|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.|
|I’d Call It That||3.0||0.00||0|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
Section Colliniti again. This group needs to be studied very methodically in the Midwest the way I do it in California. Otherwise it will be endless guessing.
There is also C. cylindripes Kauffman that is my ambition to free from the slavery of unfair synonymy to other things. I have a strong suspicion that we collected it with Dan Molter in So. Ohio two years ago – I have the dna, but the proof will require examining the type collection…
Walt, as you see I am not entirely thrilled with putting species names – I find absolutely no glory in that, particularly when it is 99% sure that they are misapplied. We have been through that conversation before. This also applies to the previous obs. Of C. trivialis, which I simply know not to be (despite being somewhat close).D.
Any thoughts on this one?
Created: 2011-01-13 02:16:08 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2011-01-13 02:16:10 CET (+0100)
Viewed: 85 times, last viewed: 2016-10-23 18:05:00 CEST (+0200)