Observation 29723: Amanita gemmata var. exannulata (J.E. Lange) anon. ined.


[admin – Sat Aug 14 02:04:58 +0000 2010]: Changed location name from ‘Pt. Reyes NP, Bear Valley, Marin CO, CA’ to ‘Bear Valley, Point Reyes National Seashore, Marin Co., California, USA



Proposed Names

77% (2)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight: for want of a better name. membranous UV that extends up above the bulb; lack of annulus. yellow color to cap. common coastally.
-44% (3)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2015-03-15 11:57:37 CDT (-0500)

If you insist on using an invalid name from Denmark you should at least add ‘sensu Breckon’ to the end of the name.

I use MO for research as well. Having these similar west coast names under sect. Amanita is helpful for future studies. For all we know this species may not be gemmatoid. The clarity is lacking when it comes to this group of fungi.

Also, the name is still there to search by.

Sure, we should stop using bad names,
By: Adam Ryszka (The Polish Hammer)
2015-03-15 11:37:08 CDT (-0500)
when we have something useful to replace them with. Removing species names from very common west coast mushrooms and placing them into “generic” sections is not helpful. Though the name may be wrong, the identity it conveys is correct. A. gemmata explains a lot more than sect. Amanita. You can justifiably call something by an incorrect name while working towards giving it a correct name. It is an accepted interim identifier or placeholder. These names that are being clobbered here are known and accepted by us on the west coast. We know they are incorrect, however, we currently do not have anything better.

And here is something to think about irrespective of if the name is correct or not. From a data collection standpoint, you just clobbered the discrete identifier of numerous collections of these mushrooms on the west coast. I know for a fact there are people that are using MO to pull data for research. You can also query MO remotely from other websites or apps. Very helpful. I worked directly with the MO developers to put together a query system so I could query location-specific data about individual observations. You just “broke” that for all these mushroom observations. Is the code broke? No! but the names we would query are now missing from the system!

In the background we are using MO to gather and aggregate data for things like habitat, occurrence, distribution, etc. All data that is being used by people WHO ARE doing the taxonomy work to try and correct these names! Turning specifics into generalizations is not helping this. The name may be wrong, the DATA in the observation is not. The incorrect name is still very useful as it holds established meaning for a discrete set of species. When a new “accepted” name is available, it will be applied, I can assure you of that.

And this is not getting into that the Gemmatoid Amanitas probably belong in their own section…

lots of those to sweep up on MO.
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2015-03-15 09:20:41 CDT (-0500)

do you include provisional names in your housekeeping?

it’s an imperfect world. I am just grateful to be able to search MO for useful data. too general of a naming is not useful, when we actually do know the species.

your opinion may vary.

By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2015-03-14 22:37:15 CDT (-0500)

You should get rid of invalid names and stop using them.

until our new NA amanita names get published …
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2015-03-14 19:25:01 CDT (-0500)

may as well use the ones that are already in use and descriptive of the species.

after all, gemmata and pantherina aren’t “valid” here, either. but what a mess to call them all Amanita sect. Amanita. We can, and should do better, in the case of recognizable forms like this one.

As to the “ameri-whatevers” … when Rod publishes his new names and full descriptions, I’ll be glad to use ’em! Until then, I am OK with our familiar latin place holders, which are searchable to species, even if some of those species will eventually need a new latin name, or are harboring cryptic species.

not helpful
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2015-03-14 19:11:02 CDT (-0500)

to make a known species unsearchable.

By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2015-03-14 18:22:23 CDT (-0500)

It is not a good working name, again, it is invalid and from Denmark.

again, this is a known species …
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2015-03-14 18:04:05 CDT (-0500)

not some new oddity that we have to slam into a mere amanita section.

much more useful to have a good working name when you are doing searches.

Created: 2009-12-07 14:56:16 CST (-0600)
Last modified: 2015-03-15 13:42:16 CDT (-0500)
Viewed: 169 times, last viewed: 2018-05-13 16:49:20 CDT (-0500)
Show Log