unknown Psilocybe species in VIC and TAS

[Shroom-Aura]

I do not know if you guys seen this (if ur as obsessed with mushrooms as i am u probably would have) but i have know about if for some time.

this linkshows a list of fungi found at Mt. Buffalo during a foray in 1997. It says Psilocybe (on dung), Psilocybe (in grass) looks like the species was not identified. I am guessing that at least one of these species probably was subaeruginosa the one on grass might be semilanceata.

this other link is a tasmanian conservation park of some sort. it states the psilocybes that were found in this area are:

Psilocybe brunneoalbescens Y.S. Chang ined.

Psilocybe sp GATES 'dark brown, pellucid, in moss’

Psilocybe sp GATES 'on dung’

Psilocybe subaeruginosa Cleland

this is the only time i have heard of Psilocybe brunneoalbescens and it appears to only be found in tasmania. the one in dung may be tasmananiana. anyway tassie hunters should get out there and maybe try to photograph some of these elusive unknown psilocybes. one of them may possibly be a new PA shroom

EDIT - oops wrong forum. some1 move this to mycology?

[ 21. July 2005, 04:32: Message edited by: Trich-Aura ]

[spiders]

Id wager that in the first case the species were most likely subaeruginosa and or semilanceata - i know a guy who has made lengthy hunts on mount buffalo and these are the only species found.

As for the second link, there are a few possibilities:

Firstly that it an inactive species (no date is provided under the species with Chang's name next to it - if it was pre-1993 then had it been active it would have been mentioned in Chand and Mills study of aussie active psilocybes.

There are a number of inative psilocybe species in australia that havent been correctly identified or studied in depth. An example is the finding of Psilocybe argentina - a species that is inactive but most likely not present in australia.

It could also be that they had compared theire finds to cleland' description which isnt entirely accurate and thus exluded the most common representation of ps.subaeruginosa - australiana with lageniform hyaline cystidia. If this as the case they may have incorrectly identified subaeruginosa as a seperate species in teh same way Guzman did.

At the end of teh day, without seeing the specimens its hard to say.

[Shroom-Aura]

yeah i didnt think it would be a new PA species, i remember seeing a nonbluing psilocybe from vic or nsw on google. has anyone tried lookin for liberties? I wonder why victorians aren't looking for these.

edit - this is the non active psilocybe

[ 29. July 2005, 12:16: Message edited by: Trich-Aura ]

[Jack]

At ethnogenesis there was mention of a new un identified psilocybe found by Bruce fuhrer in the Grampians

[ 29. July 2005, 12:17: Message edited by: Jack ]

[spiders]

New psilocybe species in the Grampians would almost certainly mean a new type of wood substrate.

For there to be a new species it would have to fruiting off a type of wood that is not readily suitable for subaeruginosa - New Zealand is the prime example of this - Ps.Makarorae fruits only off native beech, Aucklandii of other native woods, although it fruits off pine mulch as well.

Fruiting at different altitudes to subaeruginosa is also possible.

I have heard that there was an unknown psilocybe in the Dargo plains national park and another in the Warby Range National park - the later we had examined and it was a sub variant.

Its possible, but unless i see the evidence i wouldnt believe it.

If someone told me that it fruitsed off native beech in tasmania or down on the otways i would be much more accepting.