Jump to content
The Corroboree

obtuse

Members2
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    1,579

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Posts posted by obtuse

  6. Posted

    I would disregard the comparison to Psilocybe cyanescens, and instead be thinking Psilocybe subaeruginosa.

     

    Apparently Psilocybe cyanescens are insanely close genetically Psilocybe subaeruginosa, hence these being reported as the former.

     

    I think if you really want to understand these differences in these specimens you need to did deeper and be thinking full genome sequencing.

     

    at the moment we cannot be certain on phenotypic variations until we compare genes.  and there may even be structural mutations which are causing the split gills.

  7. Posted

    It is fine to import San Pedro to tasmania.  It is dealing with state customs that can be a pain.

     

    for live plants you need to have a phytosanitory certificate.  some growers have these, some dont.  And most people are pretty clear about whether they do or dont.

     

    Seed is another matter.  I cannot say whether you are meant to have approval to send send to tas or not.  but most people get their seeds. I have had more problems getting things into australia.

     

    My advise is to find people more local to you.  there are some awesome collections in Tas.  start there.

     

    I am returning to Tas in a couple of weeks and have some specimens for sale.  PM me.

  9. Posted

    well I've organised dates in the past,  no one said yay or nay, and i spent a few hours reading some papers in the gardens.

     

    if people aren't going to respond i don't see the point especially when i have deadlines.

  10. Posted

    given 19th and 20th is next weekend and there hasnt been much expression of interest. and maybe the 27th is also on the horizon.

     

    im proposing the 2nd or 3rd of june.

     

    any interest.  too cold?

  15. Posted

    Really sorry i cannot make this special gathering.

     

    I had commitments come up with university that could not be avoided.  I have been blessed with a second chance at a research project and have an amazing opportunity to do some amazing work, and had multiple deadlines arrive just prior and after the weekend.

     

    My thoughts are with you all as you celebrate time together in memorial for Christian.

     

    Have fun and enjoy.

    • Like 1

  17. Posted · Edited by obtuse

    Botanika, i think you and i have discussed this idea before.  I am very open to to this idea and would love to investigate it further.  on one hand i suspect Psilocybe subaeruginosa may represent a very fast evolving species that has taken rapidly to Australian eucalyptus woodlands.

     

    or on the other, if it werent for Psilocybe azurescens, i would suspect it could be the case the other way.  maybe it did but P. azurescens represents a speciation event outside the time frame of at least colonial movment

     

    And then there is the very close genetic similarity between P.subaeruginosa and P. weraroa, and thats where things get a little confusing, as it has been suggested that P. subaeruginosa evolved from P. weraroa.  additionally P. subaeruginosa and P. cyanescens are damn near identical genetically.

     

    i think i have to review the literature again.

     

    do you have thoughts?

    • Like 1

  20. Posted

    On 3/16/2018 at 9:11 AM, spooge said:

    Im all for keeping the things we find here, here. Prob is though the whole Psilocybe mushroom thing here is so covert. Even transporting the sample or samples to a herbarium one would risk prosecution, prob can get an official letter etc, Pablo offers to upload the data for a fee to Genbank which I will prob do, once I have a definitive answer one way or the other on what the 2 samples are that are still in question.

     

    This season I will collect samples of the 2 odd subs and have them tested agian, I may go with a couple labs and get the full range of tests done so the data is there for everyone to analyse. Both these mushroom grow in quite isolated places, in pine coups, that were once bush.

     

    I have been thinking about this.

     

    I would think that if you had collected a few specimens, dried them out appropriated, and then written up a herbarium style label, with species name, approximate location and habitat details etc., such that the herbarium could then create its own label with sufficient data, you would have a sufficient case to claim its for academic purposes.

     

    You have already paid to have the specimens tested, it would be a shame that the data were not available to others.

     

    i think i have made the point before though that I really dont think we will have a sufficient answer till we are doing full genome sequences at a decent depth so that someone can do some proper bioinformatics on specimens.  untill then every bit helps so you are to be congratulated on your efforts.

    • Like 2

  21. Posted

    I have been meaning to make this comment for a little while.

     

    but i am very concerned with the idea that specimens are leaving the country and not being deposited with local herbariums.

     

    Its important that we support local opportunities for research, and while taxonomic work on Australian Psilocybe species is not likely to happen for a while, when someone from australia is ready to be able to it would be nice if there was a decent amount of samples ready to begin work.  I dont like the idea that overseas researchers are taking possible opportunities from local researchers.

     

    In terms of getting DNA testing or sequencing done I appreciate that we have to go overseas, all uni's do the same anyway,  but is important that the results are lodged with genbank so they become available then to researchers.

    • Like 2
×