Observation 18719: Boletus bicolor Peck
When: 2003-07-30
Herbarium specimen reported

Notes: it is the variety with a reticulate stipe but as there are specimens with a reticulate stipe and with ereticulate stipe growing from the same mycelium I consider this superfluous.

[admin – Sat Aug 14 02:02:33 +0000 2010]: Changed location name from ‘Maggie Valley,North Carolina,USA’ to ‘Maggie Valley, North Carolina, USA

Proposed Names

86% (1)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight
Used references
Based on microscopic features

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
I have looked up my photos from back then now
By: Gerhard Koller (Gerhard)
2011-09-01 05:35:25 CDT (-0400)

but couldn’t find a pic of it. But I have to say that many of the pictures are still at the University of Vienna alongside with many exsiccata. I will have to look them up there but this cannot be before one month or the like. You have to keep me bugging that I will not forget.

myra.ellen.tori.amos@gmail.com

twizzler said
By: Dan Molter (shroomydan)
2011-09-01 01:10:23 CDT (-0400)

Take a photo of the print and post it. I’d like to see the reticulate stipe.

That’s a stretch…
By: Christian (Christian Schwarz)
2011-09-01 00:21:46 CDT (-0400)

They’re not just nice to have, it would ignore some of the most important uses and strengths of this site to treat them as icing on the cake.

I bet there’d be 95% less traffic on this site if no one posted images, because they are super powerful
visual teaching tools. We all know what it’s like trying to interpret descriptions without illustrations…

What is wrong
By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2011-08-31 23:25:26 CDT (-0400)

with observations without an image?
The way this site is set up they aren’t necessary, though they are nice to have…

Try
By: Paul Derbyshire (Twizzler)
2011-08-31 22:58:45 CDT (-0400)

taking a photo of the photo with a digital camera. :)

Yes, there is an image,
By: Gerhard Koller (Gerhard)
2011-08-31 10:21:18 CDT (-0400)

but unfortunately just a printed analogue one for back in 2003 I didn’t possess a digital camera … sorry!

looking for image
By: David Rust (incredulis)
2011-08-31 10:07:47 CDT (-0400)

Is there an image with this observation?

David

Created: 2009-02-21 11:41:39 CST (-0500)
Last modified: 2011-08-31 10:07:48 CDT (-0400)
Viewed: 144 times, last viewed: 2016-07-11 15:39:46 CDT (-0400)
Show Log