|I’d Call It That||3.0||0.00||0|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
I rarely bother with 1000x oil immersion anymore, either. Still, I’ve never seen the internal structure of Trebouxia so clearly as in your photos. How do you take photographs? Is there a CCD built in, or a lens adapter to attach an external camera?
I feel absolutely certain that there is a full flora available for Scandanavia. But I can’t find any mention of it to save my life. Let me ask around.
is exactly what I have. If I try 1000x, everything gets blurry (not much better with oil immersion either). But in 400x, I get a much better picture, sharper and a better depth of field. What is too small to see with my own eyes then, gets improved by the camera when I can enlarge the picture. But I think it would be even better with more megapixels (only 6 in my camera now), both for microphotos and close-ups of other details.
What I need in the first place are good and instructive keys to some of these fascinating genera of lichens, preferably scandinavian. Older keys and descriptions that I have seen so far, leave too much open for interpretations.
The grass-green cells in the last photo must be Trebouxia. You can see all the internal structure in the green algae perfectly. Wow.
The olive-green ones in the other photo look like gigantic Nostoc. You can clearly see the gelatinous sheath. Maybe I just don’t know how to read the scale, but they look 30-40 µm wide(!) if you multiply the reticle value by 2.5.
You know, a lichenologist in southern California was just telling me in effect that I should stop blaming my microscope and just practice more. I’m sorry, but if I could see even a quarter of this detail with my crappy eBay scope, I’d be lightyears ahead of where I am. Equipment is important. I rest my case with these photos. I feel the sudden and dangerous urge to spend an absurd amount of money!
Created: 2011-10-31 16:08:45 CDT (-0500)
Last modified: 2011-10-31 16:08:47 CDT (-0500)
Viewed: 32 times, last viewed: 2016-10-20 16:34:11 CDT (-0500)