mistamonsta said:

Gallusgallus229 said:

any tips on differentiating tasmaniana from subs?

---

Unfortunately Ps. Tasmaniana are outside my realm of regular first hand experience.
I suspect I have found and collected them previous to being identified as Tasmaniana but I just can't be certain.
I have read and re-read Heyowana's thread and would hope I could now spot the difference if I found them again.
If I have understood correctly, they seem smaller in stature (shorter), the cap colour is different, the caps are quite sticky when fresh (apparently they will stick to each other or your specimen container once picked), they are shorter lived than subs and are known to grow in runoff areas after rainfall from enriched soil and debris as opposed to subs growing from decayed wood matter.
But this is, as I said, speculation and analysis based on reading the above linked thread.
Perhaps Inski, or Heyowana himself, will be kind enough to show up and correct or confirm my speculations

---

tay_vic13 said:

Went out again and found nothing apart from these fellas



Absolutely no idea what they are, they weee however in bush scrubland out of my town, might have to stop looking completely, all my spots are being pillaged and destroyed by others nowadays so I’m out of ideas where to go, absolutely no idea anymore which sucks!

---

The big tall one is a Rooting Shank, Oudemansiella Gigaspora aka Xerulia Australis.
I believe the other is Leratiomyces Ceres.

Yes, mushroom picking has become quite popular of late.
I saw soooo many cars out on my local mountain trails these last two weekends, all were picking I am sure.
Best to get out during the week, even Friday arvo if you can, beat everyone else to it and avoid the weekend stampede
Your other option is to get on googlemaps and look for new terrain that is off the beaten path, patches that are easy to access become well known and then get picked out quite rapidly

GREENVK said:

Subaeruginosa specimens from eucalypt forest, at about 900m elevation.

Some of the largest I've ever seen

---

I think you have found the fabled Valley of the Giants!!!!

mistamonsta said:

Thanks for clearing that up Ent, I tip my hat to you good sir

Here is a wonderfully out of focus pic I took of a suspected Psilocybe from up near the snowy mountains when I was living there two years ago.

At the time I posted this, someone suggested Tasmaniana but I didn't collect these particular specimens to identify. It was the same time as when I discovered Ps. Alutacea on my mountain so in my ignorance of Tasmaniana identification I just wrote it off as more of the same and never followed it up.
In hindsight I realise that was quite silly of me, I have seen many of these in this particular area on many later hikes and just thought they were Alutacea doing well

---

mistamonsta said:

Gallusgallus229 said:

any tips on differentiating tasmaniana from subs?

---

Unfortunately Ps. Tasmaniana are outside my realm of regular first hand experience.
I suspect I have found and collected them previous to being identified as Tasmaniana but I just can't be certain.
I have read and re-read Heyowana's thread and would hope I could now spot the difference if I found them again.
If I have understood correctly, they seem smaller in stature (shorter), the cap colour is different, the caps are quite sticky when fresh (apparently they will stick to each other or your specimen container once picked), they are shorter lived than subs and are known to grow in runoff areas after rainfall from enriched soil and debris as opposed to subs growing from decayed wood matter.
But this is, as I said, speculation and analysis based on reading the above linked thread.

Perhaps Inski, or Heyowana himself, will be kind enough to show up and correct or confirm my
speculations

---

Warrk said:

Shroom hunters... if every one of us posted every single photo we took while hunting, imagine how clogged up this thread would be. I reckon choose your best ones to post, more than 5 pics is overkill no?

---

AzzA said:

Warrk said:

Shroom hunters... if every one of us posted every single photo we took while hunting, imagine how clogged up this thread would be. I reckon choose your best ones to post, more than 5 pics is overkill no?

---

only really good for 1st-3rd year pickers to learn how many bloody variations there are with p.subs alone.
with the phenotypes created by different weather  patterns

---

Both of you make good points.
I can't speak for everyone here, would personally love to see this thread clogged with in situ photos of actives. But if you insist I desist, I'll tone it down to just a dozen or so choice photos in future hunts.

Nickoloxious said:

I can't speak for everyone here, would personally love to see this thread clogged with in situ photos of actives..

---

I come here for the glorious shroom porn and the sharing of info on locating and picking various Psilocybe varieties.
I say keep posting all your pics, maybe just change the layout of your posts or format of your pics so they appear as clickable thumbnails.
That way the info is still there but those who are uninterested can scroll past easier
If anything, this thread is clogged with way too much weather talk and complaints about the season starting slow etc. These irrelevant, uninformed and off topic posts clearly outnumber the pics so far 

Edit: I forgot to say hi and thank you to Heyowana for stopping by with the ID info on Psilocybe Tasmaniana, how very rude of me

ent said:

Tasmaniana are very different to subs and easy to differentiate, unfortunately they seem to be extremely rare. Since they’re also related to Psilocybe semilanceata they look more like large Psilocybe alutacea than they do subs.

I got to photograph some at Heyowana’s place (NSW). Here is a photo of the back of my camera screen. I’ll upload proper photos in the NSW thread probably next month.

---

Ahh okay, thanks ent
I only say they seem similar based off of some of the photos by heyowana that seem to resemble 'waterlogged subs' that I've often picked.

Tbh I really should make more of a point of documenting things I pick, as the differences in 'subs' can be huge in itself.

mistamonsta said:

I say keep posting all your pics, maybe just change the layout of your posts or format of your pics so they appear as clickable thumbnails.
That way the info is still there but those who are uninterested can scroll past easier

---

That is a good suggestion and compromise mista.

Personally I like to see pics that are giving us new, insightful information - not more of the same which can be tiring. It isn't just you either Nick, nice finds btw and congrats