Malcolm Storey

My activity

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of In situ - dorsal:

    Yes, I agree. Many thanks. Malcolm

    10 months ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on "Stipe surface - enlarged":

    @Nathan Wilson: The photograph was taken in the UK. We don't have Retiboletus ornatipes. You need to consider it in the light of the full set of photos and description: http://www.bioimages.org.uk/html/r151305.htm I agree it's atypical.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Image of an unknown taxon:

    @Priscila Chaverri: Yes, there are a number of these confusing statements on EOL images from my website. It's not obvious from my current page (click on "More Info") how this arose. I don't know whether it was originally wrong on my website, or if it went wrong when EOL's spider scraped it. Certainly there are several places where EOL's spider was confused by punctuation (eg place names) and this maybe another of those - the original could well have had a comma: "Geoglossum cookeanum, covering ascocarp"

    It's 2 years since EOL harvested my content. We agreed a joint background project to build a more direct route and harvesting was suspended. Unfortunately neither side had time to progress it, but we're now hoping to move it forward this winter and this should correct such errors.

    almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Image of Blistum ovalisporum and Byssostilbe stilbigera:

    @Priscila Chaverri: Keith Seifert (who synonymised them) now considers Blistum ovalisporum to be distinct from Byssostilbe stilbigera. (K. Seifert, pers comm. 31/8/05)

    almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Image of Nectria cinnabarina:

    @Katja Schulz: Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh also place Hypocreaceae in Plantae! That surely went out of fashion a long time before the 1990's.

    I guess herbaria might use informal classifications for convenient access to and storage of specimens (relating to room, cupboard, shelf and box names), rather than attempting to strictly model philogeny. Of course changes to the classification are a lot more time consuming if you have to physically reorganise specimens.

    EOL perhaps ought to have some way of downplaying informal classifications.

    almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Image of Nectria cinnabarina:

    Hi Priscila,

    Did you click on the "more Info" link? That takes you to the original collection of photographs. The second one down shows a few perithecia around the bases of some of the conidiomata.

    Don't be confused by the dusting of black Massaria spores.

    almost 2 years ago • edited: almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Image of Pyrausta aurata:

    Hi Jamie, I've had another look in Goater and asked around. Yes, you're right.

    Many thanks for taking the trouble to point it out.

    almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on "What are the biological correlates of mimicry relationships?":

    Mimicry is a very wide subject. It can be body-parts that mimic, not just whole organisms: orchid flowers mimic female bees, eye-spots on insect wings, tropical leaves grow butterfly egg mimics to prevent oviposition, - and domestic dogs have evolved big heads and eyes to mimic babies :) . It can be across kingdoms or within a single species (immature male mammals mimic females to avoid male aggression - or is it just the they aren't yet producing testosterone? - calling something mimicry is usually a post hoc interpretation).

    Mimicry also merges into camouflage.

    Mimicry is a three-way interaction. It requires an enforcer. There has to be some organism (usually a predator) to create the selective advantage. Mimicry is in the eye of the beholder!

    I'm sure we're only aware of a fraction of it: scent, sound/vibration and ultra-violet colouration are beyond our sensors.

    Guess what I'm saying is that the project probably needs a restricted definition of mimicry, eg two species where the individuals, at some stage in their life-cycles, resemble each other, to human eyes, more than would be expected from their genetic similarity.

    But that definition is highly subjective, and our perception of the expected dissimilarity has been exaggerated by "dismimicry" where two closely-related species that use visual cues in mate selection are disproportionately different - eg most of the large brightly-coloured insects that we are familiar with.

    almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Image of Selenia tetralunaria:

    Actually both "more info" and "view source" still work. But you're right, it's time I revisited harvesting with Jen. The exchange-file project died when Eli left.

    almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Image of Selenia tetralunaria:

    @Jamie McMillan: Hi Jamie, Just click on the "more info" link just above "Latest updates". (Cyndy: I think "more info" is misleading - it should be"visit original website" or something like that)

    Unfortunately EOL hasn't updated from BioImages for almost 2 years.

    almost 2 years ago • edited: almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Image of Selenia tetralunaria:

    @Cyndy Parr: Yes Cyndy, they're the same individual. Both EOL and DiscoverLife separate out the individual images when there is a set of related images - I know most people don't organise their images into sets, but they're wrong! :) I always try to take a set of photos of the same individual or collection to show all the features needed to confirm identification. Set size varies but averages 14 over the 84,000 images I have online. IMO, by splitting the sets you lose the confidence in identification, especially for individual close-ups of diagnostic features which it leaves a bit isolated and arbitrary. Presumably when we get GUID's for the field record it will sort itself out.

    almost 2 years ago • edited: almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Associations:

    @Bart C.: Hi Cyndy, Bart, Afraid it's a widespread problem. Firstly I've split off the associations into www.bioinfo.org.uk as they were overwhelming the photographs on BioImages. Secondly I've changed both websites so that taxa are accessed by name, so the current URL is www.bioinfo.org.uk/html/Cetonia_aurata.htm Afraid EOL haven't scraped my sites for a couple of years and so your copy has got a bit out of date. The current work under biotic-interactions@googlegroups.com should produce exchange formats so we can get back inline again. Malcolm

    almost 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Image of Sciurus carolinensis:

    @Michаel Frаnkis: The tree was in our garden. We could see the squirrels. It's the only species of squirrel in our area. Malcolm

    about 2 years ago

  • Profile picture of Malcolm Storey who took this action.

    Malcolm Storey commented on an older version of Look Alikes:

    The stromata don’t develop perithecia until they’ve over-wintered on the ground.

    almost 3 years ago