The cap is 13 - 24 mm wide, pale beige, and planoconvex; the cap's flesh is beige under pileipellis, else white, and less than 3.5 mm thick above the stem. The cap margin is striate (about 30 - 55% of radius). The volval remnants are in the form of easily removed warts, are very pale, and are faintly sordid beige.
The gills are free, subcrowded, pale cream in mass, white in side view, unchanging, and up to 2 mm broad. The short gills are truncate to subtruncate.
The stem is 28 - 41 × 1.5 - 2.5 mm, white to pale beige, tannish from handling, minutely fibrillose (10× lens), minutely striate (10× lens) lengthwise, and lacks an annulus. The stem's
bulb is 3 - 6 × 4 - 7.5 mm, subglobose, and subabrupt. The flesh of the stem is white, and volval remnants are not evident.
There is no available information on the odor of this species.
The spores of the present species measure (7.5-) 8.0 - 10.0 (-10.8) × (5.2-) 5.8 - 7.0 (-7.2) µm and are mostly ellipsoid (occasionally broadly ellipsoid) and inamyloid. Clamps are probably absent from the bases of basidia.
Pileus 13 - 24 mm wide, pale beige, planoconvex; context beige under pileipellis, else white, less than 3.5 mm thick over stipe;
margin striate (about 30 - 55% of radius); universal very pale, faintly sordid beige, as easily removed warts.—R. E. Tulloss
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.
13 - 24 mm wide, pale beige (slightly yellower than 10YR 8/4), unchanging , planoconvex, tacky, subshiny; context white except for narrow beige zone immediately below pileipellis, unchanging, up to 2.5 mm thick above stipe, narrowing evenly for half radius, then membranous to margin; margin striate (0.3-0.55R), nonappendiculate; universal veil as pale tan ("champagne"), apparently unchanging, minutely verruculose, detersile warts.
free, lacking decurrent line on stipe, subcrowded, pale cream in mass, unchanging when cut or bruised, off-white in side view, up to 2- mm broad; lamellulae subtruncate to truncate, ??.
28 - 41 × 1.5 - 2.5 mm, white to pale beige, becoming tan from handling, narrowing slightly upward, flaring slowly at apex, minutely fibrillose (10× lens), longitudinally striatulate; bulb subglobose, subabrupt, 3 - 6 × 4 - 7.5 mm; context white, unchanging, hollow, with central cylinder up to 0.5 mm wide, with larval tunnels not preent; exannulate; universal veil not evident.
[40/2/2] (7.5-) 8.0 - 10.0 (-10.8) × (5.2-) 5.8 - 7.0 (-7.2) µm, (L = 8.6 - 9.0 µm;
L’ = 8.8 µm; W = 6.2 - 6.3 µm; W’ = 6.2 µm; Q = 1.26 - 1.50 (-1.54); Q = 1.38 - 1.44; Q' = 1.41),
hyaline, colorless, smooth, thin-walled, inamyloid, broadly ellipsoid to ellipsoid, ??; apiculus sublateral, truncate-conic to cylindric; contents guttulate; color in deposit not recorded.
In sandy soil of river bottomland mixed forest of Pinus and broad-leaved trees.
MISSISSIPPI—Perry Co. - Black Creek Wilderness Area, Cypress Creek Landing, 18.vii.1987 NAMA1987 participant s.n. [Tulloss 7-18-87-F] (RET 150-7), Alan Northrup s.n. [Tulloss 7-18-87-G] (RET 150-8).
The following sporograph compares spore size and shape data from the present "taxon" with those of material currently classified as A. russuloides:
While the color of the pileus and the exannulate stipe are somewhat reminiscent of A. crenulata, the spores of that species are dominantly subglobose to broadly ellipsoid in contrast to those of A. sp-T22.
Of the numbered, provisional, gemmatoid taxa in eastern North America, the spore data from the collections included in A. sp-T22 are the closest match to the data of the Jenkins type study of A. russuloides. At present, pigmentation and size of the basidiome discourage us from mergining A. sp-T22 with our current description of the Peck species.
—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.