Home | Community | Message Board


MRCA Tyroler Gluckspilze
Please support our sponsors.

Mushrooms, Mycology and Psychedelics >> Advanced Mycology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Amazon Shop for: ½ Pint Jars, Agar, Brown Rice Flour, Vermiculite, pH Test Strips

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlinedumbsnake34
Crazy Dude
Registered: 12/14/04
Posts: 88
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
Scientific tests
    #3525646 - 12/20/04 11:14 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

Hello all,

I am a student in school. First I want to say that this forum has lots of great info on it, however, there are many people who make claims that one strain outperforms another with one substrate in terms of potency, yield, colonization time etc...

The problem is these are not done very scientifically at all. I would like to start comparisons that have very specific documentation on what was going on. This means documenting what the exact procedure followed was and what temperature, substrate etc. What I think would be 2 studies that would be best are ones that compare 2 different strains grown on the exact same conditions and studies that grow the same strain under several different conditions. Also, it is highly preferable to not compare only 1 jar to another, sample size should be at least 4 for each group preferably. I will be posting when I get some data. I would encourage others to do the same thing.

If we all posted our results, we could come up with some stellar procedures and have actual data to support our claims.


--------------------
mmmm, daydreaming


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMorbes
Agent Urgent

Registered: 11/20/04
Posts: 5
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: Scientific tests [Re: dumbsnake34]
    #3525744 - 12/20/04 11:41 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

Hey, I'm also a science student and I posses the same opinion. If all of the grow logs here had used a standard method to report their results, there could be a wealth of untapped information about different techniques.

I think a good way to go about this might be to draft a form that people can just fill in the blanks on. The form could specify exactly what types of details to give and where.

If someone recorded all of their details, and had a wonderful result, there would be a numerable amount of people willing to replicate the experiment parameters because everyone wants to get good yields etc.

So all that's left are the details - what should be specified, and to what degree of detail?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefungophiliac
militantpacifist
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/09/04
Posts: 190
Loc: yo mama
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Scientific tests [Re: Morbes]
    #3526049 - 12/21/04 12:55 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

<------also a student of science

it seems the most important controls may be temp, lighting, sterilisation technique, substrate compostion as well as initial growth medium of course,humidity, co2 may be hard to measure without tools though so i leave it out,detailed listing of procedures with large sample sizes and positive and negative control groups :smile:
did i miss anything?

i think some kind of recognized and universal formating is a good idea.  but i also think one of the reasons most laymen enjoy this site is the lowtech aspect of the shroomery.  however i do think a scientific procedure can be low tech as long as the controls prove the data accurate.

i think a form would be too rigid for most people to ba able to record proper data. but a good start would be like somewhere up in the faq all noobs are supposed to read maybe a little piec about important data to record for your posts. get people thinkin bout it.

gotta bounce
peace
:smile:


--------------------
why are there so many more horses asses than there are horses?

if you can't duck it, fuck it.
-the makers of duck tape



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinegibbard
Stranger
Registered: 12/14/04
Posts: 9
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: Scientific tests [Re: fungophiliac]
    #3526080 - 12/21/04 01:03 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

I am a quasi-science student (engineering). I agree with all of you, but since all of the people that have posted seem in agreeance and students one might assume that this holds true to the rest of the forum.

If this is the case then why don't we all use the stuff we learn in school writing lab reports etc. and just apply those techniques.

That should be standard format enough, just a lab report.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleagar
old hand
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/21/04
Posts: 9,056
Loc: Somewhere Else
Trusted Cultivator
Re: Scientific tests [Re: gibbard]
    #3526243 - 12/21/04 01:48 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

Once, long long ago I said all "cubes were cubes", potency wise.

ANNO replied, do you think all "POT" is the same, potency wise.

We all know "Pot" differs in potency greatly. It does so, because of many circumstance.

Potency of cubes has to do with all the same circumstance, conditions, genetics, nutrients,spawn, substrate, casing, growing conditions, skill of grower, ph, rh, when the fruits are picked, how they are dried, how long they are stored, the weight, health & condition of the person who consumes them & how much he doses with.

The variables are endless. I believe it would take a very conserted effort, over considerable time, in lab conditions, at great cost to make any accurate determination of the potency of individual cube strains.

Moreover, once done under contolled & OPTIMAL conditions the finding would most likely be that the differance in potency of differing cube strains was so miniscule, it doesnt realy matter.

One thing I BELIEVE is if grown under OPTIMAL conditions, with OPTIMAL substrates, any strain of cube will take you for a TRIP, without ever leaving the barn.

That is good enough for me.

I say so because the cubes you see above, came from a print, from cubes off a cake cultivated on BRF & Verm under far less than optimal conditions.

Those cubes were not very potent.

The spores from those same cubes, when germinated & grown out on a compost designed for cubes & under optimal conditions, were so POTENT, it was almost scary. :wink:


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAlkaloids
3,4,5-trimethoxyphenethylamine
Male

Registered: 11/16/98
Posts: 743
Loc: pubis mons
Re: Scientific tests [Re: agar]
    #3526418 - 12/21/04 03:09 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

  There you go bragging again.  :smile:  j/k

  While the idea of using standardized environmental and analysis techniques is intriguing, i agree with agar that trying to get scientifically valid data on the potency of different strains is going to take a lot of resources (like GC/MS, standardized solvent/extraction techniques, etc...). 

  Sure it would be fun. If all the growers had access to that type of equipment and all the growers used the same environmental parameters, it could be done, but is isn't feasible currently, unless someone can do all that work and post all the data for it here. 

  Realistically, that is the only way we could get truly useful information out of this as bioassays, while great fun, are simply entirely too imprecise to provide pertinent data.

  If you keep going with this though have fun.  :smile:


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleATWAR
Connoisseur

Registered: 01/26/03
Posts: 1,640
Loc: #108768 in line...
Re: Scientific tests [Re: dumbsnake34]
    #3526695 - 12/21/04 07:26 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

<-----  A student in life
              I was a student in school once too  :tongue:


All of these experiments would really be useless as the results are subjective. You just cannot compare reports from many different people as each will have his/her own opinion, bias, and tolerance. Not only do people vary, but the potency of the same strain can vary from batch to batch, and flush to flush. Too many variables to consider (and there are plenty of "claimed" strains). Even if done over a long period of time (many samples) and analyzed in a true lab, the situation would most likely end up no different. People will grow all kinds, and find their own favorite...

Quote:

If we all posted our results, we could come up with some stellar procedures and have actual data to support our claims.




Sorting through the grow-logs will give you basic "statistical data" on strain performance in different conditions/substrates. There are already excellent procedures for growing in many different ways here. Plenty of TEKs and grow-log illustrations, they just require a little searching to dig up. Most of the posts in the grow-log section are more of a "show and tell" than a true scientific procedure or an experiment. This is obvious from the redundant PF TEK grows that are so common...


I like the idea of having some sort of standard for the grow-logs section. It would be neat to have a "draft" to follow, listing the parameters and conditions. Rather than some random thoughts of the writer... But, people can't even follow the standard for describing mushrooms in the hunting forum, so I would imagine such a standard for the grow-log would be ignored as well...


--------------------
To give is to live...



Edited by ATWAR (12/21/04 07:33 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAnnoA
Experimenter
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/18/99
Posts: 24,121
Loc: my room
Last seen: 2 months, 15 days
Re: Scientific tests [Re: ATWAR]
    #3526829 - 12/21/04 08:45 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

> But, people can't even follow the standard for describing mushrooms in the hunting
>forum, so I would imagine such a standard for the grow-log would be ignored as well...

Very true.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMorbes
Agent Urgent

Registered: 11/20/04
Posts: 5
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: Scientific tests [Re: Anno]
    #3527881 - 12/21/04 03:18 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

Okay - but remember the ongoing coffee thread. There are a number of people interested in trying new things. The speed of colonization is a somewhat easily quantifiable thing. Either something colonizes significantly faster in certain conditions, or it doesn't.

If everyone interested in that particular idea made an effort to standardize their procedures, you wouldn't have a thread like that dragging on forever and ending off with somewhat inconclusive results.

Would people really have a huge problem all growing the same strain, in the same substrate mixes with the same procedure? I doubt it.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefungophiliac
militantpacifist
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/09/04
Posts: 190
Loc: yo mama
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Scientific tests [Re: Morbes]
    #3528289 - 12/21/04 05:20 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

yeah, its best to stick with a little subsection if quantitative analysis is an issue. however as it was said a few posts up, the hunting forum isnt even followed in its taxonomical guidelines. its going to be hard to get a bunch of non scientists who want to grow mushrooms to outline in proper format data that is relevant to the scientist. but it is possible to give the laymen the scientific method and help to achieve a scientific approach even by those not very interested in it. this thread may serve to those that are curious how a proper report is crafted and what the objectives of lab analysis are intended to yield. ultimately it would be nice if something like this were the norm
"composition of media-temp-humidity-colonization time- spawn run" etc
to have a linear aproach that ends with "yield per flush-fruiiting method-overall quanity and time from start to finish"
then people could easily see which methods are repeatedly showing the highest COMPARATIVE yields in the shortest time. if enough people are testing each others data systematically, then the likelihood of strain isolation being a significant disturbance in data is greatly diminished. any hoot, i greatly appreciate the attempt made by the people whose posts i read at least attempt to make it science. but like i said i tihnk it is a matter of education to the principles of scientific rational and functioning that is preventing a truly scientific approach.


--------------------
why are there so many more horses asses than there are horses?

if you can't duck it, fuck it.
-the makers of duck tape



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAnnoA
Experimenter
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/18/99
Posts: 24,121
Loc: my room
Last seen: 2 months, 15 days
Re: Scientific tests [Re: Morbes]
    #3528299 - 12/21/04 05:26 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

>Would people really have a huge problem all growing the same strain, in the same
>substrate mixes with the same procedure? I doubt it.

The problems already start with the "same strain".

If you have spores, then every inoculation will produce a different strain(s). You will be comparing similar but different strains to each other.

Besides, a GT from one vendor might have a bit a different history behind than a GT from another vendor.

You would need to provide mycelium cultures, clones, to the experimenters in order to get at least this factor under control. And this would be highly illegal in the USA.....


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAnnoA
Experimenter
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/18/99
Posts: 24,121
Loc: my room
Last seen: 2 months, 15 days
Re: Scientific tests [Re: fungophiliac]
    #3528336 - 12/21/04 05:42 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

>ultimately it would be nice if something like this were the norm
>"composition of media-temp-humidity-colonization time- spawn run" etc
>to have a linear approach that ends with "yield per flush-fruiting method-overall quantity and
> time from start to finish"

I agree.
Perhaps you can put a form together that can be used as a working template?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefungophiliac
militantpacifist
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/09/04
Posts: 190
Loc: yo mama
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Scientific tests [Re: Anno]
    #3530300 - 12/22/04 03:37 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

you know anno, i fought with myself about posting this because i felt like id get sucked into finishing it.  i think i can probably manage something formal if you think it wont just get trashed through neglect to use it. but other than that reassurance i would really only be doing it cause you put me up to it :blush:


--------------------
why are there so many more horses asses than there are horses?

if you can't duck it, fuck it.
-the makers of duck tape



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAnnoA
Experimenter
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/18/99
Posts: 24,121
Loc: my room
Last seen: 2 months, 15 days
Re: Scientific tests [Re: fungophiliac]
    #3530510 - 12/22/04 06:21 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

>if you think it wont just get trashed through neglect to use it.

Frankly, I don't know it. I hope not. But i can not guarantee it since it depends on the people. There is a chance your work will be in vane.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleColonel Kurtz Ph.D
What What?
Male User Gallery
Registered: 07/22/04
Posts: 11,113
Loc: Shadow Moses
Re: Scientific tests [Re: Anno]
    #3530575 - 12/22/04 07:36 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

Well, if the form is finally "aprobed" I for one will use it for my next grows. I find it very important to start developing a scientific sense in our comunity. There are already too much misconceptions and myths.

Given time, this could lead to something similar to what happened to cannabis; a sort of artificial evolution towards more potency, better yields etc. But we need to work together :wink:


--------------------
:whatwhat:

There's no better way to rock out than with your cock out!!


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshirley knott
not my real name
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/11/02
Posts: 9,103
Loc: London Flag
Last seen: 10 months, 8 days
Trusted Cultivator
Re: Scientific tests [Re: dumbsnake34]
    #3530716 - 12/22/04 08:49 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

not really an advanced question... but lotsa replies now already.

there would be no point in collecting this data unless you had a data management plan of how best to use it, what the endpoints were, how to present the statistics etc. and none of us work out of a factory operating to GLP standards....

good luck mr idealist. for the most part growlogs are a mismash of FAQ facts


--------------------
buh


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAlkaloids
3,4,5-trimethoxyphenethylamine
Male

Registered: 11/16/98
Posts: 743
Loc: pubis mons
Re: Scientific tests [Re: fungophiliac]
    #3531291 - 12/22/04 12:41 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

  If you write up a standardized form just put it up here as a PDF and then anyone who is interested can proofread it and check for possible oversights, errors, etc..

  It appears as if we can get at least some growers to start following this format and what better way to lead than by example?  :smile:


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefungophiliac
militantpacifist
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/09/04
Posts: 190
Loc: yo mama
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Scientific tests [Re: Alkaloids]
    #3531932 - 12/22/04 03:29 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

this is kind of a large project so it will take me a while. it is the hoidays after all. and then im back in school so i will do what i can. ill post it here when i have a chance


--------------------
why are there so many more horses asses than there are horses?

if you can't duck it, fuck it.
-the makers of duck tape



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAnnoA
Experimenter
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/18/99
Posts: 24,121
Loc: my room
Last seen: 2 months, 15 days
Re: Scientific tests [Re: fungophiliac]
    #3532054 - 12/22/04 04:06 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

Don't make it TOO elaborate, since this will prevent the people from following the protocol for sure.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEonTan
bird
 User Gallery
Registered: 08/18/04
Posts: 468
Loc: very south
Re: Scientific tests [Re: fungophiliac]
    #3533075 - 12/22/04 09:23 PM (11 years, 11 months ago)

Stametes cultural research isn't even scientific by the standards you are thinking of.

Practical knowledge is what the majority of shroomerites are shooting for. Give them too much science and they will hold you in contempt.  :tongue:

Scientific research (journal science) is best left up to the licensed and funded researchers throughout the world.

Quantifying organic substrates and being able to replicate that composition is a NIGHTMARE for even the most heavily funded and equiped labs in the world. No two piles of shit are the same :crazy:

The variability you would be trying to control is WAY TO MUCH.

Practical science is good enough for the shroomery.

A good practical test for you would be to make ten PK cakes or casings per strain at the same time, and fruit them all in your conditions at the same time. Decide which is best for you, and maybe write up a grow log showing your results. Just know that your own results might change the next time you replicate them, due to SUBSTRAIN Variability from test to test, and even environmnetal change. For most shroomerites the Environmnetal parameters themselves change constantly do to a lack of COMPLETE control over Temp and humidity and gas exchange, etc...

Another person doing the same exact thing in THEIR particular parameters might come up with different conclusions. But they will know what works best for them, kind of!!!

Alot of the inconsistencies are related to the lack of control of the variables, not because the variables were ignored. Accurately measuring most of the variables or even maintaining them is beyond the practicalities of this community.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Amazon Shop for: ½ Pint Jars, Agar, Brown Rice Flour, Vermiculite, pH Test Strips

Mushrooms, Mycology and Psychedelics >> Advanced Mycology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Re: Tryptophan & potency metabolic pathway theory Sclorch 1,809 10 05/30/00 02:39 PM
by Sclorch
* Tryptophan
( 1 2 all )
Just_a_Shadow 2,817 20 01/13/05 01:28 AM
by Zen Peddler
* incrasing psilocin by spiking substrate with tryptophan. doktor_alternate 1,659 14 09/21/03 05:01 PM
by broken_lizard
* Tryptophan Substrate?
( 1 2 3 all )
shymanta 9,046 52 11/14/14 07:46 AM
by RogerRabbit
* Adding Tryptamines
( 1 2 all )
shitdog 3,380 20 11/21/01 12:21 PM
by meme
* Tryptamine: A new look at an old Gartz typo, info no one seems to realize gregoron 1,046 6 12/13/08 07:22 AM
by 4 ho cultivar
* Can someone read this article about tryptamine nutrient? devilgoob 1,180 2 01/10/08 06:45 PM
by fastfred
* Increasing potency with 5-HTP (trytophan)
( 1 2 3 all )
EFresh 6,244 41 01/18/08 01:09 PM
by RogerRabbit

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, RogerRabbit, EvilMushroom666
3,952 topic views. 0 members, 8 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Myco Supply
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.1 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.