Observation 129881: Psilocybe ovoideocystidiata Guzmán & Gaines

When: 2003-12-15

Collection location: Sausalito, California, USA [Click for map]

Who: A. Cortés-Pérez (Alonso)

No specimen available

Espécimen colectado por J. Edmonds y depositado en la Colección de Hongos XAL


esporas de 8-10(11) x 6-7
Pileipelis & Pileus trama
Pleurocystidium stained with Patent Blue V 0.1%

Proposed Names

9% (2)
Based on microscopic features

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
Mixing up different species
By: Peter G Werner (pgwerner)
2013-03-07 23:55:23 EST (-0500)

“The first sentence means that it’s hard to know what species the real Ps. subaeruginascens is because the type collection is only dust now, so only spores can be measured.”

No, actually, that describes the type of Psilocybe sepentrionalis, not Psilocybe subaeruginascens, albeit, the latter is in a poor state of preservation as well, which is why I’d be interested in seeing more details of the 2008 collection of P. septentrionalis from Hookaido.

Nonetheless, I think it is quite clear what the “real” P. subaeruginascens is – Horak and Desjardin published a solid description of it based upon the holotype and a later topotype, both from Bogor Botanical Gardens. It is entirely clear to me, anyway, that Japanese P. septentrionalis and North American P. ovoideocystidiata are both quite different from P. subaeruginascens. (Whether there’s a real species- or subspecies-level difference between Hookaido population and the rest of Japan like Guzman originally thought awaits further study.)It also seems clear to me based on the photos I’ve seen of Japanese P. septentrionalis that it’s related to, but nonetheless different from, P. ovoideocystidiata. A comparison of the cystidia between the two species makes that difference quite clear.

By: Peter G Werner (pgwerner)
2013-03-07 23:37:59 EST (-0500)

The location is “Sausalito, California, USA” and it’s already in Mushroom Observer:


By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-03-07 23:15:44 EST (-0500)

The first sentence means that it’s hard to know what species the real Ps. subaeruginascens is because the type collection is only dust now, so only spores can be measured. Google translate didn’t get much of that because my Spanish grammar was incorrect.

A neotype from a nearby location that has the same spores as the type collection should be designated.

Un neotipo desde una ubicación cerca de la colección tipo que tiene las esporas mismas la colección tipo debe ser designada.

By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2013-03-07 23:07:16 EST (-0500)

This what I got from google translate. “It’s hard to know what species of Psilocybe collection subaeruginascens type from the type collection is not pleurocystidos. Ovoideocystidiata spores be different subaeruginascens spores. I think Ps. subaeruginascens spore has a thicker wall.”

By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-03-07 19:14:16 EST (-0500)

If you want to follow this conversation you should use google translate. Alonso doesn’t speak much English. Spanish is a perfectly good language for mycology.

By: Erlon (Herbert Baker)
2013-03-07 18:17:02 EST (-0500)


By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-03-06 20:33:36 EST (-0500)

Es difícil saber qué especies de la colección tipo de Psilocybe subaeruginascens es desde la colección tipo no tiene pleurocystidos. Las esporas de ovoideocystidiata ser distinta de las esporas de subaeruginascens. Creo que Ps. subaeruginascens tiene una espora de pared mas gruesa.

si tengo
By: A. Cortés-Pérez (Alonso)
2013-03-06 19:08:24 EST (-0500)

después subiré más fotos de cystidia

Tiene fotos de las cystidias?
By: Alan Rockefeller (Alan Rockefeller)
2013-03-06 02:41:02 EST (-0500)

Created: 2013-03-05 21:04:43 EST (-0500)
Last modified: 2016-12-27 11:07:36 EST (-0500)
Viewed: 149 times, last viewed: 2018-01-28 13:31:23 EST (-0500)
Show Log