Observation 9527: Inocybe calamistrata (Fr.) Gillet

Photographed at the 2003 Oregon Mycological Society Fall Mushroom Show, World Forestry Center, Portland, OR. When an OMS Herbarium tag is present, a voucher collection is available.


Proposed Names

86% (1)
Used references: Identification by Dr. Lorelei Norvell

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

= Observer’s choice
= Current consensus


Add Comment
Agree. We need a clear conceptual outline on Generic/Family level.
By: Dimitar Bojantchev (dimitar)
2008-08-22 20:23:53 +06 (+0600)

Yes, it is very useful to see the most pertinent features of some concept right upfront. The only constraint is not to overplay them as ‘absolutes’. But then there are ‘good collections’ and ‘bad collections’. A good collection encompasses several fruitbodies in all age stages of development, showing the most typical phases for a fruitbody.

It is useful also to develop a checklist of things to inspect on a Generic, or even Family level – I have such cheat sheets that I take with me everywhere. That would offer a tremendous boost in effectiveness to the average collector and can turn her into a serious mycological weapon. A few simple corrections in collecting practices can add great mileage to the experience and final result.

Getting more points…
By: Nathan Wilson (nathan)
2008-08-22 03:24:20 +06 (+0600)

By the way if folks really want to pump up their MO score you should start putting putting distinctive features on the name pages. For example, taking a comment like Dimi’s that relate to the taxon rather than the specific observation and putting them on the name page, just takes a copy, two clicks, a paste, a little editing and another click :-).

Valuable addition to the site…
By: Nathan Wilson (nathan)
2008-08-22 03:16:13 +06 (+0600)

In my opinion this sort of observation is very valuable. While it would be better if there was a photo of the base of the stipe, at least in this case there is a voucher so when someone decides to look deep they can. Pictures from fairs are also interesting since they help capture how people are actually applying names at this point in history. The fact that there is debate about the naming makes it even more interesting.

Yes, I agree.
By: Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
2008-08-22 01:59:17 +06 (+0600)

However, show photos have often been adjudicated by internationally-known mycologists, so even if the photos don’t show all the identifying characteristics, they probably show the actual mushroom. Not always, though.

“Show” photos often not useful if important ID characters are hidden by labels!
By: Debbie Viess (amanitarita)
2008-08-20 22:22:30 +06 (+0600)

…and even the experts can make ID mistakes, esp. in the hurried atmosphere of a show. Show labels often don’t list important collection details; voucher labels are even worse! Much more useful to post photos of mushrooms that you have actually collected, so that the ID can be debated in a meaningful way. Also, not very useful for file photo sharing, another important aspect to Nathan’s site.

Does rack up the contributer points, tho. ;)

Key components of Inocybe calamistrata are:
By: Dimitar Bojantchev (dimitar)
2008-08-20 21:48:22 +06 (+0600)

I can’t say if this one in the picture is, or is not calamistrata, obviously Norvell identified it at a show.

But just wanted to share the key components of Inocybe calamistrata:

1) Ultra-scaly pileus (most scales perked up)
2) Strong, permeating, nauseating odor
3) Greenish discoloration at the base of stipe

Here’s a photo:

External Link

Too pale..
By: Irene Andersson (irenea)
2008-08-18 22:10:23 +06 (+0600)

Looks much too pale to be I. calamistrata.

Created: 2008-08-18 05:01:41 06 (0600)
Last modified: 2008-08-18 05:01:41 06 (0600)
Viewed: 86 times, last viewed: 2019-01-22 16:08:55 06 (0600)