Observation 129748: Agaricales sensu lato

When: 2010-09-17

Collection location: Earth [Click for map]

Who: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)

Specimen available

I found this orange spore print on tinfoil in an old bag. The label had worn off.

All micrographs are 1000×.

Spore measurements:

6.9 [7.2 ; 7.4] 7.7 × 5 [5.3 ; 5.6] 5.9 µm
Q = 1.2 [1.3 ; 1.4] 1.5 ; N = 10 ; C = 95%
Me = 7.3 × 5.4 µm ; Qe = 1.3

7.13 5.13
7.23 5.42
7.44 5.18
7.40 5.39
7.06 5.72
7.04 5.19
7.46 5.60
7.76 5.67
7.17 5.67
7.30 5.27

Species Lists



Proposed Names

30% (2)
Recognized by sight
-21% (2)
Based on microscopic features
28% (3)
Recognized by sight
47% (2)
Recognized by sight
28% (4)
Recognized by sight

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Yes, that’s the best I can do
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2014-01-04 21:13:57 MST (-0700)

I found this unlabeled print in my herbarium. It may be from California or may have come in the mail.

location info missing
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2014-01-04 13:43:37 MST (-0700)

nothing better than Earth?

MO is…..
By: Britney Ramsey (Riverdweller)
2013-06-14 10:11:13 MDT (-0600)

a nice conglomeration of all sorts of participation. Let’s not be snobby. Why not welcome participation at all levels. Alan is talented and interesting so why bag on him. To say his efforts have no value here because you don’t like his format is silly.

Is the web going to run out of room for pictures or something?

If I had been excluded 4 years ago when I started this journey, where would I be now….

Yes, I am depressed
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2013-06-14 09:37:38 MDT (-0600)

Yes, I am depressed, when I see MO observations that don’t have any sense, never mind how nice they are, Britney. As an old herbarium rat, I would like to see all the MO observations supported by herbarium specimens. I know, Charles, that this is an impossible goal, but we should strive for it. Ironically, Alan is also one of the supporter of this “specimens yes” movement within the MO and even for this MO observation, he has a herbarium specimen: “Tin foil in an old bag”. I worry that without the supporting specimens, MO will become a garbage heap of nice, but useless mushroom photographs.

cool spores
By: Britney Ramsey (Riverdweller)
2013-06-14 07:22:48 MDT (-0600)

and that’s all I have to say…

MO for everyone
By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2013-06-14 07:22:45 MDT (-0600)

I almost thought you were kidding with that first post Adolf. I can assure you Alan will never be banned from MO; that idea would have been funny if you weren’t being serious. Now I find your comments sad; be well, I hope you get the help you need. Depression isn’t fun for anyone.

Both Alan and Adolf are right
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2013-06-14 02:01:50 MDT (-0600)

We (Alan and I) both call for the necessity of MO observations to be supported with herbarium specimens. The only difference is that I would not call the herbarium specimen something like “this orange print on tinfoil in an old bag” with “Earth” as the collection location. If this should have been a mental exercise, I am not bright enough to get it. Adolf

I propose a mutual admiration society
By: Martin Livezey (MLivezey)
2013-06-13 18:56:12 MDT (-0600)

between Alan and Adolf

By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2013-06-12 13:40:11 MDT (-0600)

You probably understand what I mean by metadata. The exact same things you are complaining about. Date, location, etc.
I included specimen in my definition for the purposes of this instance.
It’s not the exact opposite of your definition. It’s just that I am willing to discuss this with a little flexibility so we can keep things moving.

Yes. We know that Adolf Ceska wants specimens for every observation. Believe me, we know. It’s not going to happen.

As for observation 64232 was a really fun (accidental) challenge. But I don’t think it’s that similar to this obs (unless Alan is not telling us something) because we had two specimen-supported options to choose between (ie. the right answer was there to be discovered). This one would be a fun challenge too, if we could uncover an answer somewhere. Theoretically, we could if we sequenced the spores…

I would love to do a challenge of the week with rotating curators. It could go all sorts of directions.

I see it as a challenge.
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2013-06-12 13:14:41 MDT (-0600)

There may be a shortage of information, but what’s here is clearly and thoroughly documented. DIC micrographs are not garbage. Those who know their spore characters have shape, color, size and ornamentation to go off of in coming up with possible identities. This really isn’t all that different from Observation 64232, which involved a similar kind of working backwards from microcharacters found on material which turned out to not belong to the species pictured in the thumbnail.

What do you mean by “metadata”?
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2013-06-12 13:10:37 MDT (-0600)

My problem is that I see MO observations as “metadata” that go with some real data. Just the opposite of what Christian’s definition is. I myself do not consider it worthwhile to post my photos etc. to MO for which I don’t have supporting herbarium specimens (the real data). But even MO spelling checker considers the word “herbarium” as a spelling mistake and offers “her barium”, “her-barium” or “Herbart” instead.

We all know
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2013-06-12 12:43:36 MDT (-0600)

what’s “wrong” with it – there’s no metadata attached to it, no point on voting on it. It’s less valuable than other observations. But there’s also no point in complaining about it.

Adolf -
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-06-12 12:10:33 MDT (-0600)

What is wrong with this observation?

Instead of interpreting this…
By: Image Sharer (image sharer)
2013-06-12 11:48:08 MDT (-0600)

…as a comment on identification of fungi, let’s look at this again.

Many people are becoming deeply interested not only in mycology, but in a shift in our global consciousness.

Some do not want to wait. Some want to push this.

Let even the grumpiest among us help inform our status as a world population sharing the same planet.

Compassion. Compassion. Understanding.

By: Byrain
2013-06-12 11:16:06 MDT (-0600)

The only garbage is your demands to ban someone, stop embarrassing yourself by acting so childish.

By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2013-06-12 11:10:49 MDT (-0600)

would be the point of banning Alan, Adolf?
We would get fewer high-quality observations. Who would that help?

Give me a break!
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2013-06-12 09:18:28 MDT (-0600)

I read the first two paragraphs, but did not find anything that would justify posting garbage on MO. I am horrified when I see something so nice and useful as MO to be on a suicidal mission. Nathan convinced me that I was beating a dead horse when I wanted to save MO and I agreed to let MO die. – Adolf

By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2013-06-12 08:10:28 MDT (-0600)


Pay close attention to the first two paragraphs

Ban whoever posted this observation
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2013-06-12 00:16:49 MDT (-0600)

Mushroom observer should not been misused for this nonsense! Ban whoever posted this from using MO! – Adolf

By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-03-02 10:32:20 MST (-0700)

a lot of Gymnopilus species have ellipsoid spores.
also, not all spores in the genus are inequilateral.
i agree that the ornamentation is a bit rough, but this is not all that rare for the genus…

Does not look like Gymnopilus to me
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-03-02 09:38:36 MST (-0700)

Gymnopilus has inequilateral, amygdaliform spores with fine to medium ornamentation. This has equilateral, ellipsoid spores with course ornamentation. To see what Gymnopilus spores look like with this microscope, see observation 129753.

Gymnopilus spores:

By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-03-02 06:44:27 MST (-0700)

the size, shape and ornamentation all remind me of Gymnopilus spores.

Created: 2013-03-02 06:07:19 MST (-0700)
Last modified: 2015-10-16 10:35:12 MDT (-0600)
Viewed: 405 times, last viewed: 2017-06-15 10:11:14 MDT (-0600)
Show Log