|
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
|
shroomydan
exshroomerite


Registered: 07/04/04
Posts: 4,126
Loc: In the woods
|
Re: Bluefoot is Psilocybe caerulipes and Psilocybe ovoideocystidiata. [Re: xmush]
#6774161 - 04/11/07 08:17 AM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Perhaps I should not have posted the email from Dr. Guzman.
Let's use the principle of charity here gentlemen. Guzman, Mj, and Falcon are all intelligent and respectable members of the mycological community, but none of them (none of us) are beyond making a mistake.
I personally think the problem with naming mushrooms stems from a systemic deficiency in canonical taxonomy. The system of binomial nomenclature was first developed by Aristotle 2300 years ago to classify plants and animals. It assumes two false premises:
1) That species are distinct, fixed, and eternal.
and
2) That living things have two parents.
The second premise does not hold true for fungi who can have thousands of parents, and the first is refuted by Darwin who showed living things are evolving such that there is frequently a fuzzy edge between species. Species are stable only within a balanced ecosystem and within a regular climate, wherever there is an unstable environment, or a race to secure a place in a community evolving into a balanced ecosystem, species adapt to the dynamic environment.
With each mushroom producing millions of spores, and with thousands of spores from different mushrooms coming together to form a single colony, evolution moves orders of magnitude faster in the kingdom Fungi than in Plantae or Animilia.
Furthermore, the criterion for distinguishing between species has classically been the ability to interbreed and produce fertile offspring. I suspect this criterion might not apply to fungi that can just as readily be described as colonies of cooperating single-celled animals as as they can be called 'organisms' in the sense that plants and animals are organisms. Consider the slime molds.
In falcon's defense, I would like to point out that he has information concerning Bethany that others of us do not. Bethany was identified as P. caerulipes by MrMushrooms (whoever he is).
Let's talk about this with open minds. Appeals to authority and ad hominems will not advance knowledge, and advancing knowledge is the purpose of this forum. ...........................
MJ,
It is my understanding that Guzman received samples of P. ovoideocystidiata from an unknown source in Pennsylvania last year, and has yet to publish a paper describing the species. Until the paper is published, the name is not official. I wish Dr. Guzman would join us here for this discussion, and I wish others on this board would give him the respect he has clearly earned, even if he is mistaken about this one little thing.
It is very good to be having this discussion.
Maybe this thread should be moved to advanced mycology in a few days, after it has been here long enough for all the hunting forum regulars to see it.
It feels like we are on the leading edge of something new, not just a new species, but perhaps a new way of doing fungal taxonomy. Let's keep the conversation going, and let's keep it respectful.
Peace, Dan
Edited by shroomydan (04/11/07 01:42 PM)
|
shroomydan
exshroomerite


Registered: 07/04/04
Posts: 4,126
Loc: In the woods
|
Re: Bluefoot is Psilocybe caerulipes and Psilocybe ovoideocystidiata. [Re: CureCat]
#6775251 - 04/11/07 01:55 PM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Phylogeny is a great tool, but when taken to an extreme every organism has a unique chart, except perhaps in the case of clones and identical twins.
At the other extreme, if one takes the cannonical view that all life evolved from a single common ansestor, then phylogeny could argue for a single species called "life".
At which junction of downward radiating branches does one place a species marker?
|
shroomydan
exshroomerite


Registered: 07/04/04
Posts: 4,126
Loc: In the woods
|
Re: Bluefoot is Psilocybe caerulipes and Psilocybe ovoideocystidiata. [Re: mjshroomer]
#6782214 - 04/13/07 07:56 AM (16 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
MJ,
I'm not a mycologist, but I am very interested in Taxonomy and would like to know what differentia Guzman used to distinguish P. ovoideocystidiata from P. stuntzii and P. caerulipes.
|
|
|
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: ToxicMan, inski, Alan Rockefeller, Duggstar, TimmiT, Anglerfish, Tmethyl, Lucis, Doc9151, Land Trout 31,059 topic views. 3 members, 9 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ] |
|