|
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
|
Subbedhunter420
Solitary Hunter



Registered: 12/30/06
Posts: 1,501
Loc: LA/Ventura County
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
Re: Suspected Ps. Subaeruginascens are back! [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
#8544949 - 06/20/08 03:43 PM (15 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Haha, yeah no. Im not gonna get a job for Lantz security or that bull. Id rather just go on 3 or 4 AM runs.
|
alteredstates
Psilosilly


Registered: 03/25/08
Posts: 198
Loc: PNW
|
Re: Suspected Ps. Subaeruginascens are back! [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
#8545223 - 06/20/08 05:39 PM (15 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It was weird, i got there at 1:30 am and a guard was just sitting in his truck, i told him i was lost.
Today, the reason that there have been people there all day is because the realtor was showing the house. The mushrooms are not as trapped as we tought, we should have ample time to go get the mycelium.
-------------------- Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds.
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
|
Quote:
alteredstates said: They are now in several areas of the planter and growing in increasing numbers.


Damn this is close.
You've already showed that it blues more than reqular Stuntzii, so it's probably more potent. They do look very close to P subaeruginascens excpt the ones from the Bay Area have more of a nipple..Not really a true nipple like liberty caps, but more than these photos.
Still it could be yet another adapatation, and thus another slight change of shape.
Subbedhunter, you should know that some of the experts looking at this new P subaeruginascens species in California, have pointed out a couple of things The problem with this is, it doesn't exactly match the true subaeruginascens from Japan and the far east, but those are extremely limited collections anyway, so there's not much to compare it to in the first place. (one example, the actual spores are lighter in color than the rare herbarium collections so far, from many years ago. PS > usually it;s the other way around with age, they get light in color, so the new finds should be darker, but they're not, they're lighter)
we call it P subaeruginascens because it's the closest match, not an exact match, but the closest one we can find.
I've been told by microscope experts, that if this were to be found in Japan or Java, most mycologists would have no problem classifying this as P subaeruginascens
But this isn't occuring in Japan, it's occurring in California, and that presents a unique problem, one that none of us has seen before 5 years ago.
From this first photo here, I would say the color is excellent, you have found something that is near or above cyanecens potency.
This is unlike any of the subbalteatus you're used to, the dosage isn't 20-40, it's more like 2 !!!
or 1
I remember the first timne I found it in Richmond, CA in 2006. At that time there was zero public info about any discovery, and at first I actually thought this was some sort of Panaeolus, because they were already halfway dried out at the time, didn't exhibit much bluing, because of the dryness, smelll like hay, like Panaeolus, and was like nothing I'd ever seen before related to the standard P cyanescens that usually grows around the Bay Area
Until I decided to eat just one single specimen on the BART ride back home, and I got off 3 stops later and proceeded to spend the next 5 hours biking down by the waterfront, avoiding people and cars and having a great time
It was a complete surprise to me.
You may have something very similar here, if not the same thing. So just a warning, when you finally decide to test it on yourself, or your friends.
Just don't eat 40 of these like you can with Pann Subbs, at least not the first time
we'd like to see you coherent within a week at least 
PS, this is the spot I found in 2006

This spot is a unique situation, aside from the ...*cough cough* problems I had...It is very possible this spot could have been on it's last legs since I found out later the substrate here was extremely thin, less than 1/8 inch in most places
we tried to save it
it has died in many peoples arms, the mycelium was unable to make it it in some peoples care. It was unable to make it in my care under indoor conditions, but it did survive in the outdoors in different areas, to this day)) This is consistent with some of the first finds in 2004 (the initial finds were very tricky, and often died)
my own transplants of this original patch, 14 of the 17 transplants still survive in various secret locations around the San Francisco Bay Area, they just haven't fruited in two years :P (read > air circulation)
We're not sure what's going on here, but I personally suspect it's slowly adapting to it's new environment and as time goes on, it's getting stronger in different locales.
Some of this original patch still exists, and is still growing in different locales around the Bay Area (transplants), but it has never fruited since this initial find
Like I said, it can get tricky, and there's probably nothing you can do outside the normal growth parameters, like hardwood chips, etc, and plenty of moisture
It's very likely a species still in the development stage, and it's best to just leave it alone and feed it, and water it, and sometimes test small parts of it
the most important info I can tell you is, if you want to save what you found, it doesn't take much, just a few square inches of mycelium (the more the better of course, but not required)
the most imprtant thing to remember is PATIENCE
it can take up to 6 months for you to see anything at all from your transplant, maybe even longer
don't sweat it, leave it be....All you have to do is check and see if it's still healthy, white and wet, and healthy.
As long as the mycelium is healthy, you have nothing to worry about, just keep feeding it
(you'll know the species has died when the mycelium turns grey. I know this, I've seen it, it was a big loss, but not the end of the road) 
my personal belief is that this species did come from somewhere else (the intro as a little spectacular)
this species IS slowly adapting to California and it's environment
so fasten you seat belts...hehe
Edited by auweia (06/20/08 09:59 PM)
|
alteredstates
Psilosilly


Registered: 03/25/08
Posts: 198
Loc: PNW
|
Re: Pictures! [Re: auweia]
#8546515 - 06/21/08 05:00 AM (15 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Auweia-
First, an extremely belated congratulations on that epic find.
They may have similar qualities, but the mushrooms we've been finding clearly don't look like the Subaeruginascens you've found. The caps are completely different as subbedhunter pointed out and the stems arn't much more similar. The annulus on your subs for example, is far less prominent and the mushrooms are colored differently completely. Only the pins really looked similar. Though possibly very amorphous, it feels odd that the shape and color would be almost 100% different. I don't have a microscope, but when i saw that patch of subaeruginascens you posted, all i could think was, "there's no fucking way those are the same".
We havn't transplanted any mycelium yet but I have it growing in three different places in my room (on card board and wood chips), and there was noticable growth after 48 hours, and rhizomorphic mycelium in about four days. They seem to be very strong and willing to adapt. Half of the woodchips came from my drive way and i don't really even know what they are (i was just experimenting).
We were planning on dosing about a gram each. This ranges from about 15-20 small mushrooms to just a few of the larger caps (dried). Of coarse they would all be mixed together, but considering the amount of blueing (which from the pictures posted you haven't seen half of), do you think that would be too much?
-------------------- Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds.
|
Subbedhunter420
Solitary Hunter



Registered: 12/30/06
Posts: 1,501
Loc: LA/Ventura County
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
|
I think a gram dry would be ok. Besides, we'll likely be in the middle of nowhere.
|
weiliiiiiii
Stranger


Registered: 10/10/03
Posts: 9,711
|
|
Just cuz they dont look the same as auweias does not mean they are not the same. I have patches of weilii that produce different types of shrooms, one patch has shrooms with smaller stature but more of a grayish blue color in the caps then another patch produces campanulated caps that are carmel color with massive stipes. Too someone who did not know weilii they would appear too be different species but they are not. One patch has shrooms with a very pronounced nipple the other does not. But like yall have been saying get sumbody with a microscope too check them out for a positive ID.
|
Subbedhunter420
Solitary Hunter



Registered: 12/30/06
Posts: 1,501
Loc: LA/Ventura County
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
|
The Microscope(1101 EM) is coming in the mail. Alan has already been looking at the cheliocystidia. Its definitely a stuntzii relative but auweia agrees this may be a different species.
Alteredstates discussed how amorphous these are and didnt rule out they could be the same. Then again, We just dont know right now.
We also have a very strong and healthy spawn developing from the cardboard and we also have some growing on woodchips from the front yard.
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
|
Yeah, it's tough to tell for sure from the photos so far.
I can tell you one thing for sure, finding something like that in LA is pretty damn rare, no matter what it is.
I bet they smell stronger too, because that's one of the main characteristics of these new subaeruginascens here in SF is that they are definately stronger smelling than cyans. Of course, cyans don't grow in LA, so you might not even know the difference.
We just can't say for sure yet, but it's obviously something unusual for LA, certainly not paneaolous
Alan really needs to look at it and post some microscope photos like he did with mine comparing the SF finds with yours. It very well could be a new species. The ones in SF could be a new species.
This is all brand new stuff for everybody. Welcome to the club!. It's a tiny club, yep
There just isn't enoug info yet on either of the species occuring in SF or LA. There's some top people looking at this including Dr Jochen Gartz in Germany and Dr Gaston Guzman in Mexico, and they're saying it could be a new species.
we just don't know for sure yet, and only time will tell. But it could take years, because this is it's own organism, and it does what it wants, when it wants. We don't even know the basic mechanism that triggers fruiting yet. Only one person has done it so far, and that was in a plastic cup, watered outside, and all he knows for sure it was 65-75 degrees. That barely says anything because obviously it's not a cold shock like cyans
the only thing we can do is some basic things to help it along, that's pretty much it...hehe
Quote:
Subbedhunter420 said: The Microscope(1101 EM) is coming in the mail. Alan has already been looking at the cheliocystidia. Its definitely a stuntzii relative but auweia agrees this may be a different species.
Alteredstates discussed how amorphous these are and didnt rule out they could be the same. Then again, We just dont know right now.
We also have a very strong and healthy spawn developing from the cardboard and we also have some growing on woodchips from the front yard.
also of note quote from subbedhunter >"We havn't transplanted any mycelium yet but I have it growing in three different places in my room (on card board and wood chips), and there was noticeable growth after 48 hours, and rhizomorphic mycelium in about four days. They seem to be very strong and willing to adapt. Half of the woodchips came from my drive way and i don't really even know what they are (i was just experimenting)."
the problem I had with the cardboard wasn't the cardboard itself, it was because I put it in a plastic bag, and it had very poor air circulation. That's probably why many of the early tests died. These things, along with all mushrooms, produce carbon dioxide just like we do when we breath, so it can't be sealed in an enclosure, like a plastic bag or glass jar or else the poor things will suffocate. It has to breathe some fresh air sometimes at least. It's possible these new species could require more fresh air than others... fresh air is pretty important, at least with the SF finds...something to keep in mind at least
there is a good balance between moisture, substrate, and air circulation that is common to most mushroom species. Tough to describe unless you actually see it...Wet (moist to damp) to the touch, but not flooded (drowned), but also plenty of fresh air at the same time.
in fact, as long as you have air circulation, you won't need to go the 'sterilized route' many people feel they have to do with mushrooms, but that's always an option. But people like Stamets will point out that if you go the sterilized route with pure strains, those strains are usually weaker because they don't have the genetic diversity and as a result, can't fight off infections the way naturally diverse strains can.
so the closest you can recreate the natural outside conditions, the better off you are. Remember, for example, the original patch you just found...It is likely watered (I digress, it's 100% guaranteed that spot is watered, in LA in the summertime?), and it also has plenty of air circulation, because it's sitting there outside
and I'll also make wild guess.. The spot you found in Southern California is less than two miles from the beach. This isn't happening in Lancaster, or Palmdale, or the Salton Sea...hehe
Edited by auweia (06/21/08 09:19 PM)
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,271
Last seen: 9 hours, 16 minutes
|
Re: Pictures! [Re: auweia]
#8549802 - 06/22/08 04:24 AM (15 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alan really needs to look at it and post some microscope photos like he did with mine comparing the SF finds with yours. It very well could be a new species. The ones in SF could be a new species.
I don't think that this is Psilocybe subaeruginascens due to the presence of tibiiform cheilocystidia.
I'll do some more work on it. Its probably an undescribed species.
|
Subbedhunter420
Solitary Hunter



Registered: 12/30/06
Posts: 1,501
Loc: LA/Ventura County
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
|
Youre saying the cheilocystidia that look like little balls on bars are a distinguishing microscopic feature?
Also, Did Curecat find subaeruginascens? Ive been trying the last day or two to find other gill shots of subaeruginascens and I finally may have found a few in Curecats photos that are able to be contrasted to mine.
The gill structures are quite different from the SF finds to ours. I dont have time to compare and contrast right now. I have to go to work.
|
wyattb
fellowshroomer


Registered: 07/11/07
Posts: 315
Loc: forest
Last seen: 11 months, 18 days
|
|
those pics are cool cant wait to see my patch fruit i planted it about a month ago. should i expect a fruiting this fall or do they only fruit in the spring? I'm hoping they fruit this fall springs a long ways away.
|
alteredstates
Psilosilly


Registered: 03/25/08
Posts: 198
Loc: PNW
|
Re: Pictures! [Re: wyattb]
#8552628 - 06/22/08 11:40 PM (15 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It was getting pretty hot and they were still fruiting, they might still fruit depending on where you are.
-------------------- Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds.
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,271
Last seen: 9 hours, 16 minutes
|
|
Cheilocystidia 1000x




Cheilocystidia crush mount 1000x

Spores 1000x


Pleurocystidia was infrequent, here is one at 1000x

Compare with http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/6520065
If its not subaeruginascens its pretty close. Pleurocystidia matches.
|
wisp

Registered: 04/13/08
Posts: 5,304
|
|
We need someone who can do DNA sequencing on demand for this site.
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,271
Last seen: 9 hours, 16 minutes
|
Re: Pictures! [Re: wisp]
#8553715 - 06/23/08 09:34 AM (15 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
She is at the Autonomus Mutant Festival.
http://www.mutantfest.org
|
Subbedhunter420
Solitary Hunter



Registered: 12/30/06
Posts: 1,501
Loc: LA/Ventura County
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
|
Oh CC...
|
alteredstates
Psilosilly


Registered: 03/25/08
Posts: 198
Loc: PNW
|
|
These are the next flush. They're not quite mature so I'm going to pick them tomorow.
This is the largest flush yet.

-------------------- Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds.
|
Subbedhunter420
Solitary Hunter



Registered: 12/30/06
Posts: 1,501
Loc: LA/Ventura County
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
|
|
Nice Altered. Be at my house at 5.
|
auweia
mountain biking


Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 2,725
|
|
I think Alan is right on this, it's maybe a new species, but it might be related. Who knows, time will tell. The important thing with something like this is to save it. Make transplants, backups, spread it around a little, keep it going. As long as you have the basics down, it's fairly easy. It amazing how much changes there have been in the last 10 years or so. Few people thought this was possible in the middle of summer a few years ago, almost indoors with no refrigeration

(this photo depects ZERO manual misting, ZERO sterilization techniques, 100% complete organic transfer). 100% ultrasonic cool air humidifier)
Not only did it pin without a temperature drop, it actually made it through one of the hottest heatwaves in SF in many years (103F) last week. But this isn't strictly cyanescens, and is likely a cyan/friscosa cross breed, because I've been mixing the mycelium a lot in the last year. I found out they do indeed mate. I can't prove it, of course, but just looking at the caps, it almost looks half way between the two. Just a slight undulation. (I always sort of knew cyanescens and friscosa were the same, that's why friscosas still don't have it's own name, and probably never will)
Caveat on the Friscosas > it's not exactly that they are a different species, because they obviously look much different than cyans, consistently, all the the time. Rather it's that both cyanescens and friscoscas can and do join and mate on the mycelium level, if not all of them, at least some strains. And it's those strains that do join which could possibly make a stronger strain, as depicted in the photo (able to withstand more extreme weather conditions, for example) (this is already occurring naturally - I've tried to tell people this for years - this is how I got the idea, from the plant itself)
the other thing I found out and I've never seen it mentioned before. If you were to transplant outdoors, you would have to find a way to mist it all the time, keep it moist. You can use those tiny misters in plastic tubes they use with hydroponics, but in a dry climate in Califorinia in the summer, that's not easy. In other words, this patch you're finding out in the wild now, somebody has been turning that sprinkler on in a big way..lol
the way I'm doing it is with a humidifier on a window sill (in the photo), but it's covered with a mirror sheet. A mirror sheet is something I found out does indeed work. It's mirror cellophane, the same mirror plastic sheet people put on car doors and windows for privacy. Apparently mushrooms really only need 'blue light' to induce fruiting, not thr heat light, so this works in both ways, cuts the heat down and lets in enough light at the same time
problem is, you can't really make a sealed chamber either, because this type of plastic doesn't breathe. So0 what I've done is simply make a loose chamber, full of holes, so it lets the outside breeze blow through a little but, but not enough to stop the humidifier from blowing cool steam all over the bowls
it's a balance between the two, and it's right when some of the mirror plastic chamber retains water droplets most of the time. Ultrasonic cool air humidifiers don't add any heat either, and you can find those on Amazon I know this is halfway between a hunting forum and grow forum here, but dang it, how else would you try and save a rare species found in the wild?
You can make little spots in your back yard, sure, but if you want to fruit it, you have to water it quite a bit. I don't have a backyard, so a window sill is the only place I can control the moisture and light. Strictly indoors could work with this species, but nobody knows yet. Nobody knows if this would work with common teks for cubensis, and it probably won't because it's not the same habitat. We already know that subaeruginascens don't like rye grain nearly as much as oatmeal. Pretty much all you can do is try different things, different foods, different chips, different moisture and lighting, a little at a time, here and there , and hey, it's in the mix. there ya go..hehe
PS, in the photo, upper right corner, you can see the mirror plastic sheet, semi transparent. The blue light on top is from the humidifier bought on Amazon for 20 bucks on sale. http://tinyurl.com/3neuj3
at least you know now, it's not just this new species from LA, and not just the subaeruginascens from SF, but also cyans, it's possible to fruit them in summer, under the most basic conditions, without any sterilization techiniques, no boiling, no pasterization. Nothing except some basic conditions; proper food, air flow, moisture and light
PPS, the new subaeruginascens has it's own exclusive bowl of alfalfa hay as of today, but it will take a few months to know for sure (part of the existing hay, a small part of another wood chip bowl was transferred to a new bowl with nothing but hay) 
one final note > it is extremely unlikely that this new species will be able to mate at the mycelium level with cyanescens the same way that cyanescens and friscosas can mate. Cyans and friscossa are closely related, these are NOT
it really is a whole new ballgame here
Edited by auweia (06/26/08 08:55 PM)
|
weiliiiiiii
Stranger


Registered: 10/10/03
Posts: 9,711
|
Re: Pictures! [Re: auweia]
#8568482 - 06/26/08 07:51 PM (15 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
so there not subs?
|
|