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
56% (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 02:11:55 CEST (+0200)

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 02:02:10 CEST (+0200)

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

this
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2012-07-30 23:39:21 CEST (+0200)

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)
2012-07-30 23:30:22 CEST (+0200)

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: 2012-07-30 22:16:41 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2012-10-03 08:45:59 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 77 times, last viewed: 2016-09-21 21:24:46 CEST (+0200)
Show Log