Poroblaszek żółtoczerwony – gatunek grzybów należący do rodziny borowikowatych (Boletaceae). Jest jedynym europejskim przedstawicielem borowikowatych o blaszkowatym hymenoforze.
No narrative description available for this taxon yet.
A DNA barcode is a short, standardised stretch of genes that works like a fingerprint — enough to tell one species from another. Below is the molecular trace Phylloporus rhodoxanthus has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens4
Marker genes2
GenBank sequences10
eDNA detections18
Countries3
The DNA barcodea real sequence read deposited for this species
★ the standard DNA barcode for this group — the short region actually read to tell this species apart. The rest are extra genes sequenced along the way.
★COI-5P★ITS10
animal barcodefungal barcode
06Genome at a glanceGoaT · NCBI
The complete instruction manualPhylloporus rhodoxanthus carries — its genome. We read it from three angles — how big it is, how the DNA is packed into chromosomes, and how completely it has been sequenced — and explain how to read each value as you go.
Genome sizehow big the whole instruction manual is
Genome size47 840 000 bp
Measured in base pairs (bp) — the individual letters of DNA (human ≈ 3.2 Gb, a bacterium a few million). The chart places this genome on a logarithmic scale — each step to the right is ten times bigger — among reference organisms. Across species a bigger genome loosely tracks with larger cells, slower growth and lower-energy lifestyles (powered flight favours small genomes) — yet it does not imply more genes or a more advanced organism (the long-standing C-value paradox).
BACTERIUM Carsonella ruddii0.00016 Gb
FUNGUS0.04 Gb
THIS GENOME Phylloporus rhodoxanthus0.05 Gb
INSECT0.25 Gb
HUMAN3.2 Gb
WHEAT17 Gb
FERN Tmesipteris160.45 Gb
Sequencing statusassembly quality — how far to trust these numbers
Assembly level tells you how finished the sequence is — from fragmented contigs, through scaffolds, up to a full chromosome-level assembly. BUSCO % estimates completeness: the share of genes expected to be present that were actually found. These describe the data quality, not the organism.
Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.
Coordinate accuracy67% within 1 km
≤100 m 320≤1 km 112≤10 km 143>10 km 69
644 georeferenced · 259 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor903
Museum / Voucheredphysical evidence
Backed by a physical specimen — a herbarium sheet, sample or voucher held in a collection. “Vouchered” means supported by material evidence, not just an observation.
Coordinate accuracy49% within 1 km
≤100 m 26≤1 km 86≤10 km 102>10 km 16
230 georeferenced · 366 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence596
Wildobservation + sensor
Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.
10Collections & institutions
Holding institutions28 of 53 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
Bronx, US
138
Chicago, US
60
WTUlocation not on record
50
TENN-Flocation not on record
49
Davis and Elkins Collegelocation not on record
43
Vancouver, CA
31
FLASlocation not on record
23
BDBClocation not on record
17
Durham, US
15
Bernard Price Institute for Palaeontological Researchlocation not on record
13
ILLSlocation not on record
13
Copenhagen, DK
13
Museo Entomologico de Leonlocation not on record
12
Zapopan, MX
8
Brisbane, AU
8
Denver, US
8
Champaign, US
6
Kew, GB
6
Acadia Universitylocation not on record
5
Toronto, CA
5
Karlsruhe, DE
4
Mlocation not on record
4
Ciudad de México, MX
4
Blacksburg, US
4
Hobart, AU
4
Pullman, US
3
Colorado State Universitylocation not on record
3
Baton Rouge, US
2
National Mushroom Centre, Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, Bhutanlocation not on record
2
University of Tennessee at Chattanoogalocation not on record
2
Natural History Museum, Tribhuvan Universitylocation not on record
2
Catholic University of Pekinglocation not on record
2
St. Paul, US
2
Herb. Agererlocation not on record
2
Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznańlocation not on record
2
Kensington, AU
1
Entomological Society of Latvialocation not on record
1
Université de Montréal Biodiversity Centrelocation not on record
1
MAlocation not on record
1
Bardejov, SK
1
Asheville, US
1
Personal Herbarium of David Wasilewskilocation not on record
1
DPIlocation not on record
1
Centro de Estudios Superiores del Estado de Sonoralocation not on record
1
Görlitz, DE
1
Mexico City, MX
1
Chapel Hill, US
1
MeiseBGlocation not on record
1
LDlocation not on record
1
Staten Island, US
1
US
1
Clemson, US
1
Helsinki, FI
1
53 institutions · 583 of 596 vouchered records shown · 12 without an institution code
09Environmental DNA18 detections
Where the DNA of Phylloporus rhodoxanthus was picked up in samples of water, soil or air — nobody saw the organism, only its DNA left behind. A trace is a clue that the species was near, not a confirmed sighting.
Signal
Detections DNA found18
Studies independent surveys3
Countries3
Signal confidence: moderateweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 18 detections have coordinates
Open the map3 countries0
Neotropic
How strong is each trace?
DNA read depthRead counts were not reported for this species — the map shows presence only, not how strong each trace was.
Modelled climatemodelled
−15°Ctemperature across detection sites+40°C
Temperature median21.5 °C 21.5–23.7
Seasonal swing summer↔winter14.4 °C
Max temp (day)26.9 °C 26.9–28.4
Min temp (night)17.8 °C 17.6–20.1
Precipitation86.6 mm/mo 59.3–109
Air humidity60.7 % 59.9–61.9
Moisture balance-11.1 mm/mo -92.9–-11.1
Vapour deficit999 Pa 999–1,116
Wind speed2.30 m/s 2.20–3.20
Cloud cover35.1 % 29.7–36.1
CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 17 detection points · median with p10–p90 · reflects where sampling happened, not only the true niche
How to read this: each dot is one detection of this species' DNA in an environmental sample. The confidence meter weighs how many independent studies and places back up the signal — one detection in one study is a hint; many across several studies is solid. Records dated before 2008 (when eDNA methods began) are treated as likely mislabeled and left off the map.
BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗
GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility1 522 records↗
ENAEuropean Nucleotide Archive · EMBL-EBI18 eDNA detections↗
BOLD SystemsCentre for Biodiversity Genomics4 specimens↗
NCBIUS National Library of Medicinesequences↗
Open Tree of LifeOpenTreephylogeny backbone↗
GoaTGenomes on a Tree · Sangergenome & karyotype↗
Catalogue of LifeCOLtaxonomy↗
GLoBIGlobal Biotic Interactionsbiotic interactions↗