Definitely a good Murano reproduction of Burmese type glass, circa mid 20th century. They did loads of repros of Victorian style glass, like Burmese, m.o.p satin glass, pieces with applied decorations like cherries & flowers, even epergnes with applied flowers! I have a few of these types of items marked with Murano labels.
The way to pick them from the real Victoriana is that they are what I call "fantasy" pieces, that is, nothing quite like them was originally made back in the Victorian era- they are ultra-fancy & even more over the top than the original pieces.
For example, I own a three-trumpet epergne in satin finished millefiori glass, a fine example of such a "fantasy" item of this type. It has the shape of a typical Victorian epergne, but they were never made in millefiori glass. This epergne is Murano made & dates from the early 1970s.
Mt Washington never made rose bowls in Burmese, even though they did do Burmese items with applied decoration, & Thomas Webb's Burmese item did not feature applied flowers.
Hmmm, don't think it's Gunderson Burmese either, it's way too fancy.
Ivo, I'm surprised you would give this sort of piece a Fenton attribution. Over-decorated it may be, but to my knowledge ( & according to the reference book on Fenton Burmese that I own), Fenton never made Burmese with applied decoration like this. Add to that that it basically doesn't look like a Fenton item, anyway.
And there's nothing wrong with a bit of "over-decoration" either. Some of us enjoy it & find it beautiful.
(Sorry if this seems like a rant but I feel that "smooth" glass tends to be considered superior to "fancy" on this board at times)