Observation 160756: Panaeolus cinctulus (Bolton) Britzelm.
When: 2011-09-23
No herbarium specimen
0 Sequences

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-03-06 00:02:03 CET (+0100)

ill update and let everyone vote.
i’d like to study the information further, although i do absolutely trust you.
i can’t wait to see what winters comes up with…

MO consensus
By: Byrain
2014-03-05 23:58:30 CET (+0100)

There is no MO consensus that these should all be called P. subbalteatus (Or vica versa), that was just one person and then a resulting mass name change… The argument was since the Agaricus cinctulus type does not exist anymore (There is Gerhardt’s epitype) we should use a newer name with a type collection despite no one here having looked at the collection or considering the sorry state of the original description. I would argue that we should use the name P. cinctulus that the leading European Panaeolus experts use since that is is the only one with a clear concept, but I have only bothered changing the names back on the collections that I think clearly match Gerhardt’s epitype (Microscopy included).

By: Richard Kneal (bloodworm)
2014-03-05 23:28:27 CET (+0100)

i am just going by what John Allen and Alan have had to say and by the current MO consensus.
if that is the original description then i will will edit the observation for sure.
i would like Alan and John to chime in though.

Why are you using a name
By: Byrain
2014-03-05 23:16:22 CET (+0100)

With this description? http://www.mycobank.org/...

“A magnificent species, allied to C. micaceus. Grooved like Agaricus hiascens.”

The best description I have seen is for Gerhardt’s P. cinctulus epitype.

Created: 2014-03-05 23:11:58 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2014-03-06 00:03:45 CET (+0100)
Viewed: 47 times, last viewed: 2017-10-18 19:38:12 CEST (+0200)
Show Log