Observation 204891: Agrocybe splendida Clémençon
When: 2015-05-22
(48.4332° -123.4506° 20m)

Notes: Original Herbarium Label: Bolbitius vitellinus (Pers.) Fr.
Re-Identified as: Agrocybe splendida Clémençon identified using Moser and Fungi of Switzerland
Growing in a moist depression in a cultivated lawn

Stipe without an annular zone

Cheilocystidia 20-25 × 5-6 µm
Pileipellis hymeniform composed of clavate cells, 20-25 × 9-10 µm
Spores 12-13(-14) x 7-9 µm

No pileocystidia were seen
No pleurocystidia were seen

Chironomids were sitting (trapped) on the viscid cap

Please correct our ID if you are sure that it is wrong, but do it as a Comment, NOT by changing our observation names. Thanks!

Species Lists


Cheilocystidia 20-25 × 5-6 µm
Cheilocystidia 20-25 × 5-6 µm
Cheilocystidia 20-25 × 5-6 µm
Pileipellis hymeniform composed of clavate cells, 20-25 × 9-10 µm
Pileipellis hymeniform composed of clavate cells, 20-25 × 9-10 µm
Pileipellis hymeniform compoed of clavate cells, 20-25 × 9-10 µm
Spores 12-13(-14) x 7-9 µm

Proposed Names

-25% (4)
Recognized by sight
-25% (4)
Recognized by sight
-26% (4)
Recognized by sight: If the Ring zone disappeared…
Used references: Michael Wallace.
-17% (3)
Recognized by sight
-11% (2)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Your observations are excellent
By: Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
2015-05-25 17:40:14 EDT (-0400)

and (as observations) extraordinarily rewarding to see! Better than mine overall, for sure, of course.

“Discussion forum” is a term I’m happy with. I think if MO is to be dependent on more confident than “like-to-be” identifications, then it requires a major revamping. It’s just fundamentally not the way the current system works.
(I would be less happy with such a site for a few reasons, but that’s beside the point.)
Recent discussion of that conflict in obs 203511, maybe best to add more there.

Regarding the votes/consensus determining the obs name… I have mixed feelings about it and don’t totally disagree with you. The large, bold, italicized font titleing obses may imply unreasonable confidence. I can think of a few ways to temper that, but that’s for a different discussion…

It’s disrespectful of the creators
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-05-25 16:56:24 EDT (-0400)

Yes, I do feel that it’s nearly abuse of the site to treat ourselves to be above this system. It’s disrespectful of the creators who coded the site that we’re using (for free).
On the other hand, check our observations and you can see that they add some quality to this site. Or do you want MO to remain just a discussion forum with some like-to-be identifications?
What would be wrong if the MO users would make their naming suggestions as “Annotations”, not by changing the MO observation names? “Annotations” are just structured Comments that would be something like the Proposed Name box without the power of changing the original MO observation name.
I also feel that we (Oluna and I) are using this site for our mycofloristics project, i.e., in the way Nathan proposed it to be used for this purpose. Watch Nathan’s presentation on one of the first mycofloristics meetings:
In the summary, if you are not happy about our MO observations and the purpose we are using it for, its your problem. We are happy with MO as it is when we cannot change it and you don’t have to look at our MO postings if you don’t like them. Adolf

Hello herbarium curators
By: Luca Pasquali (luca)
2015-05-25 16:20:09 EDT (-0400)

as you may see on the top of this web page, I just started to help with the development of this site.
If you get a virtual private server running latest Ubuntu version I will be glad to set up a virtual herbarium based on MO at no cost for you, using the last MO code.
A vps suitable for such service costs like 4$-5$ per month, you have just to choose one hosting solution and give me access to it.
so we will be free to correct this nonesense. It’s Protostropharia semiglobata, by the way.

By: Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
2015-05-25 15:51:13 EDT (-0400)

Name suggestions on Mushroom Observer are housed in a box in the middle of the observation page. This box includes all the important information, and only the important information, about any of the suggestions the users* make: Proposed Name, User, Community Vote, each user’s vote and weight, and Your Vote**.

*Users, not user. Users, not user. This site is deeply based on multiple users’ input per observation.

**Your Vote is SPECIFIED. This indicates the fact that there are other votes to be considered.

Now, it’s nearly abuse of the site to treat yourself to be above this system. It’s disrespectful of the creators who coded the site that you’re using (for free).

The rest of your sentences seem to imply a dismissal of not just the concept of multiple users’ input, but also the idea of a log of name changes. In opposition to that dismissal, I invite you to actually read the comments in the observation I just linked.

Our original ID is still available
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-05-25 15:34:33 EDT (-0400)

Our original ID (or misID) is still available in our Notes. As you mentioned in your note to the observation 172848, the MO identifications are just mere suggestions, and not real identifications. We want to protect the link between our MO observations to the supporting herbarium specimens by keeping the original ID in the Notes where the Consensus cannot change it. We consider MO as being a “virtual herbarium” and crossing out the MO observation name and replacing it with something else would be like crossing out the herbarium label a scribbling another name there instead. If somebody would dare to do it in the real herbarium, he/she would be kicked out from there immediately. MO gurus are telling me that MO is not a herbarium. That’s a pity. They don’t see how powerful herbarium tool they have developed.

Regarding deleting name proposals, Oluna & Adolf
By: Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
2015-05-25 13:15:22 EDT (-0400)

See the comments on obs 172848.

We hope
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-05-25 05:56:58 EDT (-0400)

We hope that we will reach consensus on Agrocybe splendida Clémençon
Thanks for your ID effort.

I agree with Michael Wallace
By: Luca Pasquali (luca)
2015-05-25 02:49:28 EDT (-0400)

Protostropharia semiglobata

How about…
By: Michael W (Michael Wallace)
2015-05-25 01:32:35 EDT (-0400)

…some slightly dry Protostropharia semiglobata

Your changes of the MO observation name are a good example
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-05-24 23:15:48 EDT (-0400)

of the major fault in design of Mushroom Observer. I greatly appreciate your suggestions, but they should be done as Comments (MO designers would not go for the more formal “Annotations”), NOT by crossing out and over-righting the original MO observation names. MO is great for its database design and for facilitating MO users’ mutual communication, but the failure to follow herbarium conventions (i.e., not crossing out or overwriting the MO observation names) leave it in realm of a nice, entertaining fungal discussion forum, useless for mycofloristics and for documenting herbarium specimens. I do have too have a lot of courage when I am using MO for the jpegs that go with the real herbarium specimens. Never mind, I am grateful to all the MO gurus for this system.

By: Jacob Kalichman (Pulk)
2015-05-24 22:44:00 EDT (-0400)
To Pulk: Deconica is about the same nonsence as Bolbitius
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-05-24 21:32:24 EDT (-0400)

I admire your courage.

Re: This clearly is not a Bolbitius
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-05-24 18:05:43 EDT (-0400)

Oluna is working on it. Adolf

[MO] Observation #204891 May Be Agaricales sensu lato
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-05-24 17:51:56 EDT (-0400)

We agree! Tell us something more useful, please!

By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (aceska@telus.net)
2015-05-24 17:09:26 EDT (-0400)

We apologize that we are using Mushroom Observer as a virtual herbarium, not as a discussion forum. If you change our MO observation name, we are loosing the link between our MO observations, our herbarium specimens and our lists of species from the collecting foray. We greatly appreciate all you suggestions and catching our misidentification, but do it as a Comment, NOT by changing our observation names. Thanks!

Created: 2015-05-24 14:11:15 EDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2015-05-26 22:57:02 EDT (-0400)
Viewed: 322 times, last viewed: 2017-06-20 04:39:16 EDT (-0400)
Show Log