Ps.Subaeruginosa growing on Brugmansia

[spiders]

I managed to find a rather small subaeruginosa specimen growing below a large brugmansia plant growinf directly off brugmansia cuttings and pine mulch.

Is that a worry in terms of edibility?

[whiterasta]

Damn good question. I know ya'll have many species which grow on eucalyptus which here in the states many edibles which grow on Euc are mildly toxic and should be avoided. A brugmansia... I believe I would be very careful with dosage in case they take up or transform any of the tropane alkaaloids. But since ya'll find subs in euc and they do not become toxic I wonder about their metabolism of eucalyptus substrate. I believe I would err to caution with them growing on a Brug although they are quite probably fine.

My own experience has been eating Turkey tails from a euc stand in soup and getting the squirts from both ends. If the subs took up any tropanes it could either be great fun or toxic nightmare.

Let us know if you sample them (but be fucking careful ) and let us know if the tropane rich substraate affected the alkaloids in the subs.

Again PLEASE be careful BM

Yours,

WR

[alkatrope]

Wooooo 4-hydroxylated tropanes! :D

Actually I have no idea whether a Psilocybe would 4-hydroxylate a tropane, or whether 4-hydroxy scopolamine or 4-hydroxy atropine are even active.

Times like these you wish you could do GC/MS in the back shed

Let us know how it goes if you decide to eat it. Do be careful

[Rev]

Damn good question. I know ya'll have many species which grow on eucalyptus which here in the states many edibles which grow on Euc are mildly toxic and should be avoided. A brugmansia... I believe I would be very careful with dosage in case they take up or transform any of the tropane alkaaloids. But since ya'll find subs in euc and they do not become toxic I wonder about their metabolism of eucalyptus substrate. I believe I would err to caution with them growing on a Brug although they are quite probably fine.

My own experience has been eating Turkey tails from a euc stand in soup and getting the squirts from both ends. If the subs took up any tropanes it could either be great fun or toxic nightmare.

Let us know if you sample them (but be fucking careful ) and let us know if the tropane rich substraate affected the alkaloids in the subs.

Again PLEASE be careful BM

Yours,

WR

Que?

the main ource of the euc 'issue' was anecdotes by david arora, published in 1993 by stamets and rescinded in 2000( and whatever) by stamets

eucs are great for (some) fungus. The brazilians ahave been growing shiitake on them for years

not discountin your experience but rather placing the opposit eburden of proff on it. Eucs are in factmor eoften safe than possibly unsafe

id say 60% of the foreign shrooms ive tested are ok with Euc, 1/3 those actully thrive on it

other species lie like melaleuca, leptospermum and even cinnamomum (camphor laurel) are also safe. Fungi hook in and in a few weeks - no smell - except that of fungus

ive eaten repeatedly and with no ill effects

its still twice as many that go well on pine

aussies avoid shrooms because we dont know them

the english are mycophobes and we came to a strange continent

by the 20th century we had foreign pines ad ther fungi , and as the 'wogs' were discovering our untapped horticulatural reources (veggies, olives, grapes figs , prickly pear) and maritime resources (Sardines, squid, octopus, and other molluscs)

they were also out in the plantations picking shooms

what a fuckd country wed live in if it wasnt 4 the wogs

and may they continue to grace our shores...

(and yeah in spite of my colour im not a 'wog' so no partial bias here)

long live the wogs, gooks, dagoes, nips,lebos, japs,dings, yugos, choggies, 'ghans, krauts, etc.....may they all find all they wish for in this new country and

bless them and all their good food they have brought to this culinary arse end of the world

Edited May 10, 2006 by Rev

[apothecary]

Wooooo 4-hydroxylated tropanes! :D

Actually I have no idea whether a Psilocybe would 4-hydroxylate a tropane, or whether 4-hydroxy scopolamine or 4-hydroxy atropine are even active.

Times like these you wish you could do GC/MS in the back shed

Let us know how it goes if you decide to eat it. Do be careful

Psilocybe mycelium is known to indiscriminately 4-hydroxylate tryptamines...

I imagine most tropane analogues are just as active.

I'd imagine them to be safe bm, but like everyone else said, excersise caution while ingesting.

[alkatrope]

Psilocybe mycelium is known to indiscriminately 4-hydroxylate tryptamines...

I imagine most tropane analogues are just as active.

I'd imagine them to be safe bm, but like everyone else said, excersise caution while ingesting.

Yes I'm quite aware of that, but it was a pleasant thought

Does anyone actually have any information on any testing of this process in mushrooms?

The only info I've been able to find on it is in extensions and commentary in Tihkal.

I find it quite interesting, would love to read more on it.

[spiders]

Im gonna test drive tonight - ill let you guys know how it goes...

[prier]

So would growing cubes on or around say phalaris or arundo, would that boost the alkaloid content at all?

[apothecary]

Not nescessarily boost, but it will most likely modify the profile. It also may leave you with some shrooms that have a nasty kick to them.

[occidentalis]

This would require either that alkaloids are leaching from the phalaris or arundo into the soil or that the subs are growing on the dead tissue of the plants, and that that tissue contains alkaloids. Pretty unlikely, particularly in the case of arundo which doesnt really seem to be active.

[spiders]

well no lasting effects or non-psilocybin-based effects but these were EASILY the most potent subs ive ever tried - i had two small specimens and they was enough to move me into the lower echlon of a distant place...

Edited May 16, 2006 by bluemeanie

[Gunter]

I hear that tryptamine rich subs (like some phalaris) can yeild stronger than average fungi.

[whiterasta]

well no lasting effects or non-psilocybin-based effects but these were EASILY the most potent subs ive ever tried - i had two small specimens and they was enough to move me into the lower echlon of a distant place...

Really makes one wonder at the substrate and the possible effect it had on potency. The mulch surounding the Brug had to be loaded with alkaloids and the decomposition products of it, then there is whatever chemistry the micro-ecology had on those and however their properties were altered by digestion of the tropanes. Now throw in the ability to 4-oh a wide variety of open chemicals.... who knows how they could have been potentiated but by your description they seem to have been either an exceptional strain or they took on potency from the substrate. What is your opinion BM? strong strain or a bit of organic hanky panky with the potency level from the substrate?

As an aside I have noticed small variations in Ps. cyanescens in the PNW with specimens from fresh N fixing Alder chips producing "better" fruits than leached piles or maple wood, it being a far richer substrate. The high alkaloids will at least raise the nitrogen level of the mulch and provide a richer substrate for the fungi.

Cool find BM I'd lke to hear what ya think bout my hair brained theories

yours,

WR

[Dirty Old Man]

Maybe one could make a straw substrate out of dried phalaris and fruit off it? That would work wouldn't it?

[naja naja]

I too have been playing with the idea that the reason W.A. subs may be considered less potent is because of the particular Eucalypt species that they r growing off.

Are vic subs still as potent when found growing off of pine?

[PD.]

I too have been playing with the idea that the reason W.A. subs may be considered less potent is because of the particular Eucalypt species that they r growing off.

Are vic subs still as potent when found growing off of pine?

In the areas i hunt in N.E. vic there are pine and native forest. Over the years i have found that the potency varies a little from patch to patch, but native and pine seem to make little difference.

I do however prefer the ones that dwell with the natives.

[AndyAmine.]

How about subs growing from an active Acacia substrate? Like was mentioned in another thread, Im sure there would be subs growing from Phleb up on the mountain at various times, or more practicly one could start a bed with Obtusifolia or something?

Will subs even grow on Acacia?

[occidentalis]

I too have been playing with the idea that the reason W.A. subs may be considered less potent is because of the particular Eucalypt species that they r growing off.

Are vic subs still as potent when found growing off of pine?

The WA population seems to have very low genetic diversity

It is highly limited in terms of substrate, is much less aggressive in culture and is less potent than many eastern states specimens. It's been suggested by some here that subs are not native to WA, but were introduced with the pines and are showing a distinct founder effect.

I'd love to do some molecular work to test this theory....

[PD.]

Will subs even grow on Acacia?

I found a heap of subs under an A. melanoxylon recently, the ground was covered in phyllodes and not much else.

As for the subs on phleb, I have found them in the vicinity of phlebs but not underneath growing off any part of the acacia

Edited May 18, 2006 by phleb

[naja naja]

I have sum 1 that could do a full DNA workup on them, if anybody is interested and could interperate this info.

[MORG]

I have sum 1 that could do a full DNA workup on them, if anybody is interested and could interperate this info.

Are you serious???

It's expensive work.

If you can get good population genetic data I'd love to do analysis and interpretation. I have experience in this area. Also, there'd be a peer-reviewed paper in it for sure.

Edited May 19, 2006 by MORG

[naja naja]

Are you serious???

It's expensive work.

If you can get good population genetic data I'd love to do analysis and interpretation. I have experience in this area. Also, there'd be a peer-reviewed paper in it for sure.

I'll talk more to them about it and find out if it will cost anything or weather he can just slip it in with a batch of his work. He could use spores rite? So he's be staying within the law!

[MORG]

I'll talk more to them about it and find out if it will cost anything or weather he can just slip it in with a batch of his work. He could use spores rite? So he's be staying within the law!

Yeah, you could use spores although I would think using bits of the fruiting body would be alot easier. I suppose if you were just using them for research you could get away with owning bits of the mushroom as well, although I don't know about the law in this regard and whether or not permits would be required.

If your friend is already working with fungi then potentially it wouldn't be too expensive for him.

This thread has gone WAY off

Edited May 19, 2006 by MORG

[spiders]

Pluteus on the Shroomery was working on a full profile of the whole Ps.cyanescens family - including subaeruginosa - but he disappeared a while back and I havenmt spoken to him in a while.

Im thinking that maybe the substrate did effect the potency - because they seemed quite potent for subs - I only ate two specimens so it is hard to be certain and Id like to see more off this patch to be sure.