Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

MagicBag Grow Bags
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

Mushrooms, Mycology and Psychedelics > Advanced Mycology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

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: North Spore Bulk Substrate   Mushroom-Hut Liquid Cultures   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds High THC Strains   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
Biological Efficiency
    #999075 -

  Just some thought that crossed my mind...
    Obviously growing style and other sundry details will affect  B.E., but w/ growers supplying growlogs with (in some cases at least) very detailed information wouldn't it be interesting for grower's to calculate their BE for a strain over time and post this information to the board?  It would be an interesting way to isolate potentially high yielding strains.In conjuction with either chemical assays and/or bioassays from numerous individuals the OMC could even isolate strains with high tryptamine to weight ratios and perhaps differing ratios of the tryptamines. 
  Anyone else interested in this or am i merely a lonely voice in the dark?  :smile:
After all with the combined input of even a decent fraction of the people here we should be able to collect some good data.
   


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Alkaloids]
    #999099 -

Become a mycologist and get permission to work with psychoactive mushrooms. I dont know what kind of BE your talking about but it seems a bit hard to calculate without some tools. Are you refering to fruit mass as a comparison or psilo production or a combo of both?


--------------------
_______________________________________
CSC

Life's a garden, Dig it!
~Joe Dirt

Off Topic Website

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Cow Shit Collector]
    #999131 -

well the most availabe measurement would probably just be straight BE (according to Stamets), but I do think having a measure of the actual psilocyin(e) and psilocybin(e) content (and other active tryptamine), in addition to anecdotal accounts via bio-assay, would also put more "meat" on meaningful comparisons between strains. And it would just be fun to know.
For the tryptamine contents to be measured a person would have to have access to some NMR, mass spec and ESI gear. Should be able to surreptiously get some more data.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Alkaloids]
    #1002323 -

  come on now...  there have to be some interested parties out there.  Isn't anyone besides my bandicoots excited about the possibility of pooling data for such a project?  :smile:
    give generously.... 


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Alkaloids]
    #1002331 -

Why dont you start a thread for this type of data hmm?


--------------------
_______________________________________
CSC

Life's a garden, Dig it!
~Joe Dirt

Off Topic Website

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Cow Shit Collector]
    #1002371 -

maybe I'll just have to do that.. *he*
  my goal with this is too ascertain whether or not there is enough interest to warrant all the effort that will (might) go into it.  If only a handful of people respond, then it wouldn't be very illuminating would it?  :wink: 


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Alkaloids]
    #1002402 -

Would it not be near impossible to accuratly calculate B/E from a pool of peaple all using differing substrates that have differing moisture content & nutrient values? All grown under differing conditions.

6T


--------------------
~whiskey river rafting, hot tubbing, dirty dancing & spending money on - wild women - having fun & just gonna waste the rest~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: SixTango]
    #1003013 -

The logistical difficulties inherent to a task such as this are innumerable, but the idea itself is very important. Imagine if a standardized set of conditions could be adopted by a mutlitude of cultivators. Conditions not limiting the process of cultivation but conditions finely determining how data regarding the cultivation process, as well as a system for qualitativly analyzing the product. The rate of compilation of information could be astounding, and the possibilities yielded by the analysis of the information, endless. But we are dealing with a psychedelic drug, a substance which invariably defies standard comparative methodologies.
The question must be asked, what is the priority, increasing the capabilty of cultivators to discuss cultivation or the definition (or rather creation) of a vocabulary to allow an increased intellectual discourse about the experience said cultivators seek? There are repetitive sets of conditions in the psychedelic experience which can not be described to those who have not experienced them. There are many facets of the experience which even after having seen countless times we can not describe to ourselves. The words are not there.
I apologize, I digress. But the point here is there is much work to be done and the time frame on this whole thing may be rather limited. Go to, go to. I say refine your idea and execute. No one should allow the lack of refined clinical procedures, lavish labratory equipment (or not so lavish, I'd kill somebody just for a nice condensor), or well defined controls and experiemntal environments keep them from seeking to better the understanding of all that we do to enter the psychedelic communtiy. Any information we can yeild is going ot be more comprehensive than what we already have. And remember, when you are dealing with a psychedelic, nothing is going to carry over from other sets of data, everything is going to be original and unique.


--------------------
No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, have ever been, or will at any future time will be participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any legal statue; be it local, state, or federal law. All posts are works of fiction, and are intended for entertainment purposes only.

Don't just assume anything I or anyone else says is true. Test it for yourself. See if it's true.
Generate more useful information. The world is running desperately low on it.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: SixTango]
    #1004622 -

  I agree that some (perhaps most) of the data would suffer from inconsistencies in procedure, but even if we can get 10 or 20 experienced growers who keep accurate logs to agree on using almost identical conditions for various strains/sub-strains I believe this would prove invaluable to the OMC.
    Also the data could be pooled based on several different conditions and then cross referenced to determine,  say, best/worst substrates for growth of particular strains. 
  For those with suitable equipment like scales, ovens, accurate thermometers, etc... this could certainly reduce the amount of experimental error.  Not too mention using spore/culture trades (as they are already used alot) comparisons could then be made between different growers with the same substrain.
  Obviously some people use more analytical methods (ala Stamets) to persue this hobby and it is to them that this idea is directed. 
    Come on Six..  you yourself have shown remarkable acuity when it comes to keeping track of different factors during all stages of development. 
  It is possible.  :laugh:
 


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Teon]
    #1004630 -

thanks for the thumbs up Teon. :smile:
  My goal is simply to try and utilize the resources (all the intelligent people here) to give us more and hopefully better information about our generous fungal friends.
  I am sure that with some cooperation this task would not prove insurmountable.
    peace 


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Alkaloids]
    #1004695 -

Since we agree that the "definition" that Teon is talking about is pretty much not obtainable then, like with Stamets, BE is really about the amounts psilocybin and psilocin produced in relation to fruitbody mass. the only way to actually recond that requires $$$ for some specailized equip(spectrograph?,among others). Also is not some data relating to this already available? Was there not something showing the average amounts for specific species? And did it not state that there are wide ranges for any strain within the species? This is definitely a worthwile undertaking none the less. But wouldn't baeocystin need to be further understood in order to consider whether or not it to is a factor in the overall BE. Because, if so, then if would change the entire equation. It being suspect to ethenogenic activity of some sort as well.


If you flame, start over again.
Control your tounge or lose your name.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: hsalf]
    #1010931 -

  Yes there is data, but as there really isn't too much research going on with these species at the moment it might be useful for the community to try and establish high yielding (mass and % tryptamine content) strains via this idea.  Just as Stamets has isolated high yielding strains I believe that with the combined resources of the OMC we could do the same with Ps. species. With the sheer number of people involved in this I think that it is even possible that we could eventually (individually and collectively) amass a huge library of strains with various ratios and productivities isolated to particular substrates.
  In Stamets book on Ps mushrooms he does list average values, but to my knowledge (unlike with edible strains) there has not been anyone who has actively sought to get "high-yielding" strains of the Ps genus.
  What I am getting at is yes they (Guzman, Stamets etc) did point out wide variability in content. I'd like to take this a step further and work on isolating the possible reasons for these variances and from there try and overcome the reasons that these variances happen (or at least minimize them). 
  Yes baeocystin(e) does need more study, but that, while related, would be a seperate study into itself.
    thanks for the feedback.  hopefully more input from other members will also be forthcoming. :wink:
  PS as I mentioned in my 1st post, some of us do have access to lab equipment (MS, ESI, HPLC, etc) so it is they who could work on verifying some of the data.   


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: hsalf]
    #1012379 -

i think this *excelant* idea and just might work.

if someone in this comunity has access to a spectrograph and can operate it, he can be sent samples from other growers.
i dont think it'll be too risky since only a very small samples are needed.

all we need is to sit down and set up the logistics.

it'l be cool having a comunity research :smile:
great idea

a growin original

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Alkaloids]
    #1013342 -

I agree.

A quote from F+ on Horse Shizznit

"I calculated the biological efficiency of this strain @ 221.3% over three flushes. Of course this calculation is based on this fruiting alone. Biological efficiency of 100% is 25% wet substrate converted to wet fruits by weight. According to Stamets in GGMM a good grower should operate w/i the 75%-125%. Although Stamets is probably referring to edible species I find my results to be excellent."

Joshua


--------------------
The Shroomery Bookstore

Great books for inquiring minds!

"Life After Death is Saprophytic!"

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Joshua]
    #1014114 -

  looks like things are picking up in hearah. *he* 
    Anyone who is interested can either post here for a show of hands or PM me.  I think I might possible know someone who has access to several pieces of useful lab equipment.  Maybe.  :wink:
    Yeah I remember reading that thread Joshua... I was absolutely stunned by the results you achieved. 
  By the way is that strain available at all to the general public?
        thanks for all the useful/critical responses and for the show of support everyone.
   


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Alkaloids]
    #1014408 -

I'll help in any way I can.

TLG is the only vendor at this time that carries the F+ strain.

Joshua


--------------------
The Shroomery Bookstore

Great books for inquiring minds!

"Life After Death is Saprophytic!"

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: growin]
    #1014518 -

Unfortunately I'm homeless. Had to hit the road for a bit. But I'm sure my friend wouldn't mind helping out. PM


be careful on a bad day
cause even brothers make you pay
-them_26

Edited by hsalf (11/01/02 10:03 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: Joshua]
    #3889203 -

Joshua said:
I agree.

A quote from F+ on Horse Shizznit

"I calculated the biological efficiency of this strain @ 221.3% over three flushes. Of course this calculation is based on this fruiting alone. Biological efficiency of 100% is 25% wet substrate converted to wet fruits by weight. According to Stamets in GGMM a good grower should operate w/i the 75%-125%. Although Stamets is probably referring to edible species I find my results to be excellent."

Joshua


I was wondering about your #'s during 5-6 rereads of that thread.
If you add water, wouldn't you have to recalculate the BE??
I thought 30-50 % BE was good... so how could ypou possibly have a BE over 100%??
-BE having to do solely w/ harvest weight- not psychoactivity or lack or if.

as in: 10Lb.s wet substrate - yields 1 pound wet. BE ratio of 10%.
or am I talking out my azz???

edited to add: different people seem to have different definition of BE- wet weight, dry weight etc....

I still can't see how you can top 100% BE.


--------------------
Hot Water Pasteuriztion - A How To Pictorial
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/4527808/an/0/page/0

Make your own shroom chocolates
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/4500682/an/0/page/5

guide with pix.


Make Your Own Magnetic Stirrer! How-To Tek w/ pix
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/5865949/an/0/page/3

Edited by No_Life_G33k (03/08/05 07:18 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: No_Life_G33k]
    #3889298 -

No_Life_G33k, someone decided that BE is the weight of wet mushroom mass divided by the weight of dry mater in the substrate times 100 (remember that even grain is not totally dry so you have to oven test it), expressed as a percent. It's just a definition. I believe you could easily get about 150-200% for cubensis. It's just fruits very easily.

Edited by ShroomGod (03/08/05 07:30 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Biological Efficiency [Re: No_Life_G33k]
    #3892438 -

I will quote part of the quote that you quoted from me, "Biological efficiency of 100% is 25% wet substrate converted to wet fruits by weight."

My %200+ BE means that over %50 of the wet substrate weight was converted to wet fruits.

Joshua


--------------------
The Shroomery Bookstore

Great books for inquiring minds!

"Life After Death is Saprophytic!"

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

Shop: North Spore Bulk Substrate   Mushroom-Hut Liquid Cultures   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds High THC Strains   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Mushrooms, Mycology and Psychedelics > Advanced Mycology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* tryptamine inriched substrate
( 1 2 all )		 michealjackstyle 5,329 22 02/10/05 01:06 AM
by micro
* effect of phosphorus in substrate........................... ph_plus 3,404 6 07/12/03 01:10 AM
by micro
* question: mycelium & substrate
( 1 2 all )		 VALIS 4,801 26 04/28/05 04:40 PM
by
* Tryptamine addition to jars via P. Viridia
( 1 2 all )		 JohnnyRespect 4,799 25 06/21/03 12:33 PM
by micro
* Handy Dandy Substrate Guide
( 1 2 all )		 SixTango 5,921 22 06/29/04 08:31 AM
by MXCN
* Sclerotia substrate water content differs between vendors blackout 1,270 7 04/20/05 08:05 AM
by blackout
* Adding Tryptamines
( 1 2 all )		 shitdog 5,859 20 11/21/01 10:21 AM
by meme
* tryptamine cubensis --->psilocin hcl extraction uneasyone 9,014 18 10/29/04 12:40 PM
by skullfarmer1979

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: RogerRabbit, cronicr, Stipe-n Cap, Pastywhyte, bodhisatta
4,859 topic views. 1 members, 27 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.036 seconds spending 0.012 seconds on 18 queries.