|
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
|
ryansuki
Oh hello there.

Registered: 04/16/18
Posts: 63
Last seen: 5 years, 7 months
|
Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne?
#25207015 - 05/16/18 06:32 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I'm very new to shroom hunting and ID'ing, so please bear with me.
Last year, a good friend of mine picked some shrooms from a patch in the general Melbourne area. From these shrooms, they had a very potent experience from a relatively small dose that they compared with DMT.
Not long after this, I was speaking with someone else that I am very close with who told me of an unexpectedly powerful trip with shrooms that they had not long ago. When asking about where they got their shrooms from, they told me that it was from a patch that is very highly likely to be the same patch that my other friend picked their shrooms from.
Today, I went picking in the same patch, and managed to find a few shrooms (FINALLY!!), however there were two shrooms that I found, both in separate patches that contained no more than about 2 or 3 other pins. These shrooms blued in the stem and were ID'd by a handful of others as being Subs, however, the stems were much more narrow, and there was something different about the caps (as you can see from the photo I uploaded - and not just the fact that they are open!).
So... I did a little research, and found Psilocybe azurescens to be very similar - almost an exact match. In fact - an extremely close match, if not perfect.
Spore print from the larger of the two came out purple/dark brown.
Considering that the Psilocybe azurescens has a much higher psilocybin content than subs, this had me wondering whether or not, by some feat of magic, this species could possibly grow in Melbourne or not? Is it even possible for these to pop up in this kind of climate? Or, could it be that some subs have a drastically higher psilocybin content than others?
Cheers y'all!
|
Anglerfish
hearing things



Registered: 09/08/10
Posts: 18,700
Loc: Norvegr
Last seen: 1 day, 2 hours
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: ryansuki]
#25207056 - 05/16/18 06:59 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
All are Psilocybe subaeruginosa. Although it is not impossible for foreign species to show up in unexpected places, it is highly unlikely that you'll find P. azurescens in Melbourne.
P. subaeruginosa is a fairly variable species, as well as being pretty close to P. azurescens genetically (if I'm not entirely mistaken), so that likely accounts for your "match" in this case.
--------------------
★★★★★
|
Tangich



Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 8,723
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: ryansuki]
#25207101 - 05/16/18 07:33 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ryansuki said:
Considering that the Psilocybe azurescens has a much higher psilocybin content than subs
This is not supported by any evidence. One test done decades ago on P. azurescens has shown that it's psilocybin content was ridiculously higher than any other species. And that table is still going around. But later experiences did not support that finding. Maybe that particular specimen had very high alkaloid content, maybe that was a measurement error. Whatever the case, judging from others' experience, most species from section cyanescens, including P. azurescens and P. subaeruginosa, have similar alkaloid content.
|
obtuse
myco0



Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 2,406
Loc: tasmania
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: Anglerfish]
#25207108 - 05/16/18 07:40 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I doubt very much Psilocybe azurescens.
people have cultivated them in australia, but i very much doubt you'd ever find them
what you have encountered is the interesting thing about woodchip Psilocybe subaeruginosa. they can be very strong.
I once cultivated Psilocybe subaeruginosa indoors, and took 4 and had what i can only compare to very high DMT doses.
I think Psilocybe subaeruginosa are easily comparable to Psilocybe azurescens.
Also very similar genetically. what you have pictured above are Psilocybe subaeruginosa.
|
Anglerfish
hearing things



Registered: 09/08/10
Posts: 18,700
Loc: Norvegr
Last seen: 1 day, 2 hours
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: Tangich]
#25207170 - 05/16/18 08:16 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tangich said:
Quote:
ryansuki said:
Considering that the Psilocybe azurescens has a much higher psilocybin content than subs
This is not supported by any evidence. One test done decades ago on P. azurescens has shown that it's psilocybin content was ridiculously higher than any other species. And that table is still going around. But later experiences did not support that finding. Maybe that particular specimen had very high alkaloid content, maybe that was a measurement error. Whatever the case, judging from others' experience, most species from section cyanescens, including P. azurescens and P. subaeruginosa, have similar alkaloid content.
I guess the assumption that P. azurescens is "super strong" probably goes back to Stamets' book "Psilocybin mushrooms of the world". But it's 22 years since it was released, and quite a bit of information in there is outdated.
--------------------
★★★★★
|
Warrk



Registered: 06/02/17
Posts: 1,638
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: Anglerfish]
#25207199 - 05/16/18 08:29 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Subs can be as potent as any shroom, enough to blast your consciousness to another reality frame. Respect and restrain highly recommended.
|
ryansuki
Oh hello there.

Registered: 04/16/18
Posts: 63
Last seen: 5 years, 7 months
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: Warrk]
#25207263 - 05/16/18 09:02 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Thanks all for the replies and good info. Been reading up a bit tonight, and sounds like everyone here is on the money. Lots of good info to go over and whatnot. I think I'm getting a tad obsessed with shrooms lately, and I'm loving it!! Thanks again y'all!
|
MushingGoodTime
Stranger Things
Registered: 05/05/18
Posts: 53
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: ryansuki]
#25207284 - 05/16/18 09:10 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Keep sharing the experience mate. I'm on a mission to learn and y'all help!
|
bobwastaken
under construction


Registered: 06/17/10
Posts: 1,973
Loc: SA
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: obtuse]
#25209583 - 05/17/18 06:44 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
obtuse said: I doubt very much Psilocybe azurescens.
people have cultivated them in australia, but i very much doubt you'd ever find them
what you have encountered is the interesting thing about woodchip Psilocybe subaeruginosa. they can be very strong.
I once cultivated Psilocybe subaeruginosa indoors, and took 4 and had what i can only compare to very high DMT doses.
I think Psilocybe subaeruginosa are easily comparable to Psilocybe azurescens.
Also very similar genetically. what you have pictured above are Psilocybe subaeruginosa.
Really interesting. I'll be attempting to fruit subs indoors shortly and am already pondering whether they'll be more potent than outdoor fruits. I've noticed indoor P.Alutacea are more potent versus wild specimens I've tried. They'll also exhibit a much stronger bluing reaction.
As for Azurescens in Australia.
Here's a couple thought provoking quotes.
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said:
If not I'd like to check the DNA, however I'll be mushroom hunting in Mexico for the next few months and I didn't bring my lab with me because some of the reagents need to be refrigerated. I can check it when I get back though, I wonder if there are multiple species going under the name P. subaeruginosa. I sequenced one already, it was a really big one that kind of looked like P. azurescens. The ITS region was only one base pair off from P. azurescens, indicating that P. subaeruginosa is extremely closely related.
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said: P. cyanescens, P. azurescens and P. allenii evolved from P. subaeruginosa. Breeding experiements are being done right now in Germany. Prints of P. allenii, P. azurescens and P. subaeruginosa are needed for this important research.
These posts are 3 years old so I wonder if anything of further interest has come to light since.
|
Anglerfish
hearing things



Registered: 09/08/10
Posts: 18,700
Loc: Norvegr
Last seen: 1 day, 2 hours
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: bobwastaken]
#25209627 - 05/17/18 07:20 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
bobwastaken said: These posts are 3 years old so I wonder if anything of further interest has come to light since.
Alan posted an updated phylogenetic tree on sect. cyanescens quite recently:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/25149980#25149980
If P. subaeruginosa indeed has evolved into P. cyanescens, it would be interesting to know if perhaps that initial find in Kew Gardens outside London more than a 100 years back actually was an immigrant species from Australia.
--------------------
★★★★★
|
obtuse
myco0



Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 2,406
Loc: tasmania
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: Anglerfish]
#25209706 - 05/17/18 08:27 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Aseroe rubra has been seen in Kew Gardens.
from wikipedia: "The first native Australian fungus to be formally described, Aseroe rubra was collected in 1792 in southern Tasmania and named by the French botanist Jacques Labillardière." ... "From its natural habitat it appears to have travelled to other parts of the world in garden or soil products; it was recorded growing on soil transported from Australia in a glasshouse in Kew Gardens in 1829, and later in California in North America."
i dare say that its quite possible that Psilocybe subaeruginosa traveled the same journey.
|
Anglerfish
hearing things



Registered: 09/08/10
Posts: 18,700
Loc: Norvegr
Last seen: 1 day, 2 hours
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: obtuse]
#25209743 - 05/17/18 08:38 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
That's pretty interesting. In the local arboretum where I live (Bergen, Norway) there have been finds of Descolea antarctica, a species apparently endemic to southern Chile. I'd guess it probably came here together with imported Nothofagus from that region.
--------------------
★★★★★
|
obtuse
myco0



Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 2,406
Loc: tasmania
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: Anglerfish]
#25209755 - 05/17/18 08:45 AM (5 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
cool, also interesting.
|
OOISI
Suburbanaut


Registered: 03/21/04
Posts: 2,395
Loc: SA
Last seen: 1 day, 23 hours
|
Re: Psilocybe azurescens in Melbourne? [Re: bobwastaken]
#25298375 - 06/29/18 06:49 AM (5 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
bobwastaken said:
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said:
If not I'd like to check the DNA, however I'll be mushroom hunting in Mexico for the next few months and I didn't bring my lab with me because some of the reagents need to be refrigerated. I can check it when I get back though, I wonder if there are multiple species going under the name P. subaeruginosa. I sequenced one already, it was a really big one that kind of looked like P. azurescens. The ITS region was only one base pair off from P. azurescens, indicating that P. subaeruginosa is extremely closely related.
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said: P. cyanescens, P. azurescens and P. allenii evolved from P. subaeruginosa. Breeding experiements are being done right now in Germany. Prints of P. allenii, P. azurescens and P. subaeruginosa are needed for this important research.
These posts are 3 years old so I wonder if anything of further interest has come to light since.
Where was this stated? I would like to follow progress on this research.
-------------------- Subaeruginosa Guide Bless the Lord, O my soul O my soul Worship His holy name.
|
|