name | Amanita citrina var. grisea |
name status | nomen acceptum |
author | (Hongo) Hongo |
english name | "Asian Citrine Bulbous Amanita" |
images | |
intro | The following information is derived from (Yang 1997). |
cap |
Fruiting bodies of A. citrina var. grisea are medium-sized. The cap is 70 - 80 mm wide, convex to applanate, grey to dark grey with a brownish tinge, innately radially fibrillose, and covered with cream-colored to yellowish felty volval remnants; the cap's margin is smooth and non-appendiculate; and the flesh is white. |
gills |
The gills are free, crowded, and white, occasionally with a pinkish tinge; the short gills are attenuate. |
stem |
The stipe is 80 × 9 - 14 mm, subcylindric or attenuate upwards, with a surface that is white; the stipe's basal bulb is 25 mm wide and abrupt to subabrupt. The annulus is membranous, with an upper surface that is yellow to yellowish and a lower surface that is grayish to whitish. |
spores |
The spores of A. citrina var. grisea measure 8.0 - 10.0 (-11.0) × 7.5 - 9.0 (-10.5) µm and are subglobose and amyloid. Clamps are absent from bases of basidia. |
discussion |
Amanita citrina var. grisea was
originally described from Japan. It was
recently reported also from southwestern China. The reader may wish to compare the present species to the following taxa: A. mappa, A. lavendula, and A. sinocitrina.—Zhu L. Yang |
brief editors | RET |
name | Amanita citrina var. grisea | ||||||||
author | (Hongo) Hongo. 1959. Mem. Fac. Liberal Arts Shiga Univ. 9: 71. | ||||||||
name status | nomen acceptum | ||||||||
english name | "Asian Citrine Bulbous Amanita" | ||||||||
synonyms |
≡Amanita citrina f. grisea Hongo. 1958. J. Jap. Bot 33: 346, fig. 2(a-b). The editors of this site owe a great debt to Dr. Cornelis Bas whose famous cigar box files of Amanita nomenclatural information gathered over three or more decades were made available to RET for computerization and make up the lion's share of the nomenclatural information presented on this site. | ||||||||
etymology | griseus "gray" | ||||||||
MycoBank nos. | 346524, 349011 | ||||||||
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 | TNS (per Doi. 1991. Bull. Natl. Sci. Mus., Tokyo, Ser. B 17(2): 50) | ||||||||
revisions | Z. L. Yang. 1997. Biblioth. Mycol 170: 206, figs. 173-175. | ||||||||
selected illustrations | Imazeki and Hongo. 1987. Color. Illus. Mushr. Japan 1: 126, pl. 31 (fig. 218). | ||||||||
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 not directly from the protolog of the present taxon and not cited as the work of Dr. Z. L. Yang or another researcher is based upon original research by R. E. Tulloss. NOTE: Spore measurements from papers by Z. L. Yang use his "Times New Roman" face for "Q" and "Q'"—respectively, " | ||||||||
basidiospores |
from Yang (1997): [50/1/1] 8.0 - 10.0 (-11.) × 7.5 - 9.0 (-10.5) μm, ( | ||||||||
ecology | Solitary. China: In forest with representatives of the Fagaceae. Japan: Scattered on ground in Pinus woods. | ||||||||
material examined |
from protolog: JAPAN: HONSHU—Shiga-ken - Ôtsu-shi, Kurozu, 1.ix.1959 T. Hongo 2011 (holotype, in herb. T. Hongo => TNS F-237276). from Yang (1997): CHINA: YUNNAN—Honghe Hani and Yi Autonomous Prefecture - Pingbian Miao Autonomous Co., Daweishan, 1900 m elev., 4.vii.1992 Z. L. Yang 1863 (HKAS 32506). | ||||||||
discussion |
t.b.d. The Japanese name for this taxon is "kuro-ko-tamago-tengutake" (Doi 1991). | ||||||||
citations | —Z. L. Yang | ||||||||
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.