Observation 152847: Psilocybe tampanensis Guzmán & Pollock
When: 2013-05-24
Who: mycomattie
No herbarium specimen

Species Lists

Images

386070
951822910-pic2.jpg
386066
341648850-IMG098.jpg
386067
341649034-IMG097.jpg
386068
943354518-IMG037.jpg
386069
951822719-pic3.jpg
386071
951823099-pic.jpg
386072
978674623-IMG_2469.jpg
386175
IMG_2467.JPG
386176
IMG_2466.JPG
386177
IMG_2467.JPG
386178
IMG_2466.JPG

Proposed Names

42% (2)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight
Based on microscopic features
28% (1)
Recognized by sight

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

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Ps. tampanensis
By: mycomattie
2013-11-18 18:32:52 CET (+0100)

Yes, they were.

well…
By: Richard and Danielle Kneal (bloodworm)
2013-11-18 18:24:46 CET (+0100)

there should be micro, imo.
these were cultivated, correct…??

Ps. tampanensis
By: mycomattie
2013-11-18 18:01:03 CET (+0100)

These photos were taken in May, so unfortunately, I have only the pictures I took at the time.

Regarding sclerotia – there’s sclerotia, but it’s subterranean; so it’s not visible in the photo.

sclerotia also must be present
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2013-11-18 05:13:00 CET (+0100)

of which I see none here…

Microscopy and additional photos should be asked of you.
By: lightworkerpeace (gsharpnolack)
2013-11-18 04:56:08 CET (+0100)

Very few people are likely to fully believe this is Psilocybe tampanensis, in my opinion. Can you please perform microscopy on the spores and cheilocystidia (i.e. measurements of ten of each cell)?

If possible, can you also try to get crisp shots showing the bluing if any was observed?

Created: 2013-11-18 03:24:41 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2013-11-18 18:22:44 CET (+0100)
Viewed: 160 times, last viewed: 2016-11-22 04:01:37 CET (+0100)
Show Log