|
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
|
hyperjump69
Papa Snatchy



Registered: 05/08/11
Posts: 432
Loc: Shakedown Street
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
panther?
#14477834 - 05/19/11 10:30 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Habitat: growing in middle of cut-over logging road Gills: white gills, attached
Stem: 4 inches long, 1 inch in diameter, white, kinda spongy, solid, medium thickness
Cap: on open one- bout 2 inches in diameter, golden color, spherical on unopened one, flat on opened one
Spore print color: white
Bruising: no noticeable bruising
Other information: top on unopened one has white warts...egg shaped bottom...cap on opened one has striations


|
maynardjameskeenan
The white stipes




Registered: 11/11/10
Posts: 16,391
Loc: 'Merica
|
|
don't think so, don't eat that please.
-------------------- May you be filled with loving kindness. May you be well. May you be peaceful and at ease. May you be happy. AMU Q&A
|
foxtym
Stranger
Registered: 02/15/10
Posts: 61
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
|
the first two look like yellow muscaria. the last one could be a pantherina, but it's hard to tell for sure. what region are you in?
|
elprawn
Mushroom Guestimator



Registered: 10/17/09
Posts: 14,303
Loc: Ilford, England
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
|
Re: panther? [Re: foxtym]
#14477928 - 05/19/11 10:53 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I wouldn't say any are A. muscaria. The base of the stem looks wrong and I don't think A. muscaria has yellow stems even if the cap is yellow.
|
hyperjump69
Papa Snatchy



Registered: 05/08/11
Posts: 432
Loc: Shakedown Street
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
Re: panther? [Re: elprawn]
#14477956 - 05/19/11 11:01 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I'm very fuzzy on American strains. I know they just changed the name of the fly agarics that grow in America, but I am getting alot of conflicting thoughts associated with North American agarics. Some say ok, some say no. Through my research, pretty much ALL of the "true" agarics grow in Europe and Asia...is there no research on the ones that grow in "the land of the free"? More info from everybody would be appreciated. by EVERYONE! Thanks to maynard and elprawn for the input. You guys are SUPER!
|
elprawn
Mushroom Guestimator



Registered: 10/17/09
Posts: 14,303
Loc: Ilford, England
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
|
|
An agaric is any mushroom with gills, btw. It's confusing to use it as an abbreviation for fly agaric.
|
hyperjump69
Papa Snatchy



Registered: 05/08/11
Posts: 432
Loc: Shakedown Street
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
|
Amanita frostiana possibly?
|
foxtym
Stranger
Registered: 02/15/10
Posts: 61
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
Re: panther? [Re: elprawn]
#14478100 - 05/19/11 11:34 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
elprawn said: I wouldn't say any are A. muscaria. The base of the stem looks wrong and I don't think A. muscaria has yellow stems even if the cap is yellow.
The stem of yellow muscaria often has yellow and lacks base features. The main key (in the first two pics) is the large size. The main look-a-likes (frostiana and flavaconia) don’t approach that size. Of course we can never be sure with pics, but it would help if we knew the region.
|
foxtym
Stranger
Registered: 02/15/10
Posts: 61
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
|
Quote:
hyperjump69 said: I'm very fuzzy on American strains. I know they just changed the name of the fly agarics that grow in America, but I am getting alot of conflicting thoughts associated with North American agarics. Some say ok, some say no. Through my research, pretty much ALL of the "true" agarics grow in Europe and Asia...is there no research on the ones that grow in "the land of the free"? More info from everybody would be appreciated. by EVERYONE! Thanks to maynard and elprawn for the input. You guys are SUPER!
The scientific nomenclature has become so confusing, it’s easier to just say “yellow muscaria”. Ironically, the point of using Latin names has been defeated.
|
Ieponumos
Mycophile/Phytophile


Registered: 09/02/09
Posts: 4,850
|
Re: panther? [Re: foxtym]
#14478231 - 05/19/11 11:59 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
This Amanita is in sect. Amanita from my eyes.Quote:
foxtym said:
Quote:
hyperjump69 said: I'm very fuzzy on American strains. I know they just changed the name of the fly agarics that grow in America, but I am getting alot of conflicting thoughts associated with North American agarics. Some say ok, some say no. Through my research, pretty much ALL of the "true" agarics grow in Europe and Asia...is there no research on the ones that grow in "the land of the free"? More info from everybody would be appreciated. by EVERYONE! Thanks to maynard and elprawn for the input. You guys are SUPER!
The scientific nomenclature has become so confusing, it’s easier to just say “yellow muscaria”. Ironically, the point of using Latin names has been defeated.
Unfortunately, "yellow muscaria" isn't specific enough. These epithets aren't for simplicity (though they do make things easier in ways), they're for specificity.
That way, you're not referring to just a bunch of "yellow muscarias," you're referring to a yellow muscaria with a set of specific accompanying characteristics identifying it as unique.
As you may soon find, the lack of specificity in mycology is the surest way to a painful death.
|
hyperjump69
Papa Snatchy



Registered: 05/08/11
Posts: 432
Loc: Shakedown Street
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
|
not me....I only eat pink snapper, and only if it's been washed...thanks. and yes. I agree, I need to learn more. But there are only so many hours in the day and my brain is about to explode. so, in response- I'm not gonna eat anything that I don't know about. as-a-matter-of-fact, I enjoy walking in the woods and just letting the things find me. Helping me with I'D'ing is just another way to enlighten me. Thanks for that. Peace always...
|
foxtym
Stranger
Registered: 02/15/10
Posts: 61
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
|
Quote:
Ieponumos said:
Unfortunately, "yellow muscaria" isn't specific enough. These epithets aren't for simplicity (though they do make things easier in ways), they're for specificity.
That way, you're not referring to just a bunch of "yellow muscarias," you're referring to a yellow muscaria with a set of specific accompanying characteristics identifying it as unique.
As you may soon find, the lack of specificity in mycology is the surest way to a painful death.
So “Yellow Amanita Muscaria” is less specific than “the mushroom known as ‘Amanita muscaria v formosa’, ‘Amanita muscaria v guessowii’, ‘Amanita amerimuscaria’, ‘Amanita amerimuscaria v guessowii’ AND ‘Amanita muscaria v americana’”? I think not. Seems like ONE common name is more specific than “referring to just a bunch of latin names”.
Look, I know the taxonomists are trying to be specific. We amateurs appreciate that effort. But until they can come to a unanimous and permanent decision on a latin name for the yellow muscaria, the common name is by default more specific.
|
Ieponumos
Mycophile/Phytophile


Registered: 09/02/09
Posts: 4,850
|
Re: panther? [Re: foxtym]
#14480630 - 05/19/11 07:51 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
foxtym said:
Quote:
Ieponumos said:
Unfortunately, "yellow muscaria" isn't specific enough. These epithets aren't for simplicity (though they do make things easier in ways), they're for specificity.
That way, you're not referring to just a bunch of "yellow muscarias," you're referring to a yellow muscaria with a set of specific accompanying characteristics identifying it as unique.
As you may soon find, the lack of specificity in mycology is the surest way to a painful death.
So “Yellow Amanita Muscaria” is less specific than “the mushroom known as ‘Amanita muscaria v formosa’, ‘Amanita muscaria v guessowii’, ‘Amanita amerimuscaria’, ‘Amanita amerimuscaria v guessowii’ AND ‘Amanita muscaria v americana’”? I think not. Seems like ONE common name is more specific than “referring to just a bunch of latin names”.
Look, I know the taxonomists are trying to be specific. We amateurs appreciate that effort. But until they can come to a unanimous and permanent decision on a latin name for the yellow muscaria, the common name is by default more specific.
Until we can PROVE they are the same, they are assumed different. Grouping them all under one "species heading" is a mistake in my opinion. We've found out all sort of interesting things such as fungi without chitinous cell walls, plants which are not in the families or even genera we thought they were, and animals we thought extinct. So why assume all Yellow A. muscarias are all of the same taxon? You may be right, but we can't say until evidence points in one direction or another. When we get data, we revise our understanding of it. This is the essence of science. If you have evidence for your claim, please elucidate. I just want clarification and am speaking from the perspective of a scientist.
Each one of those names refers to a different collection each observed by a different person, often in a different geographic region. Also, some of the varieties you have listed have different phenotypic characteristics. The geography of the collection plays a big part on the nomenclature of an organism. It's only with the coming of genetic science, cladisitcs, and photography that we can get closer to sorting out the taxonomic mess that is mycology.
|
hyperjump69
Papa Snatchy



Registered: 05/08/11
Posts: 432
Loc: Shakedown Street
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
|
well said. But for an "old head" and a "new mushie" to keep things simple I will just stick to is it good or not? I am not a doofus and am not known to stick things in my mouth just to try them. I do know that certain mushrooms will kill me. In sticking with the knowledge I have acquired after procuring a list of psychoactive mushrooms in my state, I am merely asking if it looks suspect. I will always try to find ones that match pictures and references (reputable, of course) before I even THINK about eating. The scientific knowledge at this point is an overload for me. I learn at my speed. The thing that gets me is people assume you(me) are just going to disregard the sound advice that most people on this site give me and eat anyway.... I thought mushrooms dissolved the "ego" and allowed people to lovingly give advice without sounding like pompous knuckleheads. "As you may soon find, the lack of specificity in mycology is the surest way to a painful death."...I know.... I get it.... No need to throw negative vibrations my way. DON'T WORRY. I WON'T EAT THE DAMN THING, unless EVERY POSSIBLE MEANS has been taken to 100% verify. Not trying to sound smug or offend ANYONE that is helping me. I appreciate it. I do.
|
Ieponumos
Mycophile/Phytophile


Registered: 09/02/09
Posts: 4,850
|
|
Quote:
hyperjump69 said: well said. But for an "old head" and a "new mushie" to keep things simple I will just stick to is it good or not? I am not a doofus and am not known to stick things in my mouth just to try them. I do know that certain mushrooms will kill me. In sticking with the knowledge I have acquired after procuring a list of psychoactive mushrooms in my state, I am merely asking if it looks suspect. I will always try to find ones that match pictures and references (reputable, of course) before I even THINK about eating. The scientific knowledge at this point is an overload for me. I learn at my speed. The thing that gets me is people assume you(me) are just going to disregard the sound advice that most people on this site give me and eat anyway.... I thought mushrooms dissolved the "ego" and allowed people to lovingly give advice without sounding like pompous knuckleheads. "As you may soon find, the lack of specificity in mycology is the surest way to a painful death."...I know.... I get it.... No need to throw negative vibrations my way. DON'T WORRY. I WON'T EAT THE DAMN THING, unless EVERY POSSIBLE MEANS has been taken to 100% verify. Not trying to sound smug or offend ANYONE that is helping me. I appreciate it. I do.
I wasn't talking to you, bruh. I was talking to foxtym about generalizing mushroom specimens. If I was referring to you, I would either quote you or solicit you directly. For real, it's all good. 
And seriously, you ought see some of the things people have said and done on this forum. It's just mind blowing sometimes. There is a legal and ethical liability on the users of this forum to make sure that people stay safe, even at the cost of inspiring humility.
There's one dude who had some mushrooms out on his counter and his little brother came up and ate them when he wasn't looking. Those mushrooms turned out to be Galerina marginata and the kid had to go through chemical treatment and dialysis all at the expense of his parents.
Others have done the like and worse.
|
foxtym
Stranger
Registered: 02/15/10
Posts: 61
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
|
Quote:
Ieponumos said: Until we can PROVE they are the same, they are assumed different. Grouping them all under one "species heading" is a mistake in my opinion. We've found out all sort of interesting things such as fungi without chitinous cell walls, plants which are not in the families or even genera we thought they were, and animals we thought extinct. So why assume all Yellow A. muscarias are all of the same taxon? You may be right, but we can't say until evidence points in one direction or another. When we get data, we revise our understanding of it. This is the essence of science. If you have evidence for your claim, please elucidate. I just want clarification and am speaking from the perspective of a scientist.
Each one of those names refers to a different collection each observed by a different person, often in a different geographic region. Also, some of the varieties you have listed have different phenotypic characteristics. The geography of the collection plays a big part on the nomenclature of an organism. It's only with the coming of genetic science, cladisitcs, and photography that we can get closer to sorting out the taxonomic mess that is mycology.
I understand science and taxonomy well enough, but the situation with Amanita muscaria (esp the yellow variety) is ridiculous. Feel free to expend exorbitant amounts of time trying to communicate what you mean with your “amerimuscaria / guessowii / formosa / americana / etc” terminology, but I will freely continue to use the simpler and more specific term “yellow muscaria” and enjoy the benefits. Same goes for “red muscaria”. (I find “flavivolvata” to possibly be the most worthless of all the muscaria names, yet I will use “alba” and “persicina” because they seem to remain quite specific.) And not all mycologist disagree with me; check out a lot of Gary Lincoff’s endorsements of “lumping”, in contrast to “splitting”. Besides, let’s not forget these two things: this is amateur mycology, and point is effective communication.
|
|