Chamo said:

You are the only source I have found that defines an isolated strain as being solely between monokaryons.

I’ll leave it alone stipe. Thanks for your time

---

Nichrome said:

You know Tom Hanks was bangin' Wilson from time to time.

---

Genome794 said:

Damn I miss brewing...

Pic tax

good old, reliable, keeping me honest... Golden Teacher clone.

---

Chamo said:

If you were to cross your isolated dikaryotic strain with another compatible monokaryon, what would you call the result?

---

Chamo said:

If you were to cross your isolated dikaryotic strain with another compatible monokaryon, what would you call the result?

---

Chamo said:

Are we just arguing semantics? Because while I understand what the different methods of isolation are, it makes me wonder how we are defining them. How do we differentiate between types of isolates?

https://psilosybiini.info/paperit/%5BBOOK%5D%20Essential%20Fungal%20Genetics%20(Moore%20&%20Novak-Frazer,%202013).pdf

Pages 37,38 and into section 2.3 touch on this topic.

“It is the compatibility reactions (including, for the moment, both vegeta- tive and mating-type compatibilities) that define in real life what constitutes the fungal individual. In yeasts each cell is clearly an individual, but a mycelial individual is not so obvious. Spores are individuals, and colonies developed from single spores must also be individuals, but are 10 spores from the same colony 10 different individuals, or just 10 bits separated from one individual? Then there are heterokaryons, which are mycelia that contain more than one nuclear type. Is a heterokaryon an individual, rather than a chimera or mosaic? These are important questions because in genet- ical terms a population consists of individuals that are able to interbreed. Individuals are important in evolution because selection operates on indi- viduals. Thus, to understand fungal populations we have to know where the individual begins and ends.”

Again, if I’m misunderstanding the terminology I am only looking for clarifications in my thought process. Not irrelevant comments trying to mock me

---

You and I are not arguing. Hard to see out of a complex gas lit room.

I like the way you think. feel free to dm me if you want to just banter. I don't deal in absolutes if I can avoid it. Absolutism is narrow. Semantics are moot and only tools for understanding, not weapons to wield in a superiority gambit. The ultimate goal is understanding each other to streamline information sharing, thus easing the learning curve and contributing to advancement on a community level. We can stroll as equals if you want friend. Understanding is a literal term. You can't do it if you look down at people and the world (the proverbial "you" not you you).

All this terminology is very, very, very, new. We are collectively creating it. It will change as every vernacular will. That is adaptation.

Screwup said:

Can this be shitty LME or agar? Like if I sent you my shit I’d have trouble believing it wouldn’t work.

---

or can you send me that stuff so i can try and see if it does the same for me