Accès membres

Mot de passe perdu? S'inscrire

18-07-2025 23:03

Josep Torres Josep Torres

Hello.Fruitings between 51 and 130 microns in tota

17-07-2025 11:55

Castillo Joseba Castillo Joseba

De ayer en bosque de hayas y abetos, en tieraEjemp

16-07-2025 17:34

Bernard Declercq Bernard Declercq

Hello,I have trouble distinguishing above mention

14-07-2025 11:20

Michel Hairaud Michel Hairaud

Bonjour, Voici une espèce de  (?) Hyaloscyphace

15-07-2025 13:27

Angel Pintos Angel Pintos

Hello, does anyone have access to the following ar

16-01-2023 21:31

Riet van Oosten Riet van Oosten

Hello, Nearby the find of Calycina claroflava on

14-07-2025 17:55

Yanick BOULANGER

BonjourAutre dossier laissé en suspendJe viens de

14-07-2025 11:17

Yanick BOULANGER

BonjourJ'ai un dossier Jackrogersella qui est rest

14-07-2025 15:52

Gernot Friebes

Hi,I wanted to share this collection on Rubus idae

14-07-2025 13:37

Gernot Friebes

Hi,do you think this collection could be R. ulmari

« < 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