Observation 46904: Cortinarius (Pers.) Gray
When: 2010-06-14
No herbarium specimen

Proposed Names

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Based upon Dan’s comments
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2010-06-18 01:39:47 CEST (+0200)

and Walt’s ID I take it that this type Cort has been collected and studied to the extent that subscaurus may be ruled out.

Thank you Noah
By: Dan Molter (shroomydan)
2010-06-17 09:02:16 CEST (+0200)

I did not even notice the little brown mushroom in front till you mentioned it. I was bothered by the green stem you mentioned, but I did not want to remove it because it was alive, and I knew there was no chance of making this slimy maggot covered cort look beautiful. This is not a beautiful mushroom, and it is not a great photo. The photo does however document a distinctive species that lives at Strouds Run State Park, so it is useful. If I had about fifty megapixils, then this could have been a great photo of flies, but I’m still waiting for Canon to build me a Macroscope. :)

I’m not sure how I feel about the voting either. “Okay but not useful” is equivalent to “total crap” in my book. So when somebody puts that rank on one of my photos it kinda bothers me. I take about ten photos for every one I post, so i know what crap photos look like. Then again, a photo can be aesthetically pleasing while being not good for identification, a good photo of an ambiguous specimen for example. Then again, some species are just not very attractive, but these mushrooms still need to be documented.
It’s a tough call sometimes, but I try to stay well on this side of useful. Thanks for the feedback.

I’m not the one who voted…
By: Noah Siegel (Noah)
2010-06-17 06:50:17 CEST (+0200)

it’s a good photo (but not good enough for a field guide) two things brother me about it; the small brown mushroom in the left front and the green stick behind it. Other then that it’s a really good pic.

but you can have good/great photos that aren’t good enough for field guides, like a cap of a single unidentifiable cort… I personally think the photo voting is a joke and hardly ever vote on them. I guess I want my “It’s total crap” option as well as “good enough for a picture book but not a field guide”

Calling out the photo critic.
By: Dan Molter (shroomydan)
2010-06-17 01:50:05 CEST (+0200)

Tell me who you are and why you think the photo is useless. It’s clearly not a bad photo. I think i deserve an explanation. Do you see the flies and the hundreds of tiny maggots? Didn’t look that close did ya?

C. subscaurus seems like a real longshot.
By: Dave W (Dave W)
2010-06-16 01:49:38 CEST (+0200)

But there have not yet been any ID proposals. So I’ll put this one out there. Phillips’ description includes: gills “purple at first”, “stem whitish violet at first.” The photo in Mushrooms of North America also shows one young specimen with a persistent cortina, and cap cuticles very slightly wrinkled. If 46904 is this species, then this would appear to be a nice find, as Phillips reports only one NA collection (NY).

Created: 2010-06-15 06:31:09 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2013-08-15 16:25:44 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 175 times, last viewed: 2016-10-23 01:13:13 CEST (+0200)
Show Log