Observation 1324: Psathyrella (Fr.) Quél.

Proposed Names

-8% (4)
Eye3
Recognized by sight
-3% (5)
Recognized by sight: No images, no details, no specimens, no name…
43% (4)
Eyes3
Recognized by sight: I trust Nathan can probably ID Psathyrella. I do not think specific ID for most Psathyrella is warranted without at least an image because we don’t even have relatively stable “tag names”. However I think Byrain’s “no image no name” policy is way too conservative and pretty insulting when leveraged against users with generally strong investment in taxonomy and contribution to this site (and who acknowledge the imprecision and inaccuracy inherent in such endeavors).
-78% (2)
Recognized by sight: Possible, but no way to confirm or rule it out…
-78% (2)
Recognized by sight: Possible, but no way to confirm or rule it out…

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Nathan
By: Byrain
2014-11-15 00:37:55 JST (+0900)

There are several Psathyrella that have been moved or will be moved to Coprinopsis, probably a few more at least for Parasola too. I’m not sure about Coprinellus, most of the changes for Psathyrellaceae are probably still yet to happen. Without any data I find it very hard to go past Psathyrellaceae even assuming you and everyone else who saw this collection labeled it correctly at the time which honestly can only be taken at your word.

Here are two for Coprinopsis.
http://www.vielepilze.de/...
http://mushroomobserver.org/119603?q=2LWUD

As for P. gracilis, the unfortunate truth is that even if you had perfect images and micrographs with all the information the keys asks for, you still could more than likely dead end. Especially if it ended up even remotely close to P. gracilis. Please try to navigate Smith’s keys for subgenus Psathyrella if you don’t believe me…

Mislabelled species list
By: Nathan Wilson (nathan)
2014-11-14 23:10:27 JST (+0900)

I think the list was mislabelled as being from a fair in 2001 rather than 2004. At this point I have no idea why.

MO was originally designed (and note that this list and it’s observations were created when the site first went live) it was expected that many observations without images would be created. I wasn’t expecting there to be debate about the naming of this type of observation other than nomenclatural changes.

In my view what this observation indicates is that something was seen at this event that the people there (including myself) named Psathyrella gracilis. There obviously isn’t any other data, but that’s true of most simple species lists from mushroom fairs.

From what I know of Parasola and Coprinopsis, I don’t believe I would have made that mistake, but maybe these concepts are larger than I am aware.

Probably can’t ID to genus…
By: Byrain
2014-10-21 08:30:17 JST (+0900)

No way to rule out the species that are really Parasola or Coprinopsis….

Also, Christian, please don’t make this about me, this is about the mushrooms Nathan may have found 10 years ago.

Also, Nathan, how is this part of a 2001 fungus fair, but found in 2004?

Created: 2006-12-05 13:35:07 JST (+0900)
Last modified: 2016-07-30 02:28:32 JST (+0900)
Viewed: 117 times, last viewed: 2016-09-26 22:54:26 JST (+0900)
Show Log