Home | Community | Message Board


Mycohaus
Please support our sponsors.

Mushrooms, Mycology and Psychedelics >> Mushroom Hunting and Identification

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Amazon Shop for: Microscope, Scales, Terrence McKenna

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleZen Peddler
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe
    #2044188 - 10/26/03 09:08 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

I was just wondering what people thought about the reasons why the majority of Psilocybe species around today are the result of sympatric specification rather than allopatric specification. The first is where one species has such significant variables within its own makeup in one location that it becomes two distinct species as a response to an environmental variable. The later is where one species becomes geographically isolated and evolve in seperate environments.
If we are to accept that many of the woodloving psilocybes in the United States and Australia are representations of species from either southern america (weilli? Baeocystis?) or Europe (cyanescens and allies), we would have to concede that their breakup into seperate catagories (azurescens, bohemica, subaeruginosa, cyanescens, eucalypta (?) ) would possibly be a result of sympatric specification (where cyanescens broke into azurescens and cyanescens in the US, or into cyanescens and bohemica in europe or once it became subaeruginosa through geographical isolation, became subaeruginosa and eucalypta (if we accept there differences here for a moment))

The big question is what kind of factors would produce sympatric specification in on geographical region??


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAnnoA
Experimenter
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/18/99
Posts: 24,122
Loc: my room
Last seen: 1 month, 18 days
Trusted Identifier
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #2044360 - 10/26/03 11:21 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

That?s truly a big question.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblemjshroomer
Sage
Registered: 07/22/99
Posts: 13,774
Loc: gone with my shrooms
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: Anno]
    #2044404 - 10/26/03 11:51 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

The big question is what kind of factors would produce sympatric specification in on geographical region??




The particular environmental conditions such as the introduction of trees or woodchips or mulch into scertain regions. Inthe wild those shrooms are rare and few. In man made environments they are abundant.



Baeocystis are only in Oregon Wasshingtopn and in BC, Canada.

The majority of Psilocybe species are in Mexico with over 50 somthing recognized species.

The Bohemica is really not similar at all to P. cyanescens. The WElii are a tropical species although they are in Georgia and are closely aligned to p. caerulescens and not to the oterhs. And the Baeos are only found in the PNW as are the P. stuntzzi, while a si,milar species P. fimetaria is found in the UK and some parts of Europe.

You must also not forget theat Australia is rich in many plants and animals which only exist in Australia and nowhere else in the world.

I am one of theee people who found Amanita muscaria on Kuaui in the hawaiian archipelego. They appraently came to Hawaii with the introduction of Flash Pines formthe USA inthe late 1800s.

To try top figure out where Cleland's subaeruginosa originated is not so much as was it imported, (a doubtful thought) as to what lind of trees were imported into Australia. In Mexico, P. caerulescens, adccording to the Late Roger Heim (pronounced as 'em') have as many as four to six variations.

And as yyou know from reading Chang and mill paper on subs in australia, they left it even more confusing than Awatling and Guzman or Margot and Waight.

Have a shroomy day. I think the australian species belong there except maybe the Copes and cubes and the liberty caps.

The Purpurata is an austral Floral zone shroom found down under in australia, chili and argentina, although now it is widespread throughout Europe. The real question is maybe it occured there naturally and did not appear in pig manure with woodchips imported from south America.

I have examine P. bohemica from Gartz, fresh and dried and they really bare no resemplence to P. cyanescens. Maybe microscoically they could be similar but macroscopically they are a little similar in color appearance to P. cyanofibrilosa which can have two varieties , a small one and a large one. Even Baeocystis has a v arity which does not get taller than 1-2 inches in mulch.

And there are some cyans which only grow to the one to two inch sizes and never any bigger.

However I noticed Copelandias ontheir end flushings always produce small mini shrooms as is evident inthese photos of a 21 day growth, photographed every three days for a 21 day period. Now these mushrooms appeared the next day after no manure was inthe spot where they were gerowing implying they grew inthe cows stomach, which is known to occur.

If you look and see o how fresh and dark black this cow pie was. these were the only specimens of Copelandia tropicalis collected in Hawaii in 12 years and over two hundred collections icentified as other copelandias other than tropicalis. I came back every three days to take a picture and watched them get smaler and smaller with each third day.

http://mushroomjohn.com/cult2.htm


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #2044975 - 10/26/03 04:39 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Adapatability to specific types of wood(Secondary metabolites). this causes substantial speciation in plant pathogenic species of fungi. The Psilocybes are not eating living plants, but they are eating wood that has the chemicals still present in them.

Combine this with other environmental factors in combination with more then a single Genotype present within a species, and one or more of the genotypes might start seperating from the group, leading to multiple phenotypes, and eventually speciation.

Simply changing the substrate and environmental parameters a little leads to different phenotype expression in Copelandia. The same Genotype macroscopically changes due to environmnetal tweaking. Even microscopically, the quantity and size of the Cystidia varies with environmnetal change. Spore size too.




Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleZen Peddler
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: ]
    #2075956 - 11/06/03 03:53 AM (13 years, 3 months ago)

would you consider then that Psilocybe eucalypta is a phenotype of subaeruginosa given that it is found on the same substrates and in the same conditions, yet demonstrates quite different macroscopic characteristics that are stable even when grown next to and around the other phenotypes and much less remarkable cystidia and spoer size differences??
Or would it represent specification?


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinepluteus
level-9 deviant

Registered: 08/12/03
Posts: 170
Loc: London area, UK
Last seen: 10 years, 3 months
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #2076680 - 11/06/03 12:20 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

By 'specification', are you talking about speciation?

Sympatric speciation is considered to be the major mechanism of mushroom diversification, because the opportunities for these highly dispersable organisms to become geographically isolated are relatively rare.

The questions you're asking apply to all mushrooms, not just psilocybes.

Speciation can then be understood in terms of general models applied to other organisms. Trends of resource partitioning, divergent selection, etc., lead to genetic isolation of sub-populations. The exact way in which this occurs is still hotly debated

Mushrooms also have some unique genetic properties which may assist speciation events. Because mating type loci can become self-compatible as a result of only a few single mutations, mushroom lineages can switch breeding systems abruptly, leading to rapid sympatric isolation.

MJshroomer's suggestion that the introduction of woodchip mulch and foreign trees into new areas has caused mushroom speciation is flawed. I say this because based on comparative DNA evidence, these psilocybe species diverged from each other at least tens of thousands of years before humans arrived in North America.

I do agree, however, that these 'artificial' substrates will have interesting effects on population dynamics, potentially leading to speciation events in the future.

Bearing all this in mind, I can say a few things about the possibility of P. eucalypta and P. subaeruginosa being conspecific. You say that these mushrooms are found in the same conditions and on the same substrates, but this does not necessarily mean they are using exactly the same resources. For instance they might specialize in degrading slightly different types of lignin even within the same piece of dead wood (I have no idea if this is true, it's just an example). This would be sufficient for their co-existence as distinct species.

On the other hand, they might be phenotypic extremes within a common population, that is beginning to diverge.

In this and similar cases, you won't find an conclusive answer by examining subtle differences in morphology. Molecular and mating work must be done. I'm afraid I don't know enough about the morphological differences of these two groups to predict what the molecular work would find.

I don't really see what all this is doing on the hunting forum, but I guess there isn't a forum for evolutionary / molecular / ecological mycology...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #2076821 - 11/06/03 01:29 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

- Post History Deleted Upon User's Request -


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinepluteus
level-9 deviant

Registered: 08/12/03
Posts: 170
Loc: London area, UK
Last seen: 10 years, 3 months
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: ]
    #2077135 - 11/06/03 03:19 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Mr. Mushrooms -
"Certainly we have seen enough evidences of speciation on various islands, i.e. Galapagos, Hawaii, etc to warrant the acceptance of the principles to which you are referring."

These are textbook examples of allopatric, not sympatric speciation.  The theoretical principles are very different and much more contested in sympatric scenarios.

"However, notice that there are virtually no evidences of mushroom speciation that produce basidiocarps on these islands."

Obviously.  These islands lie relatively close together and therefore mushroom spores could be easily dispersed between them, remaining in a common gene pool.  Unlike small birds, reptiles, etc., which are clearly genetically isolated by being on different islands, mushrooms are not.  This is why bluemeanie raised the issue of SYMPATRIC speciation mechanisms, which do not rely on geographic isolation.

"We have seen the evidence of widely varying morphological and taxonomic features both macroscopically and microscopically. These lifeforms grade into each other so much that it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to draw a speciation line."

This is an over-generalization.  The majority of named species are morphologically and genetically distinct.  Of course there are many problematic exceptions, but these can be resolved by examining population genetics.  In these cases we have to remember that 'species' is a human label that often fails to describe the complexity of reality, and be content with knowing to what extent populations exchange genetic material.  Whether we then decide to call such populations 'species' or not is not really important, considering we have this level of understanding.

"As an example let me share a few quotes from talkorigins to illustrate the confusion"

You quote from a history detailing refinements of biological species concepts.  This is not really relevant to the issue of sympatric speciation, because it is merely a debate over how to most accurately describe the basic units of diversity.  No one would argue against the existence of diversity nor against the existence of processes of diversification.  Such processes (i.e. sympatric speciation) can be studied without the need for an absolutely standard definition of biological species (because, of course, in reality there are no 'standard units').


"I don't think we know enough yet about how evolution works to be able to answer the question with the amount of certitude that would make me comfortable."

If you are not comfortable, I wonder if you are familiar with the recent literature on the population genetics of recently diverged and diverging groups of mushrooms?  We do know an increasing amount about how genetic isolation evolves between both sympatric and allopatric populations of mushrooms, and the selective forces driving divergence.  I am talking about detailed  molecular characterizations and evolutionary reconstructions that build a very convincing picture of reinforcement mechanisms.

If you are familiar with this literature, and still don't feel comfortable, I don't blame you  :smile:
   


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: pluteus]
    #2079023 - 11/07/03 12:59 AM (13 years, 3 months ago)

- Post History Deleted Upon User's Request -


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleZen Peddler
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: ]
    #2083034 - 11/08/03 04:28 AM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Great post - as Pluteus points out - i didnt really have a forum for it, so thought here would be the most suitable.
And you guys have all raised some great points.
I suppose we might be looking at a scenario where one entity has a number of variable phenotypes, and for perhaps some reason - a type of lignin in the substrate, two phenotypes could emerge that bend the species stick just that little bit too far.
Its interesting when you read that some mycologists in austalia assume that Ps.subaeruginosa is actually just a phenotype of Ps.cyanescens that may have been imported into australia from europe or the us on wood mulch or plant material. They are quite similar, and Guzman's comment that subaeruginosa is associated with naturla patches of rainforest isnt correct - it is like most woodloving psilocybes - cropping up in disturbed and human-created environs.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #2083748 - 11/08/03 01:20 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

- Post History Deleted Upon User's Request -


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #2084970 - 11/08/03 09:29 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Yes I think eucalypta and tasmania and australiana are variants of P. subaeruginosa( without brown cystidia).

I think they are genotype variants, if they hold there appearance on differing substrates and environmnets, not phenotype variants.

Like the difference between Mexicana A and Mexicana B and the jalisco strain. I think they will all mate together.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleZen Peddler
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: ]
    #2085566 - 11/09/03 01:06 AM (13 years, 3 months ago)

any one have the means to conduct a compatibility / isozyme test/comparison? I had a guy in Canada doing it, but he hasnt replied for a while.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #2085729 - 11/09/03 03:12 AM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Hi just wanted to make one quick point. When it comes to mushrooms Hawaii might not be all that seperate from the main land cause people come and go from there via airplane every day from all parts of the world. As people come and go they can have spores on and in their clothing that is later dropped. :smile2:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblemjshroomer
Sage
Registered: 07/22/99
Posts: 13,774
Loc: gone with my shrooms
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: ]
    #2086163 - 11/09/03 10:22 AM (13 years, 3 months ago)

I klegally studied magic shrooms in Hawaii for 12 years on a daily basis at numerous raches trhroughouot the islands.

The Hawaii species are introduced speci9es which came in witht he catltle form Capt. George vancouver in the late 1790s and early 1800s.

The Amanita muscaria on Kuaui came in wth the Flash Pines which were transplantwed to Hawaii from the PNW.

The five species of copelandia include the Copelandia cyanesens the predominant shroom in Hawaii. Followed by C. cambodigeniensis, P. bispora (Only previously found in West africa, and now known of from near Bern, Switzerland (One large lawn collection at a church)
P. anoml ala and the rare Copelandia tropicalis.

The majority of herbarium deposits included over two hundred collections of Copelandia cyanescens one, 21 collections of Copelandia cambodigeniensis (Only known of previously from Cambodia and Peru), 3 collections of C. bispora and one each of C. anmopmala and C. tropicalis.

There are no P. cubeisns in Hawaii other than those grown indoors in someones basement, cellar or attifc.

mj

There is also a strict law against the introduction of botanical specimens and certain species of both plant and animals which are not allowed in Hawaii.

mj

ASs for carrying spores onto airplanes into Hawaii is possible, their subsequent growth is not.

Asked the many people who find large patches of stuntzii or cyanescenss in one locvation and then asked them if they carried the spores to the next lawn down the street or across the street. Especially after crawling around on a lawn for several hours and then going to a nother lawn. Yes they carry spores but that does not make them grow nextr door.

One piece of sod with blue ringers is equal to a whole pasture where they are spread arop9nd all over.

mj


Edited by mjshroomer (11/09/03 10:26 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: mjshroomer]
    #2086184 - 11/09/03 10:40 AM (13 years, 3 months ago)

- Post History Deleted Upon User's Request -


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: mjshroomer]
    #2086757 - 11/09/03 05:09 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Do you still have access to the herbarium specimens of copelandia ?







Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: mjshroomer]
    #2086799 - 11/09/03 05:44 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

You contradict yourself in the same post.

Cattle were introduced into hawaii. They brought spores/mycelium with them of copelandias. The copelandias still grow in hawaii. The only way they can still be growing after the initial introduction is by SPORE DISPERSAL.

Your Stuntzii analogy does not disprove spore dispersal, it just proves that it is next to impossible for spores to compete in a an already established microenvironment. A pile of cow shit is freshly created by the cow( a renewable resource that has not already been colonized by competitors) so spores can compete within the manure pile . An established lawn, mulch bed, soil system has all of it's niches already filled, introducing spores to it is like adding spores to a colinized substrate. Do the spores outcompete an already established mycelial mass? NO Adding already colinized wood chips, soil, sod makes it so the mycelium doesn't have to compete for food, it already has an established colony and has sufficinetly stored nutrients for fruiting.

Adding a bucket of colonized wood chips to a bed of mulch that has been sitting around for a year is ineffective as well. Or putting a piece of colonized sod into a yard of old turf. Fruitings and mycelium will be restricted to the one piece of sod that already had the mycelium in it, because the rest of the old yard is colonized by other organisms.

Spore dispersal is the primary means of expanding the range of growth. If spores were as ineefective as you imagine them to be the fungi would not be able to survive, much less find its way around the world. As in cubensis/copelandia. They are very plentiful because of spore dispersal.



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleZen Peddler
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: ]
    #2110031 - 11/15/03 10:09 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Without spore dispersal we would be looking at an endless supply of clones??
Or maybe we all have it wrong, and Terence McKenna's intergalactic spore travel and innoculation is the real story :smile: 


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinepluteus
level-9 deviant

Registered: 08/12/03
Posts: 170
Loc: London area, UK
Last seen: 10 years, 3 months
Re: sympatric specification in the genus Psilocybe [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #2119601 - 11/18/03 01:42 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Mr. Mushrooms said: "Hawaii, for example, is completely isolated from the continents and probably has had plenty of time for new mushroom species to occur. And yet they haven't. Plenty of other lifeforms have evolved there and Hawaii is a textbook case for allopatric speciation or the founder effect. How do you answer that?"

When you first mentioned the islands of Galapagos and Hawaii as being textbook cases for speciation, I assumed you were referring to the famous studies of how allopatric speciation has occurred within, and entirely within these archipelagos (disregarding the founding individuals). For example, studies of the adaptive radiation of Galapagos finches and the diversification of Hawaiian fruit flies have shown how geographically isolated populations inhabiting neighbouring islands have evolved into different species, under different selection pressures.  I made the point that, in contrast to finches and fruit flies, mushroom populations living on neighbouring islands would not be significantly isolated.

I now understand that you were taking a broader view of these scenarios, and asking why islands such as these don?t have an endemic mycoflora, with reference to neighbouring continents.

My answer is that to some extent they do.  However, I would argue that perhaps even in Hawaii, the most isolated group of islands, the extremely high dispersibility of mushroom spores is still the major factor affecting species distribution, acting to homogenize mycoflora on a hemisphere and even global scale.  You say that "plenty of other lifeforms have evolved [in Hawaii]", but fail to consider that all of the examples you're thinking of are nowhere near as dispersable as mushrooms.

Having said this, I will backtrack a bit and concede that local speciation events are important - but if you look to isolated islands for evidence of this you will be disappointed.  It is very likely that Hawaii, before European settlement, supported a more diverse endemic mycoflora, a small fraction of which persists today, having been outcompeted by introduced species. There is much convincing evidence to support this.  Genetic analysis of some common Hawaiian mushroom species have shown that they are almost certainly recent, alien arrivals from overseas. The legislation that Mjshroomer cites prohibiting species importation is a response to what has already been a catastrophic reduction in the diversity of Hawaii?s endemics due to invasive species.  Many ecology textbooks present Hawaii as a prime example of the susceptibility of long-isolated island ecosystems to invasion (I am talking about a 80-90% reduction in some major groups).  So, the impoverished mycoflora of today?s Hawaii gives little clue to the diversity that may have existed several hundred years ago.  The same holds true for other islands - in fact the fungal community may be the first to be replaced during invasion events.


Mr. Mushrooms also said:  "My point was, and is, that the species line blurs. You should ask Lizard King about the widely varying macroscopic morphological differences in Psilocybe weilii to the point that a person would think they are picking a half a dozen different mushrooms. This is why we normally rely on the microscopic differences to differentiate between species. This is bluemeanie's whole point. He has been working on the various species from Australia for some time now."

Apart from making provisional identifications, I am really not interested in morphological species concepts for mushrooms, be they macro- or microscopic.  They?re inconsistent.  The relatively simple cellular organization of mushrooms serves poorly to record their evolutionary history.  As I have explained, on the *genetic* level, mushroom species or lineages are readily differentiable and distinguishable, given sufficiently detailed analysis.  (I do not mean that ?species? are always readily understandable according to a strict biological species concept, but instead that genetic analyses, combined with judiciously selected mating tests, provide a level of resolution that is much more useful than any BSC-constrained definition.)  Field collectors or cultivators of psilocybes may not find genetic definitions of mushroom species very useful, but there?s no argument that species boundaries are usually and persistently blurred beyond our comprehension, just because microscopes and eyeballs cannot detect properties of genetic divergence.

Bluemeanie said: "any one have the means to conduct a compatibility / isozyme test/comparison? I had a guy in Canada doing it, but he hasnt replied for a while."

I can do better than isozymes (DNA sequence analysis + selective crossing tests), send me a message if you?re interested.  Given the right material I could resolve relationships between your australian species without much difficulty - I'd be happy to take this on.

Teonan ? I agree completely with your critique of MJShroomer?s post.  To me, MJShroomer seems to be an excellent morphological taxonomist.

Finally, to return to the original questions about speciation mechanisms, I?ve compiled a background reading list:

Ko, S.K., Young, Lim, W.K., Yang, H.K., and H.S. Jung (2001) Phylogeographic divergences of nuclear ITS sequences in Coprinus species sensu lato, MYCOLOGICAL RESEARCH 105(12) pp.1519-1526
[This Korean study, published in a British journal, gives an example of how the original locality of a speciation event may be determined for a globally-distributed species.  It also quantifies ITS divergence and phylogeography within four coprinoid species, and shows how some types of DNA data give evidence for the existence of cryptic species]

Vilgalys, R. and B.L. Sun (1994) Ancient and recent patterns of geographic speciation in the oyster mushroom Pleurotus revealed by phylogenetic analysis of ribosomal DNA sequences, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES USA 91 pp4599-4603
[relationships between genetic divergence, reproductive isolation and biogeography are examined using sequence data in this study by America?s most prolific mushroom sequencer, Rytas Vilgalys]

Hibbett, D.S., Hansen, K. and M.J. Donoghue (1998) Phylogeny and biogeography of Lentinula inferred from an expanded rDNA dataset, MYCOLOGICAL RESEARCH 102 pp.1041-1049

Hibbett, D.S., Fukumasa-Nakai, Y., Tsuneda, A. & M.J. Donoghue (1995) Phylogenetic diversity in shiitake inferred from nuclear ribosomal species, MYCOLOGIA 87 pp618-638
[studies by Hibbett, a leading American evolutionary mycologist, which continue the molecular approach to studying mushroom speciation, with an emphasis on between-species relationships]

[The past decade has seen a proliferation of studies like this, which focus on different mushroom groups at different levels of resolution. Some ponder evolutionary questions relating to speciation mechanisms, but most are concerned primarily with relationships ? i.e. pure systematics.  I will not bother to list these here but feel free to msg me if these are of interest]


Chase, T.E. and R.C. Ulrich (1990) MYCOLOGIA 82 pp.73-81 and 67-72
[studies of the mushroom species Heterobasidion annosum which suggest that reproductive isolation of mushroom populations may evolve rapidly through the action of just a  few intersterility loci, which override mating compatibility]

Ramsdale, Mark, and Alan Rayner (1994) Distribution patterns in number of nuclei in conidia from heterokaryons of Heterobasidion annosum and their interpretation in terms of genomic conflict, NEW PHYTOLOGIST 128 pp123-134

Ramsdale, Mark, and Alan Rayner (1996) Imbalanced nuclear ratios, post-germination mortality and phenotype-genotype relationships in allopatrically-derived heeterokaryons of Heterobasidion annosum, NEW PHYTOLOGIST 133 pp303-319
[these two papers co-authored by the highly eccentric Rayner begin to present an original and thought-provoking way of understanding speciation (this is my interpretation rather than something explicitly stated) in terms of the dynamics of conflict and co-operation between potentially co-existing populations of nuclei]

hope these are of interest, if anyone?s managed to read this far    :confused:

(I think this will be my last post on this subject, as it?s an inappropriate forum - perhaps an email group or some other forum would be more suited ? contact me if you have any ideas)  :smile2:   


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

Amazon Shop for: Microscope, Scales, Terrence McKenna

Mushrooms, Mycology and Psychedelics >> Mushroom Hunting and Identification

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Psilocybe Cyanofriscosa
( 1 2 3 4 ... 17 18 all )
suiM 37,208 352 01/24/07 05:13 AM
by pscyanescens
* Psilocybe Friscosa thread
( 1 2 3 all )
deathcapcubensis 8,436 48 11/06/06 08:35 AM
by Zen Peddler
* English Psilocybe cyanescens - new find / pics
( 1 2 3 all )
pluteus 14,191 42 12/05/03 03:11 PM
by Silverwolf
* Tracking the Historical Psilocybe cyanofriscosa WorkmanV 2,750 17 01/17/08 03:01 AM
by Strophariaceae
* Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up?
( 1 2 3 all )
Strophariaceae 6,387 50 01/31/08 01:49 AM
by sui
* Psilocybe makarorae - native New Zealand shrooms
( 1 2 all )
zee_werp 11,133 30 09/23/07 01:43 AM
by fliped
* Unusual Psilocybe species!
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
inskiM 11,454 91 10/13/16 12:41 AM
by inski
* Psilocybe guilartensis (Confirmed with microscopy pics)
( 1 2 3 all )
BlimeyGrimey 7,584 41 01/29/09 02:57 AM
by BlimeyGrimey

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: ToxicMan, karode13, inski, Alan Rockefeller, TimmiT, Joust, Tmethyl
3,796 topic views. 2 members, 13 guests and 11 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Kraken Kratom
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.11 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 16 queries.