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Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information.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



Registered: 02/02/04
Posts: 109
Loc: Marvelous Marin County, C...
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up?
#7899979 - 01/19/08 12:38 AM (16 years, 13 days ago) |
|
|
And to demonstrate my point that "Psilocybe subaeruginascens" that's turned up in the Bay Area is not the "real" Psilocybe subaeruginascens, I present you with this picture showing spores of both species:

The darker, super thick-walled ones are straight from Hohnel's holotype collected at Bogor Botanical Gardens in Java. The lighter, slightly subrhomboid ones are from our locals. Same species? I think not. And, of course, by definition, if a collection is not the same species as the holotype, it should not carry the same name.
By comparison, here are spores from a Japanese collection (from this link):

Pretty similar to ours and not-so-similar to the Javanese one.
Anyway, just thought I'd finally show some of these pics.
|
sui
I love you.



Registered: 08/20/04
Posts: 31,853
Loc: Cali, Contra Costa Co.
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Strophariaceae]
#7899992 - 01/19/08 12:46 AM (16 years, 13 days ago) |
|
|
if its not the jap species then is it?
I really want to see some fruits for myself i should get on it.
-------------------- "There is never a wrong note, bend it." Jimi Hendrix
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Strophariaceae]
#7900441 - 01/19/08 03:59 AM (16 years, 13 days ago) |
|
|
Peter, is it typical to put spores from two collections on the same slide for comparison like that?? I see the benefit of being able to compare them closely, but at the same time, it leaves room for one to argue which is which.... I think the distinctions are pretty clear, but i mean, someone could argue it. I guess it is probably not a big deal, since the argument would likely be dismissed by the scientific community.
So then, were there any other micro distinctions noted between the java and local collections??
Who's gonna name the Japanese / Bay Area potential new species?
--------------------
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7901042 - 01/19/08 10:33 AM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
I wish that transplant would fruit one of these years. Mycelium is still going tho. It was nice, and definitely different than cyans in terms of the trip
all I got is some old photos
Edited by auweia (01/19/08 10:45 AM)
|
Workman
1999 Spore War Veteran



Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 3,598
Loc: Oregon, USA
Last seen: 13 hours, 47 minutes
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Strophariaceae]
#7901411 - 01/19/08 12:16 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Hmmmmm...... Perhaps the Bay Area species is actually P. septentrionalis from Japan and the Java collection is the real P. subaeruginascens.
And I must agree with Curecat on mixing the spores on a single slide. By just looking at that image, how can you be sure that some of the lighter, thinner walled spores are not immature Java spores?
Do you have any micrographs of just the Hohnel's holotype spores and/or other structures for reference?
-------------------- Research funded by the patrons of The Spore Works Exotic Spore Supply My Instagram Reinvesting 25% of Sales Towards Basic Research and Species Identification 
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Workman]
#7901837 - 01/19/08 01:48 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Workman said: By just looking at that image, how can you be sure that some of the lighter, thinner walled spores are not immature Java spores?
Yeah, that was pretty much my concern, but i figured you look at both collections first, and that they were dissimilar enough (even the immature spores) that it was no worry mixing them up.
Anyway, are there any photos or at least sketches of the java Ps. subaeruginascens??
I found this in Workmans thread:
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/6520065#Post6520065
All the photos I've found are from Asia.
--------------------
|
notapillow
I want to be a fisherman



Registered: 09/29/03
Posts: 31,129
Loc: A rare and different tune
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7901849 - 01/19/08 01:50 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
i love those old pics
--------------------
|
Strophariaceae
mycologist



Registered: 02/02/04
Posts: 109
Loc: Marvelous Marin County, C...
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Workman]
#7901876 - 01/19/08 01:55 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
I have separate photos of each, of course, but mixing them on the same slide was the quickest way to do a "comparison" shot – exactly the same illumination, same exposure time, etc, hence color differences are most clear this way. (I think the differences in color between the Bay Area collections in the above photo and that of the Japanese ones is mainly an artifact of illumination and photography.)
Not all of my photos are in one place – I'll have to dig up the single-collection spore photos.
As for other structures – no photos, but I do have drawings.
|
Strophariaceae
mycologist



Registered: 02/02/04
Posts: 109
Loc: Marvelous Marin County, C...
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: sui]
#7901916 - 01/19/08 02:03 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
suimush said: if its not the jap species then is it?
Well, I'm not sure of the "it" to which you're referring, but I don't claim that what we get in the Bay Area is a different species from what's collected in Japan. It could be, mind you, but I'd have to examine both side by side to really tell the difference. They're close relatives at the very least.
What I'm saying is that neither the North American or Japanese populations are different from the Javanese ones.
|
Strophariaceae
mycologist



Registered: 02/02/04
Posts: 109
Loc: Marvelous Marin County, C...
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Workman]
#7902070 - 01/19/08 02:47 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Workman said: Hmmmmm...... Perhaps the Bay Area species is actually P. septentrionalis from Japan and the Java collection is the real P. subaeruginascens.
Well, Guzman is going back and forth on deciding whether he's going to simply merge P. septentrionalis into P. subaeruginascens or not. (He's still working under the assumption that the holotype of P. subaeruginascens is conspecific with the other populations. I'm putting together some documentation to convince him otherwise. That said, Guzman's "working concept" of P. subaeruginascens is clearly the Japanese collections.)
The state of P. septentrionalis is a long an interesting story. Basically, it was only known from a few collections, the holotype and a few other collections, all from Hokkaido and all in the personal herbarium of Kazumasa Yokoyama. Over the years, this collection was badly hit by insects, leaving no intact collections. However, the spore print from the holotype was still available and I was sent a small part of it. I was able to examine the spore characteristics and get spore stats. To me, the spores and spore stats don't really look that different from the North American collections I've seen, nor from the pictures of "regular" Japanese "P. subaeruginascens", but I was looking at a far-from-complete set of characteristics.
Guzman separated the two mainly based on a difference in pleurocystidia size between "P. subaeruginascens" and P. septentrionalis. Unfortunately, there's simply no way to go back and double-check that at this point.
There is one rather intriguing possibility for getting a new collection of the P. septentrionalis holotype, because there is actually a type culture (that is, a culture grown from the holotype) for P. septentrionalis at NITE-BRC, a Japanese government genomics and culture collection. The record can be found here:
http://www.nbrc.nite.go.jp/NBRC2/NBRCCatalogueDetailServlet?ID=NBRC&CAT=00030219
One could easily grow, fully describe, and designate a neotype collection from this culture material. However, getting it is a whole other story. I tried doing so. Knowing that it was an active, they promptly asked the Japanese drug-control agency, who asked the US Embassy, who stated that I would need permission and documentation from the DEA, and possibly the FDA as well. I wasn't even about to try and pursue that route.
I'm not sure who could get the culture, inside or outside Japan, and I actually don't know of any mycologists or herbarium managers who typically go through the legal minefield of getting DEA/USDA/etc approval when borrowing collections.
Anyway, depending on the way Guzman wants to go with it, all Japanese and North American collections could be treated as conspecific with P. septentrionalis until direct study of all of the different populations is possible, or a new species could be named using North American or perhaps Japanese material as a holotype.
Edited by Strophariaceae (01/19/08 02:55 PM)
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Strophariaceae]
#7902104 - 01/19/08 02:55 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Someone needs to fly to Japan and grow this Ps. septentrionalis (=Ps. subaeruginascens var. septentrionalis) out!!
Fuck I hate drug policy.
--------------------
|
sui
I love you.



Registered: 08/20/04
Posts: 31,853
Loc: Cali, Contra Costa Co.
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7902111 - 01/19/08 02:57 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
isnt there a shroomerite living in japan?
-------------------- "There is never a wrong note, bend it." Jimi Hendrix
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: sui]
#7902118 - 01/19/08 03:00 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Even if there is, what are the chances that they are credible enough to be granted this culture for study??
--------------------
|
sui
I love you.



Registered: 08/20/04
Posts: 31,853
Loc: Cali, Contra Costa Co.
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7902146 - 01/19/08 03:07 PM (16 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
true true.
maybe alan should just go to japan and pick em.
-------------------- "There is never a wrong note, bend it." Jimi Hendrix
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: sui]
#7907344 - 01/20/08 09:03 PM (16 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Curecat, P Werner isn't saying it outright, and I don't think he knows for sure either because >> It takes more than just a few samples to be sure..If you really want to nail it down, it's better to have hundreds of samples and we just don't have that in the bay area...We have your find, Waylits find, and my find..I met one guy at an MSSF meet with one single specimen once, and it looked alot what I found the next year, but not like what you put on Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psilocybe_subaeruginascens
I'm really leaning toward what you found in GG Park isn't quite the same thing me and Waylit found 2 years ago ( see above Wiki link-- I can't find much commonality with that one with what I found)..I'm convinced what Waylit found is the same as what I found, but not your find ( yours might actually be closer to the proper Japanese species, but what I found and Waylit found seems to be further away from that (there's a number of macroscopic characteristics involved, and some of it is color, the stem, how they feel, how they smell, all fairly difficult to describe
so here goes...We confirmed that it is NOT Azurescens, it is NOT stuntzii, but apparently it is related to Stuntzii, but it is more potent than cyans (go figure)
so what the hell is it?...and Curecat, please note that almost none of this looks like your finds and post on Wiki, except for maybe this >>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Psilocybe.subaeruginascens.7.jpg
you can see that it is a little close, but not quite, because as the monoghraph expands, it gets further away from these central common traits
does this look anything like what you found?
I don't think so, buddy, Curecat...Nope..I honestly don't..There is something distinctly different in what you found that is significantly different from what I found...(can't even be sure yet exactly what)



Edited by auweia (01/20/08 09:55 PM)
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7907641 - 01/20/08 09:57 PM (16 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
>Curecat, P Werner isn't saying it outright, and I don't think he knows >for sure either because >> It takes more than just a few samples to >be sure..If you really want to nail it down, it's better to have >hundreds of samples and we just don't have that in the bay area...
I understand that well...
>We have your find, Waylits find, and my find..I met one guy at an >MSSF meet with one single specimen once, and it looked alot what >I found the next year, but not like what you put on Wiki
First, "my collections" are from the same patch as that guy from MSSF. So actually, that specimen you saw that looked a lot like what you found the next year, was actually from the same patch that I've posted pictures of.
I didn't put anything on Wikipedia, that was Alans fine work. The top 4 photos (including the main photo) are "that guys" photos. The 5th one is alans photo, and the last 3 are mine. They are ALL from the same patch. That guys from MSSF.
>I'm really leaning toward what you found in GG Park isn't quite the >same thing me and Waylit found 2 years ago
Again, I didn't find them in GGP. "That guy" found them back in like, 2004 or something in GGP, and then transplanted the patch to Oakland. All my photos are from the transplant in Oakland.
>does this look anything like what you found?
The first photo of the pin looks very much like collections I've seen.
Seriously, it's called phenotypic variation.
I think the differences you are pointing out can be accounted for by the exposed habitat of your patch, versus the Oakland patch, which fruits among tall grasses, big logs, blackberry vines, and other small shrubs and bushes. It is also watered very frequently.
--------------------
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7907734 - 01/20/08 10:23 PM (16 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
CureCat said: >Curecat, P Werner isn't saying it outright, and I don't think he knows >for sure either because >> It takes more than just a few samples to >be sure..If you really want to nail it down, it's better to have >hundreds of samples and we just don't have that in the bay area...
I understand that well...
>We have your find, Waylits find, and my find..I met one guy at an >MSSF meet with one single specimen once, and it looked alot what >I found the next year, but not like what you put on Wiki
First, "my collections" are from the same patch as that guy from MSSF. So actually, that specimen you saw that looked a lot like what you found the next year, was actually from the same patch that I've posted pictures of.
I didn't put anything on Wikipedia, that was Alans fine work. The top 4 photos (including the main photo) are "that guys" photos. The 5th one is alans photo, and the last 3 are mine. They are ALL from the same patch. That guys from MSSF.
>I'm really leaning toward what you found in GG Park isn't quite the >same thing me and Waylit found 2 years ago
Again, I didn't find them in GGP. "That guy" found them back in like, 2004 or something in GGP, and then transplanted the patch to Oakland. All my photos are from the transplant in Oakland.
>does this look anything like what you found?
The first photo of the pin looks very much like collections I've seen.
Seriously, it's called phenotypic variation.
I think the differences you are pointing out can be accounted for by the exposed habitat of your patch, versus the Oakland patch, which fruits among tall grasses, big logs, blackberry vines, and other small shrubs and bushes. It is also watered very frequently.
That could be, since I admit the one find of mine WAS out in the open and exposed to the elements much more than any other patch found so far
nevertheless,I just want you to admit that much more work needs to be done on this species before it can be called , properly > subaeruginascens
we are nowhere close to being able to properly identify what we found in the bay area, and i'm pretty sure Peter Werner is acknowledging that in this thread
it is commonly accepted knowledge that in cases like this, one or three samples just will not cut the cake, but hundreds of them might
we here in the bay area are nowhere close to that point, and as good a picker as I am, neither am I
this is the main problem the scientific community has < not enough samples < still too rare here in the bay area
Edited by auweia (01/20/08 10:47 PM)
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7907771 - 01/20/08 10:36 PM (16 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
>nevertheless,I just want you to admit that much more work needs to >be done on this species before it can be called , properly > subaeruginascens
Where in this thread or anywhere else, have I seemed to be struggling with this concept? 
I think that this Bay Area species is NOT the same as the Java Ps. subaeruginascens based on Peters comparison and research. I do not know why I am being asked to "admit" anything... I don't see how we are in disagreement on this issue.
Our disagreement revolves around the local collections.
--------------------
|
Strophariaceae
mycologist



Registered: 02/02/04
Posts: 109
Loc: Marvelous Marin County, C...
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7908041 - 01/21/08 12:12 AM (16 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Auweia –
I'm totally unclear on what you're talking about, but I can assure you, I don't need "hundreds of collections" to tell me that Japanese/North American so-called "P. subaeruginascens" is different from the Javanese type. As for how close or how distant the Japanese/North American populations are, and whether P. septentrionalis is or isn't a different species from these populations I'm pretty non-committal on, because I really don't have the data to establish that one way or the other. I can tell you they're all pretty close and all very unlike the Javanese type collections of P. subaeruginascens and P. aeruginomaculans.
As for the collections, you showed me, yes, they do have notable differences both macroscopically and in spore statistics with the collections Pillsbury gave me. They weren't different enough for me to all them a different species, though.
I'll post separate photos shortly of the spores of P. subaeruginascens holotype, local so-called "P. subaeruginascens", and (what's left of) the holotype of P. septentrionalis – I need to convert them out of psd format to jpegs first, though. I can't locate my P. aeruginomaculans holotype spore photos, unfortunately.
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7908589 - 01/21/08 07:11 AM (16 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
sorry, poor choice of words on my part
I just can't seem to get around that Wiki page being the same as what I found two years ago. Whatever is on the Wiki page isn't what I found and maybe I can't put my finger on it but dang it, it just ain't the same
Peters description and comparison seems fine to me, except I'm not sure which bay area type he's comparing it with. If he's comparing it with the same type on that Wiki page, there might be three types, not two
I'll tell ya, when I first saw that Wiki page, it was like 'huh?...bay area?...this can't be right...that's not what I found...this is some sort of bastardized love child experiment gone horribly awry...kill it...kill it now before it's too late!"
naw, just kidding
I'm just saying we might be talking about three types instead of two
Edited by auweia (01/21/08 07:55 AM)
|
Strophariaceae
mycologist



Registered: 02/02/04
Posts: 109
Loc: Marvelous Marin County, C...
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7908940 - 01/21/08 10:01 AM (16 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Interesting. The populations/strains I've seen of North American "P. subaeruginascens" are:
Pillsbury's collection from Golden Gate park, with its very distinctive pointy umbo and wavy gills Your collection from the East Bay Two other collections from Seattle sent to me by Joe Ammirati (both slightly different from one another in spore stats)
Others I know of:
Sal Billeci's cultivar from Golden Gate park, which was passed along to Rolf Singer (same strain as Pillsbury's? haven't seen it)
A collection from Pennsylvania Guzman tells me about.
And this third Bay Area strain you were mentioning – I don't know that one. Was that every discussed on shroomery?
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Strophariaceae]
#7909214 - 01/21/08 11:22 AM (16 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
edited out
Edited by auweia (02/21/08 12:18 PM)
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7909439 - 01/21/08 12:27 PM (16 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
>well, I never noticed any wavy gills like the one from Golden Gate >Park. Are you saying the collection from the east bay and GG park >are the same types? >did Pillsburys collection from GG park have wavy cap edges? This one >from Curecat is in the east bay http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Psilocybe.subaeruginascens.4.jpg
Yes, they are the same strain- from the same organism. "Pillsbury" is that guy from MSSF. He found them originally in GGP in 2003 or 2004, subsequent collections have been from the transplant that resides in Oakland. "My collections" are from that same patch. The wiki images are all from the same patch, taken over the years.
--------------------
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7909601 - 01/21/08 01:19 PM (16 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
edited out
Edited by auweia (02/21/08 12:21 PM)
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7909734 - 01/21/08 01:58 PM (16 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
>but has Peter compared the Richmond one ( I was able to get him a >dried one at least) and that GG Park one
Yes, he has:
>As for the collections, you showed me, yes, they do have notable >differences both macroscopically and in spore statistics with the >collections Pillsbury gave me. They weren't different enough for me >to all them a different species, though.
It's interesting actually, because I originally thought that the GGP/Oakland strain was Ps. ovoideocystidiata based on macro similarities alone. Both have wavy lammele, an umbo, annulus (which typically dries in a blue ring), and the pileus colour (especially when hygrophanous) of both is extremely similar.
--------------------
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7910000 - 01/21/08 03:00 PM (16 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
oh I see..
well, I can live with it being the same species, but it sure seems like a different strain at least, in the same way you have different cyan strains, some big and thick and other smaller and more fragile
but at least now it's that the Bay Area types are different than the Japanese types
somebody just sent me a link to that other one too > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psilocybe_ovoideocystidiata
Indeed, the top photo looks like what I found, but not the bottom one..fascinating.
and doesn't one of the OPs live in the Ohio valley?. Haven't heard of this one before, also in the stuntzii category, but are they potent like the bay area type?
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7910072 - 01/21/08 03:23 PM (16 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
>well, I can live with it being the same species, but it sure seems like >a different strain at least, in the same way you have different cyan >strains, some big and thick and other smaller and more fragile
I've been saying this for months- the macroscopic discrepencies are probably due to phenotypic variation between strains of the same species.
>Indeed, the top photo looks like what I found, but not the bottom >one..fascinating.
ACtually, I was saying that The GGP/Oakland collection looks like Ps. ovoideocystidiata.
Quote:
CureCat said: There is a Spring fruiting Psilocybe here in the Bay Area, CA, which bears macroscopic resemblance to Ps. ovoideocystidiata. Most notably, this unknown species has consistently wavy lamellae, and Ps. ovoideocystidiata is the only other Psilocybe I have seen consistently display this feature.
 http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/477801/imgpl/3/imgpp/12 http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/479823/imgpl/3/imgpp/12 http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/479454/imgpl/3/imgpp/12 http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/479451/imgpl/3/imgpp/12 http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/477815/imgpl/3/imgpp/12
The first two images you can see the distinct waviness. It's funny actually, because I suspected Ps. ovoideocystidiata based on other morphologic features BEFORE I knew about the wavy gills. So I PMed him asking for a photo showing the gills to compare to the GGP/Oakland collection, and he sent me the first image you see above. I was like "HEY NOW!"
Sorry, I couldn't easily thumbnail the other pics. All images are from ShroomyDan's gallery.
--------------------
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7910250 - 01/21/08 04:09 PM (16 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
ah right..shroomydan was from Ohio somewhere...I suspect ithe Ohio valley that would be more summertime thing. I never lived there tho
but that one spot I found was Jan 10, so not exactly spring, altho it could be a later fruiter like some cyans strains I have
I wish it would fruit..that would be nice and I can get more photos
sure is a finicky species, either way...really something else
|
Strophariaceae
mycologist



Registered: 02/02/04
Posts: 109
Loc: Marvelous Marin County, C...
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7913539 - 01/22/08 01:48 AM (16 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
OK, as promised, spore images, one species at a time this time –
Psilocybe subaeruginascens Hohnel holotype:

Psilocybe septentrionalis Guzmán holotype (all that's left after the bugs ate it):

Local "Pilsbury" collection:


For some reason, I can't find my photos I took of the holotype of Psilocybe aeruginomaculans Hohnel. Basically, the spores are very thick-walled and dark like the P. subaeruginascens holotype, however, its shape is almost globose. Based on spore shape, spore size statistics, and difference in habitat, Dennis Desjardin is publishing a paper separating these two species again.
Anyway, enjoy.
|
GGreatOne234
Stranger
Registered: 12/23/99
Posts: 8,946
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Strophariaceae]
#7915522 - 01/22/08 04:32 PM (16 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
interesting images everyone
thanks for sharing
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: GGreatOne234]
#7936506 - 01/26/08 06:19 PM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
edited out
Edited by auweia (02/21/08 12:19 PM)
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7937308 - 01/26/08 08:47 PM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
edited out
Edited by auweia (02/21/08 12:19 PM)
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7937341 - 01/26/08 08:53 PM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
auweia said: no....it's close, but this is not quite what I've seen IMHO
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/477801/imgpl/3/imgpp/12 http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/479823/imgpl/3/imgpp/12 http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/479454/imgpl/3/imgpp/12 http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/479451/imgpl/3/imgpp/12 http://www.shroomery.org/forums/usergallery.php/pid/477815/imgpl/3/imgpp/12
it's possible they could be the same species, and a new unidentified species, but what I found isn't quite like that
it really is tough cookies when it's this rare...we have little to compare it to
Auweia, I KNOW you skim a lot of posts. PLEASE READ the content of the post if you are going to reply!!!!
I wasn't suggesting that any of the Bay Area species are Ps. ovoideocystidiata, I was just comparing them macroscopically.
--------------------
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7937373 - 01/26/08 08:59 PM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Auweia, I notice the type of red wood-bark stuff that they are growing from....
What is interesting, is that I have never seen Ps. cyanescens nor the "Cyanofriscosa" take a liking to that substrate, HOWEVER, The one patch of Ps. stuntzii I've found, was inhabiting this same red wood-bark stuff! And I am not the only one who has noticed this. Another mushroom hunter also noted the propensity for Ps. stuntzii to colonize this substrate.
Interesting considering that the two species are in the same section!!
--------------------
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7937426 - 01/26/08 09:10 PM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
edited out
Edited by auweia (02/21/08 12:20 PM)
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7937461 - 01/26/08 09:15 PM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
.....what?? 
Uhh, I'll try and figure out what you're saying after a cup of coffee...
--------------------
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7937475 - 01/26/08 09:19 PM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
hehe
no shit, Curecat, it really is like that
you tell me what species this is...LOL
Edited by auweia (01/26/08 09:24 PM)
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7938477 - 01/26/08 11:59 PM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ps. ovoideocystidiata < the only reason why that name was ever included in any discusssion about that, and I believe what I did is copy that from another thread) is because it is in the same family (microscopic wise) as > STUNTZII...is that correct? And this has been discovered in the Ohio Valley, of all places
I'm not sure what you're saying or asking... The reason I brought up the species is because of the macroscopic similarities of Ps. ovoideocystidiata to the GGP/Oakland collection, as I have stated at least 3 times now. I'm not suggesting they are the same species.
Quote:
Macroscopically, which is what you, curecat are referring to is this
That is not a coherent sentence.. can you rephrase?
Quote:
I don't have microscope, and I'm not even questioning microscopic characteristics, but macroscopically, I'm saying what I found isn't the same as what you found,or what that dude from MSSF in 2004 found.
I do think what I found is the same as what Waylitjim found last year in Bezerkely tho
I understand that that is your opinion, and I am saying, you may be right. I am also saying that they might be the same species, but two macroscopically distinct strains. I am not sure.
Quote:
so I'll leave it up to you...why in the world would I want to discard one find as being 'not the same' while attaching to another who I DO think 'is the same' with both being similarly disassociated from me, being that I personally know neither of your very well
Again, I can't understand any of what you just said. If you could rephrase, I might be able to answer or at least understand what you're trying to get across.
Quote:
why do you think I say that recent discoveries might not have been documented at all, under any microscope, or on any message board?
I don't know. Do you think I disagree with this notion? It is not something anyone could disprove, so i would say it is well within reason that someone else has also collected these, and we are not aware. Certainly, plenty of hunters just pick and eat, and don't really care about mycology or WHAT they're eating, as long as they get high.
Quote:
no shit, Curecat, it really is like that
you tell me what species this is...LOL
Huh? Why? I never claimed to know what they are, and I am still not too sure.
I'm not trying to be an ass hole, but I just don't know what you're talking about half the time.
--------------------
|
GGreatOne234
Stranger
Registered: 12/23/99
Posts: 8,946
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7938966 - 01/27/08 02:36 AM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
auweia, i will exactly why. microscopically are species that might several species otherwise get same. otherwise, same to the with of P. ovoideocystidiata are spores easily.
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: GGreatOne234]
#7938989 - 01/27/08 02:51 AM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
It just figures you know the secret language... Why am I not in the loop?!!
--------------------
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7939460 - 01/27/08 09:35 AM (16 years, 5 days ago) |
|
|
edited out
Edited by auweia (02/21/08 12:12 PM)
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: auweia]
#7939573 - 01/27/08 10:13 AM (16 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
Yeah, I said they were Shroomydans Ps. ovoideocystidiata photos when i posted them for reference.
Yes, the stipe was brown and tough, fibrous. Didn't snap cleanly at all.
These are my photos of the GGP/Oakland species:




You can kind of see how the stipe splits apart.
--------------------
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7939952 - 01/27/08 12:08 PM (16 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
that I can see...very similar except for that waviness. Just haven't seen that yet
|
falcon


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 49 minutes, 10 seconds
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7942128 - 01/27/08 07:15 PM (16 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
Yep, those look like bluefoot, here's a few pictures that show some some wavy gilled bluefoot.


I've been told that bluefoot chips were planted in the bay area about 6 or 7 years ago.
|
CureCat
Strangest


Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 14,058
Loc: clawing your furniture
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: falcon]
#7943071 - 01/27/08 10:12 PM (16 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
Wow, that last photo looks exactly like them....
Are those Ps. caerulipes or Ps. ovoideocystidiata??
--------------------
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,271
Last seen: 9 hours, 16 minutes
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7946362 - 01/28/08 05:25 PM (16 years, 3 days ago) |
|
|
Psilocybe subaeruginascens, auweia 01/26/08 collection
Spores, 1000x



Cheilocystidia, 1000x



I noticed something interesting in this specimen - The tips of the cystidia (both cheilo and pleuro types) were often green. At first I thought it was a anomoly, but I saw hundreds of cystidia cells with green tips. When the cystidia is sticking out of a gill edge, it can look like a mushroom with a transparent stem and a green cap. It appears to be staining from psilocin degradation. It doesn't surprise me that random cells contain psilocin that likes to turn blue or green, but it almost looks like psilocin is concentrated in the tips of the cystidia.
Green tipped cheilocystidia can be seen in the next four pics:




Pleurocystidia, 1000x





|
doitagain
He-Bro



Registered: 02/22/07
Posts: 1,947
Loc: Land of Milk and Honey
Last seen: 13 years, 7 months
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7946387 - 01/28/08 05:29 PM (16 years, 3 days ago) |
|
|
It's funny I was about an hour or two south of yosemite on a family trip, where we stopped to eat lunch. In a planter with lots of woodchips I found a patch of mushrooms, with a patch of mushrooms that macroscopically look like the mushrooms in this thread. They were extremely dried out which made it hard to describe the features, and I gave up on trying to identify them, I've only had experience in picking so-cal lawn subs, so I was a bit out of my league.
They seemed kind of psilocybish to me, but i'm very new to this so i'm not sure. They had whitish stems until you rubbed the white layer off and they were more tan/fleshy colored. And golden brown caps. I'm trying to propagate the mycelium i saved from them, so if that's successful i'll be posting a proper id request. They were strikingly similar to the pictures of the subaeruginascens though.
-------------------- now i hear the police comin after me
|
falcon


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 49 minutes, 10 seconds
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: CureCat]
#7948543 - 01/28/08 11:41 PM (16 years, 3 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
CureCat said: Are those Ps. caerulipes or Ps. ovoideocystidiata??
|
Workman
1999 Spore War Veteran



Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 3,598
Loc: Oregon, USA
Last seen: 13 hours, 47 minutes
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: falcon]
#7948687 - 01/29/08 12:09 AM (16 years, 3 days ago) |
|
|
I have seen the blue/green tipped cystidia on occasion with other species. It seems to be just a bluing reaction and isn't always present.
Example in link below.
http://www.sporeworksgallery.com/Section-Cyanescens/Unknown_Sanfran
-------------------- Research funded by the patrons of The Spore Works Exotic Spore Supply My Instagram Reinvesting 25% of Sales Towards Basic Research and Species Identification 
|
falcon


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 49 minutes, 10 seconds
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: falcon]
#7957319 - 01/30/08 07:15 PM (16 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Quote:
falcaon said: I've been told that bluefoot chips were planted in the bay area about 6 or 7 years ago.
Edit: I've been told that a bluefoot looking psilocybe grew near Arcadia 6 or 7 years ago.
|
sui
I love you.



Registered: 08/20/04
Posts: 31,853
Loc: Cali, Contra Costa Co.
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: falcon]
#7958626 - 01/30/08 11:49 PM (16 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Quote:
falcon said:
Quote:
falcaon said: I've been told that bluefoot chips were planted in the bay area about 6 or 7 years ago.
Edit: I've been told that a bluefoot looking psilocybe grew near Arcadia 6 or 7 years ago.
ok i wasnt going to say anything about this mainly cause i didnt get a pic of the mushroom, or keep the sample, but i may have seen one in bug sur in the sand, oak rubble, in between some rocks on the river bed in an area where the river used to be.
It reminded me of it at the time but i shrugged it off, but after i got back i saw one of the pics and the crazy wierd gills and remembered it from big sur.
most likely nothing though. I wish i got a picture.
-------------------- "There is never a wrong note, bend it." Jimi Hendrix
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist

Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,271
Last seen: 9 hours, 16 minutes
|
Re: Will the real Psilocybe subaeruginascens please stand up? [Re: Strophariaceae]
#25298488 - 06/29/18 08:02 AM (5 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The bay area Psilocybe subaeruginascens-like taxon is Psilocybe ovoideocystidiata. The ITS sequences from Auweia's SF collections match 100% with sequences from Ohio.
The real Psilocybe subaeruginascens matches 97% with Psilocybe ovideocystidiata - I have some sequences from a couple collections found in South Africa. They have caps that are lighter in color than P. ovoideocystidiata.
These are Psilocybe subaeruginascens:
https://mushroomobserver.org/128946 https://mushroomobserver.org/235235
|
|