Quote:

says that psilocybe cyans, beaos and scriptipes are all close to each other(in potency).{

---

Again that comment is based on Menser's misidentification of P. strictipes being related to and similar in macroscopic id to P. Baeocystis, which were misidentified by Singer and Smith.

Again, Gary Menser, whom I have been friends with since 1974, as many others inclucing me in my first edition of "Magic Mushrooms of the PNW," Everett Kardel and Leonard Enos in their books, both titled as "Magic Mushrooms," Richard Hans Norland in his "Whats in a mushroom Part 3," Jule Stevens and Rich Gee in their "How to Identify and Grow Psilocybe Mushrooms," and even Paul Stamets in in his first book, "Psilocybe Mushrooms and their Allies," all based thier ID of P. strictipes on Singer and Smith's 1958 monograph on Psilocybe published in Mycologia in 1958 in vol. 50. They all claimed P. strictipes was closely similar to P. baeocystis. Which would indicate a potency similar to P. baeocystis and P cyanescens as potent shrooms.

Years later in the middle 1990's, Paul Stamets and Gast?n Guzm?n, Jochen Gartz, Tjakko Stijve and I have all corrected this error. Here are again, the pages from Paul Stamets 1996 "Psilocybin Mushrooms of the World" as posted by me on two previous ocassions.

P. strictipes grows in pastures and looks just like most liberty caps. Not like P. baeocystis and the dosage for P. strictipes is 20 to 40 mushrooms, making it not a potent shroom as you note from Menser's book, which as I note below is an error. P. semilanceata is considered a potent shroom at one gram dried but then baeocystis and P. cyanescens are way nmore poten than P. semilanceata by dry weight. @0 to 40 shrooms is a fresh dose for P. semilanceata, P. strictipes and P. stuntzii and P. fimetaria, all found in the PNW, including yor home of B.C., Canada.

Hell Cubensis is the weakest with a potency of one fresh whole ounce or as much as 3-5 dried grams makeing the cubes the weakest of all shrooms along with P. pelliculosa.
So it is moderately active in dry weight to P. semilanceata not p. baeocystis or P. cyanescens.

Paul wrote that, Singer and Smith's:

"line drawings of P. strictipes show two distinct forms: one mycenoid resembling the closely related P. semilanceata and an isolated drawing, more collyboid in shape, showing a mushroom atypical to the first form. Guzm?n (1983, The Genus Psilocybe) writes that the specimen used [by Smith, in their 1958 paper] to make the line drawing was actually P. baeocystis. Additionally, in their original descriptions they indicate that the number assigned to the original type was erroneous, which perhaps related to the original confusion and the two decades of confusion that followed. Virtually all the field guides published since 1958, incluiding mine [Psilocybe Mushrooms and their Allies], erroneously describe P. strictpes."

By the way, Gary Menser was a real estate agent in Florence, Oregon until his recent death about five years ago.

Ronin now has rights to republish Gary's book yet errors in it are not corrected. And Ronin which just republished Two chapters of the Psychedelic Encyclopedia have not corrected any errors ointheir reprints sinc e they do not have anyone to change the type form the books.

here are the pages of Paul's book explaining the misidentification of P. strictipes. With a photo of the real P. stictipes formerly id'ed in America as similar to P. baeocystis and in Europe Id'ed as P. calossa.

mj

see below.
Click to enlarge each image:







This is a mushroom originally identifyied in Europe as psilocybe callosa and later by Singer and Smiuth as P. strictipes who claimed it resembl;ed P. baeocystis.

Singer died in the early 1990s before this error was corrected.

mj

ANopther example of a good mistake is the ID in David arora's "Mushrooms Dymistified." David has a Paul stamets colored photograph of P. cyanofibrillosa identified as being psilocybe cyanescens. I and other s have all informed both Stamets and Arora of this eror yet three editions later neither of them have had the error corrected becasue the publishers with not pay to change the type font used to print the books.

mj

Many books prior to 1996 all contain mnumerous errosrs which were never later corrected.