|
替代為 |
|
@jonasgruska I think that this is because there is still some uncertainty in this group. For the moment, I think that synonymising them in the wait of a complete revision of the complex is best as it'a already very difficult to keep the identifications quite clean (there are many misidentifications). We can split them when we have convincing proofs and morphological criteria to work with.
VELLINGA (2001c) synonymisiert M. rickenii und M. konradii mit M. mastoidea, auch aufgrund molekularer Daten. Vermutlich sind noch einige weitere Arten ohne deutlichem Hutbuckel, wie M. fuligineosquarrosa, M. psammophila und M. subsquarrosa, nahe mit M. mastoidea verwandt. Manche dieser Arten werden aufgrund des fehlenden spitzen Hutbuckels bisweilen auch in die Gruppe um M. excoriata gestellt (z. B. von CANDUSSO & LANZONI 1990, Bon 1993a). Die Abgrenzung der Arten in der Gruppe um M. mastoidea erfordert noch genauere Studien.
Seems that the interpretation of this name in Friebes, 2013 could fit to something like this observation:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/191246545
See also:
http://dx.doi.org/10.5248/117.149
According to this website : https://www.mycodb.fr/fiche.php?genre=Macrolepiota&espece=mastoidea
A lot of the species which were accepted are in fact variety of M. mastoidea. In this case, should M. konradii have been merged with M. mastoidea var. konradii rather than the full species ?