Observation 141605: Daldinia Ces. & De Not.
When: 2013-07-27
(40.5067° 79.8836° 94m)
No herbarium specimen

Proposed Names

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
re: restoring original name
By: Richard Jacob (lostculture)
2014-07-29 19:47:18 PDT (-0700)

Yes I do, but I am choosing to leave it, and others that have been changed, as Imageless.

I agree that people should be able to post imageless entries but I am no longer considering using MO for the clubs species lists and probably wont post Imageless entries in the future. Mainly because I don’t want to spend the time defending the entries and restoring the names.

Although I might try to take pictures of all the clubs finds and enter them into MO when I am walk leader I don’t think it is something I can ask everyone to do, leading a walk is purely voluntary after all.

restoring original name
By: Joe Cohen (Joseph D. Cohen)
2014-07-28 20:29:15 PDT (-0700)

Do you understand how to restore your original name for this observation?

Club species list
By: Richard Jacob (lostculture)
2014-07-28 19:59:22 PDT (-0700)

Thanks for your comment and pointer to the recent conversation on imageless observations. All our club species lists taken at the end of a walk are compiled by the clubs mycologists or identifiers, a fairly knowledgeable bunch. We can, and do make mistakes, and have unnamed or generic named specimens (especially Russula sp.) at the end of a walk however, I still think they are of reasonable if not very good quality.

In general I agree that it would be nice if we got in the habit to take pictures of all the specimens and uploaded them with the list. However that is not happening yet and can put a burden on the identifiers who have already spent quite a lot of time on the list itself.

MO adds lots of features like mapping of locations, the occurrence map, species references etc which are all bonuses when you have lists going back 10 years.

Unfortunately I do not have the time to defend every entry when it is changed to imageless and do not plan to try.

It turned out to be fairly easy to create a workable species list generator that integrates with the clubs public website. In the long term I will look into linking it with our walk location database and mapping software to crate some nice occurrence/observation maps.

It seems a shame to keep our data locked into a propriety system. On the other hand our club is working towards DNA barcoding of specimens and will have more evidence than the typical MO entry. Then I will be able to start changing entries which just have an image to barcodeless/sequenceless (very tongue in cheek :)

Richard

PS
By: Joe Cohen (Joseph D. Cohen)
2014-07-14 19:53:57 PDT (-0700)

For examples of arguments why imageless observations are — or are not — legit, see the comments to
Observation 166760.

Club species list
By: Joe Cohen (Joseph D. Cohen)
2014-07-14 19:42:41 PDT (-0700)

Richard:
I have used MO for species lists. The associated observations usually have photographs, but sometimes I don’t have photos of all specimens. When that happens, I add a note to the Observation to indicate that no photo is available.
This upsets some MO Users — those who demand better scientific documentation. But most people who have commented (including the founder of MO) think this is a fair use of MO. And even the folks who don’t like this use typically do not change the Name of the Observation, though they may leave a negative comment. (And if they change the name, I think you can outvote them.)
For examples see
http://mushroomobserver.org/species_list/show_species_list/565 (note some Observations with photos only of labels)
http://mushroomobserver.org/species_list/show_species_list/442 (a few Observations with no photos)

—Joe

Use of MO for clubs species list – not viable without images.
By: Richard Jacob (lostculture)
2014-07-14 17:51:38 PDT (-0700)

I was testing to see if the club could use MO to store listings from walks. Although the interface is nice the answer is no because people mark the entries as “Imageless”. Fair enough, with out a picture etc etc

As our clubs species list generator has become out dated due to name changes, missing species and maintainability it sadly looks like we will have to reinvent the wheel and make a new one.

Created: 2013-08-01 13:15:49 PDT (-0700)
Last modified: 2016-08-01 23:47:03 PDT (-0700)
Viewed: 70 times, last viewed: 2016-10-27 21:38:33 PDT (-0700)
Show Log