Jump to content
The Corroboree
PD.

North east Vic. dung lovers.

Recommended Posts

After the small sprinkling of rain we recieved recently i decided it was time to get pelinster in the car and search for the dung lovers. There wasnt many specimens around at all, in fact i think this is the worst season i have seen in more than ten years. I couldnt find the psilocybes fruiting from roo poo, the patch had only just received rain and the soil was still dry an inch or two underneath, so we headed off to another patch where i have found psilocybes in cow dung. We were blessed with one piece of dung fruiting actives. There were psilocybes fruiting everywhere out of dung but did not stain at all and i assume were not active.

Anyway i hope you enjoy the pics.

non active dung dwellers

post-1464-1151828982_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1151829736_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1151829928_thumb.jpg

wood\grass dwellers(active)

post-1464-1151830223_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1151830407_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1151830605_thumb.jpg

post-1464-1151830840_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1151831055_thumb.jpg

Active dung dwellers.

These are different to the last psilocybes i found in dung at the same location. The others were a very pale colour and different in shape and size. These are like nothing i have seen before.

post-1464-1151831324_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1151831542_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1151831788_thumb.jpg

post-1464-1151832063_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1151832265_thumb.jpg

I brought the dung home with me so hopefully it fruits a bit more, although i think it is a bit of a temp. difference in the locations.

Img_0186.jpg

Img_0184.jpg

Img_0183.jpg

Img_0182.jpg

Img_0180.jpg

Img_0179.jpg

Img_0177.jpg

Img_0176.jpg

Img_0190.jpg

Img_0191.jpg

Img_0192.jpg

Img_0193.jpg

Img_0194.jpg

Img_0186.jpg

Img_0184.jpg

Img_0183.jpg

Img_0182.jpg

Img_0180.jpg

Img_0179.jpg

Img_0177.jpg

Img_0176.jpg

Img_0190.jpg

Img_0191.jpg

Img_0192.jpg

Img_0193.jpg

Img_0194.jpg

Edited by Passive backseat demon engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thats great stuff nice pics yeah i wish we had more rain it is pretty damn dry around.

:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice mushrooms but I don't reckon they're active (or even Psilocybes.. but could be wrong).

And in future try resizing your photos before putting them on the internet, those are ridiculous sizes..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*edited*

Edited by Passive backseat demon engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who has a 19" screen running in 1600x1200, I find the picture size very suitable.

I can testify to the activity of those shrooms claimed to be so in Phlebs post. Actually, half the of the ones pictured are here on my desk in all their blueness. :)

Edited by Pelinster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ridiculous, pfft, thats the size they are and thats it, click and enlarge fool. If thats too hard for you dont bother replying at all.

Play nice now...I'm not sure alkatrope was referring to so much the image resolution as the image file size (bit of a bitch for the forum members who don't have broadband). No need to be rude about it either way.

Nice pics, could those active dunglovers be the C. subaeruginosa that bm wants his dirty little paws on? :P

p.s: your pedro is showing :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah man chill out I'm just referring to the massive file size, the photos could have been a 1/4 of that size and still more than recognisable. That was a real cuntish thing to say considering I'd only made a post containing a compliment.

Maybe you're having a bad day but that's no excuse for being an asshole to well-meaning peers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to paint an image of Phlebs state of mind: (sorry it takes too long to say that other longer nick name, (doh, now I could have saved time by just typing it and not explaining it :P)

Today I got a call from a very excited Phleb, mentioning that there was a good chance that with the recent rain, he might have his chance at finding the dung loving actives he had been certain he had seen in a local park during one of his many years of hunting and had now become aware there was an interest in here on the forums.

To cut a long story short we spent most of the day at one spot with little luck in finding any actives, let alone the one he was after. As a last ditch effort we travelled another 40k's to another spot to try our luck at at least getting some actives. To Phleb's joy not only did we find actives, but he found a group of what appeared to be p. sub growing out of a cow dung. Not quite the roo dung variety we had originally set out to find but an interesting specimen none the less.

Phleb then head directly home so he could get photo's of his find and post them on here for all to behold. He was pretty excited - as you would be.

Putting this into context I think you can kind of get a fair idea at his state of mind when he reads a reply to the thread criticising the claim that his find is indeed active (let alone Psilocybes!). Phleb is a bit of a local guru around this area and has been picking locally for at least 10 years so I can guarantee when he says they are active Psilocybes you have a fairly good indication that he has to the best of his ability determined that.

Anyway, I am not condoning him being an asshole about it, just thought I might add some dramatisation. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't criticising at all, just saying to me they didn't look like active psilocybes, and continued to say I could be wrong.

If he took that and turned it into an insult.. That's his problem 'cause it certainly wasn't intended that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
p.s: your pedro is showing :wink:

Haha - very well spotted man .

I agree that there is almost no doubt that they look like a sub of some description, or at least something active.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! Pretty awesome pics and great work mate.

The first photos do look like classic subs even though the species seems non-active. Ive only ever encountered Psilocybes like coprophilus, argentipes and merdaria growing in dung which are quite common in teh areas ive looked for dung lovers - mainly down the south of victoria and in northern to mid NSW.

The only person i know who has found Ps.tasmaniana found it in dung, looking like an umbrella-shaped sub but without any blue staining, so maybe that is what they are?

Now, as for the active Psilocybes im impressed with those for a few reasons. They are almost certainly active - there is a nearly blue abort present to the left in one photo.

I dont think they look like a subaeruginosa variant. The reason i say that is the areas that look like veil remnants, the weird blotching or flaking on the caps, the peely nature of the stem. There are a couple of areas on the stems that make me think they might be Ps.cubensis, but then again its the wrong time of year for them (although they are very hardy). I have no experience with the new dung-loving aussie Psilocybe alutacea - which stains moderately blue at the base of the stem and looks like Ps.semilanceata off kangeroo manure.

All in all i dont really know what they are and wouldnt be at all surprised if they are a new species. Or if they turn out to be a sub variant, since subs can be so diverse in appearance.

Are you a member of the shroomery? I think their would be a few people interested in those pics on teh shroomery.

What type of manure is that? Cow or kangeroo???

Mate im gonna need a gill fragment and a print i think to Id those- well actually i realy only need the gillfragment, but i want to get those babies on agar! ::)

Edited by bluemeanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i agree with you BM, i dont think they are p.sub. The mature cap colour is a little different, although the variations i have seen vary greatly, this is different again, and i have never seen that flaking before. I have seen the peeling stems on psilocybes before but form a different location.

And yeah, its cow shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

subs can vary immensly but I don't think that that is what they are. very intresting, definately look like Psilocybes and also look active. im not qualified to say anything else about them though. btw waiting for those massive size photos to load with dialup is worse than dying a thousand deaths!!

:uzi::slap::crux::BANGHEAD2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im on to getting an ID on these now.

In the first pci in teh background it looks like a classic sub - is taht growing on the shit or separate from the rest of the flaky-capped ones?

Edited by bluemeanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im on to getting an ID on these now.

In the first pci in teh background it looks like a classic sub - is taht growing on the shit or separate from the rest of the flaky-capped ones?

There are 4 different types on the shit, only the ones at the front with the blue\black flaking are the actives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no worries. good find.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the way home from a hunt i went to the area i find the dung lovers. I found two growing off wood that have the same features as the actives in dung at the start of the thread.

post-1464-1153310425_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1153310903_thumb.jpg

Img_0209.jpg

Img_0226.jpg

Img_0209.jpg

Img_0226.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These caught my eye from a distance and i thought i was onto something..................

not active.

post-1464-1153311256_thumb.jpgpost-1464-1153311441_thumb.jpg

Img_0219.jpg

Img_0220.jpg

Img_0219.jpg

Img_0220.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey did the dunglover have an annular ring around the stem or a different stem to the classic sub? Do you think they are very similar or a little different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they are fairly similar, apart from the peeling of the stem which i have encountered only a few times to that extent on psilocybes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The microscopic features are weird as:

There is a three-spored basidia as well as a standard four-spored one - this is unrecorded in any Australian Psilocybe of the subaeruginosa variants, but IS recorded in Ps.cubensis (2,3 or 4 spored basidia).

The Cheilocystidia (gill edge) range from lageniform with an abrupt/obtuse apex to ventricose rostrate with an elongated neck - The ventricose has an elongated neck 8u long, the lageniform version has a neck also around 8u long. This knocks out the description of Ps.australiana, Ps.eucalypta (same shapes, but wrong size), wrong shape and slightly too small for Ps.subaeruginosa as described and but INCLUDES Ps.Tasmaniana! More interestingly, again this includes Ps.cubensis which has slightly larger C.cystidia but has that obtuse/abrupt cystidia apex and sublageniform to fuscoid/mucronate ventricose shape.

The Pluerocystidia are BIZARRE. They are fat, stumpy or wobbly and have a large bulb or capitate apex that is pigmented chocolate brown. Their length is around 14u-25u. They are basically pyriform-ventricose to monoliform with a large capitate apex. That automatically excludes Ps.Australiana and Ps.eucalypta. Ps.subaeruginosa has pigmented cystidia of the same colour, but they are much larger and a very different shape (fuscoid ventricose) with elongated necks. Ps.tasmaniana does not have pigmented cystidia, the size is right, but the shape is wrong. Ps.cubensis has p.cystidia nearly pear-shaped (which fits), sometimes mucronate (which doesnt fit), 18-30 (not quite). I can not find any record of pigmented cystidia in Ps.cubensis either! I did find images that looked similar at: http://nic-nac-project.de/~tajkor/27.pdf

If we add the habitat - being dung - Ps.subaeruginosa, Ps.tasmaniana, Ps.eucalypta and Ps.cubensis are all found or have been reported in manure (although studies now indiciate that Ps.eucalypta and Ps.australiana and most probably Ps.subaeruginosa are all synonymous).

Now we look at the spore size and shape: size 9-12u with the odd small 7u. Shape is ellipsoid, brown. The size knocks out ps.australiana, Ps.subaeruginosa, includes Ps.eucalypta, Ps.subcubensis, and just Ps.tasmaniana - giving those three one more point each.

I guess if we work on that basis and give 1 point for every positive indicator and a half point for every half the characteristics indicate:

Ps.australiana gets 0 points

Ps.eucalypta gets 1 points (spore size and shape)

Ps.subaeruginosa gets 1/2 point (pigmented cystidia, but wrong size)

Ps.tasmaniana gets 2 point (c.cystidia were very similar, spore size the same)

Ps.cubensis gets 3 1/3 points (3-spored basidia, c.cystidia perfect, same p.cystidia, but no pigmentation, spore same shape and size)

The macroscopic view of this mushroom indicated that it was more like a Ps.subaeruginosa variant than Ps.cubensis. The microscopic characteristics nearly completely match Ps.cubensis (although the spores are small as in Ps.subcubensis rather than Ps.cubensis) - but for the pigmented cystidia which I was not able to find a record of.

I am going out on a limb and saying this mushroom has all the microscopic features of Ps.subcubensis - I need to find a reference for pigmented p.cystidia and I would like to examine the mushrooms that looked similar that were found near the location growing on wood to see if these conform more with this microscopic description or is more like subaeruginosa.

The second possibility is that this mushroom is a weird variant of Ps.tasmaniana with pigmented cystidia. If this were the case it would be the first recorded finding in Victoria. It does not have forked cystidia, making this less likely.

I will examine the mushroom more when i get my new scope and see if i can find other cystidia shapes.

Thanks Inksi for all your help with the cystidia and microphotographs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would like to examine the mushrooms that looked similar that were found near the location growing on wood to see if these conform more with this microscopic description or is more like subaeruginosa.

Sorry BM, but that little fella got mixed in with a whole pile of other dried mushies :( . Looks like it might have to wait till next season. It is only a very small area where i found them, adjacent to a very well known patch. The main patch is pine but i prefer the small native patch nearby that more often than not gets overlooked by the masses.

Thanks Inksi for all your help with the cystidia and microphotographs.

Yes, and thank you BM.

:shroomer::shroomer::shroomer:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mate if you could get me a sample from near there that would be good enough - just to compare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

apologies for kind of going off topic guys, but I found this mushroom growing off either wombat or kangaroo dung (pretty sure it was weathered wombat) along the Yarra river NE melb, around Warrandyte area around 4th August.

There was a single fruiting specimen, with one or two pins buried deep in the substrate.

I was in some awkward spots without any good collection gear so I couldn't get the specimen home...I tried to at least keep the cap but lost it on one of my frequent trips to the ground trying to get through some hilly dense vegetation.

Anyway I couldn't get a print and the photos I took to document the whole specimen turned out pathetic so only a few vague ones are shown.

From memory the cap was very smooth and kind of slimey, from macroscopic looks it reminded me of Stropharia or Psilocybe (but my knowledge is limited) The cap was quite fleshy and the gills were sitting flush with the horizontal plane of the cap. Gill colour was greyish/brownish/purplish.

The stem showed no sign of blueing before and after manipulation(about 20 minutes), no spores were visible on the stem (although some photos look like a purple deposit on the stem, from memory that was just a break in the stem and not spores but i'm starting to question that from the photos)

It's very vague information but I thought it might be worth posting in case anyone recognises it.

I will be visiting the location again soon, though will mainly focus on the area next winter.

(edit: Photos more than likely Stropharia semiglobata)

gallery_239_4_18053.jpg

gallery_239_4_33627.jpg

gallery_239_4_46376.jpg

Edited by gerbil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

looks the same as the mushies in the first pic, in the first post.

They were also a little slimey with the dark spore deposits on the stem, grey to black/purple gills and no bruising was observed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×