Improving our Fungi Resource Centre

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by cybershot

Wouldn't it would be useful if favourite online references such as Phillips had a an interactive 'Notes' facility so that you could add all these up-to-date nuggets of information like yours to the appropriate species' entries. We will have to approach Fungi John about compiling a WAB reference containing such useful info as the search facility is not always reliable in finding the exact tit bit amongst all the data on the forums.
--------------------------------------------------
If anyone has any ideas on how we can improve our fungi resource or what more it should contain .. feel free to post here.

Once I have a little more time I'll collate it into some actions.

Happy Hunting - John

[cybershot]

Just to expand on my initial idea which I've already outlined to John in a PM:

I was wondering if the existing WAB Fungi List could be elaborated to include for each species the mycological data as per a Phillips/Jordan type reference and a verified image(s) from the Gallery as per the WAB bird list, plus any salient up-to-date Notes gleaned from the treasure trove that is the Fungi Forums or added interactively by the cogniscenti among our members. I appreciate it is a huge task, and not being an IT technocrat, even if it's feasible, but I'm sure there would be volunteers to help out; promoting WAB even further to the forefront of on-line Fungi references.

David

[cybershot]

Two volunteers for you already John.
Good on you Andrew.

http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/fo...olunteers.html

Let's know if and how we can help.

David

[cybershot]

The Fungi of Britain A to Z, accessed through Reference - Fungi,

http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/list/british_fungi

is building into a substantial work of reference with the help of volunteers like Deer Stalker et al. Suggestions of how to improve it would be useful:

1. Inclusion of synonyms, as well as Latin and Common names
2. Expanding size data to accommodate a range of values for both cap and stipe.
3. "Notes" for up-to-date help on ID etc, gleaned from information supplied by the experts on the forums

David

[leek]

i find that having only one picture restricts your chances of identifying a species.
I would find it much more useful to be able to see a number of pictures throughout the life cycle of the species - so that you can observe the changes that each fruit body goes through.
definitely needs info about sizes of cap, stem (height and thickness range).

maybe also info about the types of tree you may find each species near.

LEEK

[goosey]

I have just been looking through the fungi A-Z and thought I would let you know that I think it's super! It will be so useful not to have to go through the complete Gallery looking for ID's when it's complete. Well done guys, to all involved! The images are pretty impressive too .

[cybershot]

Originally Posted by goosey

I have just been looking through the fungi A-Z and thought I would let you know that I think it's super! It will be so useful not to have to go through the complete Gallery looking for ID's when it's complete. Well done guys, to all involved! The images are pretty impressive too .

It's going to take some time to get it completed and updated but it will be a great reference eventually. And Leek may be interested to know that Stuart has OK'd the facility for adding extra images to exemplify different characteristics and stages of development. Feel free to add or amend as you see fit.

David

[cybershot]

The biggest problem when starting the spade work of editing the existing entries is knowing whether or not the images, uploaded by all and sundry, are verified and correctly named according to the BC checklist. It certainly helps to have someone with Ken's experience checking out the misfits and indicating anomalies. If there's not available time to do a full edit, a short comment to that effect in the Additional Notes of such entries would be a great help. Then when I see it I'll try and sort it.

Moreover if you have a suitable verified reference shot please post it in the Gallery, indicate this in the Note, and I will retrieve it for the appropriate entry.

Many thanks.

David

[cybershot]

There are now over 400 entries in the Fungi of Britain A to Z

http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/list/british_fungi

and an awful long way to go in updating and editing the list, so if anyone finds they have some spare time on their hands to contribute a couple of revisions it will not seem quite so daunting.

TIA

David

[Alantb]

I've just discovered the picture Gallery and have not had much time to look at it but it needs some critical nit-picking. [Like, myxomycetes (e.g. Ceratiomyxa) aren't actually fungi for instance.]
Another point, one picked up by leek, is that one picture is seldom enough and that dimensions are important. If this is really setting out to be a pictorial record of All British Fungi and not just a picture book then it is going to require a lot of work.
Another point (Oh dear, he's going to go on and on...) is that identification of fungi from photographs is not a good idea and could lead, in extreme cases, to stray poisonings. A better idea might be a Gallery of drawings (cf Courtecuisse & Duhem) but that would be even more difficult.
I think that this could be nice to look at but given the picture sizes would only help identification when the features were quite obvious. I looked at the 'C' entries and I'm a bit doubtful about the Clitocybes - but given that appearances vary a good deal I'm not going to stick my neck out and say that the pictures aren't what they are said to be, they just give reason to be suspicious.