Holy Woodlovers!

[Monk]

Very cosmopolitan,

I'm azure

Quite the evolutionary,

That's for sure

Is there any doubt,

Just what I'm about?

Riding on a lignin ship,

organophosphates and egos my prey,

to the far southwestern tip,

Eight hundred miles south of where they say

That I stop.

But I don't.

Are you sure,

I'm P. azure?

Who know's for sure?

Awefully far south

and pretty immature

But strongly blueing

Ya think we're azures?

Edited December 19, 2007 by FM.

[Amulte]

they accually remind me alot of subs but... that doesnt make sense to me due to time of year....

[Monk]

I didn't think they grew in n. america. But after looking at some sub pics on the forum, I'd sat they do resemble them very closely. Do they exist in n. america? The habitat was on wood chips (imported from pacific northwest or colorado) amongst grasses/shrubs.

[Ace]

Yep, very azure-like. A little short tho - I have only seen longer specimens, but they could just be immature (which you pointed out in your cool poem). If they have intense bluing (and I mean intense, dark, indigo bluing), then I'd say you're on the money. Were they wild specimens, or home grown? I know they have been found all along the west coast of N. America (mostly towards Canada), as well as a little on the east coast (way up north). 800 miles south from their general location seems a little way off - were they found in California? That's like finding subs in Brisbane or cubies in Canberra - something pretty unheard of and probably not likely. But you never know - perhaps this is a heat tolerant variety? Perhaps Cali is having an unusually cold and hospitable winter?

I'd definately take prints and even try getting some agar cultures going (if legal). If this is a mutant azure strain that is suited to warmer weather, then it'd be EXTEMELY valuable to myconauts across the globe. After all, being the most potent of the lot, it is already in high demand and in need of further study. Please be sure to do your best to have some studies performed on these lil fellas. If possible maybe take it to a local university or something where it can be studied by a pro to determine ID?

I'd also take as many notes on these as you can (esp if you are printing/culturing them). I.E. colour, size, shape (keep pics), smell, gill/print colour/formation, growth habits, locations found, etc, etc. If these are the real deal you could find youself one popular lil bloke!

Depending on bluing intensity you should be able to determine between subs/azures. Subs will still blue strongly, but no where near as intensely as azures. Subs should be found in N. America - I'm sure someone would have started some via a print from overseas at some point. But if they were found on chips from the pacific n/west, then i'd say they are azures which have fluked a flush. Still, I'd be keeping a very close eye on them and keeping them well watered thruout the year to see if they come back next winter.

Edited December 20, 2007 by Ace

[apothecary]

that's like finding subs in Brisbane or cubies in Canberra - something pretty unheard of and probably not likely.

Definitely not unheard of in either case?

I really really doubt they're subs!

They look like Psilocybe cyanescens to me?

http://www.shroomery.org/images/23488/3036...th_Galerina.jpg

[Monk]

Yep, very azure-like. A little short tho - I have only seen longer specimens, but they could just be immature (which you pointed out in your cool poem). If they have intense bluing (and I mean intense, dark, indigo bluing), then I'd say you're on the money. Were they wild specimens, or home grown? I know they have been found all along the west coast of N. America (mostly towards Canada), as well as a little on the east coast (way up north). 800 miles south from their general location seems a little way off - were they found in California? That's like finding subs in Brisbane or cubies in Canberra - something pretty unheard of and probably not likely. But you never know - perhaps this is a heat tolerant variety? Perhaps Cali is having an unusually cold and hospitable winter?

I'd definately take prints and even try getting some agar cultures going (if legal). If this is a mutant azure strain that is suited to warmer weather, then it'd be EXTEMELY valuable to myconauts across the globe. After all, being the most potent of the lot, it is already in high demand and in need of further study. Please be sure to do your best to have some studies performed on these lil fellas. If possible maybe take it to a local university or something where it can be studied by a pro to determine ID?

I'd also take as many notes on these as you can (esp if you are printing/culturing them). I.E. colour, size, shape (keep pics), smell, gill/print colour/formation, growth habits, locations found, etc, etc. If these are the real deal you could find youself one popular lil bloke!

Depending on bluing intensity you should be able to determine between subs/azures. Subs will still blue strongly, but no where near as intensely as azures. Subs should be found in N. America - I'm sure someone would have started some via a print from overseas at some point. But if they were found on chips from the pacific n/west, then i'd say they are azures which have fluked a flush. Still, I'd be keeping a very close eye on them and keeping them well watered thruout the year to see if they come back next winter.

Great minds think alike Think 'almost mexico.'

Apo, you could be right, but no fruits made it to maturity to see if they got wavy. A several day rain was followed by sun and low humidity so these fruits made it as far as they likely would. The researcher tried, but no spores (!?) dropped. Too young? All is not lost........

temps: night - low 40s (F). day - low 60s. Suitable for said species for sure and common insitu for december. All is not lost.....

EDIT: Oh, apo, the link didn't work for me

Edited December 20, 2007 by FM.

[Ace]

Definitely not unheard of in either case

Do you mean wild ones? I know they can be successfully cultivated, but not likely to be found wild.

I too dont think they'd be subs. But I dont think cyans either. Cyans have very wavy caps and would have started to show their waves by now (even while reasonably young) - wouldnt they? Galerinas definately come to mind, but intense bluing is a sign of something unlike galerinas. They have slightly galerina-looking gills IMO - not quite that of subs, but not sure if they are the same as azures (dont think I've ever taken notice of their gills). but again, the bluing throws me off...

BTW - apo's linked pic doesnt work because you need to be a member/logged into the shroomery. Any chance you could describe what you linked apo?

Bummer about the lack of spores - possibly too young, but also could be non-reproductive due to climate/location - pointing again to azures. Perhaps they were just non-spore-producing caps, it has been known to happen very regularly. Almost in mexico?? Damn, that is very weird for azures... It certainly is a hairy one this! I guess the only option is to eat them and see if you survive the night or if you trip your balls off *joking!!* Definately do NOT consume without correct ID and positive that they are safe/non toxic

[apothecary]

The most likely reason that spores did not show up on print is that the spores usually cling to the gills until the humidity drops and then they fly away en masse.

Here's the photo again

Clearly they don't have to be showing their waves at such a young age?

Yes Ace, I am referring to wild ones. You can find cubensis in cow paddocks very far south, just the window and distribution is much smaller. Again, subaeruginosa has been spotted well north, but altitude is a very important factor the further north you go.

I'm not saying it isn't azurescens, but don't discount the other possible Psilocybes, and also keep in mind that (AFAIK) the southmost Pacific sighting of azurescens was in Arcata, CA.

[apothecary]

On closer inspection you can see some possible waviness forming on the rightmost specimens in the photo such as the bottom right and top right specimens?

[Monk]

Nice pic! I guess the other wood loving psilos shouldn't be counted out! Only one reached the size of the larger ones in that pic, but it was 75% eaten by a slug - gills and all

(AFAIK) the southmost Pacific sighting of azurescens was in Arcata, CA.

That's what I heard too...hence the 800 miles south comment Craziness either way. Goodness either way.

edit: Oh, and definately not Galerinas. Very blue staining! I know some toxic boletes stain blue, but are there any truely poisonous blue staining LBMs?

Edited December 20, 2007 by FM.

[apothecary]

I mean, I guess it's possible they're azurescens. Dunno about mutant though, more likely it's spreading, wouldn't be the first species to rapidly change it's habitat due to climate change.

[Ace]

Really is hard to make the call without a few mature specimens. I'd keep a close eye on the patch over the next few days/weeks and hope to find some mature shrooms. Perhaps make some slug pubs (open jar containing beer buried at rim depth near patch to attract/drown slugs/snails) to keep the shrooms clean and whole.

So just a list of active woodlovers which these lil fellas might possibly be:

Ps. azurescens

Ps. cyanescens

Ps. subaeruginosa

Any others that you can think of? I havent read my 'Psilocybin mushrooms of the world' by Stamets in ages, but it'd probably be the best place to look for a positive ID. There are many lesser known types that grow on wood and stain blue, but odds are it'd be one of the more commonly known ones.

At this point, I'd put my $ on Azures

Dunno about mutant though, more likely it's spreading, wouldn't be the first species to rapidly change it's habitat due to climate change.

Yeah, not likely to be mutated or anything (wishful thinking), but most likely just spread from contamed/spawned wood chips. See how things work out - if they survive ok for a couple years, it just shows how resilient the fungi are to changing temps. I'd say fungi would easily out-live the human race if there was an ice age or world-wide natural disaster or something... There's something so completely bizarre about them that gives them an 'alien' feeling... Such cool organisms, that's for sure!

Edited December 20, 2007 by Ace

[Hyphal]

Definitely not unheard of in either case?

I really really doubt they're subs!

They look like Psilocybe cyanescens to me?

Agreed, I also don't rule out the idea of azures totally, but I highly doubt it. And even less likely to be Subs.

They're probably either Cyans or possibly THIS SPECIES which has been popping up around that area.

[Monk]

I understand what an annulus is, but what exactly is meant by 'persistent.' How much is considered 'persistent'? If you zoom in on the upper right hand corner of the original pic, look at the two fruits that are laying perpendicular to the camera view - especially the one with a chunk taken out of the cap. Is that enough to be considered 'persistent.' They all had this a bit. Hyphalknot's link made me think of this as cyanescens and azurescens are supposed to lack an annulus, no? That rare species has one though. In Mycelium Running, on page 286, there is a pic and caption about a new/newly imported species to the san fransisco area. From the pic, it sounds like this subaeruginsescens that you're refering to, Hyphalknot. Do you know if that's the case? A tangent, for sure, but anyway, I would love to know the answer to my query about the 'persistent annulus' terminology.

[gerbil]

Gill attachment can be very helpful, azurescens with dominant sinuate to adnate. The sinuate attachment can be very useful in it's differentiation imo.

Interesting specimens, from the woodchip location it sounds very feasible for azures and cyans and the other complex mix...

They do look pretty short and fat as mentioned which confuses it imo, the dominant edges though look azure. like which includes the undulating looking one which can happen.

Persistent means it stays there for the life of the mushroom.

[Monk]

Persistent means it stays there for the life of the mushroom.

Thanks gerbil. So unless anyone knows if azures/cyans still have a bit of an annulus at the immature stage like this, I guess this feature doesn't say much (in this case.) Anyone?

Gill attachment can be very helpful, azurescens with dominant sinuate to adnate. The sinuate attachment can be very useful in it's differentiation imo.

So cyans are more sinuate? This could be quite helpful, indeed...

Dunno about mutant though, more likely it's spreading, wouldn't be the first species to rapidly change it's habitat due to climate change.

I'd like to address this idea. The temps I listed are not at all unusual for the climate/location/time of year. As I see it, then, these species should never have had any problem with these factors. The limiting factor, then, would be the lack of continuous days of rainy weather. The wet season is short, cool and sunny with typical rainy days lasting only about 24 hours (or less) broken up by several days of dry weather. What do these species normally need as far as consecutive rainy/hazy days in order to fruit? A week, two weeks, I really dunno? Please post it if you are someone who does know. The area they were found in received a very heavy rain for about 24 hrs. followed by a week of very dry, cool weather. One week later, there was about 3-4 days of intermittently rainy/overcast weather. This was all in the temp range listed previously. Fruits followed this second period. Those seem like insufficient fruiting conditions for the typical strains of the species discussed (azures/cyans.) Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm far from a fungus expert. Perhaps the evolutionary plasticity of these fungi, combined with accidental human intervention, has caused them to surge (way) ahead into a new climate. (Please note that I am in no way denying the existence of climate change, but merely stating that the conditions at this particular time and place are not extraordinary by any means.) I would love to hear the thoughts of those who know fungi better than myself.

[shruman]

Thanks for the link Hyphal good to see there are still more out there to find, woodies just got a lot more complicated.

[Workman]

Hi all, my first post here.

The mushrooms pictured are almost certainly the California form of Psilocybe subaeruginascens. I have examined three collections of these from the Bay Area. They are often mistaken for a ringed P. azurescens which it is not closely related.

http://www.sporeworksgallery.com/Stuntzae/...CA_specimen_001

The mushroom mentioned in Stamets' "Mycelium Running" is actually this other unrelated species and appears to be undescribed. Often called the "Cyclone Psilocybe" due to a swirling effect of the mycelium on agar in a petri dish but this effect is rarely seen (I haven't seen it and Stamets admits it isn't always present).

http://www.sporeworksgallery.com/Section-C...anofib_complete

Both are likely recent introductions with the Cyclone becoming very common and in many cases displacing its close relative, Psilocybe cyanescens.

My microscopy gallery is sorted into Sections to show how the species are thought to be related. I hope the links are not considered spam as that is not the intent.

[Monk]

Hi workman! Nice to see you here. Thanks for bringing in your knowledge and expertise to assist in this matter! I can assure you that your links will not be considered spam. Folks around here love great sources of information and good references. It's one of the things that made me decide to become a member though I'm geographically much closer to folks/forums From your posts/work elsewhere, you appear quite knowledgeable about these creatures. Would you mind addressing the following issue?

QUOTE

Dunno about mutant though, more likely it's spreading, wouldn't be the first species to rapidly change it's habitat due to climate change.

I'd like to address this idea. The temps I listed are not at all unusual for the climate/location/time of year. As I see it, then, these species should never have had any problem with these factors. The limiting factor, then, would be the lack of continuous days of rainy weather. The wet season is short, cool and sunny with typical rainy days lasting only about 24 hours (or less) broken up by several days of dry weather. What do these species normally need as far as consecutive rainy/hazy days in order to fruit? A week, two weeks, I really dunno? Please post it if you are someone who does know. The area they were found in received a very heavy rain for about 24 hrs. followed by a week of very dry, cool weather. One week later, there was about 3-4 days of intermittently rainy/overcast weather. This was all in the temp range listed previously. Fruits followed this second period. Those seem like insufficient fruiting conditions for the typical strains of the species discussed (azures/cyans.) Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm far from a fungus expert. Perhaps the evolutionary plasticity of these fungi, combined with accidental human intervention, has caused them to surge (way) ahead into a new climate. (Please note that I am in no way denying the existence of climate change, but merely stating that the conditions at this particular time and place are not extraordinary by any means.) I would love to hear the thoughts of those who know fungi better than myself.

Either way, it's great news, but I'm very curious about the dynamics that might be going on here. I'm particularly curious about the typical conditions necessary for P. subaeruginascens to fruit vs. what has been going on in socal. Thank you for any insight you can provide

Oh, and what species are the subaeruginascens most closely related to?

[Mycot]

Welcome to the corroboree Workman. Much of interest in Australia mycologically speaking.

Ha, the gallery is far from spam, being a highly valued resource of the mycological community.

[apothecary]

Welcome workman! We need a new resident mushroom geek since bluemeanie went away!

Your rep definitely precedes you.

[Workman]

Hi workman! Nice to see you here. Thanks for bringing in your knowledge and expertise to assist in this matter! I can assure you that your links will not be considered spam. Folks around here love great sources of information and good references. It's one of the things that made me decide to become a member though I'm geographically much closer to folks/forums From your posts/work elsewhere, you appear quite knowledgeable about these creatures. Would you mind addressing the following issue?

Either way, it's great news, but I'm very curious about the dynamics that might be going on here. I'm particularly curious about the typical conditions necessary for P. subaeruginascens to fruit vs. what has been going on in socal. Thank you for any insight you can provide

Oh, and what species are the subaeruginascens most closely related to?

Thanks for the warm welcome. There isn't much information on Psilocybe subaeruginascens other than it is a temperate to subtropical species normally found in southern Japan. It was probably accidently introduced by travelers from these areas, but there is no way to know for sure. At any rate it seems to like the southern California climate and appears to be spreading.

It is closely related to P. ovoideocystidiata which is a recently described species from the Eastern USA that is apparently becoming very common and is also related to P. stuntzii (which I haven't worked up a sample yet for the gallery).

I can offer identification services for species of bluing psilocybe and panaeolus if provided with a few dried gills in a letter envelope, a clear photo and a brief description of the location and habitat. I have a bit of a backlog right now but I get around to all samples eventually. It is suprising what can be gleaned with a microscopic examination. I was stunned when I first looked at the Psilocybe subaeruginascens samples under the microscope expecting to see another species in the Cyanescens section. I am really getting fried trying to figure out recent Mexican collections in the Zapotecorum section. There are probably many undescribed species in this section. I put together a document in my journal at the Shroomery to help me get a handle on the 20 described species in the Zapotecorum if anyone is interested.

What happened to blue meanie? He sent me some samples quite awhile ago before I had a proper microscope with camera. I still need to work those up for him.

[Monk]

Thank you for the offer and the info, workman! Subtropical, huh? Well, it would certainly be at home in the location it was found. Out of curiosity, are they said to be in the same potency range as the previously mentioned woodlovers?

[Workman]

Thank you for the offer and the info, workman! Subtropical, huh? Well, it would certainly be at home in the location it was found. Out of curiosity, are they said to be in the same potency range as the previously mentioned woodlovers?

I don't have any direct information on potency but I've been told that the potency is high, for whatever that is worth.

[Monk]

To your knowledge, have this species been found it southern cali prior to this instance?