|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)
a key to SOME genera. But you’re right. I know of some mycologists who simply ignore genera like Aureoboletus, Boletinus, Boletinellus, and, maybe correct, Rubinoboletus.
If I was to be asked I would go back to a time when there have not been so much splittings e.g. I still do not want to acknowledge the splitting of Xerocomus and Leccinum. I am too used to old formulas by now to always like to search for the newest name applicable. The only reason I do is the internet because nowadays via this medium it is quite easy to be on the most recent level of knowledge. But there is danger of errors in it.
in his key…, Now you have a reason to contact him!
I am in loose correspondence with Halling but I did not know this key yet.
Some more boletes are to follow.