|
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
|
rastausty
Mountaineer Fan
Registered: 06/12/06
Posts: 78
Loc: Morgantown, WV
Last seen: 11 years, 11 months
|
|
Hello all, I live in Northern WV and I'm wondering if anyone up this way has encountered the first blue foot of the season??
|
MichiganPsiloX
Dude
Registered: 08/30/06
Posts: 28
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 16 years, 4 months
|
|
Hey it seems really early to find blue foot. I have found them in Michigan but not until early June and after 75-80 degree weather, humid, and rainy. Do they normally come up that early or are you just further south than me. Also I have one question for anyone here: Without all the scientific jargon, can anyone distinguish the differences between p. caerulipes and p. ovoideocystidiata? They are both referred to as bluefoot. Does one have a different colored cap, longer stem, smaller cap? or whatever? Do they grow in the same types of substrate along streams in wood debris and soil/ mud/ sand like caerulipes does? thanks.
-------------------- "There are things known and things unknown; and between them are doors," -Jim Morrison
|
MustardMan
Peace Frog
Registered: 10/18/05
Posts: 970
Last seen: 5 years, 7 months
|
|
Well, it has been in the upper 70's to mid 80's, and has rained a lot in the past few weeks here in VA, so I guess it's just because I am more southward.
-------------------- Wild Psilocybe Ovoideocystidiata Cultivated Cubensis
|
rastausty
Mountaineer Fan
Registered: 06/12/06
Posts: 78
Loc: Morgantown, WV
Last seen: 11 years, 11 months
|
|
I'm in West Virginia, so yeah I am a little more southern than you, and this is usually around the time they start to pop up. I've never found one in the Morgantown area, only up near Bethany and down towards Parkersburg. But I'm betting on a few spots around here that I think will be big producers. Guess we'll just have to wait and see
|
nk pakelika
Visual assassin
Registered: 04/02/07
Posts: 308
Loc: the mirror
Last seen: 15 years, 2 months
|
|
are blue foots known too grow in sw pa?
-------------------- when i get up i wake-n-bake, take a pis and shake, my clock stops at 420 what you want me too say.
|
coon
big odd son
Registered: 07/06/06
Posts: 3,243
Loc: behind the rows....
|
|
you wont know until you look.
|
rastausty
Mountaineer Fan
Registered: 06/12/06
Posts: 78
Loc: Morgantown, WV
Last seen: 11 years, 11 months
|
|
Yah, I'm pretty sure you could find bluefoots in SW PA, as it is relatively in the same area as Wheeling. I suggest checking out ShroomyDan's Bluefoot threads from last spring, and take note on the habitat pics. Use these pictures as a guide and keep your eyes out for areas such as ;river valleys, 100 year flood plains, the convergence of two streams. Hope this helps , and happy hunting
|
nk pakelika
Visual assassin
Registered: 04/02/07
Posts: 308
Loc: the mirror
Last seen: 15 years, 2 months
|
|
thanks, and it should im gonna look for his blue foot thread now.
-------------------- when i get up i wake-n-bake, take a pis and shake, my clock stops at 420 what you want me too say.
|
nk pakelika
Visual assassin
Registered: 04/02/07
Posts: 308
Loc: the mirror
Last seen: 15 years, 2 months
|
|
well after some careful reading, and research i think i may already know a few locations where i could look. ill keep yinz posted on my finds. oh and good luck too all!
-------------------- when i get up i wake-n-bake, take a pis and shake, my clock stops at 420 what you want me too say.
|
mjshroomer
Sage
Registered: 07/21/99
Posts: 13,774
Loc: gone with my shrooms
|
|
Shroomery Dan's Mushrooms are not the real blue foot. They are actually Psilocybe ovopideocystidiata, a new speci9es separate form Psilocybe caerulipes (the blue foot of gary Lincoff.
mj
Shroomy Dan's images of a bluing Psilocybe with a persistent blue veil is common in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and West Virginia..
The Blue Foot, P. caerulipes is common in Michigan, southern Ontario along the US border and form Ohio to the esast coast and from New York to South Carolina.
See Falcon's thread in the shroom Hunting forum for the ID and mj's thread on the id of this species of Dan's
mj
|
MichiganPsiloX
Dude
Registered: 08/30/06
Posts: 28
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 16 years, 4 months
|
|
ahhhh... I see. Thanks a bunch MJ that is a real help. I just couldn't really interpret the terminology used by Guzman's analysis. I got a good conception from what you said though. Hope I come across some of these new ones this summer! that would be a cool find. Thanks again. peace
-------------------- "There are things known and things unknown; and between them are doors," -Jim Morrison
|
shroomydan
exshroomerite
Registered: 07/04/04
Posts: 4,126
Loc: In the woods
|
|
The common name used locally for P. ovoideocystidiata is "bluefoot". That's what people in the Ohio Valley call them, so I think it is Ok to call them that here as well.
The offical taxonomical name for these mushrooms is of secondary importance, because whether we say P. ovoideocystidiata, P. caerulipes, or bluefoot, we are talking about the same kind of mushroom.
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist
Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,355
Last seen: 11 hours, 45 minutes
|
|
Dan -
Did you just say that P. ovoideocystidiata == P. caerulipes? Or did I misunderstand?
I recently wrote wikipedia articles on both those mushrooms. If anyone here can add any more info or pictures I would really appreciate it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psilocybe_caerulipes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psilocybe_ovoideocystidiata
|
shroomydan
exshroomerite
Registered: 07/04/04
Posts: 4,126
Loc: In the woods
|
|
The taxonomical question concerning Bluefoot is a philosophy of language problem. In fact, I'm writing a masters thesis on the question.
The system of binomial nomenclature that originated with Aristotle assumes two false premises.
1) Species are fixed, distinct, and eternal.
2) Living organisms to be classified have two parents.
The first is false in general, and the second is false for mushrooms that can have tens of thousands of parents.
With each mushroom producing billions of spores, and with thousands of genetically distinct spores coming together to form a single colony, evolution moves mush faster with mushrooms than with plants and animals. Consequently, the edges between species, which are always a little fuzzy become positively blurry in kingdom fungi.
Whether or not Psilocybe ovoideocystidiata and Psilocybe caerulipes are actually two distinct species turns on whether or not the one classifying them is an essentialist or a nominalist. Hard essentialism was defeated by Darwin who showed that species evolve into other species, but it seems to me that Guzman is taking an essentialist view when splitting taxon. Essentialism is OK, laudable even, provided that clear and distinct differentia are cited for justifying the claim that one species is distinct from another, but it is not clear to me that clear and distinct differentia have been provided.
Guzman's split seems to hang on the existence of a persistent annulus in P. ovoideocystidiata which is not present in P. caerulipes, but this is simply not the case. I do not know if I have ever seen P. caerulipes. I do know that I have found thousands of Bluefoot (that is what folks in wheeling call them) and very few have an annulus at all. In cultivated specimens, the annulus is obvious but only persists for a few hours. I do not think Guzman's claim about the persistent annulus is supported by empirical data, and I do not think it can be considered an essential difference between P. caerulipes and P. ovoideocystidiata.
Nominalism, on the other hand, is concerned not with essences but with names assigned by man. It is a pragmatic approach to taxonomy that assigns names to classes of similar objects without concerning itself with the essences of things.
When I say they are the same kind of mushroom, I mean that both look the same, taste the same, smell the same, and produce the same effect when ingested. Regardless of the Latin binomials assigned by old college professors, they are the same kind of mushroom.
Even if Guzman is right. Even if caerulipes and ovoideocystidiata are essentially different species of the genus Psilocybe, they share the common name "bluefoot" and for all practical purposes are the same kind of mushroom.
|
Psychoslut
The Mother Fucking Bear-o-dactyl
Registered: 12/10/02
Posts: 20,917
Loc: all up in ya
|
|
w3rd
-------------------- [quote]KristiMidocean said: Good now thats clear.WHO FUCKING CARES. If I am fat u all keep pointing it out like its suppose to be a secret.LIke u really have nothing better to do then make fat jokes. If o know its like I do I know yall can come up with NEW AND BETTER SHIT . This shit is old and boring . I left in the first place cause this shit got boring not because of the fat jokes . Fat jokes dont bother me but seriously its old[/quote]
|
psilocybin_qualm
Student
Registered: 04/25/07
Posts: 341
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
|
|
Wow thats pretty cool. The same kind of mushroom, but not the same exact mushroom. So if it was not for the existence of a persistent annulus in P. ovoideocystidiata then they would be the same exact mushroom?
|
mjshroomer
Sage
Registered: 07/21/99
Posts: 13,774
Loc: gone with my shrooms
|
|
HI Shroomy Dan and Others.
While the original bluefoot mushroom, P. caerulipes was labeled as bluefoot, several years of posting here,members here have picked P. ovoideocystidiata and they also labeled the collections as bluefoot, But only because they believed the species to be P. caerulipes. The epithetof 'blue foot' That would then be proper.
However, here is another point of view concerning a nickname for P. stunztii. Since Blue Ringer is an epithet used when referring to Psilocybe stuntzii. It later became a nickname for two other similar species, P. fimetaria, a rare dung inhabiting shroom found originally in manure in a pasture, but is more common on manured fertilized lawns in the PNW is also referred to as a blue ringer and so is P. sierrae, a similar shroom, also form pastures but rare in a pasture and comnon on a lawn. All three of those latter species have a persistant annulus on the stem where the cap breaks open.
But members here do not refer to P. ovoideocystidiata as a blue ringer.
So Blue foot can be an appropriate nickname for P. Ovoideocystidiata.
Now on another note regarding Dan's comments above about P. ovoideocystidiata and P. caerulipes.
Dr. Guzmán's taxonomic paper also separates the spores by their sizes from P. caerulip0es and P. ovoidocystidiata.
Here in a letter to me is a simpler explanation as to his judgement.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Quote:
Dear John Allen:
Attached I am sending to you the new paper on the description of Psilocybe ovoideocistidiata Guzman & Gaines from Pennsylvania. As I said you, this species is the same that Dan Molter found is West Virginia. The differences of this species with P. caerulipes are several, as the presence of annulus and mainly the spores (form and size). Without discussion, both Pennsylvania and West Virginia are not P. caerulipes. I am sorry.
I am very busy with other several species from USA, Canada, Central and South America, Antillean, Indonesia and Australia. As you see, I have a lot of work.
PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU RECEIVED THIS MAIL.
Best regards
Dr. Gaston Guzman
mj
|
shroomydan
exshroomerite
Registered: 07/04/04
Posts: 4,126
Loc: In the woods
|
|
Quote:
georgeM said: Here are a few pictures of spore samples from these mushrooms ShroomyDan found. The spores are mounted in nutrient supplemented water so hopefully in a few days we can see hyphae formation if anyone is interested... I should take a few pictures with a stain as well, and damnit I need to get on ordering a new bottle of immersion oil.
georgeM
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/6837665#Post6837665 Thanks George
I wounder if anybody knows where we could find photos of P. caerulipes spores for comparison. A clear and distinct difference in spore size and shape would convince me of Guzman's position.
|
mjshroomer
Sage
Registered: 07/21/99
Posts: 13,774
Loc: gone with my shrooms
|
|
I am posting here an SEM of P. ovoideocystidiata, one of several by my colleague Prakitsin and me, from the university in Bangkok. This image is cropped from a larger image
Right now I am trying to obtain a copy of the original Alexander H. Smith Photograph of P. caerulipes, published in his book, a Field Guide to Eastern USA Mushrooms. I have emailed his daughter and my colleague in Bangkok is trying to get a a few samples through his Schedule one permit of a few specimens from the original collections of the P. caerulipes on deposit at the U of Michigan.
That may take several months of mail.
I also have now, chemical analysis of P. caerulipes from the late 1960s, for comparative analysis to my current analysis of Dan's shrooms, as noted, and which will appear in a forth-coming paper by Gartz, Me, Dan And Prakitsin from Bangkok.
Adn a few other poiints of interest I want to make note of here are those who want all mushrooms to have DNA sequencing performed.
\HEre is a big problem. Currently there are over 200 psilocybian mushrooms worldwide,
While a large number are on deposit at the U of mexico and at XAL in Xalapa, dozens more are in various university herbariums and other institutions of higher learning.
To even obtain a single specimen, one has to provide a DEA permit to study them. That is something that few people can obtain who are into DNA sequencing research. And if one did get a permit, that does not mean he would be about to obtain the 200 different specimens scattered cross the world which they would need to perform such a project for any school.
I and my colleagues just performed DNA sequencing for 8 mushrooms. Already, about 7 species have been reclassified as Psychedelia as their family name by John-Marc Moncalvo and Rytas Vilgalys, Scott A. Redhead and Orson K. Miller and 10 opther authors, et al. But they did not study any of the other known Mexican or world species after 6 years since they wrote their first paper on the DNA of hallucinogenic Psilocybe species.
Watling did DNA sequencing of P. semilanceata but did not publish much data except that he wrote that he performed DNA on that species. However, Moncalvo et al, and I and my colleagues also did the DNA sequencing of P. semilanceata.
So there really uis not a lot of mycologists studying the Psilocybe species because of a lack of a DNA permit to obtainthe materials from other herbariums.
Thus the normal taxonomy is still applied to most shrooms for identification based on spores and other microscopic and macroscopic specifics.
If one attempted to study one or two species then someone in a department at a particular university might be able to obtain a permit to get samples from other herbariums.
mjshroomer
|
psiclops
# 1
Registered: 12/06/02
Posts: 1,965
Loc: PNW
|
|
I know I probably post these pictures way too much, but what the - hey!
This is pretty much what you're saying?
-Because of some mynoot, macro. differences, these two "seperate species'" should not be claimed as indeed seperate species' (specii? lol).
Like these pictures, below, of P. cyanescens.
|
|