Observation 110578: Mycena crocea Maas Geest.
When: 2011-12-06
Herbarium specimen reported

Notes: Original Herbarium Label: Mycena luteopallens Peck (both collections)
Collected from Arbutus menziesii log; Twice from the same log: 2009-11-04 & 2011-12-06
Herbarium Specimen: UBC F25692

Species Lists

Images

264128
Collection Date: 2011-12-06
264129
Drawing of the Dec 6, 2011 collection
UBC
F25294
264130
Drawing of the 2009-11-04 collection from the same Arbutus menziesii log as the later collections (above)
The specimen is at the UBC waiting to be accessioned; it’s filed there as Mycena luteopallens
305718
Drawing of the December 4, 2012 collection

Proposed Names

27% (1)
Eyes3
Recognized by sight: Doesn’t look like what I would call M. crocea (=M.luteopallens_)
10% (2)
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
Thanks for your help
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2014-10-11 06:46:55 CEST (+0200)

We have three collections of this mushroom, two of them have been already accessioned into the UBC herbarium, the third one (MO Image 264130) is to be accessioned soon: http://mushroomobserver.org/image/show_image?id=264130&obs=110578&q=2FcnN
The December 4, 2012 specimen has microscopic detail in MO Observation # 119711. On MO, each of these three collections are labelled with three different names. All three collections were submitted (and two of them already accessioned) to the UBC herbarium as Mycena luteopallens, resp. as Mycena ? luteopalens. If MO users (other than the observation author) will be changing the observation names willy-nilly, the connection between the MO observations and supporting herbarium specimens may be lost. Contact me privately, if you want to know how to solve this, I don’t want to bore the MO audience with my repeated complains. I also promised Nathan that I would be quiet and follow the MO procedures.

Habitat, Color, and Name are all misapplied
By: walt sturgeon (Mycowalt)
2014-10-11 02:04:46 CEST (+0200)

as Mycena luteopallens

Mycena luteopallens
By: walt sturgeon (Mycowalt)
2014-10-11 01:50:08 CEST (+0200)

Maas Geesteranus, qui a étudié les mycènes d’Amérique du Nord, le type de Mycena luteopallens, Agaricus luteopallens, espèce décrite par Peck, est en fait un Hygrocybe. Le nom de luteopallens est donc mal appliqué. Maas Geesteranusa a renommé l’espèce Mycena crocea..

I’d like
By: Rocky Houghtby
2013-09-27 01:46:50 CEST (+0200)

To read about that as well :)

Reference, please?
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2013-09-26 22:37:08 CEST (+0200)

“Mycena crocea
Is the correct name for Mycena luteopallens. Peck’s type was a Hygrocybe.”
Reference for this statement, please! AOC

Mycena crocea
By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2013-02-02 08:23:12 CET (+0100)

Is the correct name for Mycena luteopallens. Peck’s type was a Hygrocybe…

Created: 2012-09-20 07:00:28 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2014-10-11 02:06:18 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 123 times, last viewed: 2017-06-20 18:41:06 CEST (+0200)
Show Log