Observation 103401: “Discomycetes” Sacc.
When: 2012-07-29
No herbarium specimen

Notes: Pale gray-tan cup fungi growing on damp log beside the trail…, I have not seen this one before and I don’t find it in the books.

Proposed Names

29% (1)
Eye3
Recognized by sight
28% (1)
Used references: Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mushrooms
57% (1)
Eyes3
Recognized by sight

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Now you’ve got me thinking, Danny.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2012-07-31 06:11:55 BDT (+0600)

Original description is of “gray-tan” fungus. Neither photo matches that verbal description. I see white to lilac or soft rose on the upper photo, and orange to slightly reddish-orange on the lower photo. Background is not the same in each photo. Upper photo seems to be something different than anything in Audubon Field Guide to North American Mushrooms; but lower photo similar to Guepiniopsis. Guepiniopsis is a basidio, not an asco.

These photo do not look similar to each other, and neither appears “gray-tan” to me.

Don’t think so, Danny.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2012-07-31 06:02:10 BDT (+0600)

I have about 25 years of working with CMYK issues at a major West Coast newspaper.

this
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2012-07-31 03:39:21 BDT (+0600)

could be a white balance issue. compare the background colors in each photo. if so, this observation would be a pretty dramatic example of the color changes possible with unchecked camera settings.

2 different species here.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2012-07-31 03:30:22 BDT (+0600)

I’d suggest giving each a separate observation. Would be good to give size for each, too. The pale lilac seems to be a vase-shaped fungus, while the orange-colored one is more of a disc-shape.

Created: 2012-07-31 02:16:41 BDT (+0600)
Last modified: 2012-10-03 12:45:59 BDT (+0600)
Viewed: 84 times, last viewed: 2017-09-04 08:10:38 BDT (+0600)
Show Log