|
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Psilocybe Caerulipes?
#1099903 - 12/01/02 12:22 AM (21 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I have a mushroom fruiting off straight rye-grass seed quite well. it is brown and umbonated, with strong white veil remnants over most of the cap thickening towards the margin. stem is pale white with mycelia radiating in the air at the base of the stem. Flesh whitish brown and blueing not very significant. labelled as ps.mexicanna, but ive got my doubts. ANy ideas??
--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: Zen Peddler]
#1103039 - 12/02/02 02:10 AM (21 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Ive been told that it is defiantely mexicanna, and like you've said domestic mushrooms can be quite different to wild specimens. Stamets suggests that caer. does have veil remnants along the margin. But he also suggests that ps.Australiana exists and is 'mildly potent'
--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: ]
#1104857 - 12/02/02 06:14 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Guzman's monographs are quite useful. However his description of ps.Subaeruginosa under Subaeruginosae is incorrect. Guzman accessed and examined only one type specimen from the Botanical Gardens of SA herbarium and found brown pluerocystidia. (specimen 13251). These type specimens were all lectotyped and accessined by Cleland to this herbarium in 1927 and there were approx ten specimens. Buchanan examined all other specimens available (ad 13256, 5598, 5599, 5600, 5602, 5603 lectotypes) and found only hyaline pluerocystidia in all these specimens originally delinated by Cleland as lectotype - the same mushroom. The other descriptions of Guzman's Subaeruginosa are consistant with Ps.Australiana as he described it. Chang and Mills found in 1996 through protein analysis that these are the same mushroom. No other mycologists in Australia have ever found ps.Subaeruginosa with brown pluerocystidia. I agree with buchanan, chang and mills and a host of others by saying that Guzman's AUstraliana is a misnomer. Guzman's accessined original specimen of ps.Tasmaniana was also examined and its unique forked cystidia as described by Guzman were absent! It was also Subaeruginosa. I am having enzyme and dna compatibility tests conducted in Canada that will soon provide further evidence of these arguments.
--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: ]
#1105014 - 12/02/02 06:54 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Well Chang and Mills came out in 1996 and did protein analysis on specimens of Subaeruginosa, Eucalypta, tasmaniana but not Australiana and they confirmed that they were all type specimens of Cleland original mushroom. Guzman's original specimen of ps.tasmaniana was examined and found not to have forked cystidia (Guzman's main point of differentiation) It was found to be synonymous with Ps.Subaeruginosa. Guzman refuted this by suggesting that they did not have the original subaeruginosa that he had described with brown pigmented pluerocystidia. So buchanan and others examined the specimens used by Guzman to delineate Subearuginosa into four distinct catagories (subs proper, Austaliana, Eucalypta and tasmaniana) and again noted no brown pluerocystidia and found specimens of ps.eucalypta and australiana to be synonymous with ps.subaeruginosa in New Zealand. From my experience I believe 100% that Ps.Australiana is the same mushroom as Ps.Subaeruginosa. Buchanan found this by examining the original specimens used by Guzman. Buchanan also found that Subs in NZ varied from Guzman's Australiana and Eucalypta spore sizes and cystidia characteristics in a range from small to large. There were no uniform differences or macroscopic differences. The differences described by Guzman are so minute that they are insignificant compared to the cystidia differences between different regional collections of panaeolus cyanescens. At best I believe that we have two native psilocybe mushrooms in Australia that are currently identified. Ps.Subaeruginosa and Ps.Eucalypta. Having examined specimens of Eucalypta, it appears quite unique macroscopically and very different to subs from WA, SA and NSW and Victoria. At worst all four are Ps.Subaeruginosa which is commonly believed throughtout Australian mycology.
--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: Zen Peddler]
#1105678 - 12/02/02 10:15 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Here they are: NMote the veil remnants

--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: mjshroomer]
#1109137 - 12/04/02 03:15 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Wow! Great info guys! And those pics make it very clear that this mushroom is not ps.caerulipes. Those pics indicate a mushroom with classic woodloving psilocybe characteristics, and this mushroom does not have those. Its actually cultivated from an original isolate labelled Ps.Mexicanna from Workman to a friend. When i isolated the mycelia i found it to be very different to any pictures i could find of mexicanna mycelia. Also no sclerotia formation and the fruits look like a weird psilocybe. It has purple/brown spores and is a definate psilocybe of some description, but it reminds me of pictures in Stamets of caerulipes on page 104, ps.silvatica on page 146 and samuiensis on page 140. Ive only got the one print so far, but ive got more in culture.
--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: mjshroomer]
#1116423 - 12/06/02 06:19 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Yeah this fruited well off rye grass seed and ive got no idea what it is to be honest. Did stain very slightly blue - no bioassay yet as i havent been well in the tummy for the last few days... Maybe someone would like to examine a gill fragment??
--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: Zen Peddler]
#1118150 - 12/06/02 05:39 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Reville actually examined these a while ago and got these spore measurements: 11.02-15.05 by 6.7-8.8. These seem a lot larger than the spore measurements listed in Stamets 1996.
--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: mjshroomer]
#1118325 - 12/06/02 06:52 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Thanks MJ Id appreciate that! Better not send any of my stuff on aussie Psilocybes until afterwards. I would appreciate his input regarding Buchanan's work and my own findings of synonymy between Ps.Australiana and Subaeruginosa (with cleland's originals displaying hyaline and not brown pluerocystidia) - maybe a link to some of my posts on the topic. Id love to hear some feedback from him on that as well.
--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: Zen Peddler]
#1133721 - 12/11/02 08:53 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
More pics that might help:
--------------------
|
Zen Peddler


Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
|
Re: Psilocybe Caerulipes? [Re: ]
#1141604 - 12/14/02 05:41 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
 Maybe Liniformans??
--------------------
|
|