Are these Panaeolus cyanescens?

[iluvpills]

Hi everyone,

I went mushroom hunting on the weekend after we received what was a phenominal amount of rain up here on the Gold Coast.

This was my first time out seeking the elusive Cubensis, unfortunately after much searching i didn't find any but i did find what i think is Panaeolus cyanescens? I was under the impression that these grew in cooler climates? Remeber i have no idea of what i am talking about so excuse my conclusions if they are wrong.

There appeared to be three species but i could not be certain, only one of these showed signs of bluing. The others were lovely tall and vigorous specimens but no bluing at all, does anyone know what these are?

I took a print from the ones that have the bluing and it was black, the stems that had been crushed also showed signs of bluing.

I found them out behind Burleigh in South East Queensland.

I also went up to Purling Brook Falls in Springbrook National Park, it's an awsome place and if you have not been there i would highly recommend it.

I took a few pictures and would like to know if these are Oyster Mushrooms, they were growing near the bottom of the waterfall on a log in very damp conditions. The entire log was covered in them, about 3 metres in length.

[Shroom-Aura]

The second photo looks like picked Panaeolus cyanescens, the third photo looks like Panaeolus subbalteatus and the fourth photo look all like Panaeolus cyanescens, cant see any antillarium. Of course wait for some Panaeolus hunters to properly id your finds I havent seen any active Panaeoli myself

[spiders]

agreed - the ones that stained blue are cyans - the other one in teh third photo looks more like in active pan.

[iluvpills]

agreed - the ones that stained blue are cyans - the other one in teh third photo looks more like in active pan.

Hi Bluemeanie - i cut this text from another reply you gave

'Panaeolus cyanescens - since there are 12 distinct forms with different sized spores, cystidia, basidia, macroscopic characteristics and now that Teonan has re-assigned those mushrooms that were being sold by vendors as Pan. cambo. and Pan. Tropic. as also being synonymous variants of Panaeolus cyanescens.

The major problem with the panaeolus/copelandia chain is that the characteristics used to lechotype each of the delineated psychoactives have been poorly described and are by no means as consistant as you might find the Psilocybe, Gymnopilus, Galerina, Hypholoma, etc.

Since most of the characteristics described for mushrooms like Panaeolus Cambo as an example have never been found completely since the original type specimen, its all a bit confusing.'

I know the mushrooms in pictures 1 & 2 showed distinct signs of bluing so i am now considering them as 'Panaeolus cyanescens'.

Picture 3 - if you count the number of shrooms in this picture, it matched the number lined out in Picture 2, don't forget to count the one at the back. So i think you are correct and because i was just picking randomly and putting them all together in the one container, i would say these are the same. I have only been able to sort them when i have returned home because of the bluing appearing and now assume they are the ones in Pictures 1 & 2?

Now the mushrooms in Picture 4 were the majority of what was in the field, shit loads of the little buggers. They were very healthy but showed absolutley no signs of bluing what so ever. So could these be another form of Panaeolus cyanescens but one that does not show bluing and therefore if it does not show bluing does this mean that it is deffinately NOT active. Say a person was to eat some of these non bluing shrooms, not that i would ever consider doing that of course, hypothetically, is there any chance that they could be active even if they do NOT show signs of bluing.

So many questions...........................

[spiders]

I dont remember writing that - interesting...

Uhm - any of the variants of panaeolus cyanescens would like almost identical to the naked eye - the large differences were more structural and microscopic. All of the variants would stain blue - if there is no blue staining it would be far more likely that it wasnt a pan cyan than a weird phenotype that wasnt active for some reason,

Blue staining is representative of all pans that are active.

munch them

I meant to say that the third mushrooms are inactive

Hi Bluemeanie - i cut this text from another reply you gave

'Panaeolus cyanescens - since there are 12 distinct forms with different sized spores, cystidia, basidia, macroscopic characteristics and now that Teonan has re-assigned those mushrooms that were being sold by vendors as Pan. cambo. and Pan. Tropic. as also being synonymous variants of Panaeolus cyanescens.

The major problem with the panaeolus/copelandia chain is that the characteristics used to lechotype each of the delineated psychoactives have been poorly described and are by no means as consistant as you might find the Psilocybe, Gymnopilus, Galerina, Hypholoma, etc.

Since most of the characteristics described for mushrooms like Panaeolus Cambo as an example have never been found completely since the original type specimen, its all a bit confusing.'

I know the mushrooms in pictures 1 & 2 showed distinct signs of bluing so i am now considering them as 'Panaeolus cyanescens'.

Picture 3 - if you count the number of shrooms in this picture, it matched the number lined out in Picture 2, don't forget to count the one at the back. So i think you are correct and because i was just picking randomly and putting them all together in the one container, i would say these are the same. I have only been able to sort them when i have returned home because of the bluing appearing and now assume they are the ones in Pictures 1 & 2?

Now the mushrooms in Picture 4 were the majority of what was in the field, shit loads of the little buggers. They were very healthy but showed absolutley no signs of bluing what so ever. So could these be another form of Panaeolus cyanescens but one that does not show bluing and therefore if it does not show bluing does this mean that it is deffinately NOT active. Say a person was to eat some of these non bluing shrooms, not that i would ever consider doing that of course, hypothetically, is there any chance that they could be active even if they do NOT show signs of bluing.

So many questions...........................