No interactions present.
I agree these are most likely to have been laid by a grey sea slug, but I'm not familiar enough with those of other possible species to be really sure.
Nick Upton, naturalist and photographer.
shows similar egg mass,& each white 'grain' seems about same size with same density of eggs
I think you are right but they do not look typical of the masses that I have seen - looser somehow but from an unusual angle of course.
Even the ones in the Linkyougive seem looser than I've seen in my now 8 week (weak) experience!
yes, I now agree, having seen such loose ones for myself.
Quoted here Chris
So I'm much more exercised about wrong agreements than lack of agreements; so even though it's just a shore crab, ie [shore crab (Portunidae)]to have this already agreed by 3 people of 3- 3- & 4- stars is bad enough. Sorry to be picky but agreeing with my ID but not removing it from the other 3 doesnt make sense as it affects the ID. (can I also mention Tergipes tergipes?) (a comment but no agreement)
I'm not so 'exercised' about these things - perhaps I'll grow into it.
I often make a comment and FORGET to agree - lots of people do that. I usually get back to it (I have).
I think agreements sometimes arrive based on common name. Lots of people never read the small print and only rarely get to the comment trail.
I'm quite used to getting few agreements eg http://www.ispot.org.uk/node/286488 from last august recently got it's 1st agreemt. I also like comments if they're useful or appropriate (or constructive criticism); eg in http://www.ispot.org.uk/node/336681 I'd expect a comment on why portunidae was chosen over Carcinas maenas even though the latter had links & a comment. But comments with no info just clog up my myspot, which has happened a lot lately; & here I've been tagged 3 times!
I'm not certain what you mean by tagged here..do you mean MY comments are clogging - not useful or appropriate ([nor containing]constructive criticism)?
Lat/Lng: 51.5611, -4.3078
OS grid ref: SS401872