wont accept Amanita brunnscens or Amanita or Amanita sensu lato



Proposed Names

62% (2)
Recognized by sight: testing to see why MO won’t accept the name…

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
glad to have helped
By: Matt Welter (mattfungus)
2016-01-24 04:02:15 NZDT (+1300)
Hello Matt,
By: groundhog
2016-01-23 04:59:27 NZDT (+1300)

This material has been received and accessioned to Rod’s herbarium. Thank you!

Naomi (working with RET)

Thanks, Matt
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2015-09-16 09:57:56 NZST (+1200)

One difference: we actually wrote the code that’s making it so difficult… who are we supposed to gripe about??? ;)

I can see that it is very frustrating for you
By: Matt Welter (mattfungus)
2015-09-15 07:30:10 NZST (+1200)

and I have learned to try to find updated names, that is usually the first thing I do (often if I google the name, with Kuo, Kuo’s site has the modern name).

This was just an odd one because brunnescens appeared and I hit enter and it wouldn’t accept it. Then I tried just Amanita and Amanita sensu lato and would only autotype Amanita, but then wouldn’t accept it.

I really do understand your frustration. I work at a job center and you would not believe the number of different ways that online job applications won’t let an applicant proceed (my favorite is when they say no to a question and it still asks for a reason to be filled in)

Until the mindreading computers come along in the next 5 years I guess this is what we will have to do to progress science. Thank goodness we have this and we have someone like you to help us administer it.

Nathan and I have to turn on an “admin mode”
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2015-09-15 05:02:35 NZST (+1200)

to do anything special. Otherwise, the vast majority of the time, we are totally normal (subnormal?) users. I proposed the name as a nonobserver, using a different page than you would have used when creating the observation. It is possible that therein lies the important difference. It is also possible that names have changed subtly in the intervening time, or that a duplicate name has been merged out of existence. Anything like that would also fundamentally alter the behavior of the pages involved. At this point I would have to go back through the logs, try to locate the exact request(s) you sent, set up an identical database on a local test server, and try to reproduce the behavior you saw that way. It’s a painful process, and one I simply don’t have time for. :( Instead, I’m content with getting to the desired state, and we’ll just deal with any recurrences when they happen in the future. Sorry for the frustration and inconvenience. It’s the best I can offer. :(

thanks Jason
By: Matt Welter (mattfungus)
2015-09-14 23:22:30 NZST (+1200)

From what little work I have had with website design I know that sometimes the administrator is able to do things the users arent. In one case I set up a dummy account to test what the experience would be like for a user (and sometimes let someone else do the inputting for me).

I’m checking to see if you did that and if not suggesting it as an option.

What a strange thing
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2015-09-14 16:32:43 NZST (+1200)

We’ve been getting complaints from time to time about names not being accepted. Unfortunately whatever caused it in this case, it seems to have been cleared up, because I can’t reproduce the behavior: it accepted the name the first time I tried. Sorry!

You should notify the developers.
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2015-09-14 15:30:51 NZST (+1200)

See the blue panel at the top of this page. The phrase “send us a note” is highlighted.

Very best,


in the case of both
By: Matt Welter (mattfungus)
2015-09-14 08:06:53 NZST (+1200)

Amanita and Amanita brunnescens I did not rely on my spelling but the autotype feature of Mushroom observer. In other words its not accepting its own entries.

Unfortunately, brunneistriatula was described from Australia.I
By: R. E. Tulloss (ret)
2015-09-14 06:11:40 NZST (+1200)

I think that “brunnescens” was rejected because you left out the first “e.”

See if it will be accepted with the above spelling.

Very best,