Accès membres

Mot de passe perdu? S'inscrire

06-11-2025 16:50

Rot Bojan

Hello! Yesterday I found a fungus on or near a nee

04-11-2025 14:53

Josep Torres Josep Torres

Hello.Very small, globose, mucronate perithecia, b

05-11-2025 11:33

Pierre Repellin

Bonjpur,J'ai trouvé, sur une hampe florale d'Alli

04-11-2025 09:07

Josep Torres Josep Torres

Hello.A suspected Hymenoscyphus sprouting on a thi

04-11-2025 12:43

Edvin Johannesen Edvin Johannesen

Hi! One more found on old Populus tremula log in O

03-11-2025 21:34

Edvin Johannesen Edvin Johannesen

These tiny (0.4-0.5 mm diam.), whitish, short-stip

03-11-2025 19:41

David Chapados David Chapados

Hi,Does anyone knows which genus could this be? G

28-10-2025 15:37

Carl Farmer

I'd be grateful for any suggestions for this strik

03-11-2025 16:30

Hans-Otto Baral Hans-Otto Baral

Hello I want to ask you if you have found this ye

01-11-2025 09:14

Francis Maggi

Bonjour,Trouvé sur Xanthoria parietina à Valdebl

« < 1 2 3 4 5 > »
Paoletti
Stip Helleman, 10-02-2024 21:04
Stip Helleman
Hello,

can anybody help me with this article and plate?

PAOLETTI, G., 1887. - Revisione del genere Tubercularia. - Revisione del genere Tubercularia . Atti della Societa veneto- trentina di scienze naturali 11

thanks in advance,

Stip
Martin Bemmann, 10-02-2024 21:23
Martin Bemmann
Re : Paoletti
Hi Stip,

here it is. But it seems it is in the yearbook for the year 1887 that was printed in 1888.

Best regards

Martin
Stip Helleman, 10-02-2024 21:30
Stip Helleman
Re : Paoletti
Hallo Martin!

Du bist Supermann! Ja ich hätte schon gesehen das die Nummerierung nicht immer ganz gestimmt hat.

Herzlichen Dank!

Stip
Stip Helleman, 10-02-2024 21:53
Stip Helleman
Re : Paoletti
Irgendwo verstehe ich etwas nicht, wo ist der Dendrodochium pinastri gegrundet??

in Anhang Saccardo SF10
  • message #78193
Stip Helleman, 10-02-2024 21:58
Stip Helleman
Re : Paoletti
Verzeiung, schon gesehen, der ist in der Appendix
Martin Bemmann, 10-02-2024 21:59
Martin Bemmann
Re : Paoletti
It is on p. 65 and tab. III/31-35. Maybe Saccardo had a separatum of the article with deviant page numbers.

Regards

Martin