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Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information.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

Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: ]
#2187710 - 12/18/03 11:13 AM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Rather than reinvent the wheel so to speak why not work with a closely related genera such as Naemataloma or Stropharia? Is it to determine the biopahways of tryptamine metabolism? Tag some Trypt with a radioisotope and do it right.Attempting to make the equivilent of "hemp" out of Ps.cubensis is an inefficient and round about way of studying biosynthesis.Rather it is the standard assay techniques which would probably give rise to what conditions or genetics are required to produce a non-active cubensis. WR
-------------------- To old for this place
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist



Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,587
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 1 hour, 15 minutes
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: whiterasta]
#2188024 - 12/18/03 02:12 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I really just want a mushroom that is as geneticly close as possible to Psilocybe cubensis that can be cultivated legally.
What would you reckon would be cubensis's closest legal relative?
-------------------- Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ (•_•) <) )~ ANTIFA / \ \(•_•) ( (> SUPER / \ (•_•) <) )> SOLDIERS / \
|
pluteus
level-9 deviant

Registered: 08/12/03
Posts: 170
Loc: London area, UK
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
#2188258 - 12/18/03 03:44 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Baby Hitler - The closest relative yet to be determined - by DNA evidence - of the clade of psilocybin-producing lineages that includes Psilocybe cubensis, is an obscure species called Pachylepyrium funariophilum. The non-psilocybin producing species of Psilocybe are even further removed (see Moncalvo et al, 2002, 117 clades of euagarics, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 23 pp.357-400). Basal taxa of the major psilocybian clade remain to be resolved.
There is little doubt in my mind, however, that even were a closer relative to be found, it would prove useless for your purposes, Baby Hitler.
It is not uncommon in mushrooms even for sister species (i.e., two species that are each others' closest relatives) to differ drastically in ecological strategies, substrate preferences, morphology, developmental tendencies, mating systems, physiological traits, etc. Therefore I see little point in using a substitute species as a model for optimising the cultivation of Psilocybe cubensis, if that was your intention.
I have tried not to delve too deeply into the minutiae of this tediously acrimonious thread, but I have read enough to see that a well-founded statement of Micro's was misinterpreted.
The comment "BTW -- there would be 2 copies of the gene, anyway, unless it's only a monokaryote we're talking about." seems to be simply pointing out that whatever genes are involved with psilocybin synthesis, a dikaryon would by definition carry one pair of each.
This resulted in a pointless debate about whether there is only a single gene involved in psilocybin production. I think the context of Micro's comment was clear, and a fellow microbiologist would understand the subtext that "there would be 2 copies of the gene [or series of genes in question]" present in a dikaryon.
In attacking Micro for what merely amounts to his wording in expressing this situation, Baby Hitler makes a further point about differential alkaloid expression between mushroom strains:
"[Micro said that] this gene is "not multi-allelic", which would mean that all cubensis mushrooms have the same allele for production of psilocybin. This [in my, Baby Hitler's understanding] would mean that there can be no variation in potency due to genetics."
Baby Hitler's understanding is flawed because he does not consider that (a) the same allele can undergo different levels of transcription according to genetic variation in expression factors, and (b) his own previous point that "there may be some [unlinked] genes that produce enzymes [or other products] that may inhibit or disrupt [or stimulate!] production of psilocybin at different stages."
I don't think that Micro overlooked point (b) - he just had little reason to mention it at that stage of the discussion.
While I'm at it, I'd also like to tackle this explanation of Zeronio's: Question: why do mushrooms produce psilocybin and psilocin? "There is a simple explanation. Psilocybin gene had an advantage in evolution because the mammals helped mushrooms that had it to spread their spores. They formed a symbiotic relationship with mammals. (/me puts a helmet on in anticipation of anti-evolutionists counter strike ) "
I am a pro-evolutionist, and it is actually on evolutionary grounds that I strongly disagree with this hypothesis. Firstly, molecular divergence estimates date the emergence of psilocybin-producing lineages in the early Cretaceous, before mammals were diverse. Secondly, even if psilocybin production was clearly correlated with mammalian or other animal mycophagy (which it is not), this offers no selective advantage over wind-dispersal of spores, especially because most psilocybian species are not coprophilous. Therefore the statement that psilocybes have enjoyed a symbiotic relationship with mammals over evolutionary timescales is based on false premises. I think it far more useful to speculate that psilocybin has other adaptive roles, perhaps (and remember this is pure speculation, as I know of no corroborating experimental data) as an insect & invertebrate toxin/repellent, or a mycovirus control agent.
|
zbgeed
Journeyman
Registered: 07/25/03
Posts: 95
Loc: My Hideout
Last seen: 19 years, 3 months
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
#2189187 - 12/18/03 11:33 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Good day
Edited by zeronio (12/19/03 12:49 AM)
|
CultyVader
Dark SporeApprentice

Registered: 03/13/03
Posts: 595
Last seen: 11 years, 4 months
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: pluteus]
#2189269 - 12/19/03 12:32 AM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Very well put.
|
Anonymous
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: pluteus]
#2189286 - 12/19/03 12:47 AM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
- Post History Deleted Upon User's Request -
|
zeronio
Stranger


Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: pluteus]
#2189333 - 12/19/03 01:18 AM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The idea of symbiosis was just a speculation. Cubes & Panaeolus are coprophilous and even non-coprophilous species tend to grow in habitats that were affected by humans. They surely have evolutionary advantage since the humans evolved which is probably just a second in their history.
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist



Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,587
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 1 hour, 15 minutes
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: pluteus]
#2189781 - 12/19/03 07:42 AM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Thank you for your gracious response.
I did not "attack" him because he said psilocybin was regulated by a single gene (a statement he later clarified and confirmed) I attacked him because of his shitty attitude. I don?t have much patience for uppity obstructionists. He didn?t have anything constructive to add, so he just attacked the concept. This attitude does more to bring this community down than almost anything else.
Anyone with the imagination that God gave a billy goat can see the potential that a legal cubensis cultivar could have.
For those with sub-caprine imaginations here?s a list to get you started:
1.) The single most significant factor preventing most (interested) people from cultivating cubensis is the risk of going to prison for a very long time, possibly years of even decades. Most people only grow enough to supply themselves and maybe some freinds. For me, an ounce a year would be more than I would care to grow illegally. Some people are interested in the hobby for more than it?s ability to "get you fuct up". A legal cultivar would allow more people to be more involved in cultivation than they currently are. This would result in more people being knowledgable in the cultivation of Psilocybe cubensis, and also increase the rate at which knowledge is accumulated.
2.) Security Currently, any cubensis grow-op that is sighted either in "real life" or on the internet can be easily assumed to be an illegal drug manufacturing operation. With the addition of a legal cultivar, this would no longer be an assumption that could be made with the certainty that it is today, making the world a little bit safer for everyone?s "aunt?s neighbor?s possum?s left hind oposable thumb".
3.)
-------------------- Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ (•_•) <) )~ ANTIFA / \ \(•_•) ( (> SUPER / \ (•_•) <) )> SOLDIERS / \
|
micro
bunbun has a gungun


Registered: 05/09/03
Posts: 7,532
Loc: Brick City
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
#2190097 - 12/19/03 11:01 AM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I did not "attack" him because he said psilocybin was regulated by a single gene (a statement he later clarified and confirmed) I attacked him because of his shitty attitude. I don't have much patience for uppity obstructionists. He didn't have anything constructive to add, so he just attacked the concept.
Why don't we look back....
Quote:
Baby_Hitler said: I apologize if first year college algebra is over your head. I'm surprised that you fail to see how this applies to genetics, Perhaps your claims of knowledge are overstated.
.... ummmmm who started it? Who had the shitty attitude? I get pissed off, especially when people insult my intelligence. I have respect for everyone on this board, until someone disrespects me like you did, and yes I did attack you, but only after you made the above comment. You just got pissed off because a lot of people thought it was a bad idea, including myself. I do apologize for my attitude, though -- it always takes two sides for an argument. I shouldn't have lost my cool like that. -- Micro
-------------------- Any research paper or book for free (Avatar is Maxxy, a character by Mizzyam, RIP)
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist



Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,587
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 1 hour, 15 minutes
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: micro]
#2190124 - 12/19/03 11:13 AM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I may have been a little harsh as well micro. It's just that I found the lack of vision and imagination demonstrated in this thread a little disturbing.
If I ever find a way of testing for psilocybin other than by ingestion that is within my means I will try glyphosate and see what happens.
-------------------- Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ (•_•) <) )~ ANTIFA / \ \(•_•) ( (> SUPER / \ (•_•) <) )> SOLDIERS / \
|
John
ssdp.org

Registered: 08/08/03
Posts: 7,026
Loc: Vancouver, B.C.
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
#2190278 - 12/19/03 12:01 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
wouldn't it be easier to just move where cultivating is legal?
-------------------- There's a thin line between sanity and insanity... and I just snorted it.
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist



Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,587
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 1 hour, 15 minutes
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: John]
#2190298 - 12/19/03 12:07 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Not really. Neither option seems especially practical.
I was just hoping that someone would have some anecdotes of having grown non-active shrooms.
If anyone ever does find it, I think it should be called the messiah cultivar, since it would be free from "sin".
-------------------- Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ (•_•) <) )~ ANTIFA / \ \(•_•) ( (> SUPER / \ (•_•) <) )> SOLDIERS / \
|
whiterasta
Day careobserver

Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
#2190793 - 12/19/03 02:21 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
One point, Are Ps.cubensis species specificaly listed in law? If so it would not matter if it was active or not. It really depends on how the law is written,does it proscribe the active substance, specific genera,or both.If it does specify genera even an inactive Ps. species is illeagle.This is my main reason for suggesting a closely related genera with substrate requirements which match the fruiting conditions of Ps.species should simply studying the gross ecology of the Stropharioids be what the goal is.If one wishes to study biosynthetic pathways radioisotope assay is preffered.If one wishes to have "pet" shrooms they are never going to be a Ps. species legaly IMHO. As Ps cubensis are among the known and listed carrriers of psilocybin and like hemp even non-consequential amounts of the proscribed substance would be considered prosecution worthy. WR
-------------------- To old for this place
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist



Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,587
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 1 hour, 15 minutes
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: whiterasta]
#2190898 - 12/19/03 03:01 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
My understanding of it is that the species Psilocybe cubensis has not been legally declaired an illegal species. Cannabis sativa, and all it's varieties has.
Similar to San Pedro, and Mimosa hostilis except that for some reason they pursue prosecution for manufacture of psilocybin when someone gets caught growing shrooms, but noone has yet been prosecuted for growing San Pedro.
If someone were found to be growing San Pedro for it's illegal substances for ingestion they would have a case, but if someone were growing cubensis for any reason they would be charged (and convicted) with manufacturing a controlled substance even if they somehow managed to prove that that they were not using it as a drug.
For that matter, if someone were caught growing a non-active cubensis they would be charged and prosecuted, but when they were tested and came back negative for any controlled substances, they would have to drop the case.
BTW, this is all just "my understanding" of how it is.
-------------------- Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ (•_•) <) )~ ANTIFA / \ \(•_•) ( (> SUPER / \ (•_•) <) )> SOLDIERS / \
|
Anonymous
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
#2191145 - 12/19/03 05:17 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
You are correct. It is the contents of the mushroom that are specifically outlawed, not the mushroom. You would still be raided growing the non-active cubensis, if someone ratted you out, but you would not be brought to court, once they tested negative. EDIT. unless you were caught selling them as actives.
|
ragadinks
MrBeatle


Registered: 10/20/03
Posts: 1,298
Last seen: 3 months, 20 days
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: ]
#2198154 - 12/23/03 04:02 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hope I understood everything all right but in this thread it says: "Psilocybe violacea and it comes from the hard work and collection efforts of Mr. John Allan. This is a very unique non-active Psilocybe that demands a home in everyone's microscopy collection!" What do I have to think of that ?
|
YesItsMe
Homeless GOHOME !...
Registered: 10/29/03
Posts: 253
Loc: Working for Piss ;...
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: ragadinks]
#2199380 - 12/24/03 08:21 AM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Strange shroom ...
-------------------- God save the Queen
|
whiterasta
Day careobserver

Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: ]
#2201298 - 12/25/03 08:29 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Would then cultivation of Ps montana, a species I have only seen listed as inactive, be a viable legal Psilocybe to cultivate? WR
-------------------- To old for this place
|
Anonymous
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: whiterasta]
#2204337 - 12/27/03 04:45 PM (20 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The cultivation of any non-active mushroom is legal, unless prohibited for other reasons, like Plant pathogens, etc...
Being legal, and still getting raided is a possibility, because they might suspect wrongdoing. Being raided, and arrested, and being tried and convicted are different.
It is the active properties of Psilocybe that are illegal. If the active properties are not present, then the state has no case. A case might be maid for selling non-actives as actives, but it would be difficult to prosecute.
|
fromga2wa
TRUSTED Mycolanthropist



Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 312
Loc: Renton,WA
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: A legal cultivar of cubensis possible? [Re: micro]
#14300847 - 04/16/11 01:09 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Bump
|
|