|
 Juke Adro
Peach Fluff
Registered: 04/05/08
Posts: 2,211
Loc: Shroomery village TM
Last seen: 1 day, 4 hours
|
 mycelium and chemicals
#8338101 - 04/28/08 04:03 PM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
how does the mycelium carry chemicals?
If sprayed lysol/glenn20/multi purpose cleaner all over a casing layer or grain till wet once fully colonized, will it spread through the whole substrate and mycelium network, could if produce fruit if the casing layer or grain surface was removed and then washed in water and re cased?
--------------------
Someone said: im actually not using ms, im using prints.
  
|
amanitavirosa
absurdlyoptimistic
Registered: 04/07/08
Posts: 336
Loc: Cold places
Last seen: 23 days, 10 hours
|
 Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: Juke Adro]
#8338533 - 04/28/08 05:50 PM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Why in the hell would you want to douse your casing with chemicals?
Sounds like a crutch for a more serious problem...
--------------------
-AV-
If you find a post helpful or informative, rate it! 
- $40 Glove Box - Mini Ultrasonic Humidifier -
|
Juke Adro
Peach Fluff
Registered: 04/05/08
Posts: 2,211
Loc: Shroomery village TM
Last seen: 1 day, 4 hours
|
|
Your correct about the more serious problem, tho I'm still after a few answers.
If it helps to clarify, Lary Birds wife may have tried to sabotage all his work by spraying them with chemicals.
--------------------
Someone said: im actually not using ms, im using prints.
|
amanitavirosa
absurdlyoptimistic
Registered: 04/07/08
Posts: 336
Loc: Cold places
Last seen: 23 days, 10 hours
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: Juke Adro]
#8339034 - 04/28/08 07:40 PM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
That blows!
In all honesty, I wouldn't touch the mushrooms after the casing is doused. Its simply not worth the risk.
Without a comprehensive examination of that the compounds were, and the likely metabolic products would be if any biodegradation were to occur.
--------------------
-AV-
If you find a post helpful or informative, rate it!
- $40 Glove Box - Mini Ultrasonic Humidifier -
|
Juke Adro
Peach Fluff
Registered: 04/05/08
Posts: 2,211
Loc: Shroomery village TM
Last seen: 1 day, 4 hours
|
|
Hmmmm all i can say is what a shame, the casing layer's were removed (as the knots were shriveled and blue) till fresh myceluim was seen 1.5 inches deep, then all were washed i believe in fresh water then a new casing layer was applied and re-incubated.
It's would be as if its having a second flush, I'd say Lary Birds concern is that the mycelium now has these chemicals running the it's vein's and the fruit may have defects, eg useless spores, mutations, god knows what else.
Are you suggesting that he should not even attempt to fruit after the cleaning process and new mycelium has taken over the casing layer?
--------------------
Someone said: im actually not using ms, im using prints.
|
mandelbrah
centralscrutinizer
Registered: 01/22/08
Posts: 74
Loc: the crust
Last seen: 1 month, 24 days
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: Juke Adro]
#8340275 - 04/28/08 11:48 PM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
I can't say this with 100% certainty, but I doubt most species of mushroom mycelium have the enzymes needed to metabolize the harmful ingredients found in cleaning products into physiologically harmless compounds.
Would you swallow a spoonful of lysol?
|
Juke Adro
Peach Fluff
Registered: 04/05/08
Posts: 2,211
Loc: Shroomery village TM
Last seen: 1 day, 4 hours
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: mandelbrah]
#8340317 - 04/28/08 11:56 PM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
I guess 
--------------------
Someone said: im actually not using ms, im using prints.
|
mandelbrah
centralscrutinizer
Registered: 01/22/08
Posts: 74
Loc: the crust
Last seen: 1 month, 24 days
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: Juke Adro]
#8340435 - 04/29/08 12:28 AM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
IMHO, don't try to salvage a casing that isn't safe for consumption. Make another one, and keep everything except H20 and at most a very dilute H2O2/H2O solution away from your casing.
The myc network will, as you suspected in a previous post in this thread, carry chemicals it absorbs through the whole network.
Nice avatar teats.
|
Juke Adro
Peach Fluff
Registered: 04/05/08
Posts: 2,211
Loc: Shroomery village TM
Last seen: 1 day, 4 hours
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: mandelbrah]
#8340493 - 04/29/08 12:42 AM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
ha ha lol she's cute yeah :P
cool I'll tell Mr. Bird when I see him to chuck his work out and also his partner
--------------------
Someone said: im actually not using ms, im using prints.
|
 P.Menace
Contradicting the Status Quo
Registered: 11/17/07
Posts: 3,103
Loc: Let Me See Potato Salad!!...
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: Juke Adro]
#8340570 - 04/29/08 01:08 AM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Yeah Id tell Larry Bird to:
1. dig a hole (he may need it)
2. Chuck the casing in the garbage. its CRAP. Start over.
3 Show Lary birds wife the hole, when its dark.
lol, nah it aint worth all that, just throw it out and start over. I know you just got new spores
--------------------
http://www.sporeworksgallery.com/Cubensae/Psilocybe_cubensis_Menace
SainT420 said: You gotta be a Man of your Word... Or you will be a Man of NO WORDS! 6 feet Under
Prisoner # 1 said: always remember, the stupid ones never realize they're stupid... BlackMatch456,lil_demented, Dizzwizzle.
Blutjager said: "The work for payoff ratio for pf tek is like driving 500 miles to work all day for minimum wage,.  in other words ITS NOT WORTH IT "
roby000 said: thats true a shotgun is almost like a college degree in a sense that if you show it to the right person at the right time you could make a lot of money.
|
Juke Adro
Peach Fluff
Registered: 04/05/08
Posts: 2,211
Loc: Shroomery village TM
Last seen: 1 day, 4 hours
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: P.Menace]
#8340619 - 04/29/08 01:24 AM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Ha Ha lol...... Geewizz women are nasty sometimes all Lary done wrong was spent too much time with his mushroom and Misses Bird got nasty.
I suppose it's a msg to all, family comes second to mushrooms, oops i mean first.
--------------------
Someone said: im actually not using ms, im using prints.
|
P.Menace
Contradicting the Status Quo
Registered: 11/17/07
Posts: 3,103
Loc: Let Me See Potato Salad!!...
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: Juke Adro]
#8340644 - 04/29/08 01:34 AM (5 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
If you have one.
--------------------
http://www.sporeworksgallery.com/Cubensae/Psilocybe_cubensis_Menace
SainT420 said: You gotta be a Man of your Word... Or you will be a Man of NO WORDS! 6 feet Under
Prisoner # 1 said: always remember, the stupid ones never realize they're stupid... BlackMatch456,lil_demented, Dizzwizzle.
Blutjager said: "The work for payoff ratio for pf tek is like driving 500 miles to work all day for minimum wage,. in other words ITS NOT WORTH IT "
roby000 said: thats true a shotgun is almost like a college degree in a sense that if you show it to the right person at the right time you could make a lot of money.
|
Norom
Friendly Neighborhood Lurker
Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 261
Last seen: 4 hours, 40 minutes
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: P.Menace]
#8340998 - 04/29/08 05:34 AM (5 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Personally -- assuming they'll still fruit -- I'd grow them out anyway, not for consumption, but to collect spore prints. 
And hell, with all that Lysol, you're bound to get some crazy looking mutants. 
We demand pics!
Anyway, take care, and good luck with the woman.
--------------------
I am a Shaman Magician
I am for mental extensions
Going to Burning Man '08? Let us know!
|
amanitavirosa
absurdlyoptimistic
Registered: 04/07/08
Posts: 336
Loc: Cold places
Last seen: 23 days, 10 hours
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: Norom]
#8341070 - 04/29/08 06:59 AM (5 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Actually, fungi (many basidiomycetes) express some pretty amazing enzymes. In an environmental chemistry course I did, the prof. giving the lectures was a mycologist and spent 1/3 of the course teaching how fungi degrade a shit-ton of chemicals - including lots of nasty phenolic compounds.
Suffice it to say, fungi can degrade all but conventional polymeric plastic (they can biodegrade oil!).
--------------------
-AV-
If you find a post helpful or informative, rate it!
- $40 Glove Box - Mini Ultrasonic Humidifier -
|
tripsis
biophile-misanthropist-doofer
Registered: 04/13/08
Posts: 3,890
Loc: Gondwana
|
|
too true, stamets goes into that kind of thing quite extensively - bioremediation with fungi, or "mycoremediation" as he called it. even though that is true though you couldn't say without testing what cubes specifically can break down, in what quantity and even what exactly was sprayed onto it.
but still you should fruit to print. you can never have too many prints
--------------------
Since we depend on an abundance of functioning ecosystems to cleanse our water, enrich our soil and manufacture the very air we breathe, biodiversity is clearly not an inheritance to be discarded carelessly - Edward O. Wilson 1992
|
amanitavirosa
absurdlyoptimistic
Registered: 04/07/08
Posts: 336
Loc: Cold places
Last seen: 23 days, 10 hours
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: tripsis]
#8341204 - 04/29/08 08:42 AM (5 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Ok, no I can not say with 100% confidence that P. cubensis can enzymatically degrade .. well .. just about anything.
I can say however with 95% confidence (p=0.05) that other fungi from the same clade / phyla can degrade phenolic compounds (which are the basis of many cleaners and have sufficiently varied properties to mimic cleaners).
The basis of science is not to prove anything, it is to reject the alternate possibilities. Part of this includes accepting that sufficiently similar organisms will behave similarly unless otherwise observed.
So .. would you scarf down mushrooms laced with (either in degraded form or not) cleaners?
--------------------
-AV-
If you find a post helpful or informative, rate it!
- $40 Glove Box - Mini Ultrasonic Humidifier -
|
fastfred
Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 4,326
Loc: Dark side of the moon
|
|
Quote:
The basis of science is not to prove anything, it is to reject the alternate possibilities.
What kind of "science" are you talking about?
You've really got it ass backwards there.
-FF
|
amanitavirosa
absurdlyoptimistic
Registered: 04/07/08
Posts: 336
Loc: Cold places
Last seen: 23 days, 10 hours
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: fastfred]
#8342105 - 04/29/08 01:29 PM (5 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
fastfred said:
What kind of "science" are you talking about?
You've really got it ass backwards there.
-FF
Umm .. rejecting the null hypothesis (Ho) is the entire basis of science. We perform experiments based on an alternate hypothesis (the thing we expect) and try to reject the null hypothesis.
Null Hypothesis
Alternate hypothesis
Don't feel bad, this is one of the most poorly understood realities of science. Even very well "educated" researchers often get this wrong too. They are caught up in "proving" something when in fact, you can not "prove" anything - only reject the null hypothesis.
Example: I want to prove that you exist.
Ho (null hypothesis) is that you do not exist
Ha (alternate or working hypothesis) is that you do exist
I create a number of experiments that test the alternate hypothesis statistically. If I am able to reject the null hypothesis with a confidence interval of 5% (ie. there is a 5% chance that my findings were by chance alone (p=0.05)) then I have only rejected the fact that you do not exist.
If I am able to reject the null hypothesis that you do not exist, this does not prove that you do exist. Merely that the alternate possibility (Ho) is 95% unlikely.
--------------------
-AV-
If you find a post helpful or informative, rate it!
- $40 Glove Box - Mini Ultrasonic Humidifier -
|
lipa
Registered: 07/24/07
Posts: 511
Last seen: 1 hour, 26 minutes
|
|
Would someone lock this godawfull thread.  It turning into crap
|
fastfred
Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 4,326
Loc: Dark side of the moon
|
Re: mycelium and chemicals [Re: lipa]
#8342487 - 04/29/08 03:51 PM (5 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Somebody get lipa a biscuit, he's getting cranky.
Quote:
Umm .. rejecting the null hypothesis (Ho) is the entire basis of science.
Hardly. Null hypothesis is just statistical bullshit. While it may sound interesting statistically it has little to do with science. Null hypothesis is just a statistical hoop to jump through for people with weak data.
If your data and experiment are weak then you first feel compelled to prove that something rather than nothing happened. On the weak basis that something statistically happened people then try to go out on a limb with their theories as to what happened.
It's just a statistical convolution of the idea of a control. It's sometimes even used as a bogus statistical replacement for an actual control. Null hypothesis is simply an ass backwards way of looking at things wherein you take the opposite position simply to validate your observations and correct for perspective effects.
You must always consider the alternative to your supposition and test for it. This is the purpose your control serves. You may have experimental results, but you need to prove that your results wouldn't have simply happened anyways regardless of if your theory is correct.
The basis of science is proving through experiment. You can only prove that you observed something. You cannot disprove something.
To take your example... You cannot ever prove your null hypothesis. You cannot prove that I don't exist. The best you could hope to prove is that I do not exist in the context of your experiment. If you prove that I am not in room A that does not prove that I am not in room B. In fact, you can't really even prove that I do not exist in room A. I could be hiding in a corner not observable from your viewpoint, or I could be quick on my feet and stay behind you the whole time. You could also have a blind spot in your vision precisely where I am standing. All you can prove is that you did not observe me in the room, or that using your methodology you were unable to detect me. Therefore it is impossible to prove that I do not exist.
Another example of the impossibility of disproving something... Suppose I want to prove that a certain bacteria does not produce endospores. I can observe millions of the bacteria over a period of years and all I have proven is that this bacteria, the actual bacteria I observed, didn't produce observable endospores under my exact conditions in the timeframe over which I observed them. You have not proven that the bacteria don't produce endospores. It is entirely possible that they produce copious endospores under different conditions, over a different timeframe, or that you simply did not observe them by chance. You can create a statistical argument about the probability of them producing endospores, but you can't prove that they don't.
Although a sophist argument, and thus taking away any point to further reasoning or logic, you cannot disprove that there is not actually a pink elephant pissing on your head right now. You can prove that under specific conditions a specific reality is observed, but you simply can't scientifically disprove something.
-FF
Edited by fastfred (04/29/08 04:05 PM)
|
|
login or 
register to post messages and view our members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, encrypted messages, file attachments, board customizations, and much more!
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
