When: 2009-11-14
Collection location: Fort Bragg, Mendocino Co., California, USA [Click for map]
Species Lists
Images
| 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. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 5.15 | 1 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 9.69 | 2 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 4.82 | 1 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
0.52 | 17.27% | |||||||
| 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. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 14.38 | 3 | (Twizzler) | |||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
0.93 | 31.17% | |||||||
| 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. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 4.97 | 1 | (Twizzler) | |||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 9.25 | 2 | (CureCat) | |||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 19.24 | 4 | (mykoweb) | |||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
-2.07 | -68.91% | |||||||
| 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. | |||||||||
| Vote | Score | Weight | Users | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I’d Call It That | 3.0 | 18.80 | 4 | (mykoweb,CureCat) | |||||
| Promising | 2.0 | 14.15 | 3 | ||||||
| Could Be | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Doubtful | -1.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Not Likely | -2.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| As If! | -3.0 | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||
| Overall Score sum(score * weight) / (total weight + 1) |
2.49 | 83.16% | |||||||
Comments
Add Comment
observations on this site all resemble this one and have a B. eastwoodiae identification with a confidence of 80% or more.
The species is apparently somewhat variable as to bulb shape in particular.
http://www.mushroomobserver.org/28338
http://www.mushroomobserver.org/26649
http://www.mushroomobserver.org/26644
http://www.mushroomobserver.org/5134
http://www.mushroomobserver.org/4771
Stipe is not abruptly bulbous, and the mushroom itself does not have an impacted (short and squashed) stature.
someone voted against (rather than merely didn’t vote for) B. eastwoodiae? Some field character that is at odds with that name?
Those all look like B. eastwoodiae, though more photos of the last observation would have been nice. And this observation looks like B. pulcherrimus.
Slightly different colours in the two species, typically. B. pulcherrimus tends to have less orange and red shades, and is more pink overall. Usually.