Quote:

---

Gymnopilus ventricosus is also mentioned, and is a very large western US species which lacks green staining and psychoactive effects.  One of the DNA sequences used in their phylogentic tree was generated at the DNA sequencing workshop I taught in Seattle.

---

Quote:

---

Moria841 said:
Finally!! Thank you for sharing Alan

---

I concur!

Quote:

---

oculodextro said:

Quote:

---

Gymnopilus ventricosus is also mentioned, and is a very large western US species which lacks green staining and psychoactive effects.  One of the DNA sequences used in their phylogentic tree was generated at the DNA sequencing workshop I taught in Seattle.

---

Are these found in the rocky mountains by any chance?

---

Quote:

---

Sporespreder said:
Good read, I have non active specimens from what I believed to be spectabilis/junonious but maybe is volki, it is more orange also smells like apple cinnamon like luteus, is a little bigger and not active...northeast us

---

Quote:

---

Sporespreder said:
Good read, I have non active specimens from what I believed to be spectabilis/junonious but maybe is volki, it is more orange also smells like apple cinnamon like luteus, is a little bigger and not active...northeast us

---

Quote:

---

Doc9151 said:
This could be Gymnopilus sapineus, there's debate whether or not they are active.

---

Quote:

---

Sporespreder said:
On Tilia Americana near creeks... in washout areas...have you found caerulipes? Nice find!!

---

Quote:

---

Shroomhunts said:
You should pic em they are at prime ripeness

---

Quote:

---

Sporespreder said:
On Tilia Americana near creeks... in washout areas...have you found caerulipes? Nice find!!

---

No luck finding caerulipes Perfect habitat for them though: (Hemlock/Beech/Birch) near a brook..so many LBM that look like caerulipes coming out the leaf litter/downed logs..they ought to be there somewhere, just have to look harder

Quote:

---

Alan Rockefeller said:
The red ones are Cortinarius in the C. marylandensis group.

The others I am not sure about, more clear photos would help.

---

Quote:

---

Malachite said:


Now, unless these aren't gymns (and they have extremely thick orange spore prints), I'm not really sure what species they could be. Doesn't seem like a match for anything I've found down here before. They stay pretty small, perhaps just a weak patch though.

---

Quote:

---

mycot said:
There is this paper that I came across recently.
Gymnopilus dunensis, a new species from Punjab province, Pakistan
HIRA BASHIR et al
Phytotaxa 428 (1): 051–059
Within the paper G.dunensis sits firmly within the active clade.
Another species of interest is G.igniculus whose phylogeny would indicate that it too is active.

---

Quote:

---

Malachite said:
Now that's pretty interesting. I'm glad I get to live through the restructuring of the Gymnopilus taxonomy lol. I hope I'm able to contribute in some fashion.

---

I've been looking at this for some years and waiting for some years for genbank to get a sequence for G.luteus (with its reputed activity) to shed more light on phylogenetic relationships and psychoactivety.
Well genbank got that acquisition recently with this paper and it hasn't clarified much at all.
Rather the implication is left that G.luteus is actually inactive.

Within the paper bluing is only mentioned with G.speciosissimus and that only in connection with the annulus.
Most peculiar. One would expect bluing to be more widespread as in caps and stems or the base of stems.
The photo might be seen to have very slight bluing in the annulus region, can't say for sure from same.

P.S. Some years ago due to a number of factors I argued that G.sapineus was an active species.
I've more recently believed that species to be inactive due its sequence being very different to the active clades and obviously more closely related to inactive clades.

Lots of ways to contribute. You're probably already doing it. Cheers.

Quote:

---

mycot said:
Within the paper bluing is only mentioned with G.speciosissimus and that only in connection with the annulus.
Most peculiar. One would expect bluing to be more widespread as in caps and stems or the base of stems.

---

Quote:

---

Malachite said:
Woah, are they implying that it only bruises in the annulus? can't really have a confirmation from a lack of information, but that is very odd, and a very specific region to note bluing. But if  that happens to be true, I'd be very interested to see if Gymnopilus somehow focuses all Psilocybin synthesis/storage on the annulus. Doesn't really make much sense, but is fascinating. And the Gymns around me will bruise just by existing too long and the elements doing their thing, so if that field sample bruised they had to have seen it in more places than just the annulus. That's so wild.

---

No , they are not saying that at all. What they say in the paper is "sometimes with a bluish-green zone below the annulus," on page 307
under G.speciosissimus then on page 308 which has a photograph of the species they say the exact same phrase again.
No mention of bluing due to bruising.

No, the shrooms definitely does not Store or synthesize psilocybin in connection with the annulus.
Odd about the bluish green zone though.

Have you identified gyms around where you are down to species level?

Quote:

---

mycot said:

Quote:

---

Malachite said:
Woah, are they implying that it only bruises in the annulus? can't really have a confirmation from a lack of information, but that is very odd, and a very specific region to note bluing. But if  that happens to be true, I'd be very interested to see if Gymnopilus somehow focuses all Psilocybin synthesis/storage on the annulus. Doesn't really make much sense, but is fascinating. And the Gymns around me will bruise just by existing too long and the elements doing their thing, so if that field sample bruised they had to have seen it in more places than just the annulus. That's so wild.

---

No , they are not saying that at all. What they say in the paper is "sometimes with a bluish-green zone below the annulus," on page 307
under G.speciosissimus then on page 308 which has a photograph of the species they say the exact same phrase again.
No mention of bluing due to bruising.

No, the shrooms definitely does not Store or synthesize psilocybin in connection with the annulus.
Odd about the bluish green zone though.

Have you identified gyms around where you are down to species level?

---

Quote:

---

donjonson420 said:
G. dilepis occurs in California and the PNW likely imported with eucalyptus during the California gold rush.  Alan has a pretty comprehensive tree which can be viewed here.  https://mushroomobserver.org/237083?q=1UpBZ

---

Wow.   This info is quite new and relatively recent.
Thanks for the input.

Quote:

---

mycot said:
On the contrary G.lepidotus is certainly active.
Its closest and most widespread relative phylogenetically is G.dilepis a species that is also active and blues but has not been recorded in the Americas.
So you have mentioned three good species, two of which we already have sequences for.
If not G.lepidotus there is always the possibility of an undescribed species being found, which is not as uncommon as people may think.

---

Man I don't know a damn thing huh
I suppose I thought that they weren't since my cyanopalmica bruised and those didn't. Good to know though. Do lepidotus bruise, though?

In any case, the next time I see pins out there I will document their growth and see if any of you guys can point me in the right direction.

Quote:

---

Malachite said:
They are showing for me

---

I like the way the annulus shows up so well in the second picture.

Quote:

---

Moria841 said:
I'm convinced that this species doesn't fruit directly from wood at all, but from dead or decaying roots buried beneath the earth. The largest cluster I've seen fruits every year from a patch of grass. There are no trees nearby, but the grass is depressed in such a way as to suggest there was once a tree there before it was cut down and removed.

---

Quote:

---

Moria841 said:
Further, I do believe thay this species is very variable in its colouration depending on different environmental factors. Last year one patch fruited pale-yellow, and this year it fruited bright orange.

---

Shrooms are notorious for changing their appearance under different environmental conditions including size, shape and coloration.
This does not make the identifiers job any easier. Out in the field one gets to know the variability within a species wjthout being thrown off except by the more extreme variations.

I thought I'd share a pic from a gym grow I did some years back to show the type of variation one can get within a single species in both color and morphology. These were also huge in comparison to the original find. I should also point out that under artificial conditions, variation can be more extreme than one generally finds in nature. In this case certainly so. Other shrooms from the same grow (but grown in fruiting chamber) also  look very different to these two.

Quote:

---

Malachite said:
Those are gorgeous! I hope I can fruit the jar I have colonizing right now soon. What substrate/method did you use to cultivate? Did it take very long?

---

Thanks. The substrate was composed of pecan woodchips (many species of wood are suitable) plus about 30% vermiculite (for moisture buffering) plus a small a amount of organic compost (5-10%) brought from the hardware,(read the label and make sure it doesn't contain manure or dolomite which will kill your grow) and all pasteurized by fifteen minutes in boiling water.
Method was to start by colonizing a small amount of woodchips and then mixing with that an equal amount of fresh substrate, allow to collonize and repeat. Keep this doubling up until one has the amount of colonized substrate one wishes to fruit. All this is done in at least two separate containers so if one failed there was a backup. With all this doubling going on under controlled temperature conditions it doesn't take very long. At first I only aimed for and fruited a tray.(plus a baby food jar for fun) Then I went nuts and used that already fruited substrate to create and fruit an outdoor bed five foot by two in size.
Here is a link to a thread of that grow so this thread does not become burdened by overmuch discussion of same.

Quote:

---

Moria841 said:
There's a difference in terms of microhabitats. A fungus growing on above-ground decaying wood is exposed to a different microbiome than a fungus growing underground on decaying roots, and then fruiting out of the ground. Think of the Coprinopsis species that fruit from decaying wood buried under the grass, but are rarely ever seen growing straight out of a log

---

Quote:

---

Moria841 said:
Sure they could, but I'm mainly talking about how these fungi interact with their environments in nature

---

Ah, I see that we had two different things in mind.

Quote:

---

mycot said:
The biggest is an answer to the question of whether psychoactivity (presence of psilocybin) correlates to phylogeny or not.

---

Quote:

---

In other words can we expect certain clades within gymnopilus to be active and other clades not. In recent years I would have answered yes to this question and this would highly likely lead to gymnopilus being split into two genuses as happened some years ago to the psilocybe genus. This is opposed to some species within a clade being active and others not within the same clade. Which doesn't make sense to me??

---

Quote:

---

Right now the only gyms that I feel confidant are active are those that are in that red capped active clade that Alan mentions in the opening post.

---

Quote:

---

NeoSporen said:
I do believe that I still have dried specimens from this find if you would be interested. I would gladly go to the area and hunt for newer specimens, but alas, the area is already under snow.

---

Quote:

---

Alan Rockefeller said:

Quote:

---

mycot said:
The biggest is an answer to the question of whether psychoactivity (presence of psilocybin) correlates to phylogeny or not.

---

, it was a coincidence that most inactive ones ended up in another genus.  Psilocybe turficola (aka P. atrobrunnea) is inactive, and it's still in Psilocybe due to it's phylogenetic relationship to the other species.

When a species falls into an active clade it doesn't mean 100% for sure that it is active, just that it could be.  It's common for clades to be a mixture of active and inactive species, as evolution turns on and off genes that are present across many species.

---

Quote:

---

Alan Rockefeller said:
I suspect G. dilepis might not be active.

---

Quote:

---

mycot said:

Quote:

---

Alan Rockefeller said:
I suspect G. dilepis might not be active.

---

You never gave a reason for this.
I have found pics online of G.dilepis from the UK that had blue bruising in young caps. bioimages.org.uk

---

Quote:

---

Rectopimento said:
Found these growing on a stump today in West Seattle. Keyed them to junonius but that’s now moot, eh?  If they’d be helpful to anyone, happy to ship ‘em out.

---