|
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
|
knarkkorven
Entheoholic
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 1,708
Loc: Sweden
Last seen: 14 days, 12 hours
|
ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ?
#5983019 - 08/21/06 03:50 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Hello everyone.
I was out hunting for liberty caps. Didn´t find any of those but found another kind which I can´t identify 100% ...
I wonder if the mushrooms I´ve picked today is P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus? Too small for subs or what do you think?
Habitat: Swedish cow pasture with 5-15cm long grass. Temperature 15-20 C
Edited by knarkkorven (08/21/06 06:57 AM)
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,693
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: knarkkorven]
#5983025 - 08/21/06 04:12 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Those look like regular foenisecii to me. Stems are too smooth for subbs and I'd expect wild subbs to be much more stocky. Very nice pics btw!
|
knarkkorven
Entheoholic
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 1,708
Loc: Sweden
Last seen: 14 days, 12 hours
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: koraks]
#5983042 - 08/21/06 05:03 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
yes, that´s what I thought too.
But on the other hand there seems to be (for me) a large difference in the appearance. Have a look at: http://images.google.com/images?q=panaeolus+subbalteatus ... These are of different species, right? Or are they all subbs?
From the large mushrooms here: http://www.pilzfotopage.de/Agaricales2/images/Panaeolus%20subbalteatus.jpg
To the small ones here: http://www.rogersmushrooms.com/gallery/DisplayBlock~bid~6566~gid~.asp
and the last ones looks like the ones I picked today.
/Knarkkorven - confused
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,693
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: knarkkorven]
#5983057 - 08/21/06 05:29 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You certainly have a point, but I'm still somewhat thrown off by the stems in your photo, but it's really a close call IMO. I suppose it's best to wait and see if one of the resident experts can shed some light on this. It's definitely beyond me, I'm about as confused as you are
|
Mead
Registered: 07/26/02
Posts: 2,519
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? *DELETED* [Re: koraks]
#5983119 - 08/21/06 06:29 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Post deleted by Mead
Reason for deletion: .
|
knarkkorven
Entheoholic
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 1,708
Loc: Sweden
Last seen: 14 days, 12 hours
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: Mead]
#5983146 - 08/21/06 06:59 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Ok. Thanks!
|
xmush
Professor ofDoom
Registered: 10/22/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: Jaw-juh
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: knarkkorven]
#5983201 - 08/21/06 07:39 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Forget all of this stuff about stems (although I agree they are more foen looking than subbs). Take a spore print. Foens are brown, subbs are jet black.
|
CureCat
Strangest
Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: knarkkorven]
#5983206 - 08/21/06 07:43 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Umm, if you want to be more certain, you can take a spore print.
seperate the stem from the cap and place the cap gills down on a white sheet of paper. Leave the cap alone over night, or atleast 6 hrs (up to 2 days)..
brown spore print = Panaeolina foenisecii maire jet black spore print = Panaeolus subbalteatus
*thanks to Gumby*
--------------------
|
xmush
Professor ofDoom
Registered: 10/22/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: Jaw-juh
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: CureCat]
#5983207 - 08/21/06 07:45 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Hehe, I beat you to it.
|
whatsthestorymg
badwithgrains
Registered: 07/23/06
Posts: 123
Last seen: 17 years, 16 days
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: CureCat]
#5983211 - 08/21/06 07:48 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Are Foescensii active? just wondering i got this book and it puts them under the mildly poisonous category but in toxicity doesn't mention it being hallucinogenic.
-------------------- I pity the fool who don't enjoy a good cubie I pity the fool who don't enjoy a good van eyck My Unitarian Jihad Name is: Brother Cattle Prod of Loving Kindness
|
xmush
Professor ofDoom
Registered: 10/22/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: Jaw-juh
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: whatsthestorymg]
#5983305 - 08/21/06 08:36 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
There are trace amounts of psilocybin in Pan foes, but in such small amounts that no one would really describe them as active. You would probably have to eat many, many pounds to feel anything. This topic comes up periodically. There was a pretty lively discussion a few months back if you're interested in searching the posts.
|
CureCat
Strangest
Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: xmush]
#5983310 - 08/21/06 08:38 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
O wut-Eva.
I want to make fun of you and say "it's not a competition, dork!" Except, as soon as I posted, and scrolled up to your post i was like "SHIT! bastard got to it before me!!!"
Weeell uhh, I added instructions on how to spore print and a picture Gumby posted as a visual aid!
Whatsthestory, P. foenisecii is not active, depite what some literature may state. the claim is based on accurate analysis but improper ID's. They are mildly poisonous, but nothing to go to the hospital over. Just maybe some diarhea and puke. Fuuuun.
--------------------
|
xmush
Professor ofDoom
Registered: 10/22/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: Jaw-juh
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: CureCat]
#5983321 - 08/21/06 08:42 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Dude, did I just scoop you again? Burn! Actually Cure, the latest paper that triggered the latest discussion of Pan foen activity was not based on improper IDs. They presumably had real Pan foens, and the analysis showed trace amounts of psilocybin. And by trace I mean tiny, tiny, tiny amounts. Maybe even 4 tinys. So while there might be psilocybin in some collections, the amount is so miniscule that it is not an active mushroom.
|
CureCat
Strangest
Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: xmush]
#5983324 - 08/21/06 08:42 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Conflicting responses!!!!!
According to what I have read, the lab work analyzing the activety of P. foenisecii was mislead, by the specimens having been misidentified and the suspected P. foes where actually P. subbalteatus. ????
--------------------
|
CureCat
Strangest
Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: CureCat]
#5983329 - 08/21/06 08:44 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Goddamn, rough fucking morning, I'm already behind!!!
Can you link me to any quotes of this more recent study?? I was not aware of it.
--------------------
|
xmush
Professor ofDoom
Registered: 10/22/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: Jaw-juh
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: CureCat]
#5983341 - 08/21/06 08:49 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
No problem. Here is a link to the lively thread, started by wombat. It is a fairly recent study, and unless you assume that the authors misidentified the mushrooms that they grew themselves, it is pretty definitive. Pan foen activity thread
My take on the whole matter is psilocybin, yes, active, no.
|
CureCat
Strangest
Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: xmush]
#5983352 - 08/21/06 08:55 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Gotta get some sleep before class. I'll have time to read the thread over later in the day. But before I go, let me clarify- I was not questioning the integrity of this new study, just the reliability of past, and I think, published, study which the researchers had accidentaly mistaken the two similar looking species.
--------------------
|
Mead
Registered: 07/26/02
Posts: 2,519
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? *DELETED* [Re: xmush]
#5983358 - 08/21/06 09:00 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Post deleted by Mead
Reason for deletion: .
|
xmush
Professor ofDoom
Registered: 10/22/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: Jaw-juh
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? [Re: Mead]
#5983375 - 08/21/06 09:11 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I wasn't trying to contradict your stem technique, but twisty stems is much more subjective than black vs. brown spore prints. It doesn't really matter how many subbs finds you've posted, black spores are black, brown is brown. And also, the gills of subbs can certainly be brownish in color. I guess it all comes down to whether you want a definitive method for identifying the mushroom (spore print), or a subjective method (twisty red stems). And just cause I don't post my subbs finds doesn't mean i haven't found them. But just to make mead feel better, let's all take a moment to bow down to his infinitely greater experience. (closest smiley I could find to a bow)
And mead, i'm just being sarcastic buddy and I really didn't mean to dispute your field ID technique - it's a good one. Spore print is just better
|
Mead
Registered: 07/26/02
Posts: 2,519
|
Re: ID: P. foenisecii or P. subbalteatus ? *DELETED* [Re: xmush]
#5983386 - 08/21/06 09:18 AM (17 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Post deleted by Mead
Reason for deletion: .
|
|