Amanita 'farinosa PNW04'
-
This grey, powdery Amanita with little evidence of a volva or
partial veil (making it easily confused with section Vaginatae) is in a
different subsection than all the other PNW section Amanita species, and
you could argue it is unique enough to deserve its own section. The real
Amanita farinosa from Europe and/or Eastern North America is slender and the
cap is striate. Our west coast species, also called A. farinosa sensu Thiers
but in need of a new name, is stockier
and therefore does not have many striations in the cap (striations
usually come from thin flesh allowing the outline of the gills to be visible
near the rim of the cap). Even though we don't have reliable DNA of the "real"
A. farinosa to compare with, it is universally accepted that our DNA is
going to be different because our species is unique.
Amanita 'farinosa PNW04' © Kit Scates Barnhart
Amanita muscaria EU
Amanita 'muscaria PNW03'
Amanita chrysoblema MI
Amanita muscaria (red cap, white warts, European photo) © iNaturalist user naomimoriyama1, Amanita
'muscaria PNW03' © Alice Kam and Yi-Min Wang
Amanita chrysoblema (red, orange, yellow, and white forms) © Steve Trudell,
Steve Trudell, Janet
Lindgren, and Steve Trudell
These are the famous Alice In Wonderland/Mario Brothers mushrooms with
colourful caps (red, orange, yellow or white) with pale, removable warts
on the caps from the universal veil, or "egg" that the mushroom appears to hatch
out of. They have a series of concentric rings as a volva near the base
of the stem.
Amanita muscaria EU - the
true Amanita muscaria is
uncommon in the PNW, usually found under
introduced trees with almost pure white warts. It is found
commonly across Europe and Asia and Alaska, but uncommonly has been found (so
far) as far south as Vancouver BC. Unlike our common local species, discussed
next, the real Amanita muscaria is usually red. European
literature seems to speak of non-red colours, like the yellow A. muscaria
var. formosa EU, only rarely. I would
be interested in sequences of non-red actual Amanita muscaria picked locally.
Keep reading.
Amanita 'muscaria PNW03' - only in the PNW do we find some sequences that
differ by 4 bp from all the rest of the Amanita muscaria found worldwide.
One BC photo has a yellow cap and white partial veil. One WA photo
has an orange cap and coloured partial veil. Both show cream
coloured warts. Could this be A. muscaria var.
formosa EU? That is a yellow form but I haven't found this sequence in the
EU yet and PNW03 is not always yellow. What are the tree
associates? (So far, it I'm guessing native trees since the WA collection
was with native trees). I would be very interested in more photos and collection
data of sequenced collections to find out if there is a pattern to how they look
or if they are with native or introduced trees. It seems to clearly be distinct
from var. muscaria, but I have
no idea how to tell it apart from the far more abundant A. chrysoblema,
described next.
Amanita chrysoblema MI, our abundant, spring and fall ubiquitous
species found under
native conifer and hardwood trees can be red, orange, yellow or white
and usually has creamy yellowish warts
(except the white form which usually has no pigment in the warts either). What
to call our abundant species is somewhat of a puzzle. It is too genetically distant from
A. muscaria
to be considered a variety, it does need a species name of its own. We don't
have a type sequence of A. chrysoblema, but Rod Tulloss provides
sequences that are probably of A. chrysoblema based on careful
microscopic study, and I accept that result. They are in clade Geml I#4,
discussed below. Even in the unlikely event that the type sequence ends up not
being in Geml I#4, it almost certainly will be in one of the Geml I clades. Traditionally, the different colour forms (red, orange, yellow and white)
have been getting their own variety or subspecies name, but now we know there is no
ITS difference between the colours, so that may not be a valid approach (unless
some other gene ends up being able to reliably distinguish them). It could be valid to give
each of them their own form, though. That simply means they look
different and does not try to imply any genetic relationships.
First, we have to decide how many species are in the group. There are 4 clades
of North American muscaria-like sequences that differ from each other by only 1
or 2 bp in ITS. That is usually not enough to be considered separate species,
although that could happen if there are clear ecological, morphological or
microscopic differences as well. If they are to be kept separate, here is how
they work out:
-
A. muscaria var guessowii Canada (Geml I#1) - from 1933 from eastern Canada (and also the
eastern US) is probably in the first clade (described as yellow-orange)
-
A. muscaria subsp flavivolvata CA (Geml I#2) - from 1958 from California (and also
found in the SW and Mexico, but not in the PNW) (described as red)
-
(Geml I#3) - found in eastern North America, no name attached to it yet, that I can find
-
A. muscaria var alba ENA from 1897 and A. chrysoblema MI from
1918 (Geml I#4) - also found in the PNW
(described as white)
Eastern North America probably has examples of three of the four clades, but the
only clade found in the PNW so far is clade 4. That does have a valid name,
Amanita chrysoblema. Two names were given to white forms, one of them at the
variety level (var alba) and one at the species level (A. chrysoblema)
so even though the variety name is older, since this needs to be a distinct
species from A. muscaria, the newer species name A. chrysoblema is
a valid name for our species. Remember, the colour turns out to not matter, so
A. chrysoblema is a valid name for all of our colour forms.
A. chrysoblema is also the oldest name in all 4 clades, so if they are
considered the same, that name should apply to all of them. If they are to be
considered different species, then things get more complicated. None of the
other existing names are distinct species names, they are all varieties and
subspecies of A. muscaria, so they will all need new names of their own or need to be
designated varieties or subspecies of A. chrysoblema instead of A.
muscaria. Luckily, here in the PNW, we don't need to worry about that.
We have a tradition of calling our red forms here in NA by the name
A. muscaria var/subsp flavivolvata and our yellow forms by the name A.
muscaria var formosa. That cannot continue as our collections are far too
distant from A. muscaria to be considered a subspecies or variety of it.
Amanita aprica WA -
This similar spring species is usually apricot yellow,
with something between concentric circles and a collar at the base of the
stem, and has a characteristic look like you ironed the warts into the cap.
It was described from Washington and we have sequences from BC and CA.
Amanita aprica © Steve Trudell
Amanita pantherina/gemmata group
-
These similar mushrooms can also be found in spring and fall, have
yellow or brown caps (a slightly different shade of yellow than A.
muscaria and A. chrysoblema sometimes have) and a
collar volva instead of concentric rings. We do not have either of these
European mushrooms in the PNW (neither A. pantherina nor A. gemmata),
but here's what I have been able to determine about what species we do have.
It
should be noted that a recent European study showed that A. gemmata may
actually just refer to A. muscaria, so even in Europe they may start
calling their yellow 'gemmata' species A. junquillea.
Amanita pantherinoides WA
(=ameripanthera n.p.)
Traditionally, it was thought that brown capped species were the "panther"
species, and yellow capped species were the "gemmata" species (covered next), but
that's not the way it works out for the two most common species in the Seattle area.
Amanita pantherinoides is yellow to brown, stocky, with persistent warts on
the cap. Our most common "gemmata" species, Amanita pacificogemmata
n.p., below, is
usually yellow, slender, and has warts that easily wash off,
although some of our less common "gemmata" species might be confused with
yellowish A. pantherinoides.
Amanita pantherindoides © iNaturalist users loather and cyndean
In Mycologia Volume 4 from 1912, Murrill listed all the known Amanitas on
the west coast. Not a lot was known back then, so there are of course many
species missing, but I imagine it is likely that the species he does include are
common species here. Here are the species he described from Seattle that could
represent A. pantherina/gemmata type species:
A. praegemmata - cap only to 6cm, persistent warts, honey-avellaneous
(grey- to pinkish- brown) to dark honey on the margin, white partial veil, stem
1.5cm thick, volva attached rim.
A. pantherinoides - cap thick, small numerous warts, honey
to dirty cream with brown center, white partial veil, stem 2cm thick, volva
entire or undulate free rim
A. umbrinidisca - cap fleshy drying thin, large irregular
patches, honey to straw w/umber disc, white partial veil, stem 1-2cm thick,
volva sub-entire free rim
In 1977, Jenkins studied the types microscopically and synonymized A.
pantherinoides and
A. praegemmata, saying they were likely the same thing, our local
panther species, with A. pantherinoides being the older name (it was
published one paragraph earlier than A. praegemmata). He did not even
consider A. umbrinidisca, because he thought it represented a very
different kind of Amanita, but subsequently, others have figured it probably is
similar to, if not the same species as the others. When we sequenced a couple
dozen or so Seattle area A. pantherina like species, they were all the
same species (we only have one common species).
What does this mean? If we assume that Murrill did not find something
exceedingly rare that has not been found since (and at the same time somehow
avoided finding the very common species), and if we assume that Jenkins was right
and at least two of his species are the same, I believe Amanita
pantherinoides is the correct name for our
common local panther species.
I
cannot rule out the fact that one of Murrill's species might be a local gemmata-like
species. One is very common, so why doesn't it appear in
his list? Another theory is that "stocky gemmata CA01" might be A.
umbrinidisca.
But for now many in the mycological community have decided to assume that all three are
the same and they refer to our panther-like species.
Amanita ameripanthera is another name that is being put forward for our
common local species, based on the fact that it is often dark brown instead of
the "honey-avellaneous" and "honey to dirty cream" that was in the Murrill's
descriptions. But there was a wide variety of cap colours in our sequences, from
yellow to brown, and they all sequenced the same, so this appears to be another
case of cap colour not being critically important. This would mean that A.
ameripanthera does not represent a unique species and the name would not be
needed.
Amanita pacificogemmata n.p. -
Our most common "gemmata-like" species in WA, this species is always yellowish, usually slender and
the warts wash off pretty easily, although occasionally it can be
stockier like A. pantherinoides. It is a sister species to a California
species, Amanita breckonii, differing by about 4 bp and 7 indels (a
couple of them being chunks of indels). I
have no evidence yet of sequences that match CA A. breckonii exactly
being found in the PNW.
Amanita pseudobreckonii n.p.
- another yellow, slender species with warts that easily wash off in the
gemmata-pantherina
group found commonly in Oregon and California. It is very difficult to tell apart from
A. pacificogemmata. It has now been found near Victoria, BC, so
you can't assume that all collections north of OR are A. pacificogemmata
n.p.
Amanita 'gemmata CA01'
("stocky") - is sometimes stocky like Amanita pantherinoides
but consistenly bright yellow. Unfortunately, it can also be
relatively slender and bright yellow and has now been found in Olympia WA,
where it will be easily confused with the other species. It appears to be more closely
related to Amanita muscaria than it is to the panther-gemmata group, but
it has a collar volva like the latter. It is found in Oregon and California as
well.
One theory is that Amanita umbrinidisca refers to "stocky" CA01, as it is possible that one of Murrill's three species is not the
same as the other two, but represents one of the above 3 gemmata-like species. If so, that
name from 1912 would be the proper name for it. We will need type sequences of his original 1912
collections, if we can get them, to settle the matter.
California has additional "panther-gemmata" species in their rich oak forests
and other habitats that aren't present in the PNW, making identification for
them even more difficult than for us.
Amanita pacificogemmata n.p. © Buck McAdoo, Amanita pseudobreckonii n.p. © Corinne Srsen, Amanita 'gemmata
CA01' ("stocky") © NAMA
and the Field Museum of Natural History
Amanita alpinicola MT -
This species is stocky, pale yellow
and grows in spring under 5-needle pines. It has a collar volva
and also has fused warts that looked like they were ironed into the cap.
It's often found partially buried. It was described from Montana and
the DNA has been found in Idaho, as well as in WA north of Spokane at 5500' in
July. There are reports that it may be in BC and OR as well, presumably inland
and at elevation.
Amanita alpinicola © Janet Lindgren
Amanita aurantisquamosa ID -
This tan coloured species has hints of orange in the scales,
irregular patches of veil on the cap and a volva that is somewhat
sac-like at first but soon breaking up. It is
rare, only known from Southern Idaho
and we do not have any sequences of it yet.
Amanita aurantisquamosa © Ellen Trueblood