|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||6.39||1||(Gerhard)|
sum(score * weight) /
(total weight + 1)
by text in comments (at the top of this page, write the key words after “find” and choose “comments”). I have recently discovered that myself..
Unshared knowledge is knowledge that is heading for oblivion. But many people have a low tolerance level for being lectured repeatedly. So one doesn’t always know how the “Nth” version of some text will be taken.
If Dr. Bas and other mentors had not been so generous toward me, I would never have accumulated what little I know. When I see the transience of electronic media, the short life of computers, discs, CDs, tapes, etc. (very short as compared to the life of books on paper), I fear for the future of the knowledge in human heads today. The only thing to do is to record the knowledge in the most accessible ways that one can…even if transient.
I really wish that one could search for old comments on MO by COMMENT AUTHOR and by TEXT IN COMMENT. This would be an advance. Considering the number of times I have written about some species, there must be a great deal of material already written on taxa such as Amanita muscaria. It would be nice to be able to point to such comments, but…first one has to find them. For me, that seems extremely difficult at present.
On the contrary, I’m grateful that you are so generous and taking your time to give us all these background facts that usually are hard for an amateur to find. When I need to be updated about Amanita species, I always check your site, and my memory isn’t the best – so I have to read them several times.
my longwindedness, Irene. I did not remember that I had already written the material on battarrae on the website in a previous round of discussion on these species.
I agree with you that much needs to be sorted out.
I have read your discussions about battarrae and umbrinolutea, several times, but what I have at my location cannot be ID:d by the colour concept.
It’s still possible that we are dealing with a complex of several closely related species, and at some point an extensive phylogenetic investigation will be needed to know how(or if) to divide them.
Of course, I can’t be sure that what we call battarrae in Sweden is either battarrae or umbrinolutea – none of them described from Scandinavia – for all I know it could just as well be a another, undescribed species..
Thanks for explaining the naming rules!
A. battarrae does appear to be the name that would have precedence because of the International Code’s exclusion of names published by Secretan including “Amanita umbrinolutea.” The first appearance of the latter epithet as a valid name was at the rank of variety in 1874 (this is where the “Secr. ex Gillet” comes from). It was not recombined at species rank until 1910 (by Bataille). Amanita battarrae was published in 1902 by Boudier. Therefore, since names only have priority at a given rank (here we are discussing species), IF the two names are taxonomic synonyms (at present, I don’t think so), then the name with priority is battarrae.
I think that is unfortunate, but it is what the rules say. Secretan did a good job of describing many of his taxa. Amanita battarrae was defined based on a figure in an old book with limited taxonomic information. When the name was published, minimal additional taxonomic information was added and one addition contradicted the description of the cap color in the original. We can recognize Secretan’s species and a detailed morphological species concept was not difficult to assemble, when I needed to do that in the face of the Pakistani and Indian collections that, at present, seem to belong with the European material I reviewed.
I think the question that must be asked is, “How would we satisfy ourselves that we know how to apply the name ‘_A. battarrae’?” What is the chain of reasoning that leads us from Battarra’s plate and description to application of the name “A. battarrae” in the present day? Has anyone ever insisted that the name only be applied to taxa with a “powdery” appearance on the pileus? Battarra says that the species sometimes looks likes it is sprinkled with flour. What is the reason for not considering this character mentioned by Battarra? The rules of nomenclature are clear regarding priority (for example), but taxonomy requires methodology and a logical approach that has not always been evident in the past.
I think it is a good exercise to try to imagine what evidence would have to be assembled to demonstrate that the name A. battarrae is correctly applied to any particular collection of Amanita. I tried to make a first stab at the problem here:
In particular, I suggest reading the “discussion” data field of the brief tab on that page.
and to be honest I still call it thus – I am not convinced of two species too but then again I am not that much into gilled mushrooms except for some genera but I chose umbrinolutea due to recent discussions from Italy. In my finding notes this still goes under “battarrae”. Habitat is mountaineous spruce forest around 1000 m altitude over acidic soil in very humid locality.
a place nearby where I find what I have been calling battarrae, some years in large amounts, and their cap colours range from almost pure gray to brown.
I do not beleive that two different species are growing there.
But if the name should be battarrae (preferred by IndexFungorum) or umbrinolutea (the oldest) – well, I don’t know.
Amanita umbrinolutea often has a distinct reddish tone to the brown in the darker rings. Amanita battarrae is based on an entity that was described as gray. I have worked up a description of A. umbrinolutea based on material ranging from Europe to the Himalayas (that’s a large range, but I couldn’t distinguish the European and Himalayan material (Pakistan and India) with morphological methods.
I think the most recent work on A. battarrae would come from southern France or Italy. The last publication of Neville, Poumarat et al. treated A. umbrinolutea and issues relating to its identity. I’m having trouble with my memory lately (apparently a reaction to a death of in my family), and can’t recall if A. battarrae was included in their discussion. But I think their book would be a place to start.
If you’d like to discuss the matter further, I could read that part of their book again.
Created: 2012-03-07 21:24:00 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2012-03-07 21:25:38 CET (+0100)
Viewed: 251 times, last viewed: 2017-02-04 15:31:32 CET (+0100)