|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||6.39||1||(Gerhard)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
Finally one who agrees.
I’m so sick and tired of that. It would require a year’s work to change all my names in my databases and stuff during which time I would not be allowed to do field work anymore and when I would have finished it I could start from anew.
As our president once said, “Sleep twenty years. Then wake up again. And you can use the same names as before.”
change names, change names and rechange names rechange names rechange names".
That´s a real plague.
I only heard about Othmar Breuss in relation to his studies in Verrucariales.
if I consider how many fungi there are described every year. I begin to hate taxonomists more and more. I needed more than thirty years to get used to systematics and the names that I heard and learned first (with the synonyms up to now) and now every day there is a darned name change. I lost oversight. And I am almost sure that they will improve their DNA technics and will once again throw all their names overboard in favor of new (old) ones. You have nothing to do anymore than to change names, change names, change names and rechange names rechange names rechange names.
Do you know Othmar Breuss from the University of Vienna? He is a lichen specialist. I could study with him, hahaha.
At least there are not that many KNOWN lichens as there are fungi.
At least there are not that MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
lichens as there are fungi.
But it took my a life time to get to know the mushrooms or fungi in general. I do not see any chance to achieve that knowledge in lichens too ;)
“If there are not many mushrooms or not quite interesting ones then I stick to lichens.”
I should not speak of spots but of dots as they are small and roundish. To my understanding they are pycnidia but I am no expert in lichens. I only take pictures of them to learn the most striking or important gradually. If there are not many mushrooms or not quite interesting ones then I stick to lichens. But thanks for the answer. I will post more of these when I come to it chronologically.
“So how do they look when they are fertile and mature?”
That will be good to know.
“I so often find this same patch on beech and maple, ash and hornbeam in abundant masses. Sometimes they have black spots on it. Is that the right stage for ID’ing?”
What do you mean by black spots? Apothecia or pycnidia? Sure it would help, but does not necessarily lead to an ID. Maybe, the spot tests will also help.
when they are fertile and mature?
I so often find this same patch on beech and maple, ash and hornbeam in abundant masses. Sometimes they have black spots on it. Is that the right stage for ID’ing?
to say something about these sterile crusts. Sometimes chemistry can help (as is the case of Phlyctis argena, for instance) but in general can only serve to exclude some genera. The best work I know on the subject, that was indicated by Jason sometime ago, is:
James C. Lendemer, Preliminary Keys to the Typically Sterile Crustose Lichens in North America, which is available at NYBG.
Created: 2013-02-15 21:38:37 GMT (+0000)
Last modified: 2013-02-15 21:38:43 GMT (+0000)
Viewed: 56 times, last viewed: 2015-09-07 22:19:20 BST (+0100)