Most of our observations are supported by the corresponding herbarium specimens. If you have another ID suggestions, please, make it as a comment and don’t change our MO observation name that links this MO observation with the supporting herbarium collection deposited (or to be deposited) in the UBC Herbarium, Vancouver, BC. We have our MO Observations cross-referenced with the supporting herbarium specimens and we do not want to lose that link. Thanks!
|I’d Call It That||3.0||6.25||1||(email@example.com)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
This is a photo that I took handheld with Olympus TG-3. In its macro mode, the camera has an automatic frame stacking feature that automatically combine 10 or so frames onto one, stacking together only those well focused parts of each frame. Olympus TG-4 that succeeded TG-3 does the same, but the maximum focusing distance is better. For TG-3 it is 10 cm maximum, for TG-4 30 cm. I.e. you can use TG-4 for larger objects than TG-3. That does not really matter too much, since both cameras are best in the extreme macro mode. Adolf
P.S. Our selfie was also taken with this camera.
amazing photo! the clarity of detail is incredible.
We agree with you & with Nicolas Van Vooren, but we have not had time to have a second look at it. It might be Scutellinia scutellata but we have to look at it again. We do not ignore your suggestionsexcept that we have been doing something else. We have similar problem in our Hebeloma MO observations, where we will have to attend some ID blunders. O. & A. C.
Like Nicolas I feel the hairs are too long for the suggested species.
It would be useful to see free ascospores in Cotton Blue to evaluate the ornamentation. Although the spores dimensions fit with S. umbrorum, I never saw apothecia of this species with such hairs! On my collections, they can reach 900 µm in length but this is a maximum.
Created: 2015-06-18 04:11:51 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2015-08-16 00:48:41 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 168 times, last viewed: 2016-12-14 10:34:19 CET (+0100)