Boletus betulicola

[waynehicks1]

This was another found yesterday, growing mainly amongst sweet chestnut. I ran it through my Boletus key and came to B.betulicola straight away, without any 'ifs' or 'buts', which was refreshingly novel





Should I be happy with myself or have I made a boo boo in my over confidence?

Many thanks

Wayne

[Chris Yeates]

looks like oldish Tylopilus felleus to me; did you make a spore print?

Chris

PS Boletus betulicola is considered to be a synonym of B. edulis - see: Species data - British fungi

[waynehicks1]

No spore print I'm afraid, Chris. I'm guessing that this was actually a very young specimen due to the condition I found it in, with hardly any signs of creepy crawly damage.

Unlike a recent Tylopilus felleus specimen I photographed, this lacks the 'pronounced concolorous network covering the stipe' (Geoffrey Kibby).

Hmmmm

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by waynehicks1

Unlike a recent Tylopilus felleus specimen I photographed, this lacks the 'pronounced concolorous network covering the stipe' (Geoffrey Kibby).

Hmmmm

so it's seen a bit of life/slugs - but look at those pink pores!

Chris

[fairplay]

Wayne,
I fail to see how on earth you could possibly come to this decision "without any ifs or buts" ?

Surely after cutting the thing in half you must have seen the PINK tubes, even if you missed the pink pore mouths, and B.edulis has a white network on the stem whilst T.felleus is a dark, and very coarse, network (admittedly not clear in your photo, due to overhandling ?)

So yes, you made a BIG BOOB BOOB.

Neil.

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by fairplay

very coarse, network (admittedly not clear in your photo, due to overhandling ?)
Neil.

bit harsh Neil - he's photographed it in situ so probably not handled at all - though it doesn't look like a "a very young specimen" I have to admit

it does show the danger of over-reliance on a key though - you have then to check up on a full description of the fungus

and why not do a spore print in this case? surely one can wait 24 hours before announcing to the world? it's also worth checking up on various taxonomic opinions on a fairly unfamiliar name i.e. Boletus betulicola (easily done on-line . . . . takes a bit of time . . . . but worth doing nonetheless)

Chris

[SheffieldLass]

Originally Posted by waynehicks1

I ran it through my .... key and came to .... straight away, without any 'ifs' or 'buts', which was refreshingly novel

Should I be happy with myself or have I made a boo boo in my over confidence?

Ah, done that many a time myself .... just different fungi, different keys, and will probably do so many more times ....

Melanie

[waynehicks1]

Thanks, as always, to everyone for their help and input.

Firstly, in situ, the pores looked white to me(am I slightly colour blind )but they do seem to have turned slightly pink once the specimen was cut in half.

I was aware that B.edulis and B.betulicola are regarded by some as being the same, or maybe at best just colour variations of the same species. To help you understand how I came to my conclusion I'll explain how I navigated my way through Geoffrey Kibby's Bolete key:

Cap colour: white, cream, grey, grey-white, pallid to dirty ivory

Cap surface: Smooth to suede-like or velvety (only sticky when wet)

Pore colour: White to greyish dull brown

Pores bruising another colour: nil to slightly darker

Stem surface: Smooth or slightly granular

Flesh colour change: nil

This left me with only one answer, B.betulicola(also white forms of B.edulis)

Where did I go wrong?

Many thanks again,

Wayne

[fairplay]

Flesh colour change seems to be the slip up, or at least not realising the significance of the pink colour when cutting in half.

Neil.

[Ken Burgess]

Originally Posted by fairplay

Flesh colour change seems to be the slip up, or at least not realising the significance of the pink colour when cutting in half.

Though you would think it, this doesn't actually seem to be the problem in using Geoffrey Kibby's key for this species. Unless I am missing something myself, there seems to be an omission in the synoptic key on page 12 because there is no code that uses option M for pinkish pores. So if you noted that the pores were pink, you would arrive at a code that didn't key out.

Tylopilus felleus only keys out in two places (BGJN RW or FGJN RW), both of which assume immature specimens with white to greyish or dull brown pores (option J).

Wayne's keying led him astray because of his cap colour choice and the fact that the network on the stem was not obvious. Perhaps a colour chart might be helpful in future revisions of Geoffrey's key.

The only way to get familiar with the keys is to play around with them once you know the right name for a specimen. Then you begin to understand their idiosyncrasies and how to get the most out of them.

Ken

PS The colour change of the pores to pink is not strictly a flesh colour change. It results from the gradual maturation of the spores rather than a chemical reaction on exposure of the flesh to air.