The Lloydia article sited is dated May 1961.
One of the mushroom specimens tested was collected on December 2, 1957 ( 3 1/2 years old!) and the the other sepcimen, collected by Murril sometime between 1953 and 1961 ( possibly 8 years old!)
The specimens were herbarium "voucher deposits"; i.e. DRIED.
I would venture to say that if one took Psilocybin mushrooms, dried them out and stored them for 3 to 8 years and then tested them for Psilocybin, you'd find NONE! Ergotamine and similar alkaloids are even less stable to light and heat!
So it's little wonder that they "did not find any Ergot Alkaloids"!
When Gordon Wasson et. al. first "discovered" Psilocybin mushrooms in Mexico and sent specimens to labs in France and Switzerland, the active components (Psilocybin & Psilocin) could not be isolated. Only later when shrooms were grown in the lab from spores, did Albert Hoffman have enough fresh material to successfully isolate the magic alkaloids.
So I think the Lloydia article is an example of the same thing. I may be wrong, but why would some scientists pursue a U.S. Patent (2640007) for the production of ergotamine from Omphalotus olearius if the fungus didn't produce Ergotamine??
I think one has to read between the lines of the Patent, in particular the following part:
"It is obvious to those skilled in the art that well-known methods of producing mutations, such as ultra-violet light or the addition of certain chemicals MAY BE EXPECTED TO INFLUENECE THE TYPE AND QUANTITY OF THESE ALKALOIDS..."
I suspect that the initial Omphalotus subilludens did indeed have Ergotamine production, and Foote and Lauter developed a mutant strain that made much more. The same technique was used by Tonolo et. al to develop the FIRST strain of Claviceps paspali that actually produced Ergotamine in fermentation ( See US Patent 3038840 )In their patent they also describe mutation:
"It has been found that the strains of Claviceps paspali, which do NOT produce lysergic acid derivatives by submerged culture, MAY BE VIRULENTED (mutated) ARTIFICIALLY TO GIVE NEW STRAINS....which in turn allow for said production."
Further on in that Patent it says:
"the present invention is not limited to the use of the described strains, but comprise also the mutants thereof, which may be obtained by by means of a mutation by the action of U.V. rays or Roentgen rays (x-rays), or any other mutagenous substance.."
Sound familiar?
Me, I'm going to test some Omphalotus olearius for ergot alkaloids!