- Explore community
I note that once again, lichens are being posted under 'names' like "Foliose" or "Fruticose".
That's like someone taking a photograph of a thrush and posting it under the identification of "Brown".
"Foliose" and "fruticose" are descriptions of growth forms, along with "crustose", "leprose", "squamulose", etc. These are useful terms in keys, but they are merely an indication of the general morphology of how a particular lichen partnership has developed. Quite different growth forms have developed in single genera - for example all our Aspicilia species in the UK are crustose, but there are fruticose species in other parts of the world.
Also, not every lichen neatly fits our arbitrary, human-imposed classification.
I am not trying to get at anyone and have avoided quoting examples from recent posts, though I do notice that people treating these growth forms as pseudo-species tend to be Open University students. (There again, statistically, that would be likely anyway.)
I just think that people should attempt something a bit more meaningful - no shame in getting IDs wrong, all part of the leaning experience.
BTW, if anyone is interested, I am no ornithologist but I looked out of my window this morning and was confidently able to identify two Black & Whites.
This was good, as the old rhyme forcasts that "two is for joy".