When: 2012-08-15
Collection location: Twin Lakes, near Mammoth Lakes, California, USA [Click for map]
Who: Chris (Chris S)
No specimen available
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 3.89 | 1 | (Chris S) | |||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 5.61 | 1 | (myxomop) | |||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
-0.33 | -10.98% | |||||||
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 3.89 | 1 | (Chris S) | |||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 19.29 | 4 | (Pulk,ckleine,convallaria,...) | |||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
1.28 | 42.67% | |||||||
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 5.61 | 1 | (myxomop) | |||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 3.89 | 1 | (Chris S) | |||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
0.33 | 10.98% | |||||||
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 5.13 | 1 | (Pulk) | |||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
1.67 | 55.79% | |||||||
Comments
Add CommentCreated: 2012-08-23 11:53:55 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2017-12-14 21:57:52 PST (-0800)
Viewed: 47 times, last viewed: 2018-03-08 00:03:31 PST (-0800)
Show Log
Xeromphalina campanella can be distinguished from X. enigmatica only by mating studies or DNA sequencing. They’re effectively identical in macroscopic features, microscopic features, chemical features, geographic location, and substrate preference.