The following is largely based on the original description (Wood, 1997).
The cap of Amanita strobilaceoides is up to 60 mm wide, rounded convex to plano-convex, smooth, dry, pallid cream to
bright chrome yellow, with a nonstriate margin. Volval remains
are present as flat scales, vary slightly in thickness, pallid buff to bright lemon yellow.
The gills are free, crowded, thin, white to pale
cream, with a concolorous edge. The short gills are present in at least two series.
The stem is up to 60 × 15 mm, white, and smooth or with yellow scales or fragments, with a small subglobose bulb. The ring is
large, flared, membranous, persistent, skirt-like, striate above, pale cream to pale yellow or pale apricot, with a margin slightly more
saturated in color. A volva may be absent, but is sometimes present as a yellowish to white ridge on the upper bulb.
The spores measure 7.2 - 10.2 × (4.8-) 5.1 - 7.5 (-8.1) µm and are broadly ellipsoid to ellipsoid and strongly amyloid. Clamps are
absent at bases of basidia.
Wood describes the mushroom as occurring in
sclerophyll forests from the state of
New South Wales, Australia. A sclerophyll forest in
the Australian bush is a forest of hard-leaved
plants including Eucalyptus in the
Wood was uncertain whether the two collections he
examined represented the same species. He states he
had some reservation
about considering this species as similar to such
as A. mappa (Batsch)
Fr. and A. brunnescens
G. F. Atk. although he places it taxonomically
with them. The bulb of the present species is
neither abrupt nor marginate. The volva
material is much more similar to that of typical
species of section Validae
such as A. flavoconia G. F. Atk.
(the Americas), A.
flavipes S. Imai (eastern, southeastern,
southern Asia), and A. flavella
E.-J. Gilbert & Cleland (Australia).
Just as Wood has concern over how many species he
was dealing with and whether other authors have
all consistently interpreted this Australian
species, it should be noted that the notebooks of
A. H. Smith (University of Michigan) show that he
considered splitting A. flavoconia into a
number of varieties. At
present, a central and south American variety of
A. flavoconia is recognized
inquinata Tulloss, Ovrebo & Halling).
Moreover, L. F. Zhang, J. B Yang and Zhu L. Yang
(2004) recently published molecular evidence that
A. flavipes comprises a number of genetic
clades that have macroscopic differences such as
pigmentation as well as differences first detected
on the molecular level. As Wood says,
further revision of his and other Australian
material similar to A. strobilaceoides
should be carried out.—R. E. Tulloss and
A. E. Wood. 1997.
Austral. Syst. Bot. 10: 834, fig. 60(a-e).
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.
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
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 is based entirely on the protolog of this species, which does not meet contemporary standards for Amanita taxonomy.
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.