Fungi A to Z Alerts

[flaxton]

Thanks John

Mal

[Morchella]

Can I put in a request to be able to sort by scientific name again?

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by Morchella

Can I put in a request to be able to sort by scientific name again?

No worries Morchella. The proper Latin name will be a priority.

Actually, I am getting very concerned about the whole 'Common name' scenario which is resulting in so many 'local' meaningless names. You only have to view the Gallery to see the ‘confusion’ it causes.

I would very much like to move away from them all together, using only names that everyone in the fungi / scientific community can understand.

Maybe it’s time for us to step up a gear!

John

[cybershot]

If, rather than using the 'A to Z' button at the top of the page, you access the A to Z via 'Reference' in the main menu and then 'Fungi' you will get an option to sort 'By Scientific Name', and you will also notice it is a far more complete list than that under 'By Common Name' so still a lot of tweaking required to restore this potentially excellent reference.

I couldn't agree more with John's view but as has been pointed out more than once by Stu in many debates on this bone of contention, because, apparently, the Common Names are more likely to be Googled this sets the precedent on WAB in keeping with all the other sections.

David

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by cybershot

. . . .
I couldn't agree more with John's view but as has been pointed out more than once by Stu in many debates on this bone of contention, because, apparently, the Common Names are more likely to be Googled this sets the precedent on WAB in keeping with all the other sections.

David

is that really true? the majority of photographs and useful websites on the web are non-British, and people would therefore miss out on them

I've just done a test using an interesting species discussed recently on WAB Boletus torosus;
if you google that you get 1070 hits with 266 images (though obviously not all are of this particular fungus); if you google Brawny Bolete you get 60 hits (most of these seem to simply be its listing in various BAP articles) with 4 images (one of which is actually of the fungus)

its German name "Dickröhrlinge" means Thick Bolete - perhaps not used by the powers that be as it insults the intellectually challenged?

the key reason for prioritising what I prefer to call the scientific name (Latin name does smack slightly of elitism) is that it puts closely related species together

if someone (even a beginner) is prepared to learn the word Hygrocybe then all the waxcaps can be viewed together, not "B" for Blackening, "P" for Parrot etc.

anyway I appreciate that I am largely preaching to the converted here

but that comment about googling did knock me back

cheers

Chris

[charlieb]

If the common names are present on the individual pages then Google will find them.

In my opinion the A-Z are pretty much useless - who when trying to ID something will go through the whole list without so much an idea of a name? The only reason I can see for the A-Z is an index for use by WAB editors and as links for Google to follow.

In which case the A-Z will only need to show the scientific names. The (sometimes numerous) common names can be present on the individual page - which google will find quite happily.

[cybershot]

Reinforced by the Wild About Britain factor, the Google arguement, even though shown to be questionable, is the one purported by Admin when, so oft times in the past, defending their stance against all those of us who see it from the point of view which Chris has so succinctly reitereated. It's a no brainer as far as I am concerned, but seeing as Google pays the bills then I'm afraid it's unlikely to change. (Opting for the sort 'By Scientific Name' option gives us that priority anyway)

David

[NickCantle]

What's this A-Z thing now where you have to sign in before you can edit? Ok so I know it's probably to prevent people from just editing information willy-nilly, but s a WAB volunteer, I've not been informed how to continue adding and editing information...

Could someone please enlighten me as to what to do to add/edit the A-Z again

[mollisia]

Hello,

the picture of Boletus aereus shows Boletus badius, sorry.

best regards,
Andreas

[ron1863]

Originally Posted by NickCantle

What's this A-Z thing now where you have to sign in before you can edit? Ok so I know it's probably to prevent people from just editing information willy-nilly, but s a WAB volunteer, I've not been informed how to continue adding and editing information...

Could someone please enlighten me as to what to do to add/edit the A-Z again

Here is the link Nick: Missing Fungi Facts | Wild About Britain

[cowshill]

The text of the entry for amanita phalloides states, "This common mushroom is responsible for 90% of cases of mushroom poisoning." The word "fatal" ought to be inserted in this to make the death cap "responsible for 90% of cases of fatal mushroom poisoning." I believe agaricus xanthodermus is responsible for the largest number of mushroom poisonings in the UK thanks to it's similarity to other edible and commonly collected agaricus species.

[cybershot]

Originally Posted by cowshill

The text of the entry for amanita phalloides states, "This common mushroom is responsible for 90% of cases of mushroom poisoning." The word "fatal" ought to be inserted in this to make the death cap "responsible for 90% of cases of fatal mushroom poisoning." I believe agaricus xanthodermus is responsible for the largest number of mushroom poisonings in the UK thanks to it's similarity to other edible and commonly collected agaricus species.

That certainly reflects a more accurate picture.

[flaxton]

Originally Posted by FungiJohn

Actually, I am getting very concerned about the whole 'Common name' scenario which is resulting in so many 'local' meaningless names. You only have to view the Gallery to see the ‘confusion’ it causes.

I would very much like to move away from them all together, using only names that everyone in the fungi / scientific community can understand.

Maybe it’s time for us to step up a gear!

John

Brave man John We have been here before, the fallout was not very pleasant and we lost some very good mycologist from the forum.

I have always been of the opinion that there should be a strong bias towards the scientific names. Yes I know the arguments about the seemingly constant changing of those names and which ones are in current use (and in which country as we have some great input from our European friends). It is bad enough when a name change is brought in and accepted by all but when suggested changes are not accepted by different faction of the mycological fraternity what do we do. At what point does a new name become "the" name?
If we were all using Phillips and just trying to identify the common species that would be one thing (and there are a lot on this forum that are happy with that and long may it continue) but if we are trying to take it to the next level and we are talking very serious mycology we are in most cases using European books and they often do not have the "common" names included.

I try and use the name I feel most appropriate at the time. On a public foray I am more likely to use the English name whenever possible but the rest of the time ie 90% I go for the Latin name. I think there is a place for both on here but this site has gone way beyond a lightweight bit of fun. It should be fun and is but it is also a serious force for the good of fungi and that in my opinion mean Latin names to the fore.

Mal

[NickCantle]

I completely agree with you Mal.

[flaxton]

Can someone do me a favour and bring along a dried cap/portion of cap of Boletus reticulatus.
Thanks

Mal

[solus]

Just noticed a "naughty" in the Scientific A-Z under "L".

Someone has sneaked in a link to something called "Last Chaos Quest Guides". About halfway down the page in proper alphabetical order.