|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.|
|I’d Call It That||3.0||0.00||0|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
I think that when considering mushroom ID in general, we should keep in mind that published differences are not the end of the discussion.
Many macroscopic differences have been overlooked in published keys in favor more esoteric features, often due to lack of broader experience, or any experience at all, or lack of really detailed observation.
That said, it would be good for Noah to explain.
to keep up.
But I really don’t have a problem continuing using Lactarius deterrimus for our NA species until a new name is published. After all, they are morphologically virtually identical.
even tho the Bessette book was published in 2009.
Guess it shows how hard it is to keep up and publish with all the new information
in this new age of molecular phylogenetic studies.
The collections of North American “L. deterrimus” that have been sequenced do not match the European collections. The NA species needs more work and will need a new name. See:
Nuytinck, J., Miller, S.L. & Verbeken, A. (2006). A taxonomical treatment of the North and Central American species in Lactarius sect. Deliciosi. Mycotaxon 96: 261-307.
Nuytinck, J., Verbeken, A. & Miller, S.L. (2007). Worldwide phylogeny of Lactarius section Deliciosi inferred from ITS and glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase gene sequences. Mycologia 99(6): 820-832.
species in the US. The “Milk Mushrooms of North America” by the Bessettes and Harris list it as “fairly common” especially with spruce.
what trees you have there first. L deterrimus could easily have been introduced – if it grows with Norway spruce.
It is no Lactarius deterrimus, because L.deterrimus is a purely European species.
Created: 2012-10-09 11:19:23 AST (+0300)
Last modified: 2012-10-09 11:19:27 AST (+0300)
Viewed: 117 times, last viewed: 2016-10-22 02:40:59 AST (+0300)