Observation 171431: Deconica coprophila (Bull.) P. Karst.

Original Herbarium Label: Psilocybe coprophila (Bull.) P. Kumm.
Syn.: Deconica coprophila (Bull.) P. Karst.

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Adolf. Please.
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2014-07-29 18:51:07 -03 (-0300)

Just go to advanced search. Type in the name “Psilocybe coprophila” in the Content field. Then enter your username in the Observer field.

Since you put that name in the Notes field, this observation turns up. All this despite the fact that the community consensus name is different.

Not sure why this is posing difficulties for you.

All parties should already be satisfied, it seems that you are simply not using the search feature properly.

I can tell that you don’t understand
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2014-07-29 18:43:53 -03 (-0300)

I asked the UBC database managers to put MO observations number as searchable field and I can easily find an MO observation for any herbarium specimen, if such observation exists. That’s exactly what you have suggested. The other way around, i.e., to find the MO observation to a given voucher specimen’s name is not so easy, if the MO users are changing the MO observation names willy-nilly.

I don’t understand
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2014-07-28 17:54:04 -03 (-0300)

how Byrain’s proposed name gets in your way at all.
You have the MO observation number, which is stable and
can be linked to your herbarium voucher number.
You also included the Original Herbarium Label in the notes

Seems like a good solution, I don’t see the problem here.

I would greatly appreciate if Consensus could stay away from our observations
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2014-07-28 15:27:20 -03 (-0300)

I have been using (or misusing) Mushroom Observer as a virtual herbarium of jpegs that go with our real herbarium collections. Please, do not complicate the link between our herbarium specimens and the corresponding MO observations. In the selection of names we are trying to follow Index/Species Fungorum as much as possible. In this particular case, you may notice that Index/Species Fungorum does not recognize splitting off the genus Deconica from Psilocybe and lists all the Deconica species under Psilocybe s.lato.

Created: 2014-07-28 13:16:34 -03 (-0300)
Last modified: 2014-07-28 14:58:31 -03 (-0300)
Viewed: 55 times, last viewed: 2017-06-18 14:24:59 -03 (-0300)
Show Log