AcidHorse said:

Wood Anemone

"The plant is very liable to attack from certain fungi: at times, a species of Puccinia settles on it, the result being that the stalks of infected leaves grow rapidly, high above the others, though the leaves themselves dwindle and lose their divisions. A species of Sclerotinia attacks the swollen tubers of the root, doing still more harm, for in the spring there arise not the delicate white flowers, but the ugly fructifications of the fungus."
http://www.botanical.com/botanical/mgmh/a/anemo036.html



http://www.riwps.org/Wood-anemone.pdf


http://www.naturephoto-cz.com/photos/maly/sclerotinia-tuberosa-426.jpg



Sclerotinia Stem Rot of Canola
http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/plantsci/crops/pp1201w.htm

---

metalhead said:

will that method of yours get clean spores or do you still have to do agar work? any way i'll post pics of those plants soon. like i said i put soil the plants and sclerotia in a container so we'll se what it does hopefully it'll work and grow some nice size sclerotia. it's almost time to put my morel experiment in the fc! the sclerotia i grew where quite large at the end like one of them was big enough to fill the palm of my hand. well see how it goes.

---

My method, well you have to think of it like a pile of salt with a few sprinkles of pepper. The pepper are the contaminants and the salt is the
morel spores. The mathematical odds of getting a contaminant spore are lower. So you stand a greater chance of getting a pure morel
culture than a contaminated one. Especially once the outer coat of the morel spores dries a little. And all the spores are like fine powder. Shaking it once in a while will cause contaminate spores to fall down below the morel spores because the contaminant spores are much smaller than the morel spores.

Plus preparing several jars like 10-20 guarantees that you will get at least some that do not contaminate.

However, since I've expressed the need for pasteurization, this will need to be tested in that situation.

You can do agar work and get a higher degree of cleaner cultures too with this method.

Which is better than doing a tissue culture because morel fruitbodies contain a parasitic mold which I have yet to identify.

It appears this parasitic mold is always with the morel even when the fruitbody first develops.

You can usually find it growing on the caps of the morels or on the cutoff of the stem where it was cut from the ground, after it has been given time to sit in a humid environment.



This actually looks close to Mucor mucedo, but it could be a rhizopus

AcidHorse said:

Shaking it once in a while will cause contaminate spores to fall down below the morel spores because the contaminant spores are much smaller than the morel spores.

---

metalhead said:

so ah with your setup for spores you basically have 2 panes of glass one ontop of the other with room for morels inbetween and the eject their spores to the top pane of glass?

just borrowed a cam so here are a few of todays finds. found in a place that was  picked over a week ago so not bad.

---

metalhead said:

so ah with your setup for spores you basically have 2 panes of glass one ontop of the other

---

Quote:

with room for morels inbetween and the eject their spores to the top pane of glass?

---

metalhead said:

they were in my normal hunting grounds and i did an experiment once when i found a 3 very small ones and i marked the location and i came back a week later and they were still hydrated but had gained very little girth or heigth mabee a 1/4 or 1/8 in so i figureed it wasn't worth it to wait for that little gain.

---

Quote:

also i'll try your spore collection setup. how much volume of spores are you collecting?

---

Quote:

i might have to wait till next year tho cuz the season is winding down, but i do have alot of logging specimines to work with aren't they supposed to be easier cuz the logging stimulates them so they don't have to have a tree host?

---

Roger Fudd said:

AcidHorse said:

Shaking it once in a while will cause contaminate spores to fall down below the morel spores because the contaminant spores are much smaller than the morel spores.

---

Isn't it the opposite? The contaminant spores are smaller, so the large amount of uniform morel spores will cause them to rise to the top when shaken...or am I wrong? Also, are the differences in shape so large that a few shakes will change where they are? Kinda like having a bunch of sand grains that are a little bigger or smaller and shaking them once and expecting them to settle.

---

you're dyslexic . Read my post that you quoted for a second time. And like metalhead siad its not a butterfly but a flutter, and he's not headmetal.

Yes shaking it will move those smaller things to the bottom and yes the morel spores are larger.
And no a few shakes are not enough because freshly scraped up spores are a kind of sticky mass. Over time that goes away and eventually it will be like powder. That's why shaking it from time to time is a good thing it causes any contaminate spores to break away from whereever they are stuck to. It depends on the type of shake you are talking about. For this to work it must be a side to side shake and not an up down shake. Or a Steak and Shake.

Morel spores are 25x15 microns and common mold spores are like 4x4 microns.

metalhead said:

hows it goin ah?

---

Quote:

I think I figured out Mills' secret/method.

---