Malcolm Storey

The EOL Profile Newsfeed contains comments left for its owner by other members, EOL Community invitations, and gathers updates associated with the items in the owner's EOL watch list.

Add a new comment

  • Profile picture of Katja Schulz who took this action.

    Katja Schulz commented on "Wasps - (and mites!) close-up - magnified":

    mislabeled

    6 months ago

  • Profile picture of Katja Schulz who took this action.

    Katja Schulz commented on "Associations":

    The BioImages export puts Bulbocodium vernum in Orchidaceae. It should be in Colchicaceae.

    8 months ago

  • 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

    9 months ago

  • Profile picture of Guido Bohne who took this action.

    Guido Bohne commented on an older version of In situ - dorsal:

    I think this is Empis stercorea

    9 months ago • edited: 9 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tony Sheridan who took this action.

    Tony Sheridan commented on an older version of Orange form - male - dorsal view - close-up:

    This is a female Araneus diadematus, after laying eggs.

    10 months ago

  • Profile picture of Nathan Wilson who took this action.

    Nathan Wilson commented on "Stipe surface - enlarged":

    @Malcolm Storey: I did look at the full set of bioimages and based on that info I don't know for sure that it is or isn't Xerocomus (=Boletus) subtomentosus. That's why I marked it as "incorrect/misleading" not "misidentified". I recognized that Retiboletus ornatipes has not been recorded in the UK and I'm not suggesting that would be a better id. Given the state of the Boletaceae in general right now, I prefer to take a very conservative approach to applying names. I would be very interested to see where a sequence from this specimen lands in a phylogenetic tree.

    about 1 year 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 Nathan Wilson who took this action.

    Nathan Wilson commented on "Fruitbody - in situ - top view":

    This does not seem typical of Xerocomus (=Boletus) subtomentosus. The pileus color in this shot is atypical. Looks more like Retiboletus ornatipes.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Nathan Wilson who took this action.

    Nathan Wilson commented on "Cap surface - enlarged":

    This does not seem typical of Xerocomus (=Boletus) subtomentosus. The pileus color in this shot is atypical. Looks more like Retiboletus ornatipes.

    about 1 year ago • edited: about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Nathan Wilson who took this action.

    Nathan Wilson commented on "Pores":

    This does not seem typical of Xerocomus (=Boletus) subtomentosus. The pores in this shot are atypical.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Nathan Wilson who took this action.

    Nathan Wilson commented on "Fruitbody - LS":

    This does not seem typical of Xerocomus (=Boletus) subtomentosus. The pores in this shot are atypical.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Nathan Wilson who took this action.

    Nathan Wilson commented on "Pores - enlarged":

    This does not seem typical of Xerocomus (=Boletus) subtomentosus. The pores in this shot are atypical.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Nathan Wilson who took this action.

    Nathan Wilson commented on "Stipe surface - enlarged":

    This does not seem typical of Xerocomus (=Boletus) subtomentosus. The ornamentation on stipe in this shot are atypical. Looks more like Retiboletus ornatipes, but the stipes isn't quite ornamented enough for that species.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Nathan Wilson who took this action.

    Nathan Wilson commented on "Fruitbody - side view":

    This does not seem typical of Xerocomus (=Boletus) subtomentosus. The ornamentation on stipe and the pores in this shot are atypical. Looks more like Retiboletus ornatipes, but the stipes isn't quite ornamented enough for that species.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Katja Schulz who took this action.

    Katja Schulz commented on an older version of Parasitic hymenopteran - lateral view - close-up - enlarged:

    Eilema complana is a moth. Assuming this is a parasitoid reared from a moth larva?

    over 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Katja Schulz who took this action.

    Katja Schulz commented on an older version of Parasitic hymenopteran - lateral view - enlarged:

    Eilema complana is a moth. Assuming this is a parasitoid reared from a moth larva?

    over 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of jhilty who took this action.

    jhilty commented on "Inflorescence - side view":

    The photographed plant is something in the Asteraceae, possibly a Eupatorium or something similar. Agrimonia eupatoria (Rosaceae) produces a narrow spike of simple yellow flowers, whereas the photographed plant has a panicle of pink flowerheads. A misidentification has occurred here.

    over 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of jhilty who took this action.

    jhilty commented on "Leaves":

    Again, I don't think this is Agrimonia eupatoria. The photographed stem and leaves clearly belong to the plant with a panicle of pink flowerheads (see the 2 preceding photographs). It is something in the Asteraceae, possibly a Eupatorium or something similar.

    over 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of jhilty who took this action.

    jhilty commented on "Inflorescence - side view":

    The photographed plant is not Agrimonia eupatoria, nor an Agrimonia, nor is it even in the Rosaceae. Instead, this plant is in the Asteraceae, possibly a Eupatorium or something similar. Agrimonia eupatoria produces a narrow spike of simple yellow flowers, whereas the photographed plant has a panicle of pink flowerheads.

    over 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of jhilty who took this action.

    jhilty commented on "Inflorescence in bud - side view":

    This photo from BioImages is not Agrimonia eupatoria, nor even an Agrimonia (Rosaceae). It's not even in the correct plant family. It is something in the Asteraceae, possibly a Eupatorium or Eupatoriadelphus. Agrimonia eupatoria produces a narrow spike of simple yellow flowers, whereas the photographed plant has a panicle of pink flowerheads.

    over 1 year ago