ANG-2
GUANA ISLAND—White Bay, beach rd.
[18.4775° N/ 64.5781° W, 1m], 19.x.1997 D. J. Lodge
GUA-38 (paratype, VPI), 27.x.1997 D. J. Lodge
GUA-109 (holotype, NY 00560911; isotype, CFMR),
D. J. Lodge & N. Clum GUA-179 (paratype, CFMR;
paratype, NY 00560908),
GUA-180 (paratype, CFMR; paratype, NY 00560902),
GUA-181 (paratype, NY 00560910), GUA-190 (paratype,
GUA-191 (paratype, NY 00560904), GUA-192 (paratype,
CFMR; paratype, NY 00560907), GUA-193 (paratype,
NY 00560905), GUA-194 (paratype, CFMR), GUA-195
GUA-196 (paratype, CFMR), GUA-197 (paratype, CFMR),
5.x.1998 D. J. Lodge & N. Clum GUA-198
(paratype, NY 00560906; paratype, CFMR),
(paratype, CFMR; paratype, NY 00560903); North Bay, woods
near beach, 6.x.1998 J. D. Lodge GUA-215
RICO—Mpio. Fajardo - ca. Luqillo, La Selva
Beach aka Governor's Beach, 21.xii.1997 L.
Barley & E. Garcia PR-4716 (paratype, VPI),
21.vii.1998 D. J. Lodge & N. Perez PR-4908
(paratype, CFMR), D. J. Lodge & N. Perez
PR-4909 (paratype, CFMR). Mpio. Río Grande -
Piñones Commonwealth For., beach ca. Luiza,
23.xii.1997 J. Trappe, D. J. Lodge, M. Castellano
PR-4717 (paratype, UPRRP).
type study of RET and AW:
ISLANDS: GUANA ISLAND—White
Bay, beach rd. [18.4775° N/ 64.5781° W, 1m],
27.x.1997 D. J. Lodge GUA-109
(holotype, NY 00560911, isotype in
The following figure provides sporograph comparison
between the present taxa and another species of
Amanita sect. Vaginatae that occurs on
beaches with Coccoloba
A partial nrITS sequence was derived from
NY 00560903; however, it was too short to be
accepted by GenBank.
—R. E. Tulloss and A. Wu
Information to support the viewer in reading the content of "technical" tabs
can be found here.
O. K. Mill. & D. J. Lodge
Beach-loving Ringless Amanita
Dr. D. Jean Lodge - (1) holotype, Guana Island, British
Virgin Islands. (NY 00560911)
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.