Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Amanita Muscaria Store Amanita Muscaria   Mushroom-Hut Liquid Cultures   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES?
    #9499659 - 12/26/08 10:04 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

i will led you in the hand of many scientific that are doing are  great job at understanding mushrooms . but before i like to introduce to the subject of this thread , here i like we to dig , and try to provide more information and knowledge to the subject , many of us have step in  one of this mushrooms , and have a piece of information is valid, in mushrooms world we all all learning even the pro , so even the most humidly  hunter , can  come to great conclusions, and even  more freaky mushrooms show what they what to tell their secrets. so i know knowledge can come in many directions, to observation, study , random encounter, and even what people call luck and destiny .....

after my rare encounter with what i call at the moment a mutant psilocybe , i began intrigue about , how this happened?, why this happened?, what porpoise does it have for the mushrooms? is this a random mutation , and since then  i begging interest in the subject, then  inski  finds open more light to me , what i was looking, and since then i begging to absorb all this information, is until know that i decide to make a thread about all the sequestrate form of fungi , something is not as rare as we think  in fungi , let begging to unfold the book .



EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? PART 1
From: Dr. Bryce Kendrick (mycolog@pacificcoast.net)

[Kendrick, B. 1994.
    Evolution in action: from mushrooms to truffles. I. McIlvainea 11 (2): 34-38.]

The fungi are very old. Their history extends over hundreds of millions of years. Yet their origins, and the major evolutionary pathways they have followed, are still cloaked in mystery. This is largely because the fossil record of the fungi is fragmentary and disconnected. Organisms that live on land, and particularly such ephemera as most fungal fructifications, are much less likely to be fossilized than are marine organisms with hard parts. The paucity of fossil evidence has not deterred the cognoscenti among mycologists from a little judicious speculation, inevitably based largely on what we know about fungi that are alive today. This speculation is probably wrong in many respects and is usually heavily laced with the prejudices of its authors, but it is not necessarily a bad thing: students of the fungi need a conceptual framework on which to cut their teeth, and at which to aim their more mature criticisms. But we are still on shaky ground when we try to look into the evolutionary history of most modern fungi.

It is, then, all the more exciting to encounter an area of mycology in which not only the results of evolution, but also the starting points, and the steps in the process, can still be seen in living organisms. And all this has happened, not in obscure microscopic fungi, but in conspicuous and fairly common mushrooms that can be held in the hand and compared. We now know that some mushrooms have given rise to radically changed but still viable descendants: relatives which, although often looking very different from their forebears, clearly betray their ancestry at the microscopic and molecular level. Let us see how this has happened in the well-known and easily recognized mushroom genus Lactarius (the "milky-caps": family Russulaceae, order Agaricales).

But before I describe the exciting changes we have seen, I must establish a base-line or starting point by describing how mushrooms usually develop, and what they do: how their form and function are interrelated. First, the thread-like mycelium, which permeates the soil and is often involved in an intimate and mutually beneficial mycorrhizal association with tree roots, must accumulate considerable reserves of food energy. Then conditions of temperature and moisture must be favorable. Finally, the mushroom begins its development underground, forming a clump of mycelium which differentiates into a "button," then rapidly expands upward and emerges from the earth as a characteristic structure with a central stalk or stipe, bearing an expanding circular cap or pileus. The top of the cap is covered by a skin or cutis. The thin, plate-like gills of Lactarius normally develop in a neat radial pattern (like the spokes of a wheel) on the under side of the expanding cap. The basidiospores will form on these gills. As the cap opens out like an umbrella, the gills assume a precise vertical orientation and are now ready to make and liberate spores.

The flat surfaces of the gills are covered by a fertile layer called a hymenium. This contains huge numbers of special cells called basidia, which produce and liberate astronomical numbers of spores. Each basidium bears four spores (sometimes more, occasionally fewer). These develop asymmetrically, in an offset manner, at the tips of four sterigmata, which are tiny projections from the mother cell. When ripe, the spores are delicately but deliberately launched into the air between the gills. They float slowly and gently downward until they emerge from the gills, and are then carried away like dust by air movement. In this way the fungus broadcasts its spores far and wide. The different genera and families of agarics often follow significantly different developmental pathways, some with gills exposed from the beginning, others with gills enclosed almost until maturity, but they all eventually arrive at the same endpoint, with vertical, exposed gills dropping spores into the air.

One of the ways in which we identify agarics is by placing a cap on a piece of white paper in a draftfree place and letting it drop millions of spores onto the paper overnight. The deposit will form a visible radiating pattern, which reflects the arrangement of the gills from which the spores came. This spore print may be white, cream, pink, brown or black, according to the mushroom genus which produces it. The spore print of Lactarius is white or cream coloured.

Everything I have said so far applies not just to Lactarius, but also to many other genera of mushrooms. So how does Lactarius differ from the rest? That's easy: it has a unique combination of three features which are not found together in any other genus of agarics.

[1] The cap and gills of Lactarius contain special cells filled with a milky juice or latex (white, yellow, orange or red) that oozes out in visible drops when the tissues are cut (and sometimes change colour after exposure to air).
[2] The flesh of Lactarius contains large numbers of swollen, thin-walled cells called sphaerocysts: these make the flesh extremely and characteristically brittle and granular.
[3] The spores of Lactarius are ornamented with conspicuous warts and spines, lines and ridges, which often join up to form a network. These ornamentations are chemically different from the rest of the spore wall, because they stain darkly (grey, blue, purple or black) in iodine, while the spore wall itself remains unstained, or stains only slightly. Ornamentation that gives this colour reaction is often described as iodine-positive, or amyloid.

Even beginners can easily identify Lactarius by the milky juice it exudes when the brittle flesh is broken: no other ordinary mushroom has anything like it.

But in addition to specimens of Lactarius as I have just described it, we occasionally find extraordinary specimens. Specimens which have a few important differences from the milky caps we are used to seeing. They are similar (and theoretically could therefore be included in the genus) because they have all three characters listed above: brittle flesh full of sphaerocysts; latex exuded when the tissues are ruptured; and spores with ornamentation that is iodine-positive. Yet they are different because their cap develops in such a way as to enclose their gills, and the gills are no longer vertical plates, but have become crumpled or convoluted to form a spongy, chambered mass. Since the cap remains closed, the spores obviously cannot escape. This sounds as if it would be a serious problem for the fungus: after all, have not mushrooms evolved to be spore-making and spore-launching machines? And if the spores are not released into the atmosphere, how will they be dispersed? Yet if we remember that the lungs of land vertebrates evolved from the swim-bladders of their fish ancestors, and the wings of birds from the forearms of their earthbound reptilian ancestors, we will appreciate that evolution, guided by environmental forces, often drives organisms in unforeseen directions. Something of this kind appears to be happening to the Lactarius, and we must assume that some other way of dispersing the spores has been evolved.

If we now cut away the edge of the unopened cap which is obscuring the gills, and try to make a spore print, we will not succeed. No spores will be deposited. This is not because the mushroom is either unripe or overmature. If we examine some of the basidia under a microscope, we will see that they have produced mature basidiospores. But the basidia have subtly changed. The four spores tend to develop symmetrically (not offset) on the sterigmata, and they tend to remain attached to the sterigmata: they are never forcibly discharged, as they were in normal Lactarius fruit bodies.

These differences are important enough for taxonomists to conclude that the fungus can no longer be called a Lactarius, and it has been placed in a different genus, named Arcangeliella. This genus has sometimes been excluded from the family Russulaceae and even from the order Agaricales, and has instead been put in a separate order, the Hymenogastrales. But there is no doubt that it has evolved from Lactarius in relatively recent times, that it is still closely related to that genus, and that it should be retained in the Agaricales, and even in the Russulaceae.

Arcangeliella still looks very like a mushroom, even if its behaviour is a little strange. But we have found other specimens which have evolved even further away from Lactarius. These specimens develop, and remain, just below the surface of the ground, looking rather like truffles. They are rounded or irregular in shape. The skin that covered the Lactarius now completely surrounds the truffle-like specimens. They have no stalk. There are no gills: the hymenium lines labyrinthine chambers. And the basidiospores, now sitting straight on the sterigmata of the basidia, are not actively shot away.

Note that the outer skin and often the walls of the labyrinthine spore-bearing tissues contain sphaerocysts; latex oozes from the cut surfaces of fresh specimens; and the spores have spiny or ridged ornamentation that stains dark in iodine. Once again, the three diagnostic characters of Lactarius. A vestige of a stalk may even occur in the form of a pad of sterile tissue inside the base of the fruit body; the walls of the labyrinthine chambers could be derived from crumpled gills; and the presence of sterigmata on the basidia is a reminder that these structures were originally evolved as part of a mechanism to launch spores into the air.

Yet it would be stretching the concept of Lactarius beyond the breaking point to include these specimens in it: surely no-one would call them agarics. It is also clear that they are considerably more "reduced" even than those placed in Arcangeliella. So mycologists put them in another new genus, called Zelleromyces.

Although Zelleromyces differs from both Arcangeliella and Lactarius in important ways, the fact that it has latex, sphaerocysts and iodine-positive (amyloid) spore ornamentation is a compelling argument for keeping it in the family Russulaceae of the order Agaricales. After all, this disposition seems to best reflect its true relationships. Arcangeliella and Zelleromyces are what we now call sequestrate (see the note below) derivatives of the original agaric. The word sequestrate implies that they sequester or retain their spores, rather than broadcasting them into the air. This retentive habit, diagnosed by spores sitting symmetrically on the sterigmata of non-shooting basidia, is clearly characteristic of both genera.

Before drawing the first part of this discussion to a close, I must address one final issue. If these sequestrate genera share all the essential diagnostic features of Lactarius, how are we to distinguish the Lactarius we all know from its sequestrate derivatives? It is apparent that the three diagnostic characters I described earlier must be supplemented by three more, as follows:

[4] the cap of a true Lactarius expands at maturity and the gills are exposed.
[5] its gills are vertically oriented.
[6] its basidiospores are asymmetrically mounted on the sterigmata and are forcibly discharged at maturity.

If the Lactarius -> Arcangeliella -> Zelleromyces sequence was the only case in which this strange evolutionary sequence had been observed, we might be able to dismiss it as a quirk of evolution, a freak. But we have evidence that similar pathways have evolved in other mushroom genera. These will be explored in the second part of this article, in the next two issues of BEN.

The term "sequestrate" has recently been introduced (Kendrick 1992) to describe all these closed or hypogeous offshoots of regular fungi. It means that the spores are sequestered or hidden away, kept from contact with the outside world, at least until the fruit body decays or is eaten. The term sequestrate appears to be a more useful and more widely applicable term than such frequently-used words as 'gastroid' (which inappropriately implies close relationship with gasteromycetes) and 'secotioid,' an arcane word suggesting similarity with the genus Secotium (which is a sequestrate derivative of Agaricus). Most amateur and many professional mycologists have never seen Secotium, so the term derived from that name conveys little or no meaning.
In the first article, I described how various members of the mushroom genus Lactarius (family Russulaceae, order Agaricales) had evolved into rather strange forms. They had kept their distinctive microscopic characters: latex-producing cells which exude a unique milky fluid when broken; thin-walled, swollen sphaerocysts which make the tissues of the mushroom characteristically brittle; and a distinctive spore ornamentation of spines and ridges which often form a network, and which stain dark blue or almost black in iodine (what we call the amyloid, I+, or starch-like reaction). But the fruit bodies had taken on a distinctive appearance and also appeared to function rather differently.

In these evolutionary offshoots, three things have changed: (1) the peridium remains attached to the stipe at maturity, so the gills are not exposed to the outside atmosphere; (2) the gills are no longer plate-like, and are not oriented in a precise vertical plane; and (3) the spores are not forcibly discharged from the sterigmata. So despite having the characters listed earlier as being diagnostic of Lactarius, these forms are put in a separate genus, Arcangeliella, because the differences, especially the loss of the spore-shooting mechanism so characteristic of most basidiomycetes, are regarded as being of some basic biological importance. They affect the reproductive strategy of the organisms and therefore need to be taken account of when the taxonomy of the group is being established.

There are also even more reduced forms, in which the fruit body develops underground, the stipe is lost, and the gill tissues have become so folded and convoluted as to assume a spongy, chambered appearance: they are no longer gills, though they still bear basidia and produce basidiospores. So although these forms still have latex, sphaerocysts and amyloid spore ornamentation, they have been segregated in a third genus, Zelleromyces.

I concluded by saying that the Lactarius - Arcangeliella - Zelleromyces evolutionary pathway is not unique. In this second article, I will describe other similar developmental phenomena that have come to light, and the way in which they are now being interpreted.

The family Russulaceae, as understood by many mycologists, contains only two genera. We have already looked at one of them, Lactarius. Now let's consider the other one, Russula. This genus is very easy to recognize in the field, and (along with Lactarius) is one of the first genera the beginning amateur mycologist learns to identify. Russula has substantial fruit bodies, often with brightly coloured caps, stout stipes, and beautifully regular, white or cream-coloured gills. The caps, stipes and gills are brittle because their tissues contain clusters of round, thin-walled, turgid sphaerocysts. And the basidiospores have spiny, ridged and often net-like ornamentation that stains blue in iodine. Russula shares these two characters with Lactarius (which is why they are in the same family: these features are not found in any other agarics). But Russula has no laticiferous cells, and so does not produce latex (milk). This immediately distinguishes it from Lactarius, the milky cap, at least in most young, fresh collections.

Specimens are sometimes found which match the genus Russula in most ways, yet the peridium remains intact, attached to the stipe, and the gills are not exposed, even at maturity. In such specimens it will be seen that the hymenium has become highly convoluted or lacunose. Microscopic examination shows that sphaerocysts are present in the tissues, and the basidiospores do have blue-staining ornamentation; but although the attachment of the spores to the sterigmata is still somewhat asymmetrical or offset, those spores are not forcibly discharged. That is enough to exclude these specimens from Russula, and they have been placed in a separate genus, Macowanites.

Other atypical russuloid fungi have been found which resemble Macowanites in many ways: they still have sphaerocysts throughout the tissues, and spores with amyloid ornamentation. But they develop underground, and do not emerge, even at maturity. The external stipe has been lost, although a stipe remnant, in the form of a vertical column of sterile tissue, may still run through the fruit body. The spores, which are not forcibly liberated, are now symmetrically attached to their sterigmata. And the hymenium is no longer on recognizable gills, but lines convoluted or labyrinthine chambers. These specimens are segregated in the truffle-like genus Gymnomyces.

But this is not all. A second line of reduced forms appears to have originated from Russula. Some of these resemble Russula in many ways, having a stalk and a cap, sphaerocysts in the outer tissues and spores with amyloid ornamentation. But the gills have entirely lost their vertical orientation and perhaps even their integrity. The fruit body is now filled with a spongy mass in which the hymenium lines finely convoluted chambers whose walls lack sphaerocysts. And although the spores are asymmetrically mounted on the sterigmata, they are not discharged. This is the genus Elasmomyces.

Other specimens, while retaining sphaerocysts in their outer tissues and amyloid spore ornamentation, have retreated (or rather, remained) underground, have lost their stalk, and have become essentially truffle-like. Their internal arrangements are rather like those of Gymnomyces, but although they have sphaerocysts in their outer tissues, they have none in the walls of the hymenial chambers. These fungi are placed in the genus Martellia.

So, with a little imagination, we can visualize three lines of evolution, beginning with "normal" members of the family Russulaceae, mushrooms like Russula and Lactarius, and ending in truffle-like fungi which fruit underground.

Lactarius -> Arcangeliella -> Zelleromyces

Russula -> Macowanites -> Gymnomyces

Russula -> Elasmomyces -> Martellia.

Notice that the Russulaceae really contains not just two, but no fewer than eight genera, and that six of them, while microscopically "correct," do not give spore prints.

By now, you may suspect that there must be other such strange evolutionary pathways hiding among the rest of the agarics, and even in other groups of fungi. And your suspicion would be correct.

In fact, no fewer than 14 _ yes fourteen _ mushroom families have given rise to closed or underground forms which are treated as separate taxa. Let me sketch for you these lines of evolution as they are understood at present:

  1. Russulaceae - see above

  2. Cortinariaceae: the genus Cortinarius gets its name from the presence on the expanding basidioma of a special filamentous or cobwebby partial veil called a cortina (from the Italian for curtain). Many species also have brightly coloured caps. The basidiospores are rusty-brown in mass, and characteristically ornamented. Cortinarius has some species in which the partial veil does not open. But since the basidia still shoot their spores (they end up sitting on the inside of the veil), these species are retained in Cortinarius. In other Cortinarius-like specimens, the cap also remains closed, but careful examination shows that these have lost both the spore-shooting mechanism and the vertical plate-like organization of the gills: a section shows that the hymenium-bearing tissue has become convoluted and labyrinthine or spongy. These "aberrant" forms have been placed in the genus Thaxterogaster.

      Some species of Thaxterogaster seem to have lost their external stipe, but there is still a central column of white sterile tissue running up the middle of the fruit body. Other offshoots of Cortinarius have become entirely hypogeous, never emerging above the surface of the soil. These have lost all semblance of stipe and gills, look just like a truffle, and have been put in the genus Hymenogaster, although their basidiospores still closely resemble those of Cortinarius.

  3. Agaricaceae: the genus Agaricus has given rise to sequestrate forms placed in the genera Endoptychum and Longula.

  4. Lepiotaceae: Notholepiota is a sequestrate member of this family.

  5. Amanitaceae: Torrendia is a sequestrate segregate of Amanita.

  6. Bolbitiaceae: this family has given rise to a common and widespread sequestrate form called Gastrocybe. This is a strange fungus which appears in the grass during hot, humid weather. A narrowly conical, wet-looking brown cap arises on a long, narrow, delicate white stipe, which soon flops over. The spores sit squarely and persistently on the sterigmata. The whole cap soon dissolves into a slimy mass, which sticks to the grass. The spores never become airborne. We tend to assume that these spores are dispersed by grazing arthropods, although there is as yet no hard data to support that hypothesis.

  7. Coprinaceae: Coprinus has given rise to a sequestrate form which is known as the desert shaggy mane. This fungus, which is put into the genus Podaxis, looks externally very like Coprinus comatus. Yet when a mature cap is cut open, the inside is seen to be filled, not with closely-packed, upwardly deliquescing gills, but with a dry mass of black spores, which will eventually blow away like dust when the outer skin of the fruit body erodes away or breaks. I have an excellent videotape sequence of this happening to a large specimen growing out of a termite mound in Africa (the Podaxis, unlike Termitomyces, apparently does not enjoy a mutualistically symbiotic relationship with the termites). The relationship of Podaxis with Coprinus is confirmed by the fact that under wet conditions, Podaxis, too, can undergo some deliquescence or self-digestion.

  8. Strophariaceae: Stropharia is the presumed ancestor of the sequestrate genera Nivatogastrium and Weraroa.

  9. Entolomataceae: Entoloma has spawned the sequestrate Richonia, the relationship being established by the pink colour and the distinctive angular shape of Richonia spores, which are almost identical to the spores of Entoloma itself. Nolanea may have given rise to Rhodogaster.

  10. Tricholomataceae: Hydnangium appears to be a sequestrate derivative of Laccaria.

  11. Gomphidiaceae: Gomphidius has hived off the sequestrate genus Gomphigaster, and Chroogomphus has produced Brauniellula.

  12. Paxillaceae: Austrogaster and Gymnopaxillus are sequestrate derivatives.

  13. Boletaceae: Boletus, Suillus and Leccinum have spawned above-ground sequestrate forms in Gastroboletus, Gastrosuillus and Gastroleccinum. Alpova, Truncocolumella and the extremely common Rhizopogon are below-ground, sequestrate derivatives of Suillus. The techniques of molecular biology have recently shown that, at least for certain parts of its genome, Rhizopogon is very closely related to the epigeous, spore-shooting Suillus (more closely, in fact, than Suillus is related to other genera of boletes).

  14. Strobilomycetaceae: Gautieria is a fairly common hypogeous derivative, probably of Boletellus.

I have not mentioned all the sequestrate genera connected with the families listed in Part 2: many of them are rare, or are known only from the southern hemisphere. But I have given you enough information to realize that the evolution of sequestrate forms is a widespread phenomenon. And from what I have said about the Russulaceae and the Boletaceae, it will be obvious that more than one evolutionary pathway may evolve within a single family, and perhaps even within a single genus.

One or two interesting questions arise from my survey. Why have sequestrate forms evolved? The generally accepted explanation is that during dry periods of the Earth's recent history some mushrooms mutated in such a way as to remain closed, and lose their spore-shooting mechanism. This gave these lines a selective advantage over those which exposed their gills to the hot, dry air. It is easier to maintain an appropriate level of humidity for spore development inside a closed fruit body. The next step, of remaining underground, is another way of escaping drought. Of course, once the spores are retained inside the fruit body, or kept underground, the problem of dispersal arises. In many cases, this has been solved by involving small mammals as vectors. That means evolving mechanisms for attracting these mammals and getting them to dig up or eat the fruit bodies. So one kind of adaptive change is complicated by the need for other adaptations. But that is what evolution is all about, and any organism that survives and propagates itself has obviously hit on a successful, or at least a functional, combination.

It is less easy to explain the geographic distribution of these sequestrate and hypogeous forms, since they appear to be concentrated in such areas as western North America, parts of South America, New Zealand and Australia, and to be relatively few in number in other areas such as eastern North America and northern Europe.

No sequestrate fungi have yet been connected with two agaric families, the Hygrophoraceae and the Pluteaceae. Do such fungi exist, and have we simply not seen or recognized them? And although the Tricholomataceae is a very large and diverse family of agarics, a sequestrate derivative (Hydnangium) is known only for Laccaria. Why have none of the other more than 30 widely recognized and often very common genera in this family produced sequestrate offshoots? Or have we simply not yet found them, or recognized them for what they are?

In most cases, the sequestrate forms are much less common than their spore-shooting ancestors (though this is not true of Rhizopogon). Is this scarcity more apparent than real because they are more difficult to find, since many of them grow below-ground? Does it indicate that most of these fungi are no more than rather unsuccessful evolutionary experiments, on their way to extinction? Or have they arisen so recently that they have not yet had time to spread very far?

How long ago did the oldest, and the youngest, of these fungi arise? This question, at least, we may attempt to solve by means of our newly acquired molecular techniques, which can measure the amount, and the rate, of change in the genetic material. Could sequestrate forms be appearing regularly, even now? Are the changes taking place gradually, as the necessary mutations slowly accumulate in mushrooms. Or do they appear suddenly and sporadically as a result of what is called "punctuated" evolution, involving larger jumps during periods of great environmental stress?

Why has all this happened? Is it the new trend among mushrooms? Will all mushrooms eventually become sequestrate? Will our descendants have to dig if they want to see the fall flush of fleshy fungi, or fill their cooking pots with boletes and other fine edibles? Only, I suspect, if the greenhouse effect goes all the way and our climate becomes much drier and hotter than it is now. But we'll have to wait and see.

We are not yet in a position to answer all of those questions, but at least we know know that there is a wide range of such fungi out there. There is a message here for the amateur: Don't just throw away those aberrant closed or distorted or partly hypogeous agarics. Cut them open to see if their gills are normal vertical plates, and check them to see whether they can be persuaded to yield a spore print. If the answer to both of the above is no, then you may very well have a sequestrate fungus on your hands. One of the professional agaricologists in your area should be able to check this. If it is indeed one of these most recently evolved taxa, you may congratulate yourself on your sharp eyes, and science may thank you for one more piece of the evidence we need to unravel this great jigsaw puzzle.

Acknowledgments: I would like to acknowledge stimulating discussions with Drs. Jim Trappe, Michael Castellano, Neale Bougher and Harry Thiers.

Readers who wish to explore the "sequestrate" agarics further should consult the publications listed below.

Beaton, G., D.N. Pegler & T.W.K. Young. 1985.
    Gastroid Basidiomycota of Victoria State, Australia 5-7 Kew Bull. 40: 573-598.
Bruns, T.D., R. Fogel, T.J. White and J.D. Palmer. 1989.
    Accelerated evolution of a false-truffle from a mushroom ancestor. Nature 339: 140-142.
Dring, D.M. and D.N. Pegler. 1977.
    New and noteworthy gasteroid relatives of the Agaricales from tropical Africa. Kew Bull. 32: 563-569.
Horak, E. 1973.
    Fungi Agaricini Novazelandiae I-V. Beihefte zur Nova Hedwigia, Heft 43. Cramer, Lehre.
Kendrick, B. 1992.
    The Fifth Kingdom. 2nd Edition. Mycologue Publications, 8727 Lochside Dr., Sidney, BC V8L 1M8, Canada.


if you are still here  i apreciate your enthusiasm for the subject. since my find , i knew it was a special find , a part of the puzzle only that the puzzle i was picturing is part of another bigger one puzzle and so on , for example after reading this article, we can come to some  ideas, let quote again to the great peson to made this article From: Dr. Bryce Kendrick (mycolog@pacificcoast.net)
How long ago did the oldest, and the youngest, of these fungi arise? This question, at least, we may attempt to solve by means of our newly acquired molecular techniques, which can measure the amount, and the rate, of change in the genetic material. Could sequestrate forms be appearing regularly, even now? Are the changes taking place gradually, as the necessary mutations slowly accumulate in mushrooms. Or do they appear suddenly and sporadically as a result of what is called "punctuated" evolution, involving larger jumps during periods of great environmental stress?

Why has all this happened? Is it the new trend among mushrooms? Will all mushrooms eventually become sequestrate? Will our descendants have to dig if they want to see the fall flush of fleshy fungi, or fill their cooking pots with boletes and other fine edibles? Only, I suspect, if the greenhouse effect goes all the way and our climate becomes much drier and hotter than it is now. But we'll have to wait and see.

the first question is very  good and was the same one i ask mi self the moment i see the mutant . look like we have to let that one aside  for now on until more talk make us elucidate more into this.

-the second question is this a new trend among mushrooms?
i guess not, but this also open many new field  of investigation for example is weraroa neovozelandese a some how new creation , or vice versa is and old trait that still persist in a piece of land call Australia and new Zealand , still to remember us from that beginning , or is the  secotoid form of weraroa more recent that the form of mushrooms , we See many representation in petroglyph  of mushrooms with a common shape, .

-the third question Will all mushrooms eventually become sequestrate?
it seem to be a line of progression toward that line of evolution , is like a circle . that is closing and go again , if we  for instance take the idea of this is maybe an  evolutory change due a a more  dry environment , which , make sense , mushroom use this mechanism  in dryer ages of time , that why we have mushroom even in desert habitat , which make to believe that maybe all truffles are , or are going sooner or later will be correlated with the normal partner, i bet all the truffles in the desert are just sequestrate that became hipogeous , is interesting to Start to notice, this is more common  that we believe,
apparently in the end maybe all mushrooms will become sequestrate , i don't know  but  maybe this can help to elucidate more in the subject
http://www.erin.utoronto.ca/~w3bio/bio335/pdf_papers/bruns_et_al.pdf



-Will our descendants have to dig if they want to see the fall flush of fleshy fungi, or fill their cooking pots with boletes and other fine edibles? Only, I suspect, if the greenhouse effect goes all the way and our climate becomes much drier and hotter than it is now. But we'll have to wait and see.

i really doubt  that is going to happen, but i can  see  that all mushroom will become sequestrate in time, but the mushrooms shape is something so perfect , that it will repeat here , and ever evolution take the spores, so i can guaranty our kids will pick  in the surface many mushrooms too. but maybe in time we can see mushrooms that use the  2 form of living for example  sclerotium should , be another , from that will produce new thing in  the future.




-Many ectomycorrhizal (ECM) fungi produce fruit-bodies below ground and rely on animals, especially mammals, for dispersal of spores. Mammals may therefore play an important role in the maintenance of mycorrhizal symbiosis and biodiversity of ECM fungi in many forest ecosystems. Given the pivotal role played by mycorrhizal fungi In the nutrition of their plant hosts and, possibly, in the determination of plant community structure, the ecological significance of mycophagous mammals may extend to the productivity and diversity of plant communities. Mycologists and mammalogists have been aware of the interaction between their study organisms for many years, but recent research has produced new insights Into the evolution of mammal-vectored spore dispersal among ECM fungi, the ecological importance of mycophagy to small mammals, and the effectiveness of mammals as spore-dispersal agents.

*there is the tendecy to link sequestrate fungi to animal dispersion since  spore can not longer go carry by wind , so in the position of weraroa , inski other secotoid mushroom, and my mutand psilocybe, what animal play part in the distribution of spores , maybe insects, so far my find is very isolated, but i have hear of other secotoid form of psilocybe  in psilocybe herrerae in xalapa. also from psilocybe cropophila in artificial grow, so apparently is not animal related  but in the genes ,

this thread need maybe a spell check as all my thread and more picture which i will add later on , since i got tired on the middle of the  edition of the thread:grin: but i will try to  fix all , hope some people can join in and will love the collaboration of all the secotoid finder, inski please can use your pictures or can  you provide us with more of your finds i will try to explain in this thread more of something i have been thinking for a while.

i will try to correct to update all the secotoid mushrooms  .  to make a new list please help me so , for example where are you going to put paneolopssis, iam tired.
so  the idea is to expand this list, put  good pictures of then , and make more discovery's along the way ,
:loveeyes:for the love of mushrooms please cooperate



Longula texensis is a mushroom of dry, open habitats, believed to have evolved from a moisture-loving Agaricus ancestor. Agaricus features are still apparent though modified, presumably to aid survival in an arid environment. These include a cap that no longer expands, blackish-brown, crumpled, gills that don't forcibly discharge spores, and a partial veil that remains intact even at maturity. This type of development is called secotioid or sequestrate, with examples known from a number of genera of gilled and boletaceous mushrooms. Two such fungi that resemble Longula texensis are Podaxis pistillaris and Montagnea arenaria. Both are found primarily in the desert regions of California. Podaxis pistillaris has an elongated, scaly cap, much like a shaggy mane, Coprinus comatus, but is not deliquescent and despite the similarities, probably is not closely related. Montagnea arenaria is a stalked puffball distantly allied to Coprinus. It has a woody stipe which emanates from a volva cup, and is crowned by thin umbrella of crumpled, blackish gill-like tissue.
http://www.mykoweb.com/CAF/species/Longula_texensis.html


more information
http://www.amjbot.org/cgi/content/full/88/12/2168
http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/SB97039.htm
http://www.amjbot.org/cgi/content/abstract/88/12/2168
http://www.mycologia.org/cgi/content/abstract/94/2/247
this one is gold
http://www.mykoweb.com/biblio/hypo_bib.pdf
http://www.amjbot.org/cgi/reprint/88/12/2168.pdf
http://www.mycologia.org/cgi/content/full/95/1/148
http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/SB02016.htm
http://www.biology.duke.edu/fungi/mycolab/publications/peintnerAJB.html
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WNH-4HNSG70-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=d752e7735c738a79e805b9feba44fd27
http://www.mykoweb.com/biblio/hypo_biblio.html
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/nhn/pimj/2007/00000019/00000002/art00007
http://www.ilmyco.gen.chicago.il.us/Terms/secot208.html
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=224440FFEC84E13E23C1BD9A3EB87965.tomcat1?fromPage=online&aid=208239
http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/SB02017.htm
http://users.iab.uaf.edu/~jozsef_geml/AgaricusAIMH.pdf
http://users.iab.uaf.edu/~jozsef_geml/AgaricusAIMH.pdf
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7XMR-4RS5049-9&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=78f22ad7680c0691ceb1e8f6aad2b0ed
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WNH-4HNSG70-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=d752e7735c738a79e805b9feba44fd27
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=249347
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7XMR-4MX56PS-3&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=b424aad2d43fb11ae290dc16564262b5
http://mushroomobserver.org/15179?_js=on&_new=true&id=15179
http://www.wyki.org/Secotioid

http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/mycology/survey/forms/PNW_Sequestrate_form.pdf




--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Edited by cactu (09/09/12 10:44 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9499756 - 12/26/08 10:23 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

http://botit.botany.wisc.edu/toms_fungi/Sep2003.html
Heather became interested in G. lateritia when she noticed it fruiting each morning on the lawn in front of Plant and Soil Sciences at Michigan State University, amidst the Conocybe lactea specimens she was studying.

G. lateritia is one of the common mushrooms that are found in rich, usually unpesticided and unherbicided lawns. If you are patient in studying this mushroom's development, you can observe that the immature button of this mushroom emerges around 8:00 in the evening. Overnight the mushroom expands. The basidiospores mature between 7 and 10 the following morning, and, by 10:30 or so, the fungus has dried up, effectively vanishing. The long, hollow stem often cannot bear the weight of the watery, slimy cap, and the whole thing usually topples over. Unlike most mushrooms, the basidiospores cannot be forcibly discharged-- due to the slime and the partial autodigestion of the gills-- and thus have to wait for the cap to weather or rot away to be released. Why on earth would this happen? And how could this seemingly inefficient species survive evolutionary pressures? As it turns out, G. lateritia it not alone in this dilemma.

G. lateritia has been considered a sequestrate (or secotioid) basidiomycete, that is, a mushroom that has lost the ability to forcibly discharge basidiospores and may be on its way to developing a subterranean truffle-like form



so  who will be  discover the firt psilocybe truffle like form is more naturally that emerge in australia or new zealand where it more ahead in the game.


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleShockValue
Because, ShockValue.


Registered: 11/18/08
Posts: 5,097
Loc: Tipping at windmills.
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9499814 - 12/26/08 10:34 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Psilocybe Azures, Cyans, Frisco's, etc... are already evolving at a rapid pace.  Their method of reproduction is as old as there have been living things on this planet:  They have something that another species wants, and therefor get picked, transported and ingested, distributing their spores everywhere!!! :mushroom2:


--------------------
  • When we built temples to view the stars, we knew about all 2000 of them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9499843 - 12/26/08 10:39 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Genus: Weraroa
This genus of fungi are referred to as sequestrate fungi which means that they have lost there ability to forceful eject there spores. In stead they relies on insects and birds to eat and disperse them.
line
Species: Weraroa erythrocephala (Tul) Sing.&Smith.
Common Name: Red Pouch Fungus
Found: Native forest
Substrate: Forest floor
Spores: Brown
Height: 50 mm
Width: 35 mm
Season: Autumn through to spring after rain.
Edible: No
line
Species: Weraroa novaezelandiae (G. Cunn.) Singer
These fungi ofen have no external stipe, but there is still a central column of white sterile tissue running up the middle of the fruit body.
More images Weraroa novaezelandiae
Common Name: None
Found: Native forest
Substrate: Forest leaf litter
Spores: Brown
Height: 30 mm
Width: 40 mm
Season: Autumn
Edible: No
line
Species: Weraroa virescens (Massee) Sing. & Smith.
A fungi with an unexpended head but with well developed stalk and columella, gleba sometimes very gill-like.
More images Weraroa virescens
Common Name: Blue pouch fungi
Found: Native forest
Substrate: Forest leaf litter
Spores: Brown
Height: 40 mm
Width: 15 mm
Season: Autumn
Edible: No


i bet the  agaricoid form of Weraroa erythrocephala is hypholoma aurantiaca or laerytomycez ceres or what?
what psilocybe was the agaricoid form of Weraroa novaezelandiae psilocybe subaeruginosa?
is posible this secotoid sindrome as some say , is reversibly , will some day  some one maybe inski make a hibrid with weraroa ?

still many questions in the air, ?
the puzzle get  more wide, more structurated, but still  just a piece, of other more puzzles.?

que la vida nos lleve al conocimiento eterno , si es por la manera cientifica o filosofica, no importa lo que importa es llegar, para el que esta sediento de saber, todos los caminos son dignos de ser recorridos......


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,032
Last seen: 1 hour, 21 minutes
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9499955 - 12/26/08 11:05 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Muy rico, Cactu,

Lots of info in your first post in this thread, can't digest it in one go.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9499963 - 12/26/08 11:06 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

cactu said:

EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? PART 1
From: Dr. Bryce Kendrick (mycolog@pacificcoast.net)

[Kendrick, B. 1994.
    Evolution in action: from mushrooms to truffles. I. McIlvainea 11 (2): 34-38.]

The fungi are very old. Their history extends over hundreds of millions of years. Yet their origins, and the major evolutionary pathways they have followed, are still cloaked in mystery. This is largely because the fossil record of the fungi is fragmentary and disconnected. Organisms that live on land, and particularly such ephemera as most fungal fructifications, are much less likely to be fossilized than are marine organisms with hard parts. The paucity of fossil evidence has not deterred the cognoscenti among mycologists from a little judicious speculation, inevitably based largely on what we know about fungi that are alive today. This speculation is probably wrong in many respects and is usually heavily laced with the prejudices of its authors, but it is not necessarily a bad thing: students of the fungi need a conceptual framework on which to cut their teeth, and at which to aim their more mature criticisms. But we are still on shaky ground when we try to look into the evolutionary history of most modern fungi.






Well, I don't have time at the moment to critique the whole thing but I'll say this.  That's one helluva first paragraph!

As an aside I'll say this.  Morphology and chemical testing provide, and have provided, a conceptual framework from which to work.  Without morphology, DNA analyses are meaningless.

Nice thread.  :thumbup:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9500001 - 12/26/08 11:14 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Ok, I read it.  Interesting suppositions.

On a more positive note, I think someone posted Gastrocybe lateritia recently and no one got it correct, iirc.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9501603 - 12/27/08 10:39 AM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Ok, let me give this a brief, fuller treatment.

Quote:

cactu said:

[Kendrick, B. 1994.
    Evolution in action: from mushrooms to truffles. I. McIlvainea 11 (2): 34-38.]

The fungi are very old. Their history extends over hundreds of millions of years. Yet their origins, and the major evolutionary pathways they have followed, are still cloaked in mystery. This is largely because the fossil record of the fungi is fragmentary and disconnected. Organisms that live on land, and particularly such ephemera as most fungal fructifications, are much less likely to be fossilized than are marine organisms with hard parts. The paucity of fossil evidence has not deterred the cognoscenti among mycologists from a little judicious speculation, inevitably based largely on what we know about fungi that are alive today. This speculation is probably wrong in many respects and is usually heavily laced with the prejudices of its authors, but it is not necessarily a bad thing: students of the fungi need a conceptual framework on which to cut their teeth, and at which to aim their more mature criticisms. But we are still on shaky ground when we try to look into the evolutionary history of most modern fungi.




As I said, that's one helluva opening paragraph--a lot of humble admission.  Morphology and chemical testing are adequate conceptual frameworks as well.

Quote:

It is, then, all the more exciting to encounter an area of mycology in which not only the results of evolution, but also the starting points, and the steps in the process, can still be seen in living organisms.




Starting out by begging the question isn't such a good beginning.

And all this has happened, not in obscure microscopic fungi, but in conspicuous and fairly common mushrooms that can be held in the hand and compared. We now know that some mushrooms have given rise to radically changed but still viable descendants: relatives which, although often looking very different from their forebears, clearly betray their ancestry at the microscopic and molecular level.

Then surely you'll share how you came by this interpretation of the facts.  "We now know" requires proof, as an extraordinary claim, it requires extraordinary evidence.  Be sure to include that in your paper, Dr.  The phrase belies a level of hubris/certainty rarely attained in any field, let alone one without fossil documentation.

Let us see how this has happened in the well-known and easily recognized mushroom genus Lactarius (the "milky-caps": family Russulaceae, order Agaricales).

I look forward to it.

But before I describe the exciting changes we have seen, I must establish a base-line or starting point by describing how mushrooms usually develop, and what they do: how their form and function are interrelated. First, the thread-like mycelium, which permeates the soil and is often involved in an intimate and mutually beneficial mycorrhizal association with tree roots, must accumulate considerable reserves of food energy. Then conditions of temperature and moisture must be favourable. Finally, the mushroom begins its development underground, forming a clump of mycelium which differentiates into a "button," then rapidly expands upward and emerges from the earth as a characteristic structure with a central stalk or stipe, bearing an expanding circular cap or pileus. The top of the cap is covered by a skin or cutis. The thin, plate-like gills of Lactarius normally develop in a neat radial pattern (like the spokes of a wheel) on the under side of the expanding cap. The basidiospores will form on these gills. As the cap opens out like an umbrella, the gills assume a precise vertical orientation and are now ready to make and liberate spores.

The flat surfaces of the gills are covered by a fertile layer called a hymenium. This contains huge numbers of special cells called basidia, which produce and liberate astronomical numbers of spores. Each basidium bears four spores (sometimes more, occasionally fewer). These develop asymmetrically, in an offset manner, at the tips of four sterigmata, which are tiny projections from the mother cell. When ripe, the spores are delicately but deliberately launched into the air between the gills. They float slowly and gently downward until they emerge from the gills, and are then carried away like dust by air movement. In this way the fungus broadcasts its spores far and wide. The different genera and families of agarics often follow significantly different developmental pathways, some with gills exposed from the beginning, others with gills enclosed almost until maturity, but they all eventually arrive at the same endpoint, with vertical, exposed gills dropping spores into the air.

One of the ways in which we identify agarics is by placing a cap on a piece of white paper in a draftfree place and letting it drop millions of spores onto the paper overnight. The deposit will form a visible radiating pattern, which reflects the arrangement of the gills from which the spores came. This spore print may be white, cream, pink, brown or black, according to the mushroom genus which produces it. The spore print of Lactarius is white or cream coloured.

Everything I have said so far applies not just to Lactarius, but also to many other genera of mushrooms. So how does Lactarius differ from the rest? That's easy: it has a unique combination of three features which are not found together in any other genus of agarics.

[1] The cap and gills of Lactarius contain special cells filled with a milky juice or latex (white, yellow, orange or red) that oozes out in visible drops when the tissues are cut (and sometimes change colour after exposure to air).
[2] The flesh of Lactarius contains large numbers of swollen, thin-walled cells called sphaerocysts: these make the flesh extremely and characteristically brittle and granular.
[3] The spores of Lactarius are ornamented with conspicuous warts and spines, lines and ridges, which often join up to form a network. These ornamentations are chemically different from the rest of the spore wall, because they stain darkly (grey, blue, purple or black) in iodine, while the spore wall itself remains unstained, or stains only slightly. Ornamentation that gives this colour reaction is often described as iodine-positive, or amyloid.

Even beginners can easily identify Lactarius by the milky juice it exudes when the brittle flesh is broken: no other ordinary mushroom has anything like it.


Establishing a base-line is a wonderful idea if your target audience is a group of neophytes.  So far what you have described is pure science.  I like it; it gives the paper an air of credibility, especially if you are talking to easily-led believers.  There are some in the audience--I am one--that are a little beyond that.  I'm a skeptic of the highest order when it comes to hypothetical lineages invented to turn myco-taxonomy on its head.  Science needs to proceed slowly.  Old ideas are hard to kill, especially when they have yielded such great understanding.

But in addition to specimens of Lactarius as I have just described it, we occasionally find extraordinary specimens. Specimens which have a few important differences from the milky caps we are used to seeing. They are similar (and theoretically could therefore be included in the genus) because they have all three characters listed above: brittle flesh full of sphaerocysts; latex exuded when the tissues are ruptured; and spores with ornamentation that is iodine-positive. Yet they are different because their cap develops in such a way as to enclose their gills, and the gills are no longer vertical plates, but have become crumpled or convoluted to form a spongy, chambered mass. Since the cap remains closed, the spores obviously cannot escape. This sounds as if it would be a serious problem for the fungus: after all, have not mushrooms evolved to be spore-making and spore-launching machines? And if the spores are not released into the atmosphere, how will they be dispersed?

You've discovered new morphology.  That's wonderful!  Glad to hear it.


Yet if we remember that the lungs of land vertebrates evolved from the swim-bladders of their fish ancestors, and the wings of birds from the forearms of their earthbound reptilian ancestors, we will appreciate that evolution, guided by environmental forces, often drives organisms in unforeseen directions. Something of this kind appears to be happening to the Lactarius, and we must assume that some other way of dispersing the spores has been evolved.

I remember that story too.  But let's not get ahead of ourselves and confuse the neophytes.  Some of them probably want real answers, not speculation built upon speculation.  The last time I checked fungi weren't fish, birds or reptiles.  What you are describing is history, albeit natural history--an arena ripe with speculation sans necessary empirical truth.

If we now cut away the edge of the unopened cap which is obscuring the gills, and try to make a spore print, we will not succeed. No spores will be deposited. This is not because the mushroom is either unripe or overmature. If we examine some of the basidia under a microscope, we will see that they have produced mature basidiospores. But the basidia have subtly changed. The four spores tend to develop symmetrically (not offset) on the sterigmata, and they tend to remain attached to the sterigmata: they are never forcibly discharged, as they were in normal Lactarius fruit bodies.

More science and morphologically based.  Cool beans!  :cool:

These differences are important enough for taxonomists to conclude that the fungus can no longer be called a Lactarius, and it has been placed in a different genus, named Arcangeliella. This genus has sometimes been excluded from the family Russulaceae and even from the order Agaricales, and has instead been put in a separate order, the Hymenogastrales.

I think that is wonderful and fascinating!  Of course, with morphology such as that it deserves its own classification.  Nice work.  :thumbup:

But there is no doubt that it has evolved from Lactarius in relatively recent times, that it is still closely related to that genus, and that it should be retained in the Agaricales, and even in the Russulaceae.

No doubt?  And you're talking history?  Dr., there is certainly doubt in such cases.  Perhaps you convince too easily.  Where is the requisite evidence/proof?  You know, that molecular stuff you were talking about.

Arcangeliella still looks very like a mushroom, even if its behaviour is a little strange. But we have found other specimens which have evolved even further away from Lactarius. These specimens develop, and remain, just below the surface of the ground, looking rather like truffles. They are rounded or irregular in shape. The skin that covered the Lactarius now completely surrounds the truffle-like specimens. They have no stalk. There are no gills: the hymenium lines labyrinthine chambers. And the basidiospores, now sitting straight on the sterigmata of the basidia, are not actively shot away.

Note that the outer skin and often the walls of the labyrinthine spore-bearing tissues contain sphaerocysts; latex oozes from the cut surfaces of fresh specimens; and the spores have spiny or ridged ornamentation that stains dark in iodine. Once again, the three diagnostic characters of Lactarius. A vestige of a stalk may even occur in the form of a pad of sterile tissue inside the base of the fruit body; the walls of the labyrinthine chambers could be derived from crumpled gills; and the presence of sterigmata on the basidia is a reminder that these structures were originally evolved as part of a mechanism to launch spores into the air.

Yet it would be stretching the concept of Lactarius beyond the breaking point to include these specimens in it: surely no-one would call them agarics. It is also clear that they are considerably more "reduced" even than those placed in Arcangeliella. So mycologists put them in another new genus, called Zelleromyces.

Although Zelleromyces differs from both Arcangeliella and Lactarius in important ways, the fact that it has latex, sphaerocysts and iodine-positive (amyloid) spore ornamentation is a compelling argument for keeping it in the family Russulaceae of the order Agaricales. After all, this disposition seems to best reflect its true relationships. Arcangeliella and Zelleromyces are what we now call sequestrate (see the note below) derivatives of the original agaric. The word sequestrate implies that they sequester or retain their spores, rather than broadcasting them into the air. This retentive habit, diagnosed by spores sitting symmetrically on the sterigmata of non-shooting basidia, is clearly characteristic of both genera.


New classification based on morphology as far as I can see.  I think it's :omgawesome:

Before drawing the first part of this discussion to a close, I must address one final issue. If these sequestrate genera share all the essential diagnostic features of Lactarius, how are we to distinguish the Lactarius we all know from its sequestrate derivatives? It is apparent that the three diagnostic characters I described earlier must be supplemented by three more, as follows:

[4] the cap of a true Lactarius expands at maturity and the gills are exposed.
[5] its gills are vertically oriented.
[6] its basidiospores are asymmetrically mounted on the sterigmata and are forcibly discharged at maturity.

If the Lactarius -> Arcangeliella -> Zelleromyces sequence was the only case in which this strange evolutionary sequence had been observed, we might be able to dismiss it as a quirk of evolution, a freak. But we have evidence that similar pathways have evolved in other mushroom genera. These will be explored in the second part of this article, in the next two issues of BEN.


1)  Evidence is what you failed to provide, Dr.  You have described some transitions that appear as if they are a logical sequence.  They might be, they might not.

The term "sequestrate" has recently been introduced (Kendrick 1992) to describe all these closed or hypogeous offshoots of regular fungi. It means that the spores are sequestered or hidden away, kept from contact with the outside world, at least until the fruit body decays or is eaten. The term sequestrate appears to be a more useful and more widely applicable term than such frequently-used words as 'gastroid' (which inappropriately implies close relationship with gasteromycetes) and 'secotioid,' an arcane word suggesting similarity with the genus Secotium (which is a sequestrate derivative of Agaricus). Most amateur and many professional mycologists have never seen Secotium, so the term derived from that name conveys little or no meaning.
In the first article, I described how various members of the mushroom genus Lactarius (family Russulaceae, order Agaricales) had evolved into rather strange forms. They had kept their distinctive microscopic characters: latex-producing cells which exude a unique milky fluid when broken; thin-walled, swollen sphaerocysts which make the tissues of the mushroom characteristically brittle; and a distinctive spore ornamentation of spines and ridges which often form a network, and which stain dark blue or almost black in iodine (what we call the amyloid, I , or starch-like reaction). But the fruit bodies had taken on a distinctive appearance and also appeared to function rather differently.


All science, all good.  (minus the putative evolution of Lactarius, of course)

In these evolutionary offshoots

Supposition and will remain so until the required extraordinary evidence is provided.  We have been shown a logical sequence based on morphology.  We can be content to leave it there.  Let's build science on what we know, not what we think we know.

, three things have changed: (1) the peridium remains attached to the stipe at maturity, so the gills are not exposed to the outside atmosphere; (2) the gills are no longer plate-like, and are not oriented in a precise vertical plane; and (3) the spores are not forcibly discharged from the sterigmata. So despite having the characters listed earlier as being diagnostic of Lactarius, these forms are put in a separate genus, Arcangeliella, because the differences, especially the loss of the spore-shooting mechanism so characteristic of most basidiomycetes, are regarded as being of some basic biological importance. They affect the reproductive strategy of the organisms and therefore need to be taken account of when the taxonomy of the group is being established.

Whether a loss is the case is a matter of speculation.  Nevertheless, the facts are fascinating.

There are also even more reduced forms, in which the fruit body develops underground, the stipe is lost, and the gill tissues have become so folded and convoluted as to assume a spongy, chambered appearance: they are no longer gills, though they still bear basidia and produce basidiospores. So although these forms still have latex, sphaerocysts and amyloid spore ornamentation, they have been segregated in a third genus, Zelleromyces.

I concluded by saying that the Lactarius - Arcangeliella - Zelleromyces evolutionary pathway is not unique. In this second article, I will describe other similar developmental phenomena that have come to light, and the way in which they are now being interpreted.


At least you admit interpretation is key.  You have yours; I have mine.  I surmise the philosophical chasm between is an abyss.

The family Russulaceae, as understood by many mycologists, contains only two genera. We have already looked at one of them, Lactarius. Now let's consider the other one, Russula. This genus is very easy to recognize in the field, and (along with Lactarius) is one of the first genera the beginning amateur mycologist learns to identify. Russula has substantial fruit bodies, often with brightly coloured caps, stout stipes, and beautifully regular, white or cream-coloured gills. The caps, stipes and gills are brittle because their tissues contain clusters of round, thin-walled, turgid sphaerocysts. And the basidiospores have spiny, ridged and often net-like ornamentation that stains blue in iodine. Russula shares these two characters with Lactarius (which is why they are in the same family: these features are not found in any other agarics). But Russula has no laticiferous cells, and so does not produce latex (milk). This immediately distinguishes it from Lactarius, the milky cap, at least in most young, fresh collections.

Specimens are sometimes found which match the genus Russula in most ways, yet the peridium remains intact, attached to the stipe, and the gills are not exposed, even at maturity. In such specimens it will be seen that the hymenium has become highly convoluted or lacunose. Microscopic examination shows that sphaerocysts are present in the tissues, and the basidiospores do have blue-staining ornamentation; but although the attachment of the spores to the sterigmata is still somewhat asymmetrical or offset, those spores are not forcibly discharged. That is enough to exclude these specimens from Russula, and they have been placed in a separate genus, Macowanites.

Other atypical russuloid fungi have been found which resemble Macowanites in many ways: they still have sphaerocysts throughout the tissues, and spores with amyloid ornamentation. But they develop underground, and do not emerge, even at maturity. The external stipe has been lost, although a stipe remnant, in the form of a vertical column of sterile tissue, may still run through the fruit body. The spores, which are not forcibly liberated, are now symmetrically attached to their sterigmata. And the hymenium is no longer on recognizable gills, but lines convoluted or labyrinthine chambers. These specimens are segregated in the truffle-like genus Gymnomyces.


Brilliant science stuff.  I am delighted to see such intricate morphology discussed at the Shroomery.

But this is not all. A second line of reduced forms appears to have originated from Russula.

Back to history, not so brilliant--supposition.  Appearances can be deceiving.

Some of these resemble Russula in many ways, having a stalk and a cap, sphaerocysts in the outer tissues and spores with amyloid ornamentation. But the gills have entirely lost their vertical orientation and perhaps even their integrity. The fruit body is now filled with a spongy mass in which the hymenium lines finely convoluted chambers whose walls lack sphaerocysts. And although the spores are asymmetrically mounted on the sterigmata, they are not discharged. This is the genus Elasmomyces.

Other specimens, while retaining sphaerocysts in their outer tissues and amyloid spore ornamentation, have retreated (or rather, remained) underground, have lost their stalk, and have become essentially truffle-like. Their internal arrangements are rather like those of Gymnomyces, but although they have sphaerocysts in their outer tissues, they have none in the walls of the hymenial chambers. These fungi are placed in the genus Martellia.


Morphology rules.  :woot:

So, with a little imagination, we can visualize three lines of evolution, beginning with "normal" members of the family Russulaceae, mushrooms like Russula and Lactarius, and ending in truffle-like fungi which fruit underground.

I'm a scientist, not a visionary.  John Lennon would have liked it though.

Imagine three lines of evolution,

it's easy if you try...


Notice that the Russulaceae really contains not just two, but no fewer than eight genera, and that six of them, while microscopically "correct," do not give spore prints.

:cool:

By now, you may suspect that there must be other such strange evolutionary pathways hiding among the rest of the agarics, and even in other groups of fungi. And your suspicion would be correct.

I suspect nothing about some made-up stories.  I would surmise, however, based on your research dealing with morphology these cases aren't the only ones.

In fact, no fewer than 14 _ yes fourteen _ mushroom families have given rise to closed or underground forms which are treated as separate taxa. Let me sketch for you these lines of evolution as they are understood at present:

Evolution revolution, where is the evidence?  As you said in the beginning, you're on shaky ground, Dr.

  1. Russulaceae - see above

  2. Cortinariaceae: the genus Cortinarius gets its name from the presence on the expanding basidioma of a special filamentous or cobwebby partial veil called a cortina (from the Italian for curtain). Many species also have brightly coloured caps. The basidiospores are rusty-brown in mass, and characteristically ornamented. Cortinarius has some species in which the partial veil does not open. But since the basidia still shoot their spores (they end up sitting on the inside of the veil), these species are retained in Cortinarius. In other Cortinarius-like specimens, the cap also remains closed, but careful examination shows that these have lost both the spore-shooting mechanism and the vertical plate-like organization of the gills: a section shows that the hymenium-bearing tissue has become convoluted and labyrinthine or spongy. These "aberrant" forms have been placed in the genus Thaxterogaster.

      Some species of Thaxterogaster seem to have lost their external stipe, but there is still a central column of white sterile tissue running up the middle of the fruit body. Other offshoots of Cortinarius have become entirely hypogeous, never emerging above the surface of the soil. These have lost all semblance of stipe and gills, look just like a truffle, and have been put in the genus Hymenogaster, although their basidiospores still closely resemble those of Cortinarius.


We don't know if anybody lost anything because you have given the requisite data to back up your claims.

  3. Agaricaceae: the genus Agaricus has given rise to sequestrate forms placed in the genera Endoptychum and Longula.

  4. Lepiotaceae: Notholepiota is a sequestrate member of this family.

  5. Amanitaceae: Torrendia is a sequestrate segregate of Amanita.

  6. Bolbitiaceae: this family has given rise to a common and widespread sequestrate form called Gastrocybe. This is a strange fungus which appears in the grass during hot, humid weather. A narrowly conical, wet-looking brown cap arises on a long, narrow, delicate white stipe, which soon flops over. The spores sit squarely and persistently on the sterigmata. The whole cap soon dissolves into a slimy mass, which sticks to the grass. The spores never become airborne. We tend to assume that these spores are dispersed by grazing arthropods, although there is as yet no hard data to support that hypothesis.


No hard data? I'm shocked.  The rest of your paper seems packed with it not.

  7. Coprinaceae: Coprinus has given rise to a sequestrate form which is known as the desert shaggy mane. This fungus, which is put into the genus Podaxis, looks externally very like Coprinus comatus. Yet when a mature cap is cut open, the inside is seen to be filled, not with closely-packed, upwardly deliquescing gills, but with a dry mass of black spores, which will eventually blow away like dust when the outer skin of the fruit body erodes away or breaks. I have an excellent videotape sequence of this happening to a large specimen growing out of a termite mound in Africa (the Podaxis, unlike Termitomyces, apparently does not enjoy a mutualistically symbiotic relationship with the termites). The relationship of Podaxis with Coprinus is confirmed by the fact that under wet conditions, Podaxis, too, can undergo some deliquescence or self-digestion.

Yes, a triangle is related to a square.  We know this based on morphology.  I don't think they evolved, do you?  Are Podaxis related morphologically to Coprinus?  Obviously.

  8. Strophariaceae: Stropharia is the presumed ancestor of the sequestrate genera Nivatogastrium and Weraroa.

  9. Entolomataceae: Entoloma has spawned the sequestrate Richonia, the relationship being established by the pink colour and the distinctive angular shape of Richonia spores, which are almost identical to the spores of Entoloma itself. Nolanea may have given rise to Rhodogaster.


Or it may not.  Thanks for leaving the answer open.

10. Tricholomataceae: Hydnangium appears to be a sequestrate derivative of Laccaria.

Appearances...

11. Gomphidiaceae: Gomphidius has hived off the sequestrate genus Gomphigaster, and Chroogomphus has produced Brauniellula.

You don't know this, and now, after the lack of evidence, neither do we.  I'm disinclined to take your word for it.

12. Paxillaceae: Austrogaster and Gymnopaxillus are sequestrate derivatives.

Morphologically or evolutionarily?

  13. Boletaceae: Boletus, Suillus and Leccinum have spawned above-ground sequestrate forms in Gastroboletus, Gastrosuillus and Gastroleccinum. Alpova, Truncocolumella and the extremely common Rhizopogon are below-ground, sequestrate derivatives of Suillus. The techniques of molecular biology have recently shown that, at least for certain parts of its genome, Rhizopogon is very closely related to the epigeous, spore-shooting Suillus (more closely, in fact, than Suillus is related to other genera of boletes).

  14. Strobilomycetaceae: Gautieria is a fairly common hypogeous derivative, probably of Boletellus.


Lots of qualifiers.  They reveal a tentativeness in your conclusions.  :thumbup:

I have not mentioned all the sequestrate genera connected with the families listed in Part 2: many of them are rare, or are known only from the southern hemisphere. But I have given you enough information to realize that the evolution of sequestrate forms is a widespread phenomenon. And from what I have said about the Russulaceae and the Boletaceae, it will be obvious that more than one evolutionary pathway may evolve within a single family, and perhaps even within a single genus.

Obvious if a person is easily led.  You must be talking to a neophyte or someone who wants to "believe."  I am neither.  And as far as information is concerned, you haven't given anyone shit.  Don't bullshit a bullshiter Dr.

One or two interesting questions arise from my survey.

I have more questions than that; mine involve evidence.

Why have sequestrate forms evolved?

Begging the question again, I see.  A better question would be, "Did they evolve?"

Quote:

The generally accepted explanation is that during dry periods of the Earth's recent history some mushrooms mutated in such a way as to remain closed, and lose their spore-shooting mechanism. This gave these lines a selective advantage over those which exposed their gills to the hot, dry air. It is easier to maintain an appropriate level of humidity for spore development inside a closed fruit body. The next step, of remaining underground, is another way of escaping drought. Of course, once the spores are retained inside the fruit body, or kept underground, the problem of dispersal arises. In many cases, this has been solved by involving small mammals as vectors. That means evolving mechanisms for attracting these mammals and getting them to dig up or eat the fruit bodies. So one kind of adaptive change is complicated by the need for other adaptations. But that is what evolution is all about, and any organism that survives and propagates itself has obviously hit on a successful, or at least a functional, combination.




The "generally accepted explanation" is often referred to as the "default position."  It explains nothing whatsoever other than an interpretation of the morphological facts.  Next time I need a bedtime story I'll be sure to call you.

It is less easy to explain the geographic distribution of these sequestrate and hypogeous forms, since they appear to be concentrated in such areas as western North America, parts of South America, New Zealand and Australia, and to be relatively few in number in other areas such as eastern North America and northern Europe.

No sequestrate fungi have yet been connected with two agaric families, the Hygrophoraceae and the Pluteaceae. Do such fungi exist, and have we simply not seen or recognized them? And although the Tricholomataceae is a very large and diverse family of agarics, a sequestrate derivative (Hydnangium) is known only for Laccaria. Why have none of the other more than 30 widely recognized and often very common genera in this family produced sequestrate offshoots? Or have we simply not yet found them, or recognized them for what they are?

In most cases, the sequestrate forms are much less common than their spore-shooting ancestors (though this is not true of Rhizopogon). Is this scarcity more apparent than real because they are more difficult to find, since many of them grow below-ground? Does it indicate that most of these fungi are no more than rather unsuccessful evolutionary experiments, on their way to extinction? Or have they arisen so recently that they have not yet had time to spread very far?

How long ago did the oldest, and the youngest, of these fungi arise? This question, at least, we may attempt to solve by means of our newly acquired molecular techniques, which can measure the amount, and the rate, of change in the genetic material. Could sequestrate forms be appearing regularly, even now? Are the changes taking place gradually, as the necessary mutations slowly accumulate in mushrooms. Or do they appear suddenly and sporadically as a result of what is called "punctuated" evolution, involving larger jumps during periods of great environmental stress?


:rofl2:  I love a comedian!

Seriously though, where is that solution by means of your newly acquired molecular techniques and genetic material?  That's the part I want to see.  Even then, it isn't the required extraordinary evidence needed to prop up your claim.  Get it and bring it to us.  I want to see it.

:popcorn:

Quote:

Why has all this happened? Is it the new trend among mushrooms? Will all mushrooms eventually become sequestrate? Will our descendants have to dig if they want to see the fall flush of fleshy fungi, or fill their cooking pots with boletes and other fine edibles? Only, I suspect, if the greenhouse effect goes all the way and our climate becomes much drier and hotter than it is now. But we'll have to wait and see.




Right now I'm waiting for evidence other than morphology.  So far, nada.

We are not yet in a position to answer all of those questions, but at least we know know that there is a wide range of such fungi out there. There is a message here for the amateur: Don't just throw away those aberrant closed or distorted or partly hypogeous agarics. Cut them open to see if their gills are normal vertical plates, and check them to see whether they can be persuaded to yield a spore print. If the answer to both of the above is no, then you may very well have a sequestrate fungus on your hands. One of the professional agaricologists in your area should be able to check this. If it is indeed one of these most recently evolved taxa, you may congratulate yourself on your sharp eyes, and science may thank you for one more piece of the evidence we need to unravel this great jigsaw puzzle.

Evidence?  We need plenty of it, you more than most.

I'll be on the lookout for sequestrate fungi.  Thanks for the tip.  :thumbup:

Edited by Mr. Mushrooms (12/27/08 05:48 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #9503591 - 12/27/08 05:53 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

falcon said:
Muy rico, Cactu,

Lots of info in your first post in this thread, can't digest it in one go.




yeah . i also enjoy to digest information, the theme of sequestrate fungi is amazing is a part of the puzzle i hope you can come in later on with some ideas, reflexion, pictures, words or whetever ,can open more light in this subject.

Quote:

Mr. Mushrooms said:
Quote:

cactu said:

EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? PART 1
From: Dr. Bryce Kendrick (mycolog@pacificcoast.net)

[Kendrick, B. 1994.
    Evolution in action: from mushrooms to truffles. I. McIlvainea 11 (2): 34-38.]

The fungi are very old. Their history extends over hundreds of millions of years. Yet their origins, and the major evolutionary pathways they have followed, are still cloaked in mystery. This is largely because the fossil record of the fungi is fragmentary and disconnected. Organisms that live on land, and particularly such ephemera as most fungal fructifications, are much less likely to be fossilized than are marine organisms with hard parts. The paucity of fossil evidence has not deterred the cognoscenti among mycologists from a little judicious speculation, inevitably based largely on what we know about fungi that are alive today. This speculation is probably wrong in many respects and is usually heavily laced with the prejudices of its authors, but it is not necessarily a bad thing: students of the fungi need a conceptual framework on which to cut their teeth, and at which to aim their more mature criticisms. But we are still on shaky ground when we try to look into the evolutionary history of most modern fungi.






Well, I don't have time at the moment to critique the whole thing but I'll say this.  That's one helluva first paragraph!

As an aside I'll say this.  Morphology and chemical testing provide, and have provided, a conceptual framework from which to work.  Without morphology, DNA analyses are meaningless.

Nice thread.  :thumbup:




for sure all is part of the learning process, it was until dna analises where carry on many sequestrate fungi that people  began to understand the origin in  agaricoid forms, so this is when morphology became obsolet or useless, and dna come handy , but fro example is very informative  morphology and chemical testing to prove that the cells of certaing  sequestrate fungi are the same as the lactarius agaricoid form. so i agree what you said. hope we can get dipper in the subject and not just scratch the surface.:)


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9503616 - 12/27/08 05:59 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Me too, mi amigo.

What I'd like to see is some hard evidence for the lineages, not supposition or mumbo-jumbo.  Then again, history is history and science is science.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,032
Last seen: 1 hour, 21 minutes
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9503668 - 12/27/08 06:11 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Hey Cactu,  these are the only kind of truffles I've found,



I found them because an animal, probably a squirrel had started eating
them and then left. I'd like to find more truffles.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #9503865 - 12/27/08 06:54 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Mr. Mushrooms said:
Ok, let me give this a brief, fuller treatment.

Quote:

cactu said:



Starting out by begging the question isn't such a good beginning.
-my point it o discuss the subject all details you can take care no problem .




Then surely you'll share how you came by this interpretation of the facts.  "We now know" requires proof, as an extraordinary claim, it requires extraordinary evidence.  Be sure to include that in your paper, Dr.  The phrase belies a level of hubris/certainty rarely attained in any field, let alone one without fossil documentation.

i guees this pleople really are working in the subject since long ago look the dates 1997 , and this is only a paper for comoond people to understand not scientifics. his paper is more  dificult to digest.


Let us see how this has happened in the well-known and easily recognized mushroom genus Lactarius (the "milky-caps": family Russulaceae, order Agaricales).

I look forward to it.


Establishing a base-line is a wonderful idea if your target audience is a group of neophytes.  So far what you have described is pure science.  I like it; it gives the paper an air of credibility,  especially if you are talking to easily-led believers.  There are some in the audience--I am one--that are a little beyond that.  I'm a skeptic of the highest order when it comes to hypothetical lineages invented to turn myco-taxonomy on its head.  Science needs to proceed slowly.  Old ideas are hard to kill, especially when they have yielded such great understanding.

- i wish you can tell me what you dont believe and i will beging with that, and what are you discusing , really like to know that. the fact are many if you dont like to see then is ok , but for sure  many secotoid form are apearing in all genera , and the list is very long for something i think was  rare, it really is not,i love you men  just like to dig more in the subject . 

But in addition to specimens of Lactarius as I have just described it, we occasionally find extraordinary specimens. Specimens which have a few important differences from the milky caps we are used to seeing. They are similar (and theoretically could therefore be included in the genus) because they have all three characters listed above: brittle flesh full of sphaerocysts; latex exuded when the tissues are ruptured; and spores with ornamentation that is iodine-positive. Yet they are different because their cap develops in such a way as to enclose their gills, and the gills are no longer vertical plates, but have become crumpled or convoluted to form a spongy, chambered mass. Since the cap remains closed, the spores obviously cannot escape. This sounds as if it would be a serious problem for the fungus: after all, have not mushrooms evolved to be spore-making and spore-launching machines? And if the spores are not released into the atmosphere, how will they be dispersed?

You've discovered new morphology.  That's wonderful!  Glad to hear it.


Yet if we remember that the lungs of land vertebrates evolved from the swim-bladders of their fish ancestors, and the wings of birds from the forearms of their earthbound reptilian ancestors, we will appreciate that evolution, guided by environmental forces, often drives organisms in unforeseen directions. Something of this kind appears to be happening to the Lactarius, and we must assume that some other way of dispersing the spores has been evolved.

I remember that story too.  But let's not get ahead of ourselves and confuse the neophytes.  Some of them probably want real answers, not speculation built upon speculation.  The last time I checked fungi weren't fish, birds or reptiles.  What you are describing is history, albeit natural history--an arena ripe with speculation sans necessary empirical truth.
please  men , you are traslading for the neophytes word by word , not good , the guy is just given you ideas , not imposing his beliefs. that will hapend later on in scholl.

If we now cut away the edge of the unopened cap which is obscuring the gills, and try to make a spore print, we will not succeed. No spores will be deposited. This is not because the mushroom is either unripe or overmature. If we examine some of the basidia under a microscope, we will see that they have produced mature basidiospores. But the basidia have subtly changed. The four spores tend to develop symmetrically (not offset) on the sterigmata, and they tend to remain attached to the sterigmata: they are never forcibly discharged, as they were in normal Lactarius fruit bodies.

More science and morphologically based.  Cool beans!  :cool:

These differences are important enough for taxonomists to conclude that the fungus can no longer be called a Lactarius, and it has been placed in a different genus, named Arcangeliella. This genus has sometimes been excluded from the family Russulaceae and even from the order Agaricales, and has instead been put in a separate order, the Hymenogastrales.

I think that is wonderful and fascinating!  Of course, with morphology such as that it deserves its own classification.  Nice work.  :thumbup:
you see  you got youself , haha , you are making a new clasification of the same mushrooms , is good i mean we can study  more easy that maybe, you see dont matter where you put it  it always be a clasification that will be changing is not good to be atach of clasification they can change as our understanding in mushrooms change, here in the shroomery we give corect id we say , and we never handle a mushroom in hand , so is not this a bit of especulation? now you will agree that to make changes you have to imagine then to elavorate in your mind the subject. it will be tremendous tedious if we only see what is on the paper and we dont go beyond with our mind , what good scientific do is to philosopy with and idea , dream about it, and then make it real, i try people to dream, let the scientific , fight later on , but if you dream you will got to a real conclucion as all scientific do right ?after you land  first.
But there is no doubt that it has evolved from Lactarius in relatively recent times, that it is still closely related to that genus, and that it should be retained in the Agaricales, and even in the Russulaceae.

No doubt?  And you're talking history?  Dr., there is certainly doubt in such cases.  Perhaps you convince too easily.  Where is the requisite evidence/proof?  You know, that molecular stuff you were talking about.
:rofl: i got it now you a kidding  in a way , is your way of do things.:thumbup:

Arcangeliella still looks very like a mushroom, even if its behaviour is a little strange. But we have found other specimens which have evolved even further away from Lactarius. These specimens develop, and remain, just below the surface of the ground, looking rather like truffles. They are rounded or irregular in shape. The skin that covered the Lactarius now completely surrounds the truffle-like specimens. They have no stalk. There are no gills: the hymenium lines labyrinthine chambers. And the basidiospores, now sitting straight on the sterigmata of the basidia, are not actively shot away.

Note that the outer skin and often the walls of the labyrinthine spore-bearing tissues contain sphaerocysts; latex oozes from the cut surfaces of fresh specimens; and the spores have spiny or ridged ornamentation that stains dark in iodine. Once again, the three diagnostic characters of Lactarius. A vestige of a stalk may even occur in the form of a pad of sterile tissue inside the base of the fruit body; the walls of the labyrinthine chambers could be derived from crumpled gills; and the presence of sterigmata on the basidia is a reminder that these structures were originally evolved as part of a mechanism to launch spores into the air.

Yet it would be stretching the concept of Lactarius beyond the breaking point to include these specimens in it: surely no-one would call them agarics. It is also clear that they are considerably more "reduced" even than those placed in Arcangeliella. So mycologists put them in another new genus, called Zelleromyces.

Although Zelleromyces differs from both Arcangeliella and Lactarius in important ways, the fact that it has latex, sphaerocysts and iodine-positive (amyloid) spore ornamentation is a compelling argument for keeping it in the family Russulaceae of the order Agaricales. After all, this disposition seems to best reflect its true relationships. Arcangeliella and Zelleromyces are what we now call sequestrate (see the note below) derivatives of the original agaric. The word sequestrate implies that they sequester or retain their spores, rather than broadcasting them into the air. This retentive habit, diagnosed by spores sitting symmetrically on the sterigmata of non-shooting basidia, is clearly characteristic of both genera.


New classification based on morphology as far as I can see.  I think it's :omgawesome:

Before drawing the first part of this discussion to a close, I must address one final issue. If these sequestrate genera share all the essential diagnostic features of Lactarius, how are we to distinguish the Lactarius we all know from its sequestrate derivatives? It is apparent that the three diagnostic characters I described earlier must be supplemented by three more, as follows:

[4] the cap of a true Lactarius expands at maturity and the gills are exposed.
[5] its gills are vertically oriented.
[6] its basidiospores are asymmetrically mounted on the sterigmata and are forcibly discharged at maturity.

If the Lactarius -> Arcangeliella -> Zelleromyces sequence was the only case in which this strange evolutionary sequence had been observed, we might be able to dismiss it as a quirk of evolution, a freak. But we have evidence that similar pathways have evolved in other mushroom genera. These will be explored in the second part of this article, in the next two issues of BEN.


1)  Evidence is what you failed to provide, Dr.  You have described some transitions that appear as if they are a logical sequence.  They might be, they might not.

The term "sequestrate" has recently been introduced (Kendrick 1992) to describe all these closed or hypogeous offshoots of regular fungi. It means that the spores are sequestered or hidden away, kept from contact with the outside world, at least until the fruit body decays or is eaten. The term sequestrate appears to be a more useful and more widely applicable term than such frequently-used words as 'gastroid' (which inappropriately implies close relationship with gasteromycetes) and 'secotioid,' an arcane word suggesting similarity with the genus Secotium (which is a sequestrate derivative of Agaricus). Most amateur and many professional mycologists have never seen Secotium, so the term derived from that name conveys little or no meaning.
In the first article, I described how various members of the mushroom genus Lactarius (family Russulaceae, order Agaricales) had evolved into rather strange forms. They had kept their distinctive microscopic characters: latex-producing cells which exude a unique milky fluid when broken; thin-walled, swollen sphaerocysts which make the tissues of the mushroom characteristically brittle; and a distinctive spore ornamentation of spines and ridges which often form a network, and which stain dark blue or almost black in iodine (what we call the amyloid, I , or starch-like reaction). But the fruit bodies had taken on a distinctive appearance and also appeared to function rather differently.


All science, all good.  (minus the putative evolution of Lactarius, of course)

In these evolutionary offshoots

Supposition and will remain so until the required extraordinary evidence is provided.  We have been shown a logical sequence based on morphology.  We can be content to leave it there.  Let's build science on what we know, not what we think we know.

, three things have changed: (1) the peridium remains attached to the stipe at maturity, so the gills are not exposed to the outside atmosphere; (2) the gills are no longer plate-like, and are not oriented in a precise vertical plane; and (3) the spores are not forcibly discharged from the sterigmata. So despite having the characters listed earlier as being diagnostic of Lactarius, these forms are put in a separate genus, Arcangeliella, because the differences, especially the loss of the spore-shooting mechanism so characteristic of most basidiomycetes, are regarded as being of some basic biological importance. They affect the reproductive strategy of the organisms and therefore need to be taken account of when the taxonomy of the group is being established.

Whether a loss is the case is a matter of speculation.  Nevertheless, the facts are fascinating.glad you actually take alook at the fact you are welcome to do your own researh but please dont do as other do look information to buried the other , no look for the truth ...

There are also even more reduced forms, in which the fruit body develops underground, the stipe is lost, and the gill tissues have become so folded and convoluted as to assume a spongy, chambered appearance: they are no longer gills, though they still bear basidia and produce basidiospores. So although these forms still have latex, sphaerocysts and amyloid spore ornamentation, they have been segregated in a third genus, Zelleromyces.

I concluded by saying that the Lactarius - Arcangeliella - Zelleromyces evolutionary pathway is not unique. In this second article, I will describe other similar developmental phenomena that have come to light, and the way in which they are now being interpreted.


At least you admit interpretation is key.  You have yours; I have mine.  I surmise the philosophical chasm between is an abyss.

The family Russulaceae, as understood by many mycologists, contains only two genera. We have already looked at one of them, Lactarius. Now let's consider the other one, Russula. This genus is very easy to recognize in the field, and (along with Lactarius) is one of the first genera the beginning amateur mycologist learns to identify. Russula has substantial fruit bodies, often with brightly coloured caps, stout stipes, and beautifully regular, white or cream-coloured gills. The caps, stipes and gills are brittle because their tissues contain clusters of round, thin-walled, turgid sphaerocysts. And the basidiospores have spiny, ridged and often net-like ornamentation that stains blue in iodine. Russula shares these two characters with Lactarius (which is why they are in the same family: these features are not found in any other agarics). But Russula has no laticiferous cells, and so does not produce latex (milk). This immediately distinguishes it from Lactarius, the milky cap, at least in most young, fresh collections.

Specimens are sometimes found which match the genus Russula in most ways, yet the peridium remains intact, attached to the stipe, and the gills are not exposed, even at maturity. In such specimens it will be seen that the hymenium has become highly convoluted or lacunose. Microscopic examination shows that sphaerocysts are present in the tissues, and the basidiospores do have blue-staining ornamentation; but although the attachment of the spores to the sterigmata is still somewhat asymmetrical or offset, those spores are not forcibly discharged. That is enough to exclude these specimens from Russula, and they have been placed in a separate genus, Macowanites.

Other atypical russuloid fungi have been found which resemble Macowanites in many ways: they still have sphaerocysts throughout the tissues, and spores with amyloid ornamentation. But they develop underground, and do not emerge, even at maturity. The external stipe has been lost, although a stipe remnant, in the form of a vertical column of sterile tissue, may still run through the fruit body. The spores, which are not forcibly liberated, are now symmetrically attached to their sterigmata. And the hymenium is no longer on recognizable gills, but lines convoluted or labyrinthine chambers. These specimens are segregated in the truffle-like genus Gymnomyces.


Brilliant science stuff.  I am delighted to see such intricate morphology discussed at the Shroomery. i will never discuss morphology  with you is a no win  battle haha

But this is not all. A second line of reduced forms appears to have originated from Russula.

Back to history, not so brilliant--supposition.  Appearances can be deceiving.is in dna  studies too , haha  you should read more about in the subject it took me 2 years to make this post...

Some of these resemble Russula in many ways, having a stalk and a cap, sphaerocysts in the outer tissues and spores with amyloid ornamentation. But the gills have entirely lost their vertical orientation and perhaps even their integrity. The fruit body is now filled with a spongy mass in which the hymenium lines finely convoluted chambers whose walls lack sphaerocysts. And although the spores are asymmetrically mounted on the sterigmata, they are not discharged. This is the genus Elasmomyces.

Other specimens, while retaining sphaerocysts in their outer tissues and amyloid spore ornamentation, have retreated (or rather, remained) underground, have lost their stalk, and have become essentially truffle-like. Their internal arrangements are rather like those of Gymnomyces, but although they have sphaerocysts in their outer tissues, they have none in the walls of the hymenial chambers. These fungi are placed in the genus Martellia.


Morphology rules.  :woot:

So, with a little imagination, we can visualize three lines of evolution, beginning with "normal" members of the family Russulaceae, mushrooms like Russula and Lactarius, and ending in truffle-like fungi which fruit underground.

I'm a scientist, not a visionary.  John Lennon would have liked it though.
i can belive so ..the fact evidence that rizhopogon are more  close realated to suillus  is just  visionary , men i tell you there is many information on the subject why you said that?,
Imagine three lines of evolution,

it's easy if you try...


Notice that the Russulaceae really contains not just two, but no fewer than eight genera, and that six of them, while microscopically "correct," do not give spore prints.

:cool:

By now, you may suspect that there must be other such strange evolutionary pathways hiding among the rest of the agarics, and even in other groups of fungi. And your suspicion would be correct.

I suspect nothing about some made-up stories.  I would surmise, however, based on your research dealing with morphology these cases aren't the only ones.haha  y ou amaze me i hope and aline plane abduct you and then we took about it .  just kidding as i guees you are , that silly ....

In fact, no fewer than 14 _ yes fourteen _ mushroom families have given rise to closed or underground forms which are treated as separate taxa. Let me sketch for you these lines of evolution as they are understood at present:

Evolution revolution, where is the evidence?  As you said in the beginning, you're on shaky ground, Dr.

  1. Russulaceae - see above

  2. Cortinariaceae: the genus Cortinarius gets its name from the presence on the expanding basidioma of a special filamentous or cobwebby partial veil called a cortina (from the Italian for curtain). Many species also have brightly coloured caps. The basidiospores are rusty-brown in mass, and characteristically ornamented. Cortinarius has some species in which the partial veil does not open. But since the basidia still shoot their spores (they end up sitting on the inside of the veil), these species are retained in Cortinarius. In other Cortinarius-like specimens, the cap also remains closed, but careful examination shows that these have lost both the spore-shooting mechanism and the vertical plate-like organization of the gills: a section shows that the hymenium-bearing tissue has become convoluted and labyrinthine or spongy. These "aberrant" forms have been placed in the genus Thaxterogaster.

      Some species of Thaxterogaster seem to have lost their external stipe, but there is still a central column of white sterile tissue running up the middle of the fruit body. Other offshoots of Cortinarius have become entirely hypogeous, never emerging above the surface of the soil. These have lost all semblance of stipe and gills, look just like a truffle, and have been put in the genus Hymenogaster, although their basidiospores still closely resemble those of Cortinarius.


We don't know if anybody lost anything because you have given the requisite data to back up your claims.those data are in internet sorry if do not provide then all but you can look for then instead.

  3. Agaricaceae: the genus Agaricus has given rise to sequestrate forms placed in the genera Endoptychum and Longula.

  4. Lepiotaceae: Notholepiota is a sequestrate member of this family.

  5. Amanitaceae: Torrendia is a sequestrate segregate of Amanita.

  6. Bolbitiaceae: this family has given rise to a common and widespread sequestrate form called Gastrocybe. This is a strange fungus which appears in the grass during hot, humid weather. A narrowly conical, wet-looking brown cap arises on a long, narrow, delicate white stipe, which soon flops over. The spores sit squarely and persistently on the sterigmata. The whole cap soon dissolves into a slimy mass, which sticks to the grass. The spores never become airborne. We tend to assume that these spores are dispersed by grazing arthropods, although there is as yet no hard data to support that hypothesis.


No hard data? I'm shocked.  The rest of your paper seems packed with it not.

  7. Coprinaceae: Coprinus has given rise to a sequestrate form which is known as the desert shaggy mane. This fungus, which is put into the genus Podaxis, looks externally very like Coprinus comatus. Yet when a mature cap is cut open, the inside is seen to be filled, not with closely-packed, upwardly deliquescing gills, but with a dry mass of black spores, which will eventually blow away like dust when the outer skin of the fruit body erodes away or breaks. I have an excellent videotape sequence of this happening to a large specimen growing out of a termite mound in Africa (the Podaxis, unlike Termitomyces, apparently does not enjoy a mutualistically symbiotic relationship with the termites). The relationship of Podaxis with Coprinus is confirmed by the fact that under wet conditions, Podaxis, too, can undergo some deliquescence or self-digestion.

Yes, a triangle is related to a square.  We know this based on morphology.  I don't think they evolved, do you?  Are Podaxis related morphologically to Coprinus?  Obviously. why is so dificult for you to imaging , or try to prove wrong  that they are so far distand that this is ridiculous ,

  8. Strophariaceae: Stropharia is the presumed ancestor of the sequestrate genera Nivatogastrium and Weraroa.

  9. Entolomataceae: Entoloma has spawned the sequestrate Richonia, the relationship being established by the pink colour and the distinctive angular shape of Richonia spores, which are almost identical to the spores of Entoloma itself. Nolanea may have given rise to Rhodogaster.


Or it may not.  Thanks for leaving the answer open.

10. Tricholomataceae: Hydnangium appears to be a sequestrate derivative of Laccaria.

Appearances...

11. Gomphidiaceae: Gomphidius has hived off the sequestrate genus Gomphigaster, and Chroogomphus has produced Brauniellula.

You don't know this, and now, after the lack of evidence, neither do we.  I'm disinclined to take your word for it.

12. Paxillaceae: Austrogaster and Gymnopaxillus are sequestrate derivatives.

Morphologically or evolutionarily?

  13. Boletaceae: Boletus, Suillus and Leccinum have spawned above-ground sequestrate forms in Gastroboletus, Gastrosuillus and Gastroleccinum. Alpova, Truncocolumella and the extremely common Rhizopogon are below-ground, sequestrate derivatives of Suillus. The techniques of molecular biology have recently shown that, at least for certain parts of its genome, Rhizopogon is very closely related to the epigeous, spore-shooting Suillus (more closely, in fact, than Suillus is related to other genera of boletes).

  14. Strobilomycetaceae: Gautieria is a fairly common hypogeous derivative, probably of Boletellus.


Lots of qualifiers.  They reveal a tentativeness in your conclusions.  :thumbup:thank god 1 point minus 100

I have not mentioned all the sequestrate genera connected with the families listed in Part 2: many of them are rare, or are known only from the southern hemisphere. But I have given you enough information to realize that the evolution of sequestrate forms is a widespread phenomenon. And from what I have said about the Russulaceae and the Boletaceae, it will be obvious that more than one evolutionary pathway may evolve within a single family, and perhaps even within a single genus.

Obvious if a person is easily led.  You must be talking to a neophyte or someone who wants to "believe."  I am neither.  And as far as information is concerned, you haven't given anyone shit.  Don't bullshit a bullshiter Dr.

One or two interesting questions arise from my survey.

I have more questions than that; mine involve evidence.

Why have sequestrate forms evolved?

Begging the question again, I see.  A better question would be, "Did they evolve?"well  how you will say  they apear , some where never registered until very recent  , so why are not so common, maybe is a new or old  line in evolution , this is what this thread is about , to dig depper, the fact are there , do you think einsteins was  worry if the science in their time was acurate he was dreaming about a new science , we know so little about mushrooms i like this guy ideas and the other  hundret scientific out there, but this guy put it in dreamer  word he is not claming all is true his show you what  he has learn , i will use that and put it in my world and see what i can make out of it.

Quote:

The generally accepted explanation is that during dry periods of the Earth's recent history some mushrooms mutated in such a way as to remain closed, and lose their spore-shooting mechanism. This gave these lines a selective advantage over those which exposed their gills to the hot, dry air. It is easier to maintain an appropriate level of humidity for spore development inside a closed fruit body. The next step, of remaining underground, is another way of escaping drought. Of course, once the spores are retained inside the fruit body, or kept underground, the problem of dispersal arises. In many cases, this has been solved by involving small mammals as vectors. That means evolving mechanisms for attracting these mammals and getting them to dig up or eat the fruit bodies. So one kind of adaptive change is complicated by the need for other adaptations. But that is what evolution is all about, and any organism that survives and propagates itself has obviously hit on a successful, or at least a functional, combination.




The "generally accepted explanation" is often referred to as the "default position."  It explains nothing whatsoever other than an interpretation of the morphological facts.  Next time I need a bedtime story I'll be sure to call you.
exaclty  this bed time story , is for you to dream you are a scientific , so they dream dont they ?.
that explanation is not acurate since i have seem for example in psilocybe coprophila grow how some secotoid form evolve maybe is link to the origin of mushrooms , but this really is what i like to dream and to dig in my mind in this field no scientific is up to the job only few. and in this field if you got to the conclucion you are way ahead of science don`t you fell science is just to late to give answers i just dont know can you handle for me science is not enouf , because science have a wall that advance  very  little and we are speculing inj the other side, i rather take scientific fact and jump the wall with science and philosophy  or what i call my mind , i have better tools , that only science,



It is less easy to explain the geographic distribution of these sequestrate and hypogeous forms, since they appear to be concentrated in such areas as western North America, parts of South America, New Zealand and Australia, and to be relatively few in number in other areas such as eastern North America and northern Europe.

No sequestrate fungi have yet been connected with two agaric families, the Hygrophoraceae and the Pluteaceae. Do such fungi exist, and have we simply not seen or recognized them? And although the Tricholomataceae is a very large and diverse family of agarics, a sequestrate derivative (Hydnangium) is known only for Laccaria. Why have none of the other more than 30 widely recognized and often very common genera in this family produced sequestrate offshoots? Or have we simply not yet found them, or recognized them for what they are?

In most cases, the sequestrate forms are much less common than their spore-shooting ancestors (though this is not true of Rhizopogon). Is this scarcity more apparent than real because they are more difficult to find, since many of them grow below-ground? Does it indicate that most of these fungi are no more than rather unsuccessful evolutionary experiments, on their way to extinction? Or have they arisen so recently that they have not yet had time to spread very far?

How long ago did the oldest, and the youngest, of these fungi arise? This question, at least, we may attempt to solve by means of our newly acquired molecular techniques, which can measure the amount, and the rate, of change in the genetic material. Could sequestrate forms be appearing regularly, even now? Are the changes taking place gradually, as the necessary mutations slowly accumulate in mushrooms. Or do they appear suddenly and sporadically as a result of what is called "punctuated" evolution, involving larger jumps during periods of great environmental stress?


:rofl2:  I love a comedian!

Seriously though, where is that solution by means of your newly acquired molecular techniques and genetic material?  That's the part I want to see.  Even then, it isn't the required extraordinary evidence needed to prop up your claim.  Get it and bring it to us.  I want to see it.

:popcorn:

Quote:

Why has all this happened? Is it the new trend among mushrooms? Will all mushrooms eventually become sequestrate? Will our descendants have to dig if they want to see the fall flush of fleshy fungi, or fill their cooking pots with boletes and other fine edibles? Only, I suspect, if the greenhouse effect goes all the way and our climate becomes much drier and hotter than it is now. But we'll have to wait and see.




Right now I'm waiting for evidence other than morphology.  So far, nada.

We are not yet in a position to answer all of those questions, but at least we know know that there is a wide range of such fungi out there. There is a message here for the amateur: Don't just throw away those aberrant closed or distorted or partly hypogeous agarics. Cut them open to see if their gills are normal vertical plates, and check them to see whether they can be persuaded to yield a spore print. If the answer to both of the above is no, then you may very well have a sequestrate fungus on your hands. One of the professional agaricologists in your area should be able to check this. If it is indeed one of these most recently evolved taxa, you may congratulate yourself on your sharp eyes, and science may thank you for one more piece of the evidence we need to unravel this great jigsaw puzzle.

Evidence?  We need plenty of it, you more than most.

I'll be on the lookout for sequestrate fungi.  Thanks for the tip.  :thumbup:








hope a secotoid fungi found you and teach you all :hehehe:


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: falcon]
    #9504017 - 12/27/08 07:29 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

falcon said:
Hey Cactu,  these are the only kind of truffles I've found,



I found them because an animal, probably a squirrel had started eating
them and then left. I'd like to find more truffles.





nice find  did you got to id then yet, is interesting how truffles are help by animal  in the dispersion of spores , and a idea of evolution of secotoid mushrooms is maybe influence by animals, i guees is really amazing  with  all little  we know about mushrooms , how in this new year we are going to see many changes , in our understanding of mushroooms .
do you think they are truffles or false truffles ?


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,032
Last seen: 1 hour, 21 minutes
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9504096 - 12/27/08 08:03 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

I'm pretty sure they were the false truffle, Elaphomyces granulatus.

Animals seem to play a big role in their spore dispersal. The idea that
they play a part in their evolution is tempting, especially as to what gets selected by dispersal.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: falcon]
    #9504159 - 12/27/08 08:25 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

i found similar specie  or maybe granulatus  growing with cordyceps .

did you make a transversal cut , do it next time, maybe you found a secotoid, mushrooms , do you think it was a deer . deer mushrooms ?


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,032
Last seen: 1 hour, 21 minutes
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9504202 - 12/27/08 08:39 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Yep, I think it was deer mushroom.  The spores were almost mature,
it wasn't a puffball. It had a pungent smell, not unpleasant, but very
strong.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9504232 - 12/27/08 08:48 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

cactu said:

http://www.amjbot.org/content/vol88/issue12/images/large/abot-88-12-21-f04.jpeg

http://www.amjbot.org/content/vol88/issue12/images/large/abot-88-12-21-f05.jpeg

hope a secotoid fungi found you and teach you all :hehehe:




Fascinating drawings.  I think I've seen something similar in an avatar.  Tell me, cactu, how much pruning will those require?  Do those cladograms indicate the gradual change required for natural selection?  They appear rather rigid.

Here's a couple more for your collection.  Neither look like a tree, but they sure are pretty.




--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #9504688 - 12/27/08 10:48 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Relationship of Laccaria to Hydnangium and Podohydnangium
Podohydnangium must be considered along with Hydnangium in discussions of the relationship of Laccaria to putative gasteroid relatives. Podohydnangium is a monotypic genus that differs from Hydnangium by having a distinct stipe-columella and, therefore, appears intermediate between Laccaria and Hydnangium (Beaton et al., 1984). Podohydnangium  was not included in Kühner's (1980) or Jülich's (1981) treatments since it was first described in 1984 and was excluded from Singer's (1986) classification for the same reason that he excluded Hydnangium; uncertainty of affinity. These three classifications discussed above treat the relationship of Laccaria  to Hydnangium and Podohydnangium differently (Table 2). This is because of fundamental differences in opinion regarding the relationship of gasteroid genera to their agaric counterparts. Kühner (1980) and Jülich (1981) both treated certain gasteroid taxa within the Agaricales, incorporating them into the classification with their putative sister taxa. Singer (1986), on the other hand, maintained that the relationship of these fungi to epigeous agarics is not sufficiently resolved to justify incorporating them into the Agaricales.
While Laccaria, Podohydnangium and Hydnangium differ drastically in macromorphology, they share several presumably derived micromorphological character states; identical basidiospore ornamentation and, at least in Laccaria and Hydnangium (Podohydnangium has not been examined), multinucleate basidiospores.
Laccaria is unique among epigeous agarics in that the conic echinulae, diagnostic features of the genus, are formed by microtubials that run perpendicular to the epispore (Besson and Kühner, 1971; Kühner, 1980; v. Hofsten and Mueller, unpublished). SEM micrographs of basidiospores from several Hydnangium and Podohydnangium taxa have documented the similarity of shape of the basidiospore ornamentation between these taxa and those of Laccaria (Pegler and Young, 1979; Beaton et al., 1984; Castellano et al., 1989) and unpublished TEM data obtained by v. Hofsten (Institute of Physiological Botany, University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden) document that the basidiospore wall ultrastructure of Hydnangium is similar to that found in Laccaria; the echinulae are composed of microtubials that run perpendicular to the epispore.
All examined taxa of Laccaria as well as Hydnangium carneum have multinucleate basidiospores (Table 1; Kühner, 1980; Tommerup et al., 1991).
The three genera also share several pleisiomorphies such as having abundant clamp connections; nonamyloid, acyanophilic basidiospores; and the lack of a heteromerous trama (Pegler and Young, 1979; Beaton et al., 1984). Finally, at least some species of Hydnangium appear similar in color to orange-brown Laccaria.
Differences between the genera are statismosporic basidiospores that are orthotropic in development in Hydnangium and Podohydnangium versus ballistosporic basidiospores that are heterotropic in development in Laccaria. But, as pointed out by several authors (e.g., Pegler and Young, 1979; Beaton et al., 1984), Hydnangium is not closely related to any of the genera such as Octavianina O. Kuntze formerly treated in the polyphyletic Hymenogastrales sensu Singer and Smith (1960) and others.
While Laccaria, Hydnangium and Podohydnangium appear to form a monophyletic group, it is currently not possible to undertake a rigorous analysis of the relationship of these three genera to each other as no detailed systematic work has been carried out on either Hydnangium or Podohydnangium and species circumscriptions, composition, and relationships are still uncertain in these two genera. Castellano and Trappe (1990) accepted 23 names in Hydnangium in their bibliographic survey of Australian gasteroid fungi. Numerous systematic problems remain in the group, however, and some of these taxa probably belong in other genera. Until intra- and intergeneric relationships within this group are resolved, I choose to treat the taxa in this group as three separate genera (Laccaria, Hydnangium, Podohydnangium) in the Tricholomataceae sensu Singer (1986) amended to include Hydnangium and Podohydnangium. The inability to resolve infrafamiliar relationships within the family precludes recognizing the clade composed of these genera in a formal classification (see above).

here is more information http://www.fieldmuseum.org/research_Collections/botany/botany_sites/fungi/phylo-consid.main.html


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9504751 - 12/27/08 11:10 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Tricholomatoid clade (V).
The Tricholomatoid clade appears sister of an inclusive group of mostly dark-spored taxa, the Agaricoid clade (see below). Analysis III produces a significant PP (0.97) for the union of these two inclusive clades. Of the 11 EM origins (FIG. 1Go) nine are concentrated in the Tricholomatoid + Agaricoid clade alone. Gross morphologies in both groups are dominated by gilled pileate-stipitate forms but also include secotioid or truffle-like forms (sequestrate)
Agaricoid clade (VI).
Most members of the Agaricoid clade are characterized by pigmented, multinucleate basidiospores and an open-pore type of hilum (Pegler and Young 1969Go; Kühner 1980Go, 1984Go). The clade is essentially that of Kühner’s narrow concept of the Agaricales but unequivocally includes the Hydnangiaceae (multinucleate, white-spored Laccaria and sequestrate allies), the gasteromycete groups, Nidulariaceae and Lycoperdales, and several other sequestrate forms (Krüger et al 2001Go, Peintner et al 2001Go). No links to resupinate taxa have been established, but a few cyphelloid lineages are included (viz. Pellidiscus [Crepidotaceae] and Phaeosolenia) (Bodensteiner et al 2004Go). Many taxa in the Agaricoid clade possess basidiospores with an apical germ pore (e.g. most Psathyrellaceae, many Agaricaceae, Panaeoleae, many Bolbitiaceae), but the phylogenetic distribution of these taxa is diffuse. A germ pore is not present among taxa in the other major clades of the Agaricales. In addition no members of the clade exhibit amyloid spores with the exception of some species of Cystoderma. Hallucinogenic compounds, namely psilocybin, can be found in several lineages of the Agaricoid clade—Conocybe, Copelandia, Gymnopilus, Inocybe s. str., Panaeolina, Panaeolus (Benjamin 1995Go).

As many as six EM origins are inferred in the Agaricoid clade and include the Hydnangiaceae, Cortinariaceae s. str., Inocybaceae, the genera Descolea and Phaeocollybia and elements of the Hymenogastraceae. The remaining taxa are primarily saprotrophic (Vellinga 2004Go, Watling and Gregory 1987Go) but include some lineages in the Agaricaceae that are symbiotic with ants (Chapela et al 1994Go, Mueller et al 1998Go).
http://www.mycologia.org/cgi/content/full/98/6/982
http://www.anbg.gov.au/fungi/truffle-like.html
http://mycor.nancy.inra.fr/IMGC/LaccariaGenome/pub/LaccariaSpecialIssue/TR_Laccaria.pdf


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Edited by cactu (12/27/08 11:31 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9504774 - 12/27/08 11:18 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Does secotioid inertia drive the evolution of false-truffles?

References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

Steven Robert Albee-ScottCorresponding Author Contact Information, a, E-mail The Corresponding Author

aUniversity of Michigan Herbarium, Ann Arbor, 3600 Varsity Drive, MI, 48108-2287, USA

Received 3 January 2006;
revised 17 July 2007;
accepted 15 August 2007.
Corresponding Editor: Scott LaGreca.
Available online 28 August 2007.

Abstract

Secotioid inertia is a model implemented to explain the prevalence of highly derived false-truffles with no obvious connection to the Homobasidiomycetes. The model accommodates the apparent lack of epigeous sister taxa for some highly derived hypogeous lineages by assuming that gasteromycetation in some fungi leads to the extinction of their epigeous sister population. The derived state of some hypogeous lineages suggests that they arose early in the evolution of Homobasidiomycetes and that those groups were subject to conditions that favoured hypogeous lineages such that the hypogeous fruit body form became the predominant form for some lineages. The directional selection component of secotioid inertia, termed secotioid drive, led to the extinction of their epigeous sister taxon. Morphological and molecular data from Russulaceae are used to model the evolutionary stages of secotioid inertia. The resulting phylogenetic results are compared with data from the order Leucogastrales, and the genus Destuntzia. The implications of secotioid drive are discussed with reference to gasteromycete phylogenetics, evolution, and conservation. Specifically, secotioid inertia can be used to account for reversals in fruit body morphology and instability in mycorrhizal formation.

yo any hacker out there that can access more of this information?
iam dying for more :dna:  :watchingyou:


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9504853 - 12/27/08 11:43 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

The truffle-like genus Rhizopogon is very closely related to the bolete genus Suillus  . In fact, Suillus appears to be much more closely related to Rhizopogon than to any other bolete genus. In this case, the DNA evidence suggest that both genera evolved from a common ancestor.
http://www.anbg.gov.au/fungi/truffle-like.html


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9504857 - 12/27/08 11:44 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Evolution of gilled mushrooms and puffballs inferred from ribosomal DNA sequences
Evolution of Gasteromycetes.

The nine species of Gasteromycetes that we examined occur in four separate lineages and appear to have been derived from both gilled and nongilled Hymenomycetes (Fig. 1). In addition, anatomical studies have suggested that as many as 14 lineages of Hymenomycetes have given rise to gasteromycetous false truffles and “secotioid” fungi, which are epigeous Gasteromycetes that resemble unexpanded mushrooms (23, 24). In several cases, such hypotheses have been supported by molecular studies. For example, previous studies have suggested that (i) the false truffles Rhizopogon and Chamonixia and the secotioid fungus Gastrosuillus are derived from within the Boletales (3, 12, 18, 25), (ii) the false truffle Hydnangium is closely related to the gilled mushroom Laccaria (4), and (iii) the secotioid fungi Podaxis and Montagnea are nested in the gilled mushroom family Coprinaceae (19). Taken together with our results, this suggests that Gasteromycetes have been repeatedly derived from Hymenomycetes, but there is no evidence that this transformation has ever been reversed.

Derivation of Gasteromycetes from Hymenomycetes involves the evolution of an enclosed hymenophore. In the gilled mushroom Lentinus tigrinus, there is a naturally occurring developmental mutant in which a recessive allele at a single locus confers a Gasteromycete-like enclosed hymenophore (26). Although the genetic basis of gasteromycetization in other lineages is unknown, the situation in L. tigrinus suggests that such transformations could be mediated by one or a small number of mutations in genes that have large phenotypic effects. The resemblance of secotioid Gasteromycetes to unopened mushrooms has led to suggestions that the initial steps in transformations from Hymenomycetes to Gasteromycetes are mutations that confer loss of function in developmental pathways, resulting in pedomorphosis (3, 23, 25). This view is consistent with observations of low levels of rDNA sequence divergence between certain secotioid fungi and closely related Hymenomycetes (3, 25).

In addition to the evolution of an enclosed hymenophore, derivation of Gasteromycetes from Hymenomycetes entails changes in the mechanisms of spore dispersal. Hymenomycetes discharge spores by a forcible mechanism, termed “ballistospory,” that is absent in Gasteromycetes. Structural features associated with ballistospory include short, curved sterigmata (the stalks that bear the spores), asymmetrical spores, and formation of a droplet of liquid at the base of the spore at the time of discharge (27). It appears that the suite of characters involved in ballistospory, once lost, has never been regained, which may explain why forms with exposed hymenophores have never been secondarily derived from Gasteromycetes.

In the absence of ballistospory, diverse spore dispersal mechanisms have evolved among Gasteromycetes (28). In puffballs, spores are produced internally and sift into the air through cracks or pores in the outer wall of the fruiting body (Fig. 2 D–F). Our results suggest that the puffball type fruiting body has evolved at least three times (Figs. 1 and 2). This is a conservative estimate because the taxonomically controversial puffballs Astraeus and Calostoma were not included in the analysis. In false truffles, spores are produced internally and are disseminated into soil as fruiting bodies break down and may also be dispersed by rodents that eat the fruiting bodies (29). As discussed above, molecular and morphological evidence suggests that false truffles also have multiple origins.

Other “solutions” to nonballistosporic dispersal appear to have arisen only once. In Nidulariales, spores are contained in packets (peridioles) that are dislodged from an upturned, concave fruiting body by a splash-cup mechanism (Figs. 1 and 2 G; ref. 30). The dislodged peridioles adhere to vegetation by means of a specialized hyphal cord and are thought to be dispersed by herbivores (30). In Phallales (represented in this study by Pseudocolus fusiformis), spores are dispersed by insects, especially Diptera. Spores develop within an initially enclosed fruiting body primordium but become exposed as the fruiting body expands. At maturity, a showy, flower-like structure is produced, which is lined by a dark, fetid slime in which the spores are suspended (Fig. 2 H). Finally, in Sphaerobolus, spores are produced in a glebal mass inside minute (≈1.5 mm in diameter) fruiting bodies. At maturity, the outer wall of the fruiting body splits open, and the inner wall suddenly evaginates, ejecting the spore mass up to 6 m (Fig. 2 I; ref. 31).

Our results suggest that Phallales, Sphaerobolus, and the puffball Geastrum form a monophyletic group (Fig. 1). With three radically different spore dispersal mechanisms, this clade provides a remarkable example of functional and morphological diversification. Although this group is not strongly supported by bootstrapping, it is nevertheless nested in a strongly supported, slightly more inclusive clade, which also includes the Hymenomycetes Gomphus, Ramaria, and Clavariadelphus. [This is consistent with results of unpublished analyses of nuc-lsu-rDNA and mt-lsu-rDNA sequences that suggest that Ramaria, Phallales, and Sphaerobolus are monophyletic (R. G. Thorn, personal communication, and J. Spatafora, Oregon State University, personal communication).]
http://www.pnas.org/content/94/22/12002.full


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9504913 - 12/27/08 11:58 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

look all this secotoid pnw hunters, post some if you find
thanks in advance:
Name: Alpova diplophloeus
Group: Basidiomycota, Boletaceae
Season: May-Dec.
Habitat: With alders
Spores: 4-6 x 1.8-2.8 µm, bacilliform, colorless
Features: Peridium tan and staining pink to red in youth where bruised, becoming reddish brown with age. Gleba solid, gelatinous, dull yellow with white marbling when first exposed but quickly turning dark reddish brown.
Comments: Always under alders; distributed broadly in North America and Europe. The change of color when the gleba is cut open occurs quickly. It is too small and flavorless to have much culinary value.

Name: Arcangeliella camphorata
Group: Basidiomycota, Russulaceae
Season: Oct-Mar.
Habitat: Douglas-fir
Spores: 8-10.5 x 7.5-9.5 µm, ellipsoid, with amyloid reticulation
Features: Rounded with a vestigial stem and columella; peridium light to deep reddish brown. Gleba of fresh, moist specimens produces a milky latex.
Comments: A hypogeous relative of the mushroom genus Lactarius, as indicated by its latex production. The odor of fresh specimens is mild, but despite the species name, dried specimens have an odor of maple syrup. It occurs west of the Cascade Range from southern Oregon to southern British Columbia.

Name: Arcangeliella crassa
Group: Basidiomycota, Russulaceae
Season: June-Oct.
Habitat: Douglas-fir, pines, true firs
Spores: 8-11 x 6.5-8 µm, ellipsoid, with amyloid reticulation
Features: In the shape of a mushroom but with a much reduced stem and locules instead of gills on the underside of the cap; peridium brownish white to light brown
Comments: A close relative of the mushroom genus Lactarius, it exudes a white latex where cut when fresh and moist. Found in the Cascade Mountains of northern Oregon south to California's central Sierras.

Name: Balsamia magnata
Group: Ascomycota, Helvellaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: Relatively warm sites with Douglas-fir, pines, true firs, possibly oaks.
Spores: 20-24 x 12-14 µm, long and cylindrical to ellipsoid, colorless, smooth
Features: Rounded with a cavity on top or sides, deep reddish brown, warty. Gleba grayish white with white veins that radiate to the cavity.
Comments: This cheerfully colored little truffle fruits from Oregon south to Southern California and east to Arizona. It is always pleasant to find but is too small and scarce to be useful as food.

Name: Barssia oregonensis
Group: Ascomycota, Helvellaceae
Season: Year-round but mostly late winter to late spring
Habitat: With relatively young Douglas-fir (generally 10 to 60 yrs old)
Spores: 32 x 18 µm, ellipsoid
Features: Peridium lumpy but smooth, pale pinkish cream to pinkish brown. Gleba pale with white veins firm and brittle; with cavity on top or one side.
Comments: This species occurs only in the Pacific Northwest where Douglas-fir is present. It commonly fruits in habitats that also produce Oregon white truffles and similarly seems not to occur in old-growth forests. It has a nice texture but little flavor when added raw to salads or cooked dishes.

Name: Cortinarius magnivelatus
Group: Basidiomycota, Cortinariaceae
Season: Apr-Sep.
Habitat: Montane with pine, true fir, hemlock
Spores: 9-14 x 6-8 um, elliptical, finely verrucose
Features: Hypogeous, with a distinct but reduced stem and contorted gills enclosed by a fibrillose-membranous veil.
Comments: This species is a true mushroom, not a truffle, but it never emerges above ground. Its vestigial stem and persistent veil that prevents escape of spores from the gills indicate an evolution towards a truffle-like ecology, i.e. depending on being eaten by small mammals or insects as a method of spore dispersal.

Name: Cystangium vesiculosum
Group: Basidiomycota, Russulaceae
Season: June-Nov, March
Habitat: Under Douglas-fir, hemlocks, spruces, true firs and pines
Spores: 10-14 x 8-11 µm, with strongly amyloid spines 1-2 µm long
Features: Peridium smooth, it and gleba white to pale cream color
Comments: Related to the mushroom genus Russula, this attractive, smooth truffle has little odor or taste and adds little to any dish in which it is added. Like Russula, it does not produce a latex. It occurs from northern California to Washington and Idaho from the Pacific Coast to middle elevations in the mountains.

Name: Elaphomyces granulatus
Group: Ascomycota, Elaphomycetaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With members of the pine family (i.e. Douglas-fir, spruces, true firs, hemlocks, etc.) and many broadleaved (oaks, beech, birch, etc.)
Spores: 24-60 µm, globose, with spines sometimes aggregated into warts
Features: Peridium minutely warty, thick, leathery, andsolid white to brown in cross section; spore mass black and powdery at maturity.
Comments: perhaps the most common and widely distributed of all truffles in the Northern Hemisphere, it is particularly abundant in boreal forests in deep humus or rotten wood. Its texture and powdery interior eliminate any culinary use.

Name: Elaphomyces muricatus
Group: Ascomycota, Elaphomycetaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With members of the pine family (i.e. Douglas-fir, true firs, hemlocks, etc.) and many broadleaved species such as oaks, beech, birch, etc.
Spores: 18-35 µm, globose, with spines sometimes aggregated into warts.
Features: Peridium with prominent warts thick, marbled pattern in cross section; spore mass black and powdery at maturity.
Comments: A close relative of Elaphomyces granulatus, this species occupies similar habitats and is also widely distributed but less common than the former. Neither have culinary value.

Name: Endogone flammicorona
Group: Zygomycota, Endogonaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With members of the pine family (i.e. Douglas-fir, true firs, hemlocks, etc.) and many broadleaved species such as oaks, beech, birch, etc
Spores: 52-120 x 42-99 µm, globose to ellipsoid or obovoid, each one enclosed within tightly appressed hyphae that in face view look like a fingerprint and in cross-section like a "crown of flames"
Features: Irregularly shaped; peridium thin and delicate in youth, collapsing by maturity; spores large enough to be easily seen with a hand lens.
Comments: Widely distributed in the Northern Hemisphere, it is most often found in young stands. Sometimes it fruits by the tens of thousands in conifer nurseries. Too small and full of grit for use in cooking.

Name: Fevansia aurantiaca
Group: Basidiomycota, possibly Boletaceae
Season: Aug-Nov.
Habitat: Upper elevation Douglas-fir and true fir
Spores: 10-13 x 3.5-5 µm, smooth, fusiform
Features: Peridium pale orange. Gleba of yellow spherical locules.
Comments: This rare truffle has been found only in the Cascade Mountains of Oregon in relatively mature forests. Known from only 5 collections, it is one of the rarer species known. Its culinary value is unevaluated, but it does not have a distinct fragrance. Named after NATS founding member Frank Evans.

Name: Gastroboletus subalpinus
Group: Basidiomycota, Boletaceae
Season: Jul-Oct.
Habitat: Whitebark and lodgepole pines, true firs, mountain hemlocks at relatively high elevations to tree line
Spores: 10-18 x 4.5-8 µm, ellipsoid to oblong or ovate, smooth, colorless
Features: In the form of a contorted Boletus, with a very reduced stem and long, contorted, closed tubes; cap brown, stem dirty white; odor and taste similar to Boletus edulis.
Comments: Though not a truffle, this species is always hypogeous and represents the mushrooms that have mutated to a belowground habit. It is a truffle in the making and relies on being eaten for its spore dispersal.

Name: Gautieria monticola
Group: Basidiomycota, Gautieriaceae
Season: Mar-Nov.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, hemlocks, pines, true firs
Spores: 10-16 x 7-9 µm, elongate citriform, longitudinally ridged
Features: Peridium thin and disappearing early in development to reveal the outermost chambers of the firm, rubbery, cinnamon colored gleba with its inconspicuous to distinct white to translucent columella.
Comments: Among the more common spring and early summer truffles of western North American truffles, this species emits a strong, obnoxious odor when fully mature, especially when warmed such as in a car that has been sitting in the sun. When cooked, it loses the odor but also whatever other culinary value it might otherwise have had.

Name: Gautieria parksiana
Group: Basidiomycota, Gautieriaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, pines, hemlocks, true firs, spruces and oaks
Spores: 14-24 x 9.5-12 µm
Features: Irregularly globose with a well developed, persistent, white to brown, cottony peridium. Gleba firm, rubbery, cinnamon colored, with an obscure to prominent columella; base with a robust rhizomorph.
Comments: Low to high elevations in western North America but less common than G. monticola, from which it differs by its persistent peridium and larger spores. Its culinary value is similar to that of the latter species.

Name: Genabea cerebriformis
Group: Ascomycota, Pyronemataceae
Season: Mar-Oct.
Habitat: With pine, Douglas-fir, oak
Spores: 29-34 µm, globose, with densely crowded spines 2-3 µm tall
Features: Dull grayish yellow, convoluted and minutely warty with many chambers, rarely more than 1 cm broad, fragile and brittle.
Comments: "Cerebriformis," (in the form of a brain), aptly describes this petit truffle, which occurs in western North America. It develops a nice, garlicky fragrance at maturity but is too small and hard to clean for use in cooking.

Name: Genea harknessii
Group: Ascomycota, Pyronemataceae
Season: Mar-Oct.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, oaks
Spores: 25-32 x 21-29 µm, subglobose to ellipsoid, ornamented with cones mostly 1-3 µm tall and broad.
Features: Charcoal black, warty exterior and convoluted-hollow, the interior of the hollow also black and warty, the base with a thick tuft of hyphae; flesh thin, white to gray, fragile and brittle.
Comments: Odor at maturity garlicky, but specimens are hard to find and small, hence not usually found in enough quantity to use in cooking.

Name: Genea intermedia
Group: Ascomycota, Pyronemataceae
Season: Feb-Aug, mostly Apr-Jun.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, true firs and oaks
Spores: 36-40 µm, globose, ornamented with broad, rounded warts
Features: Vinaceous red, warty exterior and convoluted-hollow, the interior of the hollow also vinaceous and warty, lacking a basal tuft of hyphae; flesh white, fragile and brittle.
Comments: Small and lacking distinctive odor and flavor, but attractive to see.

Name: Geopora cooperi
Group: Ascomycota, Pyronemataceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With pines, Douglas-fir, true firs, hemlocks, larch
Spores: 16-21 µm, ellipsoid, smooth
Features: Peridium brown and minutely but distinctly hairy (use hand lens). Gleba white with some brown veins, of tightly contorted chambers.
Comments: The odor varies from undetectable to radish-like or garlicky. The surface hairs hold soil and sand grains, so if used in cooking it is best peeled. A second form is similar but has subglobose to globose spores.

Name: Gymnomyces abietus
Group: Basidiomycota, Russulaceae
Season: Aug-Dec.
Habitat: Montane to subalpine conifer forests with true fir
Spores: 8-14 x 7-11 µm, globose, with amyloid spines and often a partial reticulum
Features: Peridium white to yellowish. Gleba orange yellow.
Comments: Widely distributed in its habitats in the Cascade and Sierra Mountains. It has little odor or taste.

Name: Gymnomyces brunnescens
Group: Basidiomycota, Russulaceae
Season: Jul-Dec.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir
Spores: 8-12 x 8-10 µm, globose, with amyloid spines ± 1 µm tall
Features: Peridium white, bruising brown and becoming brown overall by maturity. Gleba initially brownish white, soon developing brown areas and at maturity brown overall.
Comments: One of the more common hypogeous fungi in Douglas-fir forests of western Washington, western Oregon and northern California, it has no distinctive odor or taste.

Name: Hydnangium carneum
Group: Basidiomycota, Tricholomataceae
Season: Nov-May
Habitat: With Eucalyptus
Spores: 10-18 µm, globose, spiny
Features: Peridium pinkish, felty. Gleba pink, often with sterile base and sometimes with a columella.
Comments: Closely related to the mushroom genius Laccaria, native to Australia but introduced around the world as a hitch-hiking symbiont on Eucalypt roots. Lacking distinctive odor or taste.

Name: Hydnotrya variiformis var. pallida
Group: Ascomycota, Discinaceae
Season: May-Oct.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, hemlocks, pines, true firs, often in well decomposed wood and other organic materials on the forest floor
Spores: 25-30 x 10-15 µm, ellipsoid, colorless to pale yellow and enclosed in an amorphous sheath decorated with scattered, tiny pits.
Features: White to cream color, convoluted with several chambers, fragile and brittle
Comments: This pale form is common in low to subalpine elevations, as is the equally common typical form that is orange brown and has orange brown spores. Neither form has a distinctive odor or flavor.

Name: Hymenogaster subalpinus
Group: Basidiomycota, Cortinariaceae
Season: Oct-Mar.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir at low to middle elevations
Spores: 20-30 x 14-16 µm, roughened, narrowly citriform with a truncate-cupped base
Features: Peridium dull brownish white to yellowish brown, bruising brown. Gleba dark brown, soft, with an unpleasant odor and soft texture.
Comments: The most common winter species in the Pacific Northwest, it is related to the mushroom genus Hebeloma. The odor may be pleasant to squirrels, but it definitely is not to humans. That, together with its soft texture, leaves it culinary appeal strictly to wild creatures.

Name: Hymenogaster sublilacinus
Group: Basidiomycota, Cortinariaceae
Season: Mar-Aug.
Habitat: Mostly pines and true firs but also other conifers and moderate to high elevations
Spores: 9-13 x 6.5-8 µm, ellipsoid, tawny brown, minutely warty
Features: Peridium initially white, then becoming lilac to violet, by maturity mostly yellowish brown. Gleba firm with small chambers, cinnamon colored. Odor pleasant, mild to sweet or resinous.
Comments: The fruiting bodies can be quite large and colorful, so it is always a pleasure to find them. The firm texture and pleasant fragrance suggest good possibilities for cooking, but no data have been found on that.

Name: Hysterangium coriaceum
Group: Basidiomycota, Hysterangiaceae
Season: Year-round, but mostly in spring
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, hemlocks, spruces, pines, true firs and larches
Spores: 11-14 x 4-5 µm, smooth, fusoid, enclosed in a wrinkled outer skin
Features: Peridium white bruising pink to red or rosy brown, separating easily from the dark olive green, very firm and rubbery gleba with its narrow, dendroid columella.
Comments: The most common spring truffle in the western USA, its colonies often produce dozens of small sporocarps nested in a white mycelium in the soil. Although it has little odor or flavor, its chewy texture provides an interesting additive to omelettes or scrambled eggs. A similar species, H. separabile, which has larger spores, occurs under oaks.

Name: Hysterangium crassirhachis
Group: Basidiomycota, Hysterangiaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, pines, hemlocks, spruces, true firs and larches
Spores: 11-15 x 4-5.5 µm, smooth, ellipsoid
Features: Peridium white bruising pink to brown, separating easily from the dark olive green, very firm and rubbery gleba with its usually thick, dendroid columella.
Comments: Similar to H. coriaceum in habitat, appearance and culinary value. The two species are only distinguishable by microscope.

Name: Hysterangium occidentale
Group: Basidiomycota, Hysterangiaceae
Season: Apr-Oct, mostly spring
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, pines and oaks low elevations
Spores: 12-16 x 5-8 µm, smooth, fusoid to narrowly citriform
Features: Subglobose to irregular, the peridium white to pale brown and bruising brown, easily separable from the firm, pink to pale, brownish red gleba with its rubbery columella; odor absent or pleasant.
Comments: Among the larger species of the genus (up to 6 cm broad), H. occidentale occurs from western Oregon through California to Arizona. It's size and pleasant fragrance might commend it for table use, but it is rather rare.

Name: Leucangium brunneum
Group: Ascomycota, Discinaceae
Season: Sep-Feb.
Habitat: With sapling to large Douglas-firs in moist forests
Spores: 45 x 30 µm, smooth, ellipsoid
Features: Up to 3 inches broad, lumpy; peridium orangish-brown, granular to warty. Gleba with gray pockets of spores separated by white veins, firm, with garlicky odor.
Comments: Known only from western Oregon and northern California in lowland to foothill forests, this species is popular for table use and is commercially harvested. It often fruits in the same places and times as L. carthusianum.

Name: Leucangium carthusianum
Group: Ascomycota, Discinaceae
Season: Sep-Feb.
Habitat: With relatively young Douglas-fir, often 4-10 inches deep in the soil
Spores: 65-80 x 25-40 µm, fusiform, smooth
Features: Peridium charcoal-black and warty. Gleba solid and firm, with gray pockets of spore-bearing tissue separated by white veins.
Comments: Originally described from France but more common in the western Pacific Northwest, it has become known as the "Oregon black truffle." With its pleasant, fruity aroma (most often resembling pineapple), it is prized for table use and commercially harvested.

Name: Leucogaster citrinus
Group: Basidiomycota, Leucogastraceae
Season: Jun-Nov.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, hemlocks, pines and true firs
Spores: 8-11 x 7-9 µm, subglobose to globose, reticulate, enclosed in a smooth, loosely fitting outer skin
Features: Peridium light yellow to dark yellow. Gleba white, firm, exuding a white sticky fluid when fresh, the locules round and 1-2 mm broad.
Comments: This species is endemic from northern California to southwestern Washington from the Cascade Range to the coastal mountains. It has a pleasant fragrance, but it's sticky exudates does not invite table use, and its flavor is negligible.

Name: Leucogaster rubescens
Group: Basidiomycota, Leucogastraceae
Season: May-Dec.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, hemlocks, pines, true firs
Spores: 10-15 x 10-13 µm, subglobose to globose, reticulate, enclosed in a smooth, loosely fitting outer skin sac
Features: Peridium yellow in youth, becoming brick-red, especially when dried. Gleba white, firm, exuding a white sticky fluid, locules round and 1-2 mm broad.
Comments: Generally similar to L. citrinus except for the red coloration developing on its peridium and larger spores, this species is common throughout western North America and has also been found occasionally in eastern Canada. Its culinary value is similar to L. citrinus.

Name: Leucophleps spinispora
Group: Basidiomycota, Leucogastraceae
Season: Jun-Dec.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, hemlocks, pines and true firs
Spores: 10-13 x 10-11 µm, globose, with crowded spines, colorless
Features: Peridium white. Gleba white, exuding a sticky, white fluid when moist, locules labyrinthine and ± 0.5 mm broad.
Comments: Distributed in western North America over a wide range of elevations, this usually small species is often abundant in habitats where it is fruiting. When fresh it has little odor or taste, but dried specimens often have a pronounced odor of celery salt. Its culinary value has not been reported.

Name: Macowanites luteolus
Group: Basidiomycota, Russulaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, hemlock, spruce
Spores: 7-12 x 6.5-10 µm, globose to subglobose, with amyloid spines
Features: Peridium pale yellow, often cracking. Gleba pale orange yellow, with a prominent, white columella and vestigial stipe; odor and taste mild.
Comments: Although recorded from western Oregon to Alaska at low to moderate elevations, this species is never abundant. Its minimal odor and taste render it uninteresting to the palate.

Name: Melanogaster tuberiformis
Group: Basidiomycota, Boletaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: Douglas-fir, pines, hemlocks, spruces and true firs
Spores: 10-15 x 6-9 µm, ellipsoid to ovoid
Features: Peridium dark brown, becoming nearly blackish brown at full maturity, thick, in wet weather often with dark brown droplets of fluid on the surface. Gleba gelatinous, black with whitish veins at maturity; odor oily-metallic with a touch of garlic.
Comments: Widely distributed in the Northern Hemisphere, this species often fruits in huge numbers in a single colony. Many collectors enjoy it as food.

Name: Pyrenogaster pityophilus
Group: Basidiomycota, Geastraceae
Season: Dec-Jun.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, pines and oaks in dry, lowland forests and woodlands
Spores: 7-8 x 4-7 µm, finely warty, brown
Features: Globose to subglobose, felty, bruising pink. Gleba with a central, capitate columella from which radiate brown, elongated peridioles that contain the spores; the peridoles are easily teased apart. Odor mild.
Comments: First described from France, this peculiar species has since been found from southwest Oregon and California into Mexico. It's small size and strange gleba do not entice one to add it to the menu.

Name: Radiigera fuscogleba
Group: Basidiomycota, Geastraceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: Under Douglas-fir, pines, oaks, poplars, and many other kinds of trees at low to moderate elevations and warm sites
Spores: 4.5-8 µm broad, globose, finely warty, brown
Features: Peridium brown, thick and crisp, the surface felty. Gleba with a capitate columella from which fibers radiate out to connect with the peridium, everything white in youth, the spores born among the radiating fibres and, in mass at maturity, making that part of the gleba black and powdery.
Comments: Radiigera species are essentially earthstars (Geastrum spp.) that remain hypogeous and never open up. Small mammals dig them up to eat the thick peridium and discard the spores. Early collectors would find the discarded mass of spores and fibers lying loose on logs or tree limbs and misinterpret them as a slime mold. The black mass of spores and fibers would not excite the appetite of human diners.

Name: Rhizopogon ater
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Sep-Jan.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir in moist forests
Spores: 6-7 x 2.5-3 µm, ellipsoid, smooth
Features: Peridium dark brown to black. Gleba firm, charcoal grey to nearly black; odor mild to slightly sweet or onion-like.
Comments: Known only from Douglas-fir stands in western Oregon and southwestern Washington, this Rhizopogon is distinctive for its black or nearly black colors, which arise from deposits of black, granular crystals in its tissues. Its mild flavor and aroma would add little more than texture to a dish.

Name: Rhizopogon atroviolaceus
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: May-Sep.
Habitat: Douglas-fir, pines, hemlocks, true firs, spruce at moderate to high elevations
Spores: 6-8 x 3-3.6 µm, smooth, colorless but becoming purple in iodine solution
Features: Peridium white in youth, soon becoming brown from a surface layer of brown fibrils, often staining vinaceous where bruised. Gleba grayish green with small chambers; odor and taste mild.
Comments: This rare species is known only from Idaho and Oregon. It is one of a small group of Rhizopogon species with spores that turn strikingly purple in iodine solutions.

Name: Rhizopogon ellenae
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With pines, Douglas-fir, true firs, madrone
Spores: 6-9 x 2.5-4 µm, ellipsoid
Features: Peridium white in youth, soon becoming light brown from a surface layer of brown fibrils and staining vinaceous to light yellowish brown where bruised; usually with abundant rhizomorphs appressed over the surface. Gleba white in youth, soon becoming yellowish brown to dark brown. Odor and taste mild.
Comments: A fairly common species in the Pacific Coastal states plus Idaho and Utah, R. ellenae may be found from near sea level to high elevations in the mountains. It has no particular value for culinary purposes.

Name: Rhizopogon evadens
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With pines, Douglas-fir, hemlock, true fir in diverse habitats
Spores: 6-8 x 2-2.3 µm, ellipsoid, colorless
Features: Peridium white to dirty white, staining bright red when bruised or exposed. Gleba white in youth, by maturity dark olive. Odor somewhat metallic and disagreeable.
Comments: Widely distributed across North America, this species is particularly striking because of its bright red staining soon after it is unearthed. This reaction is particularly vivid in young specimens, as shown in the photograph.

Name: Rhizopogon hawkerae
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With Douglas-fir in a wide variety of habitats
Spores: 6.5-8 x 2.2-2.8 µm, ellipsoid
Features: Peridium smudgy white and staining red in youth, as shown in the photo, later brown with red tints and black bruises. Gleba white in youth, later dark olive; odor mild or slightly spicy, taste mild.
Comments: Among the earliest fruiters in autumn, this species is common over much of the range of Douglas-fir in western North America. It can get quite large; when mature it becomes firm and, when diced, adds some texture and a bit of flavor to scrambled eggs or omelettes.

Name: Rhizopogon occidentalis
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Sep-Mar.
Habitat: With 2-3 needled pines from coastal dunes to mountain forests
Spores: 5.5-7 x 2-3 µm, ellipsoid, colorless
Features: Peridium yellowish white to yellow, often with orange to red areas, with yellow to orange rhizomorphs appressed to form a network over the entire surface, sometimes reddening slightly where bruised or cut. Gleba grayish olive to olive.
Comments: Common in western North America, often emergent and fruiting in large numbers. Because it can be so abundant and easily found in places, it can be used in cooking in a variety of dishes despite its mild odor and taste.

Name: Rhizopogon ochraceorubens
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Aug-Nov.
Habitat: With 2-3 needled pines in mountain forests
Spores: 6-8 x 2-3 µm
Features: Peridium bright yellow in youth with yellow rhizomorphs appressed to form a network over the entire surface, the outer rhizomorphs and peridium soon darkening to red or reddish brown. Gleba at first white, by maturity olive to olive brown or brown; odor and taste mild.
Comments: Widely distributed in mountains of western North America but less common than R. occidentalis. It can become rather large (up to 4 inches broad) and often fruits in clusters that mound up the soil. It can be used in cooking much the same as R. occidentalis.

Name: Rhizopogon parksii
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Aug-Dec.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir
Spores: 4.5-6.5 x 2.3-3 µm, ellipsoid
Features: Peridium smudgy white in youth, by maturity gray to brown, in youth staining slightly pink where cut or bruised, later sometimes staining gray or violet. Gleba white in youth, at maturity gray to grayish olive, sometimes with vinaceous to purple-stained areas; odor and taste mild to slightly garlicky or of spicy sausage.
Comments: Widely distributed in the Douglas-fir forests of western North America, especially from the Cascade Mountains west to the Pacific shore. Its culinary qualities are marginal.

Name: Rhizopogon salebrosus
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With pines, Douglas-fir, true firs, hemlocks, spruces
Spores: 6-10 x 2.5-3.5 µm, oblong to fusoid
Features: Peridium initially white, soon becoming brownish from an overlay of brown fibrilles, thick, fibrous-felty. Gleba initially white, at maturity brown to olive brown; odor and taste mild.
Comments: One of a complex of species difficult to tell apart, R. salebrosus is widely distributed and common in western North America. Because of its generally small size and lack of interesting odor or taste, it is not often used as food by humans.

Name: Rhizopogon separabilis
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Aug-Dec.
Habitat: With 2-3 needled pines and possibly other conifers
Spores: 6.5-8 x 2.5-3 µm, subellipsoid to subfusoid
Features: Peridium white in youth, becoming light yellow to brownish yellow, often with reddish brown apots. Gleba yellowish brown to cinnamon brown.
Comments: This rare species is known only from mature conifer forests of the Oregon Cascade Mountains at relatively high elevations. Its culinary qualities are unknown.

Name: Rhizopogon subsalmonius
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Mar-Sep.
Habitat: With true firs at moderate to high elevations
Spores: 6-8 x 2-2.5 µm, colorless
Features: Peridium pale peach pink to light salmon colored in youth, later yellowish salmon to brownish salmon, with salmon-colored rhizomorphs appressed here and there on the peridium, thin and easily rubbed off. Gleba white in youth, becoming olive colored and finally dark yellowish brown; taste and odor mild.
Comments: The attractive peach to salmon color of the peridium delights the eye of the finder. It has been found in montane to tree-line habitats, particular with subalpine fir. Like other Rhizopogon species, it has only modest culinary virtues.

Name: Rhizopogon truncatus
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: Moderate elevations to subalpine forests, with conifers
Spores: 7-10 x 3.5-5 µm, truncate-ellipsoid, dark brown
Features: Peridium bright chrome yellow with yellow rhizomorphs, associated with mats of bright yellow mycorrhizae. Gleba dark brown; odor and taste mild.
Comments: The most brightly colored hypogeous fungus in North America, it occurs in the Appalachian and western mountains, is often first noticed in soil because of its bright yellow mycelium in which fruiting bodies are embedded. Its small size, rather infrequent occurrence and mild odor and taste do not lend it much value for cooking.

Name: Rhizopogon villosulus
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With Douglas-fir through most of its range
Spores: 6-8 x 2-2.5 µm, oblong, smooth, colorless
Features: Peridium dark brown and felty over an underlying whitish layer, not staining. Gleba white in youth, dark olive brown at maturity; odor at maturity of spicy, garlicky sausage, taste mild.
Comments: Found throughout most of the range of Douglas-fir in North America and introduced to Europe, Australia and New Zealand on Douglas-fir seedlings in plantations. Its aroma is interesting but dissipates during cooking.

Name: Rhizopogon vinicolor
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With Douglas-fir
Spores: 5.5-8 x 3-4.5 µm, truncate-ellipsoid
Features: Peridium initially white with tinges of yellow and staining pink to vinaceous when exposed or bruised, by maturity dark vinaceous brown and darkening where bruised. Gleba light yellow in youth, by maturity dark cinnamon brown to dark olive and rubbery. Odor slightly fruity, taste mild.
Comments: Found throughout most of the range of Douglas-fir in North America and introduced to Europe, Australia and New Zealand on Douglas-fir seedlings in plantations. It's generally small size, rubbery texture and mild flavor require more effort in the kitchen than the results justify.

Name: Rhizopogon vulgaris
Group: Basidiomycota, Rhizopogonaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With pines, Douglas-fir, true firs, and other conifers in young to mature stands from sea level to subalpine
Spores: 5.5-8 x 2-3 µm, subfusoid to oblong or ellipsoid
Features: Peridium in youth pale cream color and staining red where cut or bruised, at maturity dull yellow to yellowish brown. Gleba white in youth, by maturity light olive; base with a root-like cluster of rhizomorphs.
Comments: Probably the most widely distributed of all Rhizopogon spp., occurring around the Northern Hemisphere with diverse conifers; its basal, root-like cluster of rhizomorphs sets it apart from other, similarly colored species, but that cluster commonly breaks off when fruiting bodies are removed from the soil.

Name: Sarcosphaera coronaria
Group: Ascomycota, Pezizaceae
Season: Feb-Jul.
Habitat: Upper elevation to subalpine forests with pines and other conifers
Spores: 14-22 x 7-9 µm, elliptical
Features: A large, fragile hollow orb with an apical, stellate-rimmed opening into the cup; outer surface dirty white to gray, the cup interior white in youth, soon becoming violet to purple.
Comments: This species is not a true truffle, because it forcibly discharges its spores to the air. When it develops under a thick layer of fir needles, however, it often matures below ground without opening and mimics a truffle.

Name: Scleroderma cepa
Group: Basidiomycota, Sclerodermataceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: Common in yards and gardens, mixed forest
Spores: 7-12 µm, globose, dark brown, spiny
Features: Fruiting bodies round, up to 4 or more inches in diameter, with a sterile base that often is projected as a stem. Peridium thick and tough, smooth in youth but by maturity developing scales, dull yellow to brownish yellow, in cross-section white and slowly staining pink where cut. Gleba white and with filled chambers in youth, darkening and becoming powdery as the spores mature.
Comments: Scleroderma species are actually puffballs and not truffles, but they do begin their development below-ground and can be mistaken for truffles by novice collectors. Sclerodermas are poisonous and anyone who dines on them will be subjected to a world of gastric distress. Their toxicity seems to develop as they mature.

Name: Thaxterogaster pavelekii
Group: Basidiomycota, Cortinariaceae
Season: Mar-Jun, occasionally Nov.
Habitat: Spruce-hemlock forests in the coastal fog belt
Spores: 14-18 x 9-10 µm, ornamented with narrow lines and warts, brown
Features: Yellowish gray to brown, thickly slimy visid when wet, shiny when dry. Gleba dark cinnamon, chambered, with a columella that is greatly enlarged near the base and sometimes protrudes beyond the botton of the fruiting body.
Comments: This interesting species occurs only near the coasts of Oregon and Washington. Nothing has been recorded about its culinary value, but its extremely slimy surface and close relationship to the mushroom genus Cortinarius, many species of which are toxic, discourage its use for food. Named after NATS founding member and past president Henry Pavelek, Sr.

Name: Thaxterogaster pingue
Group: Basidiomycota, Cortinariaceae
Season: Jul-Oct.
Habitat: With true fir at moderate elevations to timberline in the mountains
Spores: 12-16.5 x 8-9.5 µm, ellipsoid, wrinkled/warty
Features: Peridium slimy-viscid when wet, tan to olive brown. Gleba of convoluted gills, with prominent vestigial stipe and columella.
Comments: Widely distributed in the mountains of western North America, T. pingue fruits during the summer, snow-free time. It can often be found when no other fungi are fruiting. The comments on the lack of culinary value of T. pavelekii apply here as well.

Trappea darkeri
Group: Basidiomycota, Phallaceae
Season: Apr-Nov.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, pines, true firs, hemlocks, spruces and oaks at moderate to high elevations.
Spores: 4-5 x 2-3 µm, ellipsoid to oblong, smooth, colorless
Features: Fruiting bodies subglobose to irregular, rubbery, with one or more rhizomorphs emerging from the base. Peridium white but staining yellow to orange or brown where bruised, in cross-section thin with an underlying zone of white, sterile chambers. Gleba with a translucent, dendroid columella, the fertile chambers olive to bright olive green or olive brown. Odor of stinkhorns or gasoline.
Comments: This unusual truffle, characterized especially by its zone of sterile chambers underlying the peridium, is widely distributed in western North America but not abundant in any one spot. Small mammals must be attracted to it, but its unpleasant odor and rubbery texture do not recommend it for table use. Named after NATS Scientific Advisor Dr. James Trappe.

Name: Truncocolumella citrina
Group: Basidiomycota, Boletaceae
Season: Aug-Dec.
Habitat: Douglas-fir, rarely lodgepole pine, at low to moderate elevations
Spores: 6-9 x 3.5-5 µm, smooth, ellipsoid
Features: Peridium lemon-yellow. Gleba brown with prominent columella, often quite large and emerging to the soil surface.
Comments: The bright color and often large size of this truffle make it easy to spot and identify. It is frequently found pushing through the soil surface on trailsides and roadcuts. It probably occurs over the range of Douglas-fir, although it has yet to be reported from Mexico. It can be used in cooking but is bland.

Name: Tuber californicum
Group: Ascomycota, Tuberaceae
Season: Oct-Jun.
Habitat: With various conifers, oaks and hazels at low to moderate elevations
Spores: 40-50 µm broad, globose, with a honeycomb reticulum
Features: Globose to somewhat irregular, white to tan with whitish furrows, smooth to finely pubescent; gleba brown, marbled with white veins; aroma mild to slightly garlicky.
Comments: This petite species occurs west of the Cascade and Sierra Mountains from Washington to southern California. Its combination of globose spores and a fine pubescence of long, tapered hyphal tips separate it from other species. It tends to be solitary which, along with its small size, makes it hard to get enough to even have a taste.

Name: Tuber gardneri
Group: Ascomycota, Tuberaceae
Season: May-Sep.
Habitat: With Douglas-fir, pines, hemlocks and oaks, often in warm, dry habitats
Spores: 28-58 x 24-30 µm, varying from subglobose to long-ellipsoid, with a honeycomb reticulum
Features: Small, globose to somewhat irregular, yellowish brown, minutely warty; odor mild or slightly garlicky; asci thick-walled. Gleba at maturity brown to purplish brown marbled with very narrow, white veins.
Comments: Another small species, T. gardneri is unusual in its fruiting season being confined to spring and summer. The combination of the minutely warty peridium and thick-walled asci are unique for North America, although a similar species, T. murinum, occurs in Europe. Found from Washington South into Mexico, it is too small and infrequent to have value for table use.

Name: Tuber gibbosum
Group: Ascomycota, Tuberaceae
Season: Jan-Jun.
Habitat: With young to early-mature Douglas-fir.
Spores: 25-45 x 17-33 µm, ellipsoid, with a honey-comb ornamentation.
Features: Peridium olive to brownish yellow with some brown mottling, smooth but with furrows that are minutely pubesent with short, emergent hyphae having peculiar, bead-like wall thickenings. Gleba firm, white when immature, brown with white marbling when mature; odor "truffly," a complex of garlic, spices, cheese, and undefinable other essences.
Comments: This truffle, the "spring Oregon white truffle," is a popular edible and is commercially harvested. It occurs from northern California to southern British Columbia west of the Cascade Range from sea level to about 2,000 ft elevation. As is true of all truffles, the special aroma develops only at maturity, so young specimens have no particular appeal.

Name: Tuber lyonii
Group: Ascomycota, Tuberaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With pecans and oaks
Spores: 30-37 x 22-24 µm, ellipsoid, with tall spines connected by low lines
Features: Peridium smooth with roughened furrows, reddish-orangish brown. Gleba white when immature, brown with white marbling when mature; odor "truffly."
Comments: It occurs from northeastern Mexico to Ontario from the Great Plains to the East Coast. The most popular native truffle in the eastern U.S., it is commercially harvested.

Name: Tuber oregonense
Group: Ascomycota, Tuberaceae
Season: Oct-Jan.
Habitat: With young to early-mature Douglas-fir
Spores: 25-52 x 17-40 µm, ellipsoid or tapered to a blunt tip at both ends, with a honey-comb ornamentation
Features: Peridium white in youth, soon becoming yellow to olive mottled with brown to orange-brown or reddish brown botches, at full maturity reddish brown overall. Gleba firm, white when immature, brown with white marbling when mature; odor "truffly," a complex of garlic, spices, cheese, and undefinable other essences.
Comments: This popular "fall Oregon white truffle" is closely related to Tuber gibbosum. It differs in the the anatomy of the peridium, and spore size and shape. The two species share the same distribution, but their seasons barely overlap. Of the two, T. oregonense seems to have a more intense fragrance and is particularly sought by commercial harvesters. Unfortunately, the raking method of harvest unearths many immature ones that have not developed the special fragrance.

Name: Tuber querciola
Group: Ascomycota, Tuberaceae
Season: Year-round
Habitat: With oaks, especially in warm, dry sites.
Spores: 20-45 x 15-35 µm, ellipsoid, spiny, light brown
Features: Peridium dark reddish-brown to dark brownish red, finely warty. Gleba white in youth, at maturity light yellowish brown marbled with both white and dark brown, narrow veins. Odor at maturity of fresh, green beans.
Comments: West Coast of North America south into Mexico, in the past literature referred to the related but different Tuber rufum. It’s mild flavor adds little of interest to a meal. Some people experience digestive discomfort from eating the European T. rufum; no record of such a reaction exists for T. quercicola, but reasonable caution should be used when first trying it.
http://www.natruffling.org/blurbs.htm


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9505070 - 12/28/08 12:42 AM (15 years, 2 months ago)

http://bugs.bio.usyd.edu.au/Mycology/Animal_Interactions/animalsFungi/mycophagy.shtml

i wonder why  australia have more Sequestrate Form
maybe since is the only place with more  marsupial and they sure are fungivorous , maybe , just dreaming.

Ocurrence of ectomycorrhizal, hypogeous fungi in plantations of exotic tree species in central Argentina
http://www.mycologia.org/cgi/content/abstract/100/5/752

http://www.mycologia.org/cgi/content/full/94/2/327
http://www.rbg.vic.gov.au/research_and_conservation/scientificcollections_staff/teresa_lebel
Papers
Lebel, T. and Castellano, M.A. (1999). Australian truffle-like fungi. IX. History and current trends in the study of the taxonomy of sequestrate macrofungi from Australia and New Zealand. Australian Systematic Botany 12: 803-817.

Miller, S.L. and Lebel, T. (1999). Hypogeous fungi from the southeastern United States. II. The genus Zelleromyces. Mycotaxon 72: 15-25.

Lebel, T. and Trappe, J. M. (2000). Type studies of sequestrate Russulales. Part I. Generic type species. Mycologia 92 (6): 1188-1205.

Lebel, T. (2001). Native Truffles in Australia. The Victorian Naturalist 118: 38-43.
Bougher, N. and Lebel, T. 2001. Sequestrate (truffle-like) fungi of Australia and New Zealand. Australian Systematic Botany 14: 439-484.

Lebel, T. (2002). Sequestrate Russulales of New Zealand. Gymnomyces and Macowanites. New Zealand Journal of Botany 40: 489-509.

Lebel, T. (2002). A new species of Zelleromyces (Russulales) from Australia. Australasian Mycologist 21 (1): 4-8.

Bougher, N. L. and Lebel, T. (2002). Australasian sequestrate (truffle-like) fungi. XII. Amarrendia gen. nov.: an astipitate, sequestrate relative of Torrendia and Amanita (Amanitaceae) from Australia. Australian Systematic Botany 15: 513-525.

Lebel, T. and Castellano, M. A. (2002). Type studies of sequestrate Russulales. Part II. Species related to Russula from Australia and New Zealand. Mycologia 94: 327-354.

Smith, J.E., Molina, R., Huso, M.M.P., Luoma, D.L., McKay, D., Castellano, M.A., Lebel, T., and Valachovic, Y. (2002). Species richness, abundance, and composition of hypogeous and epigeous ectomycorrhizal fungal sporocarps in young, rotation-age, and old-growth stands of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) in the Cascade Range of Oregon, USA. Canadian Journal of Botany 80: 186-204.

Trappe, J.M, Lebel, T., and Castellano, M.A. (2002). Nomenclatural revisions in the sequestrate russuloid genera. Mycotaxon. 81: 195-214.

Lebel, T. (2003). Australian truffle-like fungi. XIII. Cystangium. Australian Systematic Botany 16(3): 371-400.

Lebel, T. (2003). Australian truffle-like fungi. XIV. Gymnomyces. Australian Systematic Botany 16(3): 401-426.

Lebel, T., Thompson, D.K., & Udovicic, F. (2004). Descriptions and affinities of a sequestrate fungus, Barcheria willisiana T.Lebel gen. et sp. nov. (Agaricales). Mycological Research 108: 206-213.

Jumpponen, A., Claridge, A.W.C., Trappe, J.M., Lebel, T., Claridge, DL. (2004). Ecological relationships among hypogeous fungi and trees: inferences from association analysis integrated with habitat modelling. Mycologia 96: 510-525.

The Australian continent is characterised by a harsh climate and highly weathered, nutrient-poor soils. Trees and shrubs in these stressful environmental conditions typically form ectomycorrhizae with a variety of fungi, many of which form hypogeous (underground) fruit-bodies. The total number of hypogeous fungi Australia-wide is unknown, although recent systematic studies in the far south-eastern corner of the country suggest that they may number well over a thousand. Similar surveys elswhere are urgently required to clarify the situation. The precise ecological role of many hypogeous fungi remains to be determined, although most presumably facilitate nutrient and water uptake on behalf of their mycorrhizal partners. Others may also protect their plant host from root pathogens. One key function of hypogeous fungi is the role their fruit-bodies play as a food resource for a large range of terrestrial mammals. For a few animals, hypogeous fungi form the single most important dietary item year-round, whereas for others they may only be of seasonal or supplementary value. The extent to which fungi form part of the diet of any mammal species is reflected in the various levels of adaptation toward acquiring, then processing and digesting these cryptic and nutritionally challenging foodstuffs.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/j80484847urv8444/


http://www.utas.edu.au/docs/plant_science/tasfungi/PDF%20files/Mt_Wellington_sequestrates.pdf


from rod , every body loves rod:http://eticomm.net/~ret/amanita/key.dir/hemibkey.pdf
Amarrendia - The species of this genus are hypogeous ("subterranean and truffle like").  At present, the genus is known only from Australia.  The genus is largely based on shared elements of gross morphology.  Molecular work has excluded several morphologically similar hypogeous entities originally assigned to Amarrendia that did not belong in the Amanitaceae.  Detailed morphological workups on Amarrendia material have not been completed to our knowledge.  Evidence suggests that the truffle-like taxa in Amanita have descended from an ancestor or ancestors assignable to Amanita sect. Caesareae [ key (over 540 Kb PDF) ].  The editors of these pages presently favor recombining all amanitoid taxa of Amarrendia in Amanita.

The type species of Amarrendia is A. oleosa Bougher & Lebel (2002).
Torrendia - The species of this genus are (1) secotioid; (2) expand from within a membranous, universal veil; (3) have longitudinally acrophysalidic stipe tissue (as in Amanita); (4) have inamyloid spores (with one possible exception); and (5) have clamps on the bases of their basidia (with the same possible exception). Taxa of the Mediterranean region and Australia have been assigned to Torrendia.  At least some of the taxa of this genus (including the type species) appear to have had ancestors in common with species of Amanita section Caesareae [ key (over 540 Kb PDF) ].  As in the case of Amarrendia (above), the status of the genus Torrendia  is under on-going investigation.  At present, the editors of these pages favor recombination of all taxa of Torrendia in Amanita.

The type species of Torrendia is T. pulchella Bres. (1902).  See Malençon (1955), Bas (1975), Miller and Horak (1992), Tulloss (2005b). The image of T. pulchella is a line drawing by C. Bas that is used with his permission.

[NB: Images and well-documented dried collections are sought by both editors.]
http://pluto.njcc.com/~ret/amanita/mainaman.html


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9505968 - 12/28/08 06:02 AM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

cactu said:
Evolution of gilled mushrooms and puffballs inferred from ribosomal DNA sequences
Evolution of Gasteromycetes.

http://www.pnas.org/content/94/22/12002.full




This is a much better article than the first one I read.  It actually details the methods used to arrive at these tentative conclusions.  For me, you left out the best part.  I'll add them with a few comments.

Taxon Sampling.  To construct a comprehensive phylogenetic data set, representatives of all the major lineages of homobasidiomycetes were sampled. Exemplars were selected from 10 families of Agaricales (6), 18 families of Aphyllophorales (2), and seven families of Gasteromycetes (7); these included 20 species of gilled mushrooms, 52 nongilled Hymenomycetes, and nine Gasteromycetes, including five puffballs (a list of strains is available from D.S.H.). In modern homobasidiomycete taxonomy, there are many small families that have been segregated relatively recently on the basis of unique characters, as well as a handful of larger, older families that are united not by synapomorphies but rather by the lack of distinguishing characters that could be used to subdivide them (2, 6, 7). Single exemplars were chosen from the smaller, putatively monophyletic families (e.g., Schizophyllaceae, Fistulinaceae, and Ganodermataceae) whereas multiple species were sampled from the larger, presumably artificial families (Clavariaceae, Corticiaceae, Polyporaceae, and Tricholomataceae). Based on previous phylogenetic analyses at more inclusive levels than the present study (8), the heterobasidiomycete “jelly fungi,” Auricularia, Dacrymyces, and Tremella, were included for rooting purposes.

Molecular Techniques and Phylogenetic Analyses.  Laboratory methods for culturing, DNA isolation, PCR amplification, and DNA sequencing have been described (9, 10). Sequences of nuclear (nuc) and mitochondrial (mt) small subunit (ssu) rDNA (nuc-ssu-rDNA and mt-ssu-rDNA) were obtained using published primer sequences (10, 11). Seventy-five nuc-ssu-rDNA and 44 mt-ssu-rDNA sequences have been deposited in GenBank (accession nos. AF026567–AF026687). This study also used 40 mt-ssu-rDNA sequences from our previous work (ref. 9; GenBank accessions U27023–U27080, U59099) and one mt-ssu-rDNA and nine nuc-ssu-rDNA sequences downloaded from GenBank: Agaricus bisporus (L36658), Auricularia auricula-judae (L22254), Boletus satanas (mt-ssu-rDNA M91009 and nuc-ssu-rDNA M94337), Coprinus cinereus (M92991), Dacrymyces chrysospermus (L22257), Lepiota procera (L36659), Pleurotus ostreatus (U23544), Schizophyllum commune (X54865), and Tremella foliacea (L22262).

Parsimony analyses of manually aligned sequences were performed using paup* 4.0d53 (test version provided by D. L. Swofford, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.). All transformations were unordered and equally weighted. Three hundred replicate heuristic searches were performed, using random taxon addition sequences and TBR branch swapping. Bootstrap analyses used 100 replicates, with simple taxon addition sequence, with TBR branch swapping, and with MULPARS off. Complete nuc-ssu-rDNA coding sequences were ≈1750-bp long and were alignable over their entire length, except for three regions of 55, 95, and 83 bp in Cantharellus tubaeformis, which are highly divergent and were excluded from the analyses. Partial mt-ssu-rDNA sequences ranged from 550 to over 1000 bp, which was due to length variation in three hypervariable regions (9, 12, 13) that alternate with three conserved regions of 131, 237, and 116 bp (aligned). The conserved regions were aligned for all ingroup taxa except Sparassis spathulata, which is highly divergent and was omitted from mt-rDNA alignments. The second conserved region of mt-ssu-rDNA, termed “block 5” (9), showed greater sequence divergence than the other regions; outgroup sequences could not be aligned to the ingroup in this region. Analyses were performed that included or excluded the entire block 5 region, as well as the mt-rDNA sequence from Sparassis. Although there were some topological differences, basic conclusions regarding evolution of gilled mushrooms and puffballs were not sensitive to the inclusion or exclusion of these data (results not shown). The alignment can be obtained from TreeBASE (ref. 14) or from D.S.H.

Topologically constrained analyses were used to evaluate the hypothesis that all gilled mushrooms form a single lineage. Constraint trees were constructed using macclade (15), which forced monophyly of gilled mushrooms but which specified no other tree structure. Parsimony analyses were performed under this constraint, using the same settings as in the baseline analyses (above). The resulting trees were evaluated by the Kishino–Hasegawa maximum likelihood test, using the program dnaml of the phylip software package (16). macclade also was used to infer historical patterns of morphological transformations. Fruiting body morphology was coded as an unordered character with three-states (gilled mushroom/nongilled Hymenomycete/Gasteromycete) that were optimized onto the trees using parsimony, with all transformations equally weighted.


Notice two things in the section above.

1)  The adoption of adjectives qualifying the statements, e.g. putatively and presumably.  This means that the authors know, and we know, that trees are subject to pruning.  These are tentative conclusions and will have to remain so given the number of unknowable variables in fungal history.

2)  They deliberated excluded data (I presume to bolster their case).  See this: Although there were some topological differences, basic conclusions regarding evolution of gilled mushrooms and puffballs were not sensitive to the inclusion or exclusion of these data (results not shown).   I have a major problem with that.

Other things stand out but I needn't point to all of them to make my one, singular point.  I found this to be particularly enlightening.

The oldest unambiguous homobasidiomycete fossils are 90–94 million-year-old gilled mushrooms that are strikingly similar to certain extant euagarics (20, 21).

20.  Hibbett D S, Donoghue M J, Grimaldi D A (1995) Nature (London) 377:487.
21.  Hibbett D S, Donoghue M J, Grimaldi D A (1997) Am J Bot 84:981–991.

Well, no shit.  In my opinion that throws the whole shooting works out the window.  I don't have to explain why.

This, also, was particularly intriguing:

Parsimony-based optimizations of morphological character states suggest that gilled mushrooms evolved at least six times although the precise location on the tree of some changes is equivocal (Fig. 1).

The precise location on the tree is equivocal?  Gee, do ya think?  :rolleyes:  The "parsimony-based optimizations of morphological characters" yields suggestions, not certainty.  Moreover, they find mushrooms that look nearly the same today as they did nearly 100,000,000 years ago.

The point remains: taxonomic classification should be based on what we know with certainty, not some pie-in-the-sky speculation, which is all phylogenetic trees or cladograms will ever be.

I know playing with the new toys is fun.  Hell, I remember when I got my first microscope (1968 for those who are wondering).  And, as a biologist and a mycologist, I am more than familiar with range of morphological characteristics.  Yet, they remain the unequivocal means by which we can arrive at taxonomic classification.  Period, End of Story.  As I've said repeatedly, taxonomic classification should be based on what we know, not what we think we know.

The bottom line is this.  Evolution is speculation, always was, always will be.  Why?  Because it is a historical reconstruction of past events.  That is history, not science.  :noway:

And that, mi amigo, is incontrovertible and inarguable.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #9506932 - 12/28/08 11:51 AM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Mr. Mushrooms said:

The bottom line is this.  Evolution is speculation, always was, always will be.  Why?  Because it is a historical reconstruction of past events.  That is history, not science.  :noway:

And that, mi amigo, is incontrovertible and inarguable.




science  is base on many speculation  for say theory`s , i don't have a problem with that in the end the truth  will alway comes out, for me is  of immense intensity to try to understand the past of mushrooms , the evolution for say a word even i don't like to much the term evolution as a Darwinian  point , since organism don't evolve as random mutation as is point out in evolution , for me evolution or new changes are a conjunction or symbiosis, normally new species arise, with interaction with bacteria or other symbiont , and in mushrooms this particular process as my point of view is happening real fast .,

you really gave your opinion . i will like to hear what other have to say . i am fascinated with the idea that maybe in future we are going to see a truffle like psilocybe ,
all this information have  help me to understand a bit more about mushrooms .


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9506988 - 12/28/08 12:00 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

:wink:like to read more  , dont be afraid the brain will not explode i hope...
The Evolution of a Great-Big Headache:

"Understanding" Mushroom Taxonomy and Phylogeny
by Michael Kuo

or maybe give a second read with a secotoid  felling
http://www.mushroomexpert.com/kuo_05.html
My point is: What the hell is going on? Are we at the point where DNA research will re-align our groups of mushrooms in ways that make them seem to the naked eye (or even to the microscope) like alliances of strange bedfellows? What are we learning about the mushrooms themselves--how they evolved over time, how they function in ecosystems? What use can we make of our new knowledge?

We have not even come close to documenting all the mushroom species on the planet. Molecular biology represents at least the second (possibly the third or fourth) time the entire project has had to be reconsidered, and many backward steps taken along with the forward steps in order to account for previous "mistakes." The first time was caused by the microscope . . .


we are not alone  ......... and we are all humand , conected also , the truth i want the truth .


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9507000 - 12/28/08 12:02 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Mi Amigo :hug:

I know there are parts of science that are theoretical, and necessarily so, e.g. physics.  But that is a bit different from creating taxon status for a living organism when the entity is right there in your hand.  To me it is the height of hubris to remake taxonomy on the basis of speculation.  Fuck history, and I say that in the strongest of terms.  But yes, like you, I find all of this fasicinating and I am glad you created the thread.

I gave my opinion in the hopes others would speak out.  However, the length of your posts might have scared some people off.  There are only a handful of us that are as interested in this as you and I are.  If no one else posts, others have read it.  Perhaps we will have to be content with that.

I just want to thank you for your enthusiasm, diligence and passion for mushrooms.

All the best,
Hongos


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9507038 - 12/28/08 12:10 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

cactu said:
the truth i want the truth .




I read the link a while ago.

You want the Truth?  Are you sure you can handle it?



--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #9507108 - 12/28/08 12:29 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Mr. Mushrooms said:
Mi Amigo :hug:

I know there are parts of science that are theoretical, and necessarily so, e.g. physics.  But that is a bit different from creating taxon status for a living organism when the entity is right there in your hand.  To me it is the height of hubris to remake taxonomy on the basis of speculation.  Fuck history, and I say that in the strongest of terms.  But yes, like you, I find all of this fasicinating and I am glad you created the thread.

I gave my opinion in the hopes others would speak out.  However, the length of your posts might have scared some people off.  There are only a handful of us that are as interested in this as you and I are.  If no one else posts, others have read it.  Perhaps we will have to be content with that.

I just want to thank you for your enthusiasm, diligence and passion for mushrooms.

All the best,
Hongos




we will make this a dialogue , if it take to much will take  via pm . haha
but  any way i like it, since i stand  relax in my ground learning in the process , science , also learn from error.

i know that in maybe 50 year  we are going to see back  taxomy and lught iam just  more advanced i guees , or more in the future. i can see it  some how, Mushroom Taxonomy by Morphology
for example if you look at Carl Linnaeus sensibly decided in 1735 that "objects are distinguished and known by classifying them methodically and giving them appropriate names"  well how  thing have change then we began to use his method refine it then the microscope open  more  thing (Mushroom Taxonomy by Microscopy), well let quuote  kuo :; It was not long, however, before microscopic examination began to reveal differences that were not paralleled by differences in macrofeatures--and all hell broke loose..
here  for you my friend to get into science . haha  for me is not a exact one .....
kuo is my favorite  let quote again and again.:
As the 20th Century progressed, mycologists like C. H. Kauffman (1869-1931), Alexander H. Smith (1904-1986), and Rolf Singer (1906-1994), to mention only a few of the North American "giants," used better and better microscopes, and began to reclassify mushrooms on the basis of what they were seeing under the lens. Smith's 1947 monograph of Mycena in North America, for example, separated 232 species into subgenera and sections, in a key based extensively on microscopic features. Introducing this mammoth treatment, Smith wrote:

      At the present time generic concepts in the gill fungi may be said to be in a state of transition. The genera of the Friesian classification have been critically evaluated in the light of information obtained on microscopic characters and as a result of the discovery of many interesting species from other parts of the world, and it has become evident that considerable regrouping throughout the agarics is desirable.

The Golden Age of the microscope in North American mushroom taxonomy (and we are definitely still within it) is epitomized by the works of Smith and L. R. Hesler. Aside from using powerful microscopes to analyze and measure spores, Hesler & Smith studied the cellular ("hyphal" in the fungus world) structures of mushrooms, and focused (oops) on differences they discovered. In 1963 they arranged the waxy caps into subgenera and sections based entirely on the arrangement of cells in the gills ("intricately interwoven," "somewhat interwoven," "divergent," and so on). Interestingly, however, the subsequent arrangement of subsections, "series," and species for the 244 mushrooms is accomplished primarily on the basis of old-fashioned, Friesian macrofeatures. Hesler & Smith's 1979 treatment of Lactarius is also an interesting combination of macroscopic and microscopic emphases; see their Key to Subgenus Lactifluus, Section Lactifluus for a brief example.

Hesler & Smith collected a stunning number of North American mushrooms, and authored many species. But each time Alexander Smith sat down to arrange a genus of mushrooms, with or without a collaborator, he was obliged to re-study the collections of earlier mycologists, such as Peck, under the microscope. In short, all the data compiled before the emphasis on microscopic features must be re-examined. This project--re-evaluating mushroom taxonomy in light of the microscope--is far from over, despite the prolific contributions of Smith and many others, which is why I said we are still in the microscope's Golden Age.

Mushroom Taxonomy by Molecular Biology

Simultaneously, however, new taxonomic tools have not only knocked on the door but have been making themselves at home for a number of years. Analysis of the chemicals present in mushrooms has led to questions that Friesian and microscope-based taxonomy may be unable to answer. Additionally, laboratory experiments performed on mushrooms in culture (like, petri-dish culture; not social culture) are producing interesting results, some of which may challenge our taxonomical assumptions. But the biggest and loudest stranger suddenly getting comfortable on the couch is the molecular biology person--the one who coolly bandies phrases like "goat-antirabbit immunoglobulin antiserum." As I hope I made clear above, this stuff gives me a headache. Whereas I can get out my microscope and see the spores of Boletellus pseudochrysenteroides for myself, I can't exactly pull out my DNA sequencing stuff, or my RFLP equipment (don't ask) and fire it up. All I can do is ask molecular biologists to tell me what they have learned about mushrooms by torturing rabbits.

I can approximate an answer on when moleculary biology stuck its foot in the door, however. A quick trip through the citations in the extensive entry for "Molecular Biology" in Ainsworth & Bisby's Dictionary of the Fungi (Kirk et al., 2001) makes it clear that DNA studies on fungi got into full swing in the early 1990's (327). To double-check, and to stick to the bolete theme of this essay, I searched "boletus" in the CABI Bioscience Bibliography of Systematic Mycology, which returned the titles, authors, and dates of some 600 publications related to Boletus, stretching back about 20 years. The earliest bolete publication I can find that is clearly (to me, anyway) based on DNA science is from 1990.

So for about 10 or 15 years molecular studies have been performed on mushrooms, perhaps rather haphazardly; which mushrooms get studied is more or less a matter of chance. I have been told that molecular research is probably more reliable when it comes to separating large groups of mushrooms--"clades," in molecular parlance--and less relevant (though not irrelevant) when it comes to separating species. This may be due in part to the fact that mushrooms simply have "less DNA" than humans, for example, giving scientists fewer data to work with. Regardless, however, the technology is still in its infancy, and this limitation may disappear with advances in equipment, software, and the like.

It goes without saying that the project of using molecular studies to review the mushroom taxonomy already accomplished on the bases of macrofeatures and microscopes has barely begun. One step forward; two steps back.:grin:


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9507359 - 12/28/08 01:44 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

is interest to read the hole article  . but i will put also the last part :http://www.mushroomexpert.com/kuo_05.html
Headache Postponed

If you are still reading, I thank you for your patience!

My headache, caused by the revelation from molecular biology that one bolete was more closely related to a puffball than to most other boletes, is gone--gone because, since its onset, I have spent days and days with my nose buried in mycological texts, and had the choice of letting it get worse, or getting over it. So, just as the dense mass inside Scleroderma citrinum turns to spore-dust and winds up being shot into the air when raindrops fall on the puffball, my headache disintegrated and blew away. It is not worth having a headache over these issues when so little is known and so much remains to be seen.

Over the past fifteen years or so, insights into mushroom phylogeny from molecular biology have snowballed. Now mycology journals are full of papers investigating the big questions. With a little research, in fact, it became evident to me that Binder & Bresinsky's research was not even the first to suggest the relationship between Scleroderma and Gyroporus. Molecular biology has quite simply stood Friesian taxonomy on its head. As Hibbett and Donoghue (1998) put it:

      The central goal of taxonomic mycology is to create classifications that communicate understanding of fungal phylogeny. . . The current taxonomic system, which is based on the hierarchy of Linnaean ranks and the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, is unsatisfactory for this purpose.
      (347)

A few months after Hibbett & Donoghue's assessment that Linnaean taxonomy might be doomed in the fungal world, for example, Johnson & Vilgalys (1998) published a paper in the same journal after submitting a number of gilled mushrooms to DNA research. They found, among other things, that Coprinus comatus, the Shaggy Mane, may belong in what used to be called the Lepiotaceae, along with the Meadow Mushroom, Agaricus campestris. With this, we're talking white-spored, brown-spored, and black-spored mushrooms in the same groups! They also found that some of the satellite genera created over the years out of Lepiota--like Chlorophyllum and Leucoagaricus--may not be supported by molecular evidence (splitters will be happy to know that Leucocoprinus, at least, was tentatively supported).

This is a bad time to demand answers from mushroom mycology, or to insist on a stable picture. But it may well have been this insistence on a stable system--a Linnaean, or Friesian system--that led mushroom science to the uncomfortable position of sitting in the 21st Century with few answers, a crumbling taxonomy, and a lot of work to do. Amateur mushroomers, too, have a lot of work to do, if they're interested. No, we cannot extract DNA or conduct mating research in petri dishes. But we can definitely help provide missing data to the specialists, who need information on the distribution of species, and as much ecological data as can be gathered. Our collections are important, especially when illustrated, described, and preserved. Those of us who have been collecting mushrooms more or less the way Peck did, a hundred years ago, should consider changing our habits so that we gather ecological data as well--not just the mushrooms.^




.exactly  in many year , we are gonna relate and see how things are connected, and no isolated,many changes , and so for say evolution happened with interaction of organism  with the environment and with then self  or others. we have to think in mushrooms as plastid creatures. capable of transform, adapt, in vary rapid ways, it is fascinated.  for me . the future of mycology  and other natural science, since aim a biologist, i can see how in  the future we are gonna start to correlate all the information from all types of investigation , sometimes not related to mushrooms directly  , but  tied  by destiny , as for example studies in tree and animals, genetic studies,etc, human interactions, , ecological studies, i try to absorb as much as i can information , i get surprise how much i can relate to mushrooms , i will say all , is related to mushrooms to me, and if i get to mushrooms to the deep end i will get a glimpse of all .hard to say  but true, for me mushrooms are a tool to understand nature and other creatures, and other creatures and nature are tool to understand mushrooms, and by the way human are part of nature  they just  don`t realize yet .

so as a biologist i became to understand  my science is not correct have many draw back, is to rigid, to square, sometimes a obstacle to go further, but i consider the scientific route the first step in the understanding of nature and all things, is dedication, and practice , error , and accert, that build the character of the scientific, is to prove thing and not only read then , what satisfied the  hungry for compression for understanding , for the truth , seek the truth adn the truth will make you free, i consider science , was dominated in the past era  by people trying to hidden the information it is as deliberating  science, can  go beyond  because we have a code, we have rules,  we have...;) so science is changing slowly but  scientific have seem the boring protocol have to be change , for a more open mind , this are the scientific of today and  future, the ones that ties the rope , understand the limitations of the tools they have given and with this poor light in the dark they like to seek the way out, seriously
science is good , but is not all , observation  is the key , in nature, in the microscope in the DNA, in the even other part of physic we are like afraid to say  metaphysic ,since we can be call as crazy , but the era of inquisition is over guys, we are free to speculate and dream, and no one will fight you for that..hope so .


the only scientific that have move that wall of knowledge  further away , where dreamer , they where so confuse with they current world, that  don`t believe in it, what today is and idea is a reality tomorrow , there is  history to prove it  if you like history ,

so  by saying with all the given fact that many secotoid form arise in different genera and that we can see now the correlation is absolutely true,  this open a new field of investigation in many field of mycology , yeah the era where the lumper-splinter will end, at last, but it will take year to be there  until then i will try to live in my own world .

this is a big piece of the puzzle that is with in more puzzle , that why is a head ache to all of us, free your mind, filled with all information, look all sides of the coin, throw it in the air and see it disappear?,¿? it is a coin that will decide your future go on and look for yourself...............


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9508615 - 12/28/08 06:13 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

here is an article from January -February 1984 that apear in Official Publication of the Mycological Society of America
THE SECOTIOID SYNDROME
Department of Biological Sciences, Sun Francisco State University,
Sun Francisco, California 94132
the last part is inspiring too.
In conclusion I would like to give an explanation of why I believe the progression went from an epigeous to a hypogeous habitat and why the sequence went from a typical agaric type of basidiocarp with an exposed hymenium and a ballistosporic type of spore to an enclosed, gastroid type of basidiocarp with statismospores. At the outset it must be kept in mind that I am speaking only of
areas with climates similar to the western mountain ranges of the United States where there are extended periods of drought.
1. Initially there was a natural selective process favoring those basidiocarps which offered some protection against the loss of moisture from the hymenium.
Perhaps this protection arose from the permanent establishment of arrested stages in sporocarp formation. Such protection would, therefore, be derived from the failure of the pileus to expand and expose the hymenium. Furthermore, constrictions
placed upon the hymenophore due to the failure of the pileus to expand would result in the formation of pockets or spaces in the hymenophore which would be effective in maintaining a higher humidity and enhancing spore production.
2. The forcible discharge of the spore could have been lost during any of the various arrested stages; however, it seems to me that this character must have disappeared early in the sequence. If the hymenophore is no longer exposed there is no selective advantage in the forcible discharge of basidiospores. Perhaps when
the hymenophore became enclosed the basidia for some reason, unknown at this point, might have lost this dispersal mechanism. At least at the present time there are no Homobasidiomycetes known to me which have retained the forcible discharge
of spores when the hymenium is enclosed.
3. With the disappearance of forcibly discharged basidiospores it is apparent that the stipe offered no selective advantage for the survival of the species. Thus perhaps by attrition, if in no other way, it slowly disappeared. Again, it should
be pointed out that truly stipitate hypogeous species are very rare. A continuation of the stipe in the form of a columella within the gleba has persisted much longer and many of the hypogeous species possess such a structure.
4. The disappearance of the stipe removed any means by which the sporocarp could be elevated from the soil, thus it became hypogeous.
5. The absence of a differentiated stipe allowed the peridium (epicutis) to enclose the hymenophore and hymenium thereby resulting in the formation of a gastroid type of basidiocarp.
6. The restrictions placed upon the development and elaboration of the hymenophore by the enclosure by the peridium eventually resulted in the formation of a finely lacunose type of gleba.
7. In the case of boletes or Discomycetes the process was essentially the same with allowances being made for differences in hymenium, hymenophore and carpophore.
8. The principal disseminating agent for the spores of secotioid fungi is, obviously, no longer air currents but dissemination is now dependent largely upon animal dispersal. The two most important agents are small rodents (12) and insects. Water perhaps plays a minor role, particularly run-off and percolating waters which may carry spores for some distance.
The major basis for the belief that the evolutionary process proceeded in the manner elaborated upon above is the forcible discharge of the spores. It seems to be the most logical and simplest assumption that this character was acquired by an early ancestral type which in turn transmitted it to the various groups of present-day Homobasidiomycetes. Otherwise it would have been necessary for this character to have arisen de novo in each of the different evolutionary series. It seems unrealistic to believe that this same character would have been independently acquired in so many different groups of fungi and in so many different series of organisms. Finally I should like to say that I fully realize that the  contributions of this paper will not resolve the controversy regarding the origin and phylogeny of the secotioid fungi. I sincerely hope, on the other hand, that I might have been able to stimulate your interest and curiosity regarding these fungi and to make you more aware of their presence and significance and to alert you to their value as potential research organisms in studies on the evolution of the fleshy fungi.

http://www.mykoweb.com/systematics/literature/The%20Secotioid%20Syndrome.pdf


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9508641 - 12/28/08 06:17 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Derivation of a polymorphic lineage of Gasteromycetes from boletoid ancestors

Manfred Binder 1
Andreas Bresinsky

    Institut für Botanik, Universität Regensburg, D-93040 Regensburg, Germany

The phylogeny of selected gasteromycetes and hymenomycetes was inferred from partial nuclear large subunit rDNA (nuc-lsu, 28S) sequences, delimited by primers LR0R and LR5. Taxon sampling with emphasis on relationships within the Boletales further included some gasteroid groups, which obviously have evolved convergent fruiting body morphology, and therefore remained controversial in taxonomy. This study confirms the close relationship of Geastrales, Gauteriales and Phallales and the presumable derivation of Nidulariales and Tulostomatales within the euagarics clade, as widely accepted. In addition, four Hymenogaster species investigated were found to be in the euagarics clade and a relationship to the Cortinariaceae was indicated. The gasteroid fungus Zelleromyces stephensii is an example for maintaining morphological linkage by a lactiferous hyphal system to the genus Lactarius in the Russulales, and this relationship was affirmed in the sequence analysis. Several previously suggested relationships of gasteromycetes and Boletales were reproducible by analyzing nuc-lsu sequences. As a new result, Astraeus hygrometricus, the barometer earth star, is an additional representative of the Boletales. Together with Boletinellus, Phlebopus, Pisolithus, Calostoma, Gyroporus, Scleroderma, and Veligaster, Astraeus forms an unusual group comprising pileate-stipitate hymenomycetes and polymorphic gasteromycetes. This group is a major lineage within the Boletales and we propose the new suborder Sclerodermatineae, including the six families Boletinellaceae fam. nov. (Boletinellus and Phlebopus), Gyroporaceae (Singer) fam. nov. (Gyroporus), Pisolithaceae (Pisolithus), Astraeaceae (Astraeus), Calostomataceae (Calostoma), and the typus subordinis Sclerodermataceae (Scleroderma and Veligaster). Morphological and ecological characters, and pigment synthesis support the delimitation of the Sclerodermatineae, and indicate the radiation of different lineages in the Boletales originating from fungi with primitive tubular hymenophores. We regard such boletes with gyroid-boletinoid hymenophores, like Boletinellus, Gyrodon, Gyroporus, Paragyrodon and Phlebopus as key taxa in the evolution of Paxillineae, Sclerodermatineae and Boletineae.

Key words: Astraeus, Boletinellus, Calostoma, Gyroporus, Pisolithus, Phlebopus Scleroderma, nuc-lsu rDNA, taxonomy

from here http://www.mycologia.org/cgi/content/abstract/94/1/85


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9508724 - 12/28/08 06:37 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Thank you, cactu.  I love bedtime stories.



I keep reading to see if anyone else responds.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #9508740 - 12/28/08 06:40 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

:rofl:


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleShockValue
Because, ShockValue.


Registered: 11/18/08
Posts: 5,097
Loc: Tipping at windmills.
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #9509047 - 12/28/08 07:42 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Mr. Mushrooms said:
However, the length of your posts might have scared some people off.




:leaving:


--------------------
  • When we built temples to view the stars, we knew about all 2000 of them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleinskiM
Cortinariologist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/28/06
Posts: 5,766
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9559138 - 01/06/09 05:49 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Excellent post with great information cactu, you are welcome to use any of my images that you think are relevant to this most interesting subject and I will be happy to contribute my findings:cool:
Here is a link to a recent post!
Weraroa novaezelandiae.
inski..


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: inski]
    #9559349 - 01/06/09 06:19 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

thank you my friend , i was expecting  your call , since you are one of ther best representative we have there , and of course your part of the world is devoid of secotoid so we all have to work together. since each can add information to this what i call puzzle .
i will soon use your picture to try to  xplaing a bit more .


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleinskiM
Cortinariologist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/28/06
Posts: 5,766
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9559433 - 01/06/09 06:33 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

You are welcome,
I have about four months to wait before I can make more finds but I hope to fill some gaps in the "puzzle" and make many more images:cool:
The information you have compiled has changed some of my views on the evolution of these organisms and I hope we can learn more!
inski..


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: inski]
    #9560064 - 01/06/09 08:01 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

thank you  inski it really takes time to digest all this information and the one out there , evolution is a theme  you know i love .

because  we are use to see the world static ,  we are teach that way, instead we should be teach at school that we live in a world is constantly changing alive, full of many mechanism to evolve, to adapt , that it behave as a single organism , that we are all connected,  once  biology  begging with that and is getting there in many areas, is more easy to understand things, just with the help of mycologist taxonomist , molecular biology, genetic, mushrooms hunter, plant biology, ecology, mathematic, physics, and more, science, is that we are going to make more sense i like the idea of all time people like Darwin that instead  of choose a career they call then self materialist , in a broader sense it apply to many Of the different lines of science today , but sometimes this is what lack  our scientific today , some of then are taking the highest route, to take maybe the humanity to knew horizons.


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9562490 - 01/07/09 03:52 AM (15 years, 2 months ago)

I finally got around to posting in this again.  I hadn't forgotten I assure you.  I find Kuo's piece embarrassing in that he finds time to discuss God when we are supposed to be doing science.  Particularly revealing is this quote by Hibbett and Donoghue:

Quote:

The central goal of taxonomic mycology is to create classifications that communicate understanding of fungal phylogeny....




The idea that taxonomic mycology should key off of fungal phylogeny is philosophically flawed.  Instead of teaching what we know, and thereby learning what we could learn, some historians--I won't call them mycologists--are more interested in ideas about God and history than mushrooms.  Like I said, they should have switched majors.

I enjoy the opportunity to discuss this though.  Everyone should be aware of it if they are interested in mushrooms.  We're headed down a blind alley with historians for our guides.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #9597705 - 01/12/09 08:34 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

hello all  i like  to poiint his article about  how virus influenciate the evolution of  individuals.
is may indea something like this happend in the  secotoid mushrooms
EVOLUTION:
Viruses Scout Evolution's Path
Virginia Morell

ARNHEM, THE NETHERLANDS--At a meeting of the European Society for Evolutionary Biology here in August, researchers described studies in viruses that point to a possible resolution of a dispute about the trajectory of evolution. One theory argues that evolution is like a staircase on which organisms evolve through a series of small genetic steps, while another postulates that genetic and environmental changes can derail the evolutionary process, picturing evolution as taking place on a landscape of numerous peaks and valleys where harmful mutations can displace an organism from a peak into a valley. The virus cultures described at the meeting suggested that both metaphors may be valid.


iam been thinking about his  event recently  how all this affect mushrooms events.  inski you may like this
Geological Factors and Evolution of Southwestern Gondwana Triassic Plants
Purchase the full-text article



References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

L.A. Spallettia, c, E-mail The Corresponding Author, A.E. Artabeb, c, E-mail The Corresponding Author and E.M. Morelb, d, E-mail The Corresponding Author

aCentro de Investigaciones Geológicas, Universidad Nacional de La Plata - CONICET. Calle 1 nro. 644, 1900 La Plata, República Argentina

bDepartamento de Palaeobotánica, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Paseo del Bosque s/n, 1900 La Plata, República Argentina

cCONICET, República Argentina

dComisión de Investigaciones Científicas de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Received 16 May 2002;
accepted 15 October 2002.
Available online 15 November 2005.

Abstract

A synergistic model based on reciprocal influences between biotic and abiotic factors is developed for the Triassic of southwestern Gondwana. Changes in physical environment exerted a strong influence on the characteristics and evolution of plant assemblages. The Permian-Triassic extinction, and the change from palaeophytic to mesophytic floras, is one of the most striking examples of direct influence of physical environment upon plant communities. Pangea coalescence, the distribution of land masses and seas, the spreading of continental climates (megamonsoonal conditions) and the waning polar glaciation determined the expansion of xeromorphic morphotypes that became dominant during the whole Mesozoic. In southwestern Gondwana, the introduction or invasion of immigrant lineages suggests a strong asymmetrical interchange from the Euroamerican realm to the Gondwana realm. In addition, generalised extensional volcanism, development of intracratonic rifts and the palaeolatitudinal location of climatic zones during the early-Middle Triassic favoured extinction of the Glossopteris flora and explosive diversification of endemic groups.

From the chronological viewpoint, the Barrealian, Cortaderitian and Florian stages are recognised in the Triassic of southwestern Gondwana. These stages are respectively characterised by: (a) appearance of mesophytic elements, and coexistence of Palaeozoic and Mesozoic groups, (b) maximum diversification of the Dicroidium flora, and (c) Dicroidium flora decline and replacement by morphotypes with strong Jurassic affinity. These palaeofloristic changes seem to be strongly influenced by tectonic evolution of sedimentary basins, temporal and regional distribution of sedimentary environments, and intra-Triassic palaeoclimatic change.

Key words: Triassic; Gondwana; environments; palaeobotany; synergism

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7XNB-4HK0S5B-7&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=ff86c52a2fb87ecfb13782b0aef075bb
Venezuelan paleoflora of the Pennsylvanian-Early Permian: Paleobiogeographical relationships to central and western equatorial Pangea
Purchase the full-text article



References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

Fresia Ricardi-Brancoa, E-mail The Corresponding Author

aDepartamento de Geologia e Recursos Naturais, Instituto de Geociências, Universidade Estadual de Campinas-UNICAMP, Campinas, Brasil. Cx. Postal: 6152. CEP. 13083-970. Brazil

Received 8 May 2007;
revised 7 December 2007;
accepted 25 February 2008.
Available online 7 March 2008.

Abstract

The flora of northwestern Venezuela shows close links with the Pennsylvanian flora of the Northern Hemisphere and Northern Africa; in the Early Permian, it also closely matches the flora reported in the Southwestern and Central United States. The Permian fossils from Venezuela have various species and genera in common with that of this part of the USA, not only flora, but also warm-water marine fauna. The floristic data studied here provide evidence of a close relationship of the plants of the central portion of Pangea with those of Gondwanaland. Based on these similarities in the flora, it is suggested that during the Pennsylvanian-Early Permian, the northeastern part of Gondwanaland, which was one of the regions most affected by the formation of Pangea, had a progressively drier climate, with the vegetation characteristic of such conditions. Moreover, the relationship between the vegetation of this equatorial area and that of the Cathaysian Province during the Early Permian is discussed. Both showed the presence of gigantopterid genera, although there were climatic differences; furthermore, the differences in the species of the group suggest that the two regions may have had quite different vegetation, rather than the shared one traditionally proposed.

Keywords: Palmarito formation; Carache formation; Delnortea; Permian Paleobotany
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7XNB-4S0PKVY-2&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=33f29ba34cc6e04cde02a57d5ba97af6

Mass extinctions have played many evolutionary roles, involving differential survivorship or selectivity of taxa and traits, the disruption or preservation of evolutionary trends and ecosystem organization, and the promotion of taxonomic and morphological diversifications-often along unexpected trajectories-after the destruction or marginalization of once-dominant clades. The fossil record suggests that survivorship during mass extinctions is not strictly random, but it often fails to coincide with factors promoting survival during times of low extinction intensity. Although of very serious concern, present-day extinctions have not yet achieved the intensities seen in the Big Five mass extinctions of the geologic past, which each removed greater than or equal to 50% of the subset of relatively abundant marine invertebrate genera. The best comparisons for predictive purposes therefore will involve factors such as differential extinction intensities among regions, clades, and functional groups, rules governing postextinction biotic interchanges and evolutionary dynamics, and analyses of the factors that cause taxa and evolutionary trends to continue unabated, to suffer setbacks but resume along the same trajectory, to survive only to fall into a marginal role or disappear ("dead clade walking"), or to undergo a burst of diversification. These issues need to be addressed in a spatially explicit framework, because the fossil record suggests regional differences in postextinction diversification dynamics and biotic interchanges. Postextinction diversifications lag far behind the initial taxonomic and morphological impoverishment and homogenization; they do not simply reoccupy vacated adaptive peaks, but explore opportunities as opened and constrained by intrinsic biotic factors and the ecological and evolutionary context of the radiation.

Title:
Lessons from the past: Evolutionary impacts of mass extinctions


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Edited by cactu (01/12/09 09:10 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9597817 - 01/12/09 08:51 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Well, first of all I would....

You know what?  Never mind.  :lol:

:hug:

Thanks for posting it.

Just to let you know someone is actually reading it.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #9622255 - 01/16/09 05:01 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

iam obsess with the sequestrate fungus  sorry
Gastrosuillus laricinius  is a Recent Derivative of Suillus grevillei  : Molecular Evidence
http://plantbio.berkeley.edu/~bruns/papers/bruns1992c.html
a really good read i  will put this :What then is the possible role of G. laricinus  in fungal phylogeny? In 1933 Goldschmidt (9) proposed the concept of a hopeful monster. The occurrence of a monster embodies the idea that a change during early developmental processes may produce a fundamentally altered phenotype. This monster would be hopeful should the change be viable and permit the occupation of a new environmental niche. We can apply this concept to G. laricinus  interpreting its secotioid form as a developmental arrest (3). With this view the lack of divergence in the ITS region relative to S. grevillei  and its restriction to a single collecting site suggests that this monster is of very recent origin and thus far has not been particularly successful.

-i put this becasue the where the conclucion i get from the rare psilocybe i found wich  is a secotoid form .


and they go on saying: If we accept the view that G. laricinus  is a recent mutant of S. grevillei then the history of the site allows us to estimate a maximum age of approximately 60 yr for the origin of G. laricinus  . This estimate is derived from the planting date of Larix decidua  Mill. (E. Both, pers. comm.), the apparent mycorrhizal host of both taxa at the Krull Park location (14). It is possible that G. laricinus  was derived somewhere else and migrated into the Krull park site after its establishment, but no appropriate habitats border the park and G. laricinus has never been found in repeated searches of similar habitats in Western New York (E. Both, pers. comm.).

- and  after workman  work in the microscope we can relate  the mutation i find with the psilocybe zapotecorum that grow real close to then . so  maybe is a secotoid form  derive from zapotecorum .and as this article sugest is a early one , i can speculate that my find it had no such antiguity , it most be at much the date of the alnus tree is growing of , is interesting since they also use a tree Larix decidua to calculatte when this mutation takes places , so the tree is bend to the side maybe  for a big inundation  in the area that make the tree fall but is still alive , it does not look like more that 30 year old tree in fact i guees  is less that 10 year this mutation take place but maybe the tree of alnus acuminata wich is growing is more old ...:tripping:  what you said alan since you have take a look a it .
maybe if we can do a phylogeny of all the mushroms in the area we can get more ideas.


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleinskiM
Cortinariologist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/28/06
Posts: 5,766
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9622622 - 01/16/09 06:19 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

Hi, cactu:cool:
I also have a great interest in secotioid forms, I did not realize that these kinds of mutations could take place in such a small time frame!
I can see the spot that you found those interesting mushrooms in my mind, very close to a river, there is a tunnel or bridge and the mushrooms were growing under that tree, there is a drain pipe coming from the wall directly above the mushrooms.
Maybe the tree has been stunted from the damage and is older than suspected.
In New Zealand secotioid mushrooms form for different reasons compared to other forms around the world that usually form because of dry desert like conditions, for example the Weraroa species in NZ seem to associate with very wet areas near rivers and do a really great job of imitating the fruits of native trees that many of the birds love:)
The secotioid mushroom I found, probably a secotioid form of Psilocybe subaeruginosa I suspect must have formed before your find, I know of three isolated patches that are at least 30km apart, and there have been a few other finds, this makes me think this strange mushroom has had time to spread and find an ecological niche where it can thrive.
I would love to learn more about this subject and am always interested in your research, thankyou cactu for your enthusiasm and great interest in fungi:mushroom2:
inski.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: inski]
    #9622981 - 01/16/09 07:29 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

inski  since you are a terrific person where it come to try to find answers  and you are in new zealand Australia which is the place with more sequestrate form yet , i guess you may like this next information, .
but i will say i few thing it seem logical that sequestrate from evolve from agaricoid form and  the environment have some to do with it, as i have find  , there is the idea this happened many times when all the world mass extintion takes place, the more Early is the Pleistocene age , but other like Devonian, Triassic, etc, so , mushroom are very clever , the way they reduce their expose to the air and the action of dispersal spores since logical in a dry environment which also make then go underground ,which imitate  sun and wind exposure, but they have the animals and insect in their side is all part of a big plant all nature was doing , ha ha  for example y was thinking why Australia have more secotoids forms  true  more of the land of godwanna  turn into a desert so thing change from humid to dryer areas, but that will not help to reproduce the secotoid hypogious form of mushrooms , what then  well animals , apparently marsupial loves truffle like fungus  and maybe is some of the reason we have so many in Australia , but the thing is world wide in laws, desert, tropical area, i guess also  ice places, you name it, it is happening at least  very frequently  wish also intrigue and as i tell you when i get obsess is , terrible the puzzle  begging to unfold, for example what i was thinking is maybe mushrooms are preparing to the next mass extinction , they are so cleaver that  is in my mind , truffles  have been around for ages and are maybe the last result of the  ultimate extinctions, and the secotoid form as the ones you find i find ,the other  secotoids in all the world i promise iam about to make a list about later,  seem to be  more early  developed , to be close to agaricoid form is some other you can see how they are more like truffle and became  hyphogyus  mushroms ....

my secotoid form i believe come from zapotecorun also loves a wet  enviroment  as weraroa , what make you think what  really trigger the  change , in close  proximity of mi find are some  specimen  wich show normal forms , but this  secotoid form are very consitend for 2 year  know , and i am dying to know if the micelium are interacting some how and how related they are ,

thank you you inski for share all your knowledge and finds . with us
aqui algunos lugares donde se encuentra mucha infromacion alrespecto :
HISTORICAL AND CURRENT PERSPECTIVES IN THE SYSTEMATICS
OF AUSTRALIAN CORTINARIOID SEQUESTRATE (TRUFFLE-LIKE) FUNGI
http://bugs.bio.usyd.edu.au/AustMycolSoc/Journal/2002/21_3_b.pdf
http://www.mykoweb.com/book_reviews/Fungi_of_Southern_Australia.html
Gastrosuillus laricinius  is a Recent Derivative of Suillus grevillei  : Molecular Evidence
http://plantbio.berkeley.edu/~bruns/papers/bruns1992c.html


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleinskiM
Cortinariologist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/28/06
Posts: 5,766
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: cactu]
    #9623465 - 01/16/09 09:12 PM (15 years, 2 months ago)

It is very interesting how you connect the evolution of these fungi with mass extinction and also animals, New Zealand is known to have no mammals until the first Maori settlers arrived, this was estimated to be around the 13th century, they brought rats and dogs, before then there were only birds, particularly flightless birds like Kiwis and the extinct Moa which could reach heights of up to 12 feet and weigh up to 250kg, they were all hunted to extinction and now only the Kiwi remains but is very rare!
Maybe Weraroa novaezelandiae is a remnant of a secotioid form that evolved long ago from an ancient agaricoid form, maybe due to environmental conditions like volcanic activity or the introduction of mammals, it's almost as if these fungi reflect the condition of earth, maybe we should see this as a warning!
I suspect the secotioid form I found is getting stronger and will prevail over the more common Psilocybe subaeruginosa in the future and like you say we may soon be finding truffle like fruitbodies with no stipe that are closely related to the present secotioid forms we have been discovering!
Perhaps a random strain becomes susceptible  to something in the environment that causes the mutation as a defence mechanism???
I'm not a scientist but the subject is very interesting and I hope others can contribute their thoughts!
Thanks cactu for all your links, there's a lot of good information there!
inski..


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblecactu
culture and magic
Male


Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 3,913
Loc: mexicoelcentrodelconocimi...
Trusted Identifier
Re: EVOLUTION IN ACTION: FROM MUSHROOMS TO TRUFFLES? [Re: inski]
    #9737707 - 02/04/09 10:17 PM (15 years, 1 month ago)

the subject goes and go on in my  mind , now iam seein more and more way of the path is a long way to go , but jesus is increble to  understand this creatures.


let quote few articles :

This begs the question of why any self-respecting fungus would want to produce a fruitbody as hideous-looking as that of a truffle. To most of us, elegance in the fungal world would look
more like the Amanitas, Lepiotas, or chanterelles. Something with a stem and a cap, at the very least. Truffle-like fungi look and grow more akin to a potato tuber. (In fact, Tuber is the name of the genus of the most highly prized species of truffles.)

As with everything in nature, though, there is a reason.
Form follows function:

the convoluted hymenium Although it may not be obvious upon first inspection, species of truffle are most closely related to members of the order Pezizales, which includes Peziza, the eyelash fungus (Scutellinia scutellata),and the beautiful scarlet cup (Sarcoscypha coccinea). But how did members of the genus Tuber and their relatives go from a flattened morphology and epigeous (above ground) growth habit to highly convoluted and hypogeous (subterranean)?
In his terrific book The Fifth Kingdom, Bryce Kendrick illustrates the evolutionary sequence from a flattened, above-ground cup like Peziza that likely gave rise to fungi that were increasingly convoluted like Genea.
Taking the reproductive surface layer, or hymenium, and convoluting
it allows for more surface area (and more spore production) per unit area of mushroom. Spring mushroom hunters will recollect a similar morphological progression in morels (Morchella species), from their close relatives like Gyromitra, Helvella, and Verpa. Now take the loosely convoluted Genea and increase the infolding, compressing it, and even letting it develop entirely underground. You are beginning to see the intermediate species en route to the genus Tuber. And in nature, a good idea like the truffle-like habit has evolved more than once!

Basidiome types occurring in the Cortinarius clade. 1. Agaricoid basidiomes of Cortinarius sp. 2–3. Sequestrate basidiome types. 2. Secotioid
basidiome type of Thaxterogaster sp. 3. Gastroid basidome type of Protoglossum sp. Photo by Neale L. Bougher.

inski pictures to get a brief of what i have been said





There are trufflelike
members of the primitive fungal class Zygomycetes, and
false-truffle species likely have evolved several different times
within the Basidiomycetes.
The class Basidiomycetes is without a doubt the group of
fungi most familiar to everyone as it includes the true mushrooms,
boletes, polypores, shelf fungi, bird’s nests, stinkhorns,
and puffballs. Despite the amazing diversity of fruitbodies, all
share a common style of spore production: the club-shaped basidium.
And with such a diverse array of fruitbody morphologies, it
should come as no surprise that within many groups of Basidiomycetes,
there are many sequestrate (those with closed or “hidden”
hymenia) and hypogeous species. In fact, for just about any
common genus of mushrooms, we could follow an evolutionary
progression from “typical” mushroom morphology to more and
more truffle-like. These are the so-called false truffles. Take Lactarius.
We know it to be the ancestor of Arcangeliella and its most
truffle-like kin, Zelleromyces.


Within the family Boletaceae, Boletus,Suillus, and Leccinum have all given rise to epigeous sequestrate forms (Gastroboletus, Gastrosuillus, Gastroleccinum)
Gastroboletus SUBALPINUShttp://www.svims.ca/council/thumbn/Gastroboletus%20turbinatus%201%20Michael%20Beug.jpg

as well as
false truffles (Alpova, Truncocolumella, and Rhizopogon).
Alpova

Rhizopogon luteolus
Ditto Russula through Macowanites to Gymnomyces.
macowanites_luteolusbasidiospores of the sequestrate Macowanites, stained in Melzer's reagent and showing its connection to Russula X 1000

In fact, no fewer than 14 families of mushrooms have separately given rise to sequestrate or false truffle forms. For an excellent review of the topic, try to find “Evolution in action: from mushrooms to truffles?” by Bryce Kendrick (McIlvainea 1994, 11[2]: 34–47).
Form follows function: the subterranean hymenium So, we have discussed—and hopefully made some sense of— the convoluted morphology of truffle-like fruitbodies, but what about the habit of remaining underground? Wouldn’t it make more sense to have the spore-producing surface above ground where spores could be dispersed more easily by wind into the  environment? For most fungi that we mycophiles encounter— the mushrooms—this is the method for dispersing offspring.
Spores are released to the winds whereby chance may favor them
with an opportunity to alight on a suitable substrate for growth.
Or not. Which is probably why wind-dispersed species produce
such vast numbers of spores. (Wind is the method that many
species of plants use to disseminate pollen and fruits as well, of
course.) But if wind dispersal is so successful (and it is the modus
for the ancestors of many truffle and false truffle species), why
go underground? No one is completely sure, but there are several
possible reasons. Perhaps some groups of hypogeous fungi
were driven underground by some biotic factor like mycophagy;
maybe mushroom-grazing animals simply were consuming too
many fruitbodies for that style of reproduction to be successful
within that group. More likely it was because of environmental,
or abiotic, factors. Most fungi are very sensitive to dry conditions,
especially at the time of fruitbody formation. It is probable that as
environmental conditions became more arid locally or globally—
and it is well known that this has occurred repeatedly in the
earth’s history—fungi may have been faced with going underground
or going extinct. You may be surprised to learn that many
of the deserts of Africa and the Middle East abound with trufflelike
fungi! (An in-depth discussion of desert truffles is beyond
the scope of this primer, but papers by two of the world’s experts
on the subject can be found elsewhere in this issue of FUNGI.)
Producing spores within a subterranean fruitbody presents
new challenges: namely, how to get those spores dispersed into
the environment. To ensure successful spore dispersal, all you
have to do is entice a suitable vector. Offers of nutrition would
likely work; many plants employ this technique (think nectar,
here). All sorts of organisms are known to feed on truffles. Several
mammals dig up and consume truffles, including deer and
squirrels; some people believe the western red-backed vole feeds

exclusively on truffles. Many invertebrates are truffle feeders,
including slugs and insects; many fly species probably are strict
truffle feeders. (Easily the best source of information on the
subject is the brand new book Trees, Truffles, and Beasts, reviewed in
this issue.) The most advanced plants mimic an animal’s own
reproductive pheromones, all but guaranteeing pollination. Likewise,
it is well supported that truffles attract mammalian vectors
by producing odors that mimic reproductive pheromones. According
to The Fifth Kingdom, species of Tuber produce a compound
called alpha-androstenol. This chemical also is found in
the saliva of rutting boars and acts as a pheromone to attract sows.
Many other mammals probably also produce this pheromone,
which explains the attraction numerous digging mammals have
for these fungi.

http://www.fungimag.com/Truffle-Issue-08-articles/truffle-primer.pdf
http://www.google.com.mx/search?hl=es&q=stinkhorns+probably+evolved+from+truffle-like+ancestors&btnG=Buscar+con+Google&meta=

In the last several years, molecular analysis has revealed that many of these morphological states have in fact evolved numerous times. Agarics are a good example - while the majority of agaric species belong to one clade, the euagarics, it is clear that there are at least four other separate evolutionary lines that have produced agaric species. The most notable group is the Russulales (Russula and Lactarius), who's closest relatives are woody resupinate fungi like Stereum. Hence, Russula, which for all outward appearances looks as much like an agaric as, for example, Tricholoma, in fact represents a completely separate line of evolution from a polypore-like ancestor to an agaric morphology. Similarly, Panus, Lentinus, and Lentinellus each represent separate lines of evolution from closely-related woody fungi. The gasteromycetes also represent at least three separate evolutionary lines; the Lycoperdaceae turn out to be very close relatives of Agaricus and Lepiota, Scleroderma and Pisolithus are related to the boletes, and earthstars and stinkhorns are relatives of Gomphus and Ramaria. Woody fungi, such as polypores, turn up in five of the eight major evolutionary lines of homobasidiomycetes; this type of morphology may have evolved many times independently, or it may be an ancestral state in several of the evolutionary lines of fleshy fungi.

The boletoid clade is notable for its extreme morphological diversity. This clade contains not only boletes, but also several groups of gastroid and hypogeous fungi, several groups of agarics, and even Serpula, the dry-rot fungus. These varying morphologies are scattered throughout the boletoid clade, and surprisingly, not all boletes are directly related to other boletes. Boletus and Suillus are on widely separate lines of boletoid evolution, with Suillus being a close relative of Rhizopogon and the gophidiaceous agarics. Boletus, for its part, shows closer affinity to several species of Paxillus than to Suillus. The bolete genus Gyroporus is very close to a gastroid clade that includes Pisolithus and Scleroderma. Rounding out this extreme morphological diversity are number of paxillaceous agarics that are found scattered at different points throughout the boletoid clade.
The relationships we are discovering within the euagarics are no less surprising and represent a complete revision of how we have viewed agaric "Families" in the past.


--------------------

cuando una rafaga del pensamiento nos pasa  al lado se puede sentir  que valio  la pena  haber vivido, y cuando ese pensamiento se  convierte en sueño no paramos de soñar hasta realizarlo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Amanita Muscaria Store Amanita Muscaria   Mushroom-Hut Liquid Cultures   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Magic truffles? S.F.Sorrow 3,154 8 06/11/03 07:08 AM
by canid
* odd mushrooms II Polecat 1,013 5 11/24/03 10:50 AM
by ToxicMan
* Unusual find... maybe secotioid Bolbitius TimmiTM 930 3 09/18/10 01:40 PM
by St. Chibes
* Mushroom Fair in Denver, Sunday, August 11 ToxicManM 2,172 10 08/10/02 04:09 AM
by Anonymous
* Hunting mushrooms with dogs... Ajoc 1,733 8 10/19/03 10:46 PM
by Gumby
* New Cambodian Magic Mushroom (Picture)
( 1 2 all )
mjshroomer 5,566 27 08/31/03 09:37 PM
by Zen Peddler
* URGENT: STUPID FRIENDS MUSHROOM INJESTION! Melbourne, Aus.
( 1 2 all )
121212 6,022 25 07/02/03 03:54 AM
by Anonymous
* TRUFFLE ( TUBER ) T0aD 1,674 9 11/23/02 05:14 AM
by Roadkill

Extra information
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
19,151 topic views. 0 members, 16 guests and 8 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.081 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 14 queries.