Suillus luteus is a bolete fungus, and the type species of the genus Suillus. A common fungus native to Eurasia, from the British Isles to Korea, it has been introduced widely elsewhere, including North and South America, southern Africa, Australia and New Zealand. Commonly referred to as slippery jack or sticky bun in English-speaking countries, its names refer to the brown cap, which is characteristically slimy in wet conditions. The fungus, initially described as Boletus luteus by Carl Linnaeus in 1753, is now classified in a different family as well as genus. Suillus luteus is edible, though not as highly regarded as other bolete mushrooms, and is commonly prepared and eaten in soups, stews or fried dishes. The slime coating, however, may cause indigestion if not removed before eating. The fungus grows in coniferous forests in its native range, and pine plantations in countries where it has become naturalized. It forms symbiotic ectomycorrhizal associations with living trees by enveloping the tree's underground roots with sheaths of fungal tissue. The fungus produces spore-bearing fruit bodies, often in large numbers, above ground in summer and autumn. The fruit body cap often has a distinctive conical shape before flattening with age, reaching up to 13 cm in diameter. Like other boletes, it has tubes extending downward from the underside of the cap, rather than gills; spores escape at maturity through the tube openings, or pores. The pore surface is yellow, and covered by a membranous partial veil when young. The pale stipe, or stem, measures up to 10 cm (4 in) tall and 3 cm thick and bears small dots near the top. Unlike most other boletes, it bears a distinctive membranous ring that is tinged brown to violet on the underside.
No narrative description available for this taxon yet.
Compounds documented for Suillus luteus across natural-product and food-composition databases — not just the ~150 nutrients on a classic label ("nutritional dark matter").
Compound class profile3 classes
Cinnamic acids and derivatives2
Arylnaphthalene and aryltetralin lignans1
Dibenzylbutane lignans1
Documented compounds5 total
Compound
Class
Amount
Source
3',4',5'-Trimethoxycinnamyl alcohol
present
LOTUS
3,4,5-Trimethoxycinnamyl alcohol
present
LOTUS
Guaiacin
present
NPASS
Meso-Dihydroguaiaretic Acid
present
NPASS
Suillumide
present
LOTUS
05DNA & barcoding58 specimens
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 Suillus luteus has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens58
Marker genes2
GenBank sequences10
eDNA detections57
Countries13
The DNA barcodea real sequence read deposited for this species
Suillus luteus HYNK25257 genes for 18S rRNA, ITS1, 5.8S rRNA and ITS2, partial and complete sequence
Marker genes sequenced
★ 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.
★ITS10★ITS1
fungal barcode
06Genome at a glanceNCBI
The complete instruction manualSuillus luteus 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 size62 960 000 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 Suillus luteus0.06 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 8 221≤1 km 6 159≤10 km 6 679>10 km 376
21 435 georeferenced · 2 312 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor23 747
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 accuracy56% within 1 km
≤100 m 106≤1 km 236≤10 km 215>10 km 55
612 georeferenced · 748 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence1 360
Cultivated / Captivenot free-living
A living individual in a botanical garden, zoo or nursery — cultivated or kept, not free-living.
Coordinate accuracy0% within 1 km
≤10 km 1
1 georeferenced · 3 without coordinates
Open the mapnot free-living4
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 institutions51 of 94 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
Durham, US
188
Joensuu, FI
145
Olocation not on record
69
TROMlocation not on record
50
Auckland, NZ
42
Helsinki, FI
38
BDBClocation not on record
34
St. Paul, US
32
Toronto, CA
31
Museo Entomologico de Leonlocation not on record
21
Ann Arbor, US
21
DPIlocation not on record
18
17
Durango, MX
17
Uppsala, SE
16
Bernard Price Institute for Palaeontological Researchlocation not on record
16
Champaign, US
16
Osaka, JP
14
San Sebastián, ES
13
TENN-Flocation not on record
13
Université de Montréal Biodiversity Centrelocation not on record
13
Mexico City, MX
13
Vitoria, ES
12
GJOlocation not on record
12
Uniwersytet Łódzkilocation not on record
11
ILLSlocation not on record
11
FLASlocation not on record
11
WU-MYClocation not on record
11
Kensington, AU
11
Kew, GB
10
Ciudad de México, MX
9
Bando, JP
9
Fungario QCAM de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuadorlocation not on record
9
Göteborg, SE
7
Universidade de Lisboa, Museu Bocagelocation not on record
7
Acadia Universitylocation not on record
7
JA-CAGPDS-CAMlocation not on record
7
Karlsruhe, DE
7
Kuopio, FI
7
Davis and Elkins Collegelocation not on record
6
IPA/SPlocation not on record
6
Vancouver, CA
6
MeiseBGlocation not on record
6
Brisbane, AU
5
Blacksburg, US
5
Pullman, US
5
Catholic University of Pekinglocation not on record
4
Entomological Society of Latvialocation not on record
4
Zapopan, MX
4
IB FRC Komi SC UB RASlocation not on record
4
Oulu, FI
4
SLU Artdatabankenlocation not on record
4
Hobart, AU
3
PHlocation not on record
3
Parkville, AU
3
CA
3
Bardejov, SK
3
Canberra, AU
3
Laramie, US
3
Jyväskylä, FI
2
Tromso University Museumlocation not on record
2
KOMlocation not on record
2
Salzburg, AT
2
Trondheim, NO
2
KNAMlocation not on record
2
Staten Island, US
2
LDlocation not on record
2
Royal Ontario Museum, TRTC Fungariumlocation not on record
2
Warsaw, PL
2
Mexico City, MX
2
Copenhagen, DK
2
Odawara, JP
1
Rene Pomerleau Herbariumlocation not on record
1
University of Oslo, Natural History Museumlocation not on record
1
California State University, East Baylocation not on record
1
McWane Science Centerlocation not on record
1
Personal Herbarium of Paula DeSantolocation not on record
1
Santa Cruz, US
1
Cincinnati, US
1
Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Moreloslocation not on record
1
Personal Herbarium of Steve Nesslocation not on record
1
Stockholm, SE
1
TUR-Alocation not on record
1
Oskarshamn, SE
1
National Mushroom Centre, Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, Bhutanlocation not on record
1
Yerevan, AM
1
Leicester, GB
1
Denver, US
1
US
1
Madison, US
1
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana (PUJ)location not on record
1
Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt (IAvH)location not on record
1
Toyota city nature sanctuarylocation not on record
1
nsnflocation not on record
1
94 institutions · 1 126 of 1 360 vouchered records shown · 221 without an institution code
Cultivated / Captivenot free-living
A living individual in a botanical garden, zoo or nursery — cultivated or kept, not free-living.
09Environmental DNA57 detections
Where the DNA of Suillus luteus 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 found57
Studies independent surveys2
Countries12
Signal confidence: moderateweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 57 detections have coordinates
Open the map12 countries0
OtherNo woody hosts, in grassy prairie
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 median13.2 °C 7.40–18.1
Seasonal swing summer↔winter21.1 °C
Max temp (day)17.7 °C 11.3–21.2
Min temp (night)9.00 °C 3.10–14.7
Precipitation78.4 mm/mo 33.4–344
Air humidity61.7 % 52.9–64.9
Moisture balance-8.50 mm/mo -61.7–274
Vapour deficit581 Pa 459–953
Wind speed2.90 m/s 2.00–7.90
Cloud cover41.9 % 35.7–59.2
CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 25 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.