The following information is derived from the
original description (Li et al.,
and a description provided by Yang (2015).
The fruiting body of Amanita subpallidorosea
is small to medium-sized.
The cap is 30 - 80 mm wide, obtusely conic when young,
then convex, becoming applanate at maturity,
occasionally with a noticeable umbo. The cap is
white to dirty at first; sometimes, it becomes
pale rose in the center. The cap's margin is
non-striate and non-appendiculate, and its flesh is
white. No volva remains are present on the cap.
The gills are free, white to whitish, crowded, and up
to 4 mm broad. The short gills are attenuate,
plentiful, and in at least two to three ranks.
The stem is 70 - 120 mm long, nearly cylindric,
slightly tapering upward, with an apex that is
slightly expanded. The stem is 6 mm wide at the
top and 14 mm wide near the base. It is white
to whitish, solid, and is decorated with finely
fibrillose squamules. Its flesh is white.
The basal bulb of the stem is subglobose and 15 - 30
mm wide. The volva is limbate, membranous,
rather firm, with free limb up to 15 mm high;
both its surfaces are white. The stem's ring is
near the top of the stem and is thin, skirt-like, and
The odor is indistinct. The species is deadly
POISONOUS (Li et al. 2015).
The spores measure (7.5-) 8 - 11 (-12) × (7-) 8 - 10
(-12) µm and are globose to subglobose and
amyloid. The basidia are clampless.
Amanita subpallidorosea grows in broad-leaved
forests dominated by Fagaceae [trees of the Beech-Oak
family]. It is only known from China (Guizhou
It is characterized by its small to medium-sized
basidioma often with a white pileal margin and pale
rose center, a subapical annulus, and large, amyloid
globose to subglobose basidiospores
(8.5–11 × 8–10 μm). It differs from
A. pallidorosea by its larger basidia and
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.