When:
2010-06-12
Collection location:
Sintra, Portugal [Click for map]
Who: zaca
No herbarium specimen
Notes: No hairs on the cap.
Images
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 6.47 | 1 | (zaca) | |||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 5.51 | 1 | (Mycowalt) | |||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
0.15 | 4.92% | |||||||
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 5.51 | 1 | (Mycowalt) | |||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 5.10 | 1 | (douglas) | |||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
1.86 | 62.11% | |||||||
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 4.37 | 1 | (AmatoxinApocalypse) | |||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 5.10 | 1 | (douglas) | |||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 6.47 | 1 | (zaca) | |||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
0.69 | 23.10% | |||||||
| User’s votes are weighted by their contribution to the site (log10 contribution). In addition, the user who created the observation gets an extra vote. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 5.10 | 1 | (douglas) | |||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
0.84 | 27.87% | |||||||
Comments
Add Comment
Maybe…
By: Douglas Smith (douglas)
2010-06-12 21:50:03 CDT (-0400)
Might be Crepidotus applanatus, but C. cesatii is perhaps more common in Europe, but it is hard to say, depending on the area. One difference is that Crepidotus applanatus is clearly hygrophanous when fresh, and C. cesatii is not. Also C. cesatii usually has paler spores when older. From my limited experience…
This one is so small, rough and old, it is 50-50 on which it might be, but I’d kinda lean towards C. cesatii myself.
Created: 2010-06-12 18:00:43 CDT (-0400)
Last modified: 2010-06-13 06:33:42 CDT (-0400)
Viewed: 54 times, last viewed: 2017-06-07 20:06:39 CDT (-0400)
Show Log
The size of the specimen was about 1.2 cm. One point in favor of Crepidotus cesatii is that it didn’t seem to be hygrophanous. But, as far as I could see another hypothesis of classification would be Crepidotus variabilis which is more commom in these areas. Since, when I arrived home the specimen was not in good conditions, I think it is better to leave it as Crepidotus sp..