consensus stands — without requiring a headcount. When someone does disagree, they can put the identification in question, encouraging real deliberation rather than a popularity contest. Te system is not without its own limitations, but it reflects a considered approach to the genuine difficulty of fungal identification. One specific capability illustrates the


depth of this commitment: MO has supported temporary and provisional names for over twenty years. For a kingdom in which vast numbers of species remain unnamed or incompletely described, this is not a niche feature — it is essential infrastructure for anyone working at the edges of what is known. It is a capability that general-purpose platforms are only beginning to explore.


Hygrocybe sp. “MA01” — a potential new species documented on MO using a provisional name. Photo: Nathan Wilson (nathan) — Copyright © 2025, Creative Commons BY-SA.


Mushroom Observer and iNaturalist: Different Tools, Shared Goals No conversation about MO in 2026


is complete without addressing its relationship with iNaturalist (iNat).


Summer 2026 FUNGI Volume 19:2 31


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52