|
Iggle Piggle
Cutie


Registered: 05/18/22
Posts: 25
|
Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread!
#27785288 - 05/20/22 06:08 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|

            THIS IS WHAT I HAVE KNOWN TO BE PSILOCYBE TASMANIANA SINCE 2016!!!(above photos taken by yours truly)
Tas75 and obtuse are veteran and well respected Australian hunters and taxonomists from Tasmania. They reckon this certain Psilocybe species known as "tasmaniana" is wearing a mis-applied species name and must be re-examined...
Tas75 and obtuse are skeptical this is the true Psilocybe tasmaniana that was described by Gastón Guzmán and Roy Watling in 1978...
inski and Alan Rockefeller however (my favorite mycologists) have been calling this distinct species Psilocybe tasmaniana since 2016... I listen to what inski and Alan Rockefeller have to say... If inski and Alan call this species "tasmaniana", then that is what I'm calling it by default also...
Let's settle this debate once and for all... So we humble mushroom nerds of the lower knowledge tier such as myself, and the more simple minded frequenters of the forums can rest easy learning about true taxonomy of Psilocybe species such as "tasmaniana"...
I summon inski or Alan Rockefeller to argue in favor of this species being the true Psilocybe tasmaniana...
|
Iggle Piggle
Cutie


Registered: 05/18/22
Posts: 25
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Iggle Piggle]
#27785301 - 05/20/22 06:34 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tas75 said: inski and Alan Rockefeller are misapplying the name to a taxon that is not Psilocybe tasmaniana.
Quote:
Tas75 said: Well, speaking as a taxonomist and systematist, I'll believe it the day I see the type collection sequence and that of whatever is getting called Psilocybe tasmaniana today and they are the same and different to other species with nomenclatural priority.
The protologue also clearly and unambiguously describes Psilocybe tasmaniana as growing on dung. Everything I've seen so far here and elsewhere to which the name has been applied were woodlovers.
Quote:
Tas75 said: Taxonomic correctness does not depend on amateurs applying a name as they see fit, it depends on valid publication of names and concepts.
I would be over the moon if someone tracked down the holotype, managed to get a sequence from it, and proved that the applicaton of the name is correct and this is, in fact, P. tasmaniana. One less problem to work through.
Quote:
obtuse said: I don't agree with the overconfident call for this as tasmaniana.
|
sam11
Stranger



Registered: 05/08/20
Posts: 677
Loc: North
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Iggle Piggle] 1
#27785787 - 05/20/22 01:39 PM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Here for the pretty pictures, not got a lot to add to the argument. I agree with what nic said, this is going in circles... But anyway here are some more photos of contender number two.






|
Iggle Piggle
Cutie


Registered: 05/18/22
Posts: 25
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: sam11]
#27785806 - 05/20/22 01:52 PM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
LOVING THE TASMANIANA PORN...
   
|
sam11
Stranger



Registered: 05/08/20
Posts: 677
Loc: North
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: sam11]
#27785828 - 05/20/22 02:13 PM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Rodger your photos seem to show them growing in woodchip. Did you pay attention when picking them, to whether they appeared to be growing from the soil underneath or the woodchip itself? Mine were in what seemed like quite rich soil with a lot of woody debris in it. The spot where I found them has 2 distinct zones, the upper and lower zones. The upper zone is an area that has been planted out on a south facing slope about 3-4 years ago I'd guess. It's mostly flax, manuka and cabbage tree plus a few other natives. It has become quite over grown. Along with the "tasmaniana" there are a few other types of mushroom that grow in the upper zone. There is no woodchip. The lower zone has some more established cabbage trees, flax etc and while it's mostly just earth there is a decent amount of fallen wood and flax/cabbage tree litter which as we both know subs quite like. I find plentiful subs in the lower zone along with a few other things like stinkhorns that are typical for sub friendly conditions. There doesn't appear to be much crossover between zones and mushroom species. Taz75 mentioned that recently a suspected tasmaniana from nz sequenced as a sub. To me they look fairly different. Many are quite dainty and small having quite thin stems, but there are also some that have thick white hollow stems like a sub and would be the same size as an average sub, so I can see how someone might get confused.
|
Bardy



Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 12 hours, 15 minutes
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: sam11]
#27785944 - 05/20/22 03:40 PM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Photo 8 in the original post just look like subs to me
|
Nickoloxious
Forest solivagant


Registered: 06/18/17
Posts: 2,405
Loc:
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: sam11]
#27785982 - 05/20/22 04:21 PM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I too have very little to add in terms of taxonomic debating. Just going to drop a few more photos… Here’s some finds from Inner suburban Melbourne over the last two seasons;
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
|
Iggle Piggle
Cutie


Registered: 05/18/22
Posts: 25
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Nickoloxious]
#27786059 - 05/20/22 05:55 PM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
GREAT TASMANIANA PORN NICK!!!

Quote:
sam11 said: Did you pay attention when picking them, to whether they appeared to be growing from the soil underneath or the woodchip itself?
I found my tasmaniana patches pretty much in brown bark woodchips, with a fairly deep substrate of woodchips, nothing really struggling for substrate. Also note, that tasmaniana seem to prefer a "brown-bark" rather than the typical "tan-bark" that subs prefer.
Quote:
Bardy said: Photo 8 in the original post just look like subs to me
Get ur eyes checked then. Take a closer look at my photos... All the photos I posted are BLATANT tasmaniana in my eyes...
|
Dandurn777



Registered: 12/09/19
Posts: 1,566
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Iggle Piggle]
#27786109 - 05/20/22 06:51 PM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Iggle Piggle said: LOVING THE TASMANIANA PORN...
   

Don’t shoot your spore load just yet, mate.
-------------------- Prying open my Allenii
|
Blazer420
ŦøжїϿ ÐȐȜȧƜƐȓ


Registered: 06/13/09
Posts: 4,825
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Dandurn777]
#27786297 - 05/20/22 11:18 PM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Ah yes, I love this debate with these "tassies" "angulo" "stunzi" variations..... Interesting times, great thread.
Here are some photos dating back from 2016 New Zealand Auckland area.

 ^^^^ What ya rekon? Tassies?









-------------------- ~ I used to get high on life, until I realized life was cut with morons ~ * You need 2 wake up and smell the music! * -We are all computer data in a materialistic world- |Sometimes you have to lose yourself, to find anything|
 
|
Bardy



Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 12 hours, 15 minutes
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Iggle Piggle]
#27786389 - 05/21/22 01:39 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Iggle Piggle said:
Quote:
Bardy said: Photo 8 in the original post just look like subs to me
Get ur eyes checked then. Take a closer look at my photos... All the photos I posted are BLATANT tasmaniana in my eyes...
Not saying I’m definitely right, just that they look identical to subs I’ve found. If anything I’m just in amazement as to how similar these species can look. The others do look different though, photo 8 might just not showcase the differences enough to my eyes.
Edited by Bardy (05/21/22 01:39 AM)
|
sam11
Stranger



Registered: 05/08/20
Posts: 677
Loc: North
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Bardy]
#27786453 - 05/21/22 02:57 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
blazer. if the last photo is of the same shrooms as the first 2 photos, then yeah i'd guess taz.
|
Iggle Piggle
Cutie


Registered: 05/18/22
Posts: 25
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Blazer420]
#27786552 - 05/21/22 06:41 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Beautiful photos Blazer, as always...

Quote:
Blazer420 said:

 ^^^^ What ya rekon? Tassies?
These are 100% Psilocybe angulospora bro...

Quote:
Blazer420 said:







All these ones are 100% Psilocybe tasmaniana...
Quote:
Blazer420 said:


These ones are 100% Psilocybe angulospora...
Quote:
Blazer420 said:

This one is also 100% Psilocybe angulospora...
 I don't miss when it comes to tasmaniana vs angulospora ID requests...
|
Iggle Piggle
Cutie


Registered: 05/18/22
Posts: 25
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Iggle Piggle]
#27786611 - 05/21/22 08:12 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Since we are showing some angulospora porn also, I'll do a small photo dump of my own, to highlight what Psilocybe angulospora looks like...
         
This species is called Psilocybe angulospora, and grows commonly alongside Psilocybe tasmaniana in New Zealand.
The angulospora hails from Taiwan, and we get them here in New Zealand also. They actually, speaking of bad taxonomy, used to go under the false title of "makarorae" until 2018, when niggas started to realize makarorae and angulospora aint the same species...
BACK TO TASMANIANA TALK!!!
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said: ITS sequence:
atgaACTTGGCTCGGTTGCAGCTGGTCCTCTAGAGGGCATGTGCTCGCCGTGTCATCTTTATCTCTCCACCTGTGCACCTTTTGTAGACCTGGATTAGTTAATTTTCCGAGGAAACTCGGTCGGGAGGATTGCTTTCACAAGCTCTCCTTGCAATTAACCCAGGCCTACGTTTTCATATACCCCAAAGAATGTAACAGAATGTATTATATTGGCCTTGTGCCTATAAACTATATACAACTTTCAGCAACGGATCTCTTGGCTCTCGCATCGATGAAGAACGCAGCGAAATGCGATAAGTAATGTGAATTGCAGAATTCAGTGAATCATCGAATCTTTGAACGCACCTTGCGCTCCTTGGTATTCCGAGGAGCATGCCTGTTTGAGTGTCATTAAATTCTCAACCTTACCAGCTTTTGCTGATAATGGCTTGGATGTGGGGGTCTTTTTGCTGGCTTCGTTAAGAGGTCTGCTCCCCTTAAATGTATTAGCCGGTGCCCCGCGCAGAGCCGTCTATTGGTGTGATAATTATCTACGCCGTGGACCTTTGCATGAATGGGATTGCGCTGCTTCTAACCGTCCTTCACTGGACAATACAAATGACAATTTGACCTCAAATCAGGTAGGACTACCCGCTGAACTTAAGCATATCAATAAGCGGAGGAAAAGAAACTAACAAGGATTCCCCTAGTAACTGCGAGTGAAGCGGGAAAAGCTCAAATTTAAAATCTGGCGGTCTCTGGCCGTCCGAGTTGTAATCTAGAGAAGTGTTATCCGCGCTGGACgt
Surprisingly, it differs from the ITS sequence of P. tasmaniana from the Heyowana collection by only one base pair. Either this is P. tasmaniana, or it's extremely closely related
It's pretty close to P. baeocystis and P. stuntzii, and not too far from P. semilanceata.
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23381006#23381006 The New Zealand tasmaniana collection by Bagels in 2016 turned to be one base pair different than Heyowana's Australian tasmaniana collection, according to Alan.
I'm under impression that the base pairs of tasmaniana could be variable (different base pair, yet still same species) and had spouted names such as stuntzii aff. and "Orini"...
I must note tho, marcoscopically they hold no differentiating features and superficial phenotype overlaps regardless... One could say pink stipe is a trait of "Orini", then one could also argue it's a pink stiped tasmaniana pheno...
Which funny enough that we mention it on shroomery, is another cause of me having big fights with faggots on facebook such as Luke, who disrespect the fuck out of me for saying Orini is just a tasmaniana phenotype with a base pair difference...
|
Mycoangulo


Registered: 12/29/20
Posts: 482
Loc:
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Iggle Piggle]
#27786619 - 05/21/22 08:33 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I'm bemused by the idea that this issue will be resolved on a shroomery thread.
It will be resolved when a paper is published that resolves it, and gets accepted by the scientific community.
Tas75 has raised valid points, but I don't see any point arguing over it in shroomery threads.
Anyway, if this thread is going to be depository of sorts for photos of the mushrooms called "Psilocybe 'tasmaniana'" on the internet, I have a few to add to the mess.


|
Iggle Piggle
Cutie


Registered: 05/18/22
Posts: 25
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Mycoangulo]
#27786631 - 05/21/22 08:40 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
LOVING THE TASMANIANA PORN MYCOANGULO!!!

    
  
Any other of you degenerate cunts got any more tasmaniana photos for tonights wank!??
|
Iggle Piggle
Cutie


Registered: 05/18/22
Posts: 25
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Iggle Piggle]
#27786641 - 05/21/22 08:49 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Even angulospora photos will suffice...
|
RenegadeMycologist
On the case



Registered: 12/05/20
Posts: 3,817
Loc: Serbia
Last seen: 8 days, 2 hours
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: Iggle Piggle] 1
#27786711 - 05/21/22 10:17 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
This started to look like "wild panaeolus discussion" thread. Absolutely great idea at first, just like this thread, however it quickly degenerated into being a dumpster of all sort of Panaeolus spp pictures, without any serious discussion on the matter, and this thread is fastly and similarly degrading into the same kind of thing. So instead of consolidating and broadening our knowledge with regards to taxonomy of tasmaniana, possibly even doing some microscopy, analyzing the substrate and comparing them to a original description, here we are with yet another "official thread". And for some reason angulospora is also starting to appear here. Angulospora is settled, tasmaniana is not. And it's not those are ugly species to look at, quite the contrary, but this thread should aspire to resolve the question, not just be a random photo album.
For starters mycologists who first adopted tasmaniana name for this morphotype should speak up, and elaborate on their reasons for doing so, because they paved way for mere Psilocybe enthusiasts and billion percent accurate identifiers like my nigga Overlord.
And if the holotype can't be examined, at least we could do our best to compare these finds here to original tasmaniana description. So we need original description of tasmaniana posted in this thread asap. If there are enough inconsistencies, and if people in Tasmania are not finding any (according to Tas75 and obtuse), someone should thoroughly describe this species, and publish it.
--------------------
l e a r n i n g t h i n g s
|
TimmiT


Registered: 03/23/10
Posts: 5,303
Loc: Victoria
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: RenegadeMycologist]
#27787889 - 05/22/22 08:34 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Original description of Psilocybe tasmaniana Guzman, G. & Watling, R. (1978). Studies in Australian agarics and boletes, 1: Some species of Psilocybe. Notes from the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh. 36,179-210.
Paper that synonymised P. tasmaniana with P. subaeruginosa Chang, Yu Shyun; Mills, Alan K. (1992). Reexamination of Psilocybe subaeruginosa and related species with comparative morphology, isozymes and mating compatibility studies. Mycological Research. 96 (6): 429–441.
|
RenegadeMycologist
On the case



Registered: 12/05/20
Posts: 3,817
Loc: Serbia
Last seen: 8 days, 2 hours
|
Re: Psilocybe tasmaniana taxonomic solidification or dismisal thread! [Re: TimmiT]
#27787999 - 05/22/22 10:40 AM (1 year, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
TimmiT said: Original description of Psilocybe tasmaniana Guzman, G. & Watling, R. (1978). Studies in Australian agarics and boletes, 1: Some species of Psilocybe. Notes from the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh. 36,179-210.
Paper that synonymised P. tasmaniana with P. subaeruginosa Chang, Yu Shyun; Mills, Alan K. (1992). Reexamination of Psilocybe subaeruginosa and related species with comparative morphology, isozymes and mating compatibility studies. Mycological Research. 96 (6): 429–441.

--------------------
l e a r n i n g t h i n g s
|
|