|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||6.50||1||(Mycowalt)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
paper (actually its abstract) mentions morphological differences in the three new species, so reliable field identification is a possibility… One of those cases when a genotype translates into a phenotype.
but from the photos I’m seeing, it seems that with a little research, some standardized data collection, there’s definitely hope for morphological ID of the fruitbodies of these three species.
Maybe I’m misleading myself? Matt?
Too bad we no longer can slap the C. cibarius moniker on any of these found east of the Rockies. :) The plot thickens, as usual, for now we must also consider C. flavus, C. phasmatis and C. spectaculus. We need portable and affordable DNA analyzers asap! :D
Created: 2013-07-09 16:08:48 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2015-01-28 18:40:38 PST (-0800)
Viewed: 59 times, last viewed: 2016-10-20 18:22:50 PDT (-0700)