Fungus for ID

[BROCSMAN]

What is this? I think it's an amanita, but it doesn't look right for any that I know. Sorry they're not better photos.

[Hedge Witch]

How big is it, roughly?

[BROCSMAN]

About 15 cm tall I'd say

[Hedge Witch]

At the moment I'm thinking Amanita inaurata, but hopefully someone more knowledgeable will come along soon.

[mykonik]

Originally Posted by Hedge Witch

At the moment I'm thinking Amanita inaurata, but hopefully someone more knowledgeable will come along soon.

Hi Hedge Witch - you are actually thinking absolutely correctly !

But the name has changed now, with this fungus now properly called Amanita ceciliae based on the original name of Agaricus ceciliae from 1854 - the epithet inaurata coined in 1874 is thus a later name, and ends up being reduced to a synonym of A. ceciliae.

Nick

[BROCSMAN]

Thanks for the fast ID.

[Hedge Witch]

Originally Posted by mykonik

Hi Hedge Witch - you are actually thinking absolutely correctly !

But the name has changed now, with this fungus now properly called Amanita ceciliae based on the original name of Agaricus ceciliae from 1854 - the epithet inaurata coined in 1874 is thus a later name, and ends up being reduced to a synonym of A. ceciliae.

Nick

Ah - cheers for that - will write myself a little reminder in my Collins guide
It says it is uncommon - so I presume this is quite a good find for BROCSMAN.

[NickCantle]

I've never found it

[mykonik]

Originally Posted by Hedge Witch

Ah - cheers for that - will write myself a little reminder in my Collins guide
It says it is uncommon - so I presume this is quite a good find for BROCSMAN.

Hello Hedge Witch.

Like all of the other frequency data 'uncommon' is meaningless - it simply means that the species in question is not often recorded (i.e there are too few people around with enough field knowledge or taxonomic skill, to actually do the recording properly, to keep the material so that the record can be verified by future workers, and then to collate and send those records into the British Fungus Database run by the British Mycological Society).

The term 'rare' means the same (in effect), only even less frequently recorded than things supposedly uncommon !

The only frequency term that actually does mean anything is 'common' since it implies that the fungus is commonly seen and / or reported - however even that has limitations, much of which is dependant on the skill / knowledge of the recorder.

A good example of this would be Hypholoma capnoides - all of the literature (mistakenly !) says it is [in Britain] 'common' on conifer stumps' - yet if one checks through the material in public herbaria the vast majority of specimens labelled as H. capnoides is actually just common or garden Hypholoma fasiculare (Sulphur Tuft)

The reason being in this case is that the literature is wrong [invariably says H. fasciculare occurs on wood of broadleaved trees, and usually doesn't mention it's common occurence on coniferous stumps]

Thus someone with too little knowledge finds H. fasciculare on a conifer substrate, reads the literature saying that it 'only occurs on broadleaved substrates' and simply then records it as H. capnoides because of the conifer substrate.

And that is just one example !


Nick

[Hedge Witch]

Nick - wow - with all your expertise you should be in the "WAB fungi hunters"
Hedge