New Ergot Alkaloid Source?

[abc_n_123]

Concerning the Clitocybe (sub)illudens:  That was what I suspected that the author was trying to state a subspecies.  I think he should have just gone all the way and said something like C. illuden var. ergotocontinerous or something of the sorts.  Even though that name isn’t entirely suitable, but it is good enough.  But what if we find out that this is a subspecies of O. olearius? Then, we can add the var. ergotocontinerous! The hive’s contribution to mycology!  That would be cool.

Well, I haven't been interested in mycology for a while, but I do have a slip of paper saying at least four species of Inocybe contain psilocybin, I. aeruginascens, corydalina, haemata and tricolor, and references for Bels & Mack, Z. Myk. 51, p. 183 (1985) and Gartz & Drewitz, same journal, page 199. Since Inocybe are supposedly closely related to Clitocybe, it would seem logical if most members of this genus have also been tested

I think that this paper being so recent Clitocybe illudens would not have been tested, because it would have be known as it’s correct name Omphalotus olearius.  However, it wouldn’t hurt to check.  I still have the belief that this trait that was found in the patent will be specific for the U.S. east coast Jack or O. illudens (if it is truly a separate species).  Hopefully that is the case and it is not a subspecies specific to Gainesville, Fl.  Although, I do make trips through there sometimes and I might just go out there this coming fall.

Those of you wondering about how abundant this mushroom is, let me tell you:  in the southeast during the proper season, if you can go hiking in the woods and do not find it, you must me blind.  From my experience it is very abundant.

As far as getting the mushroom to fruit, it should not be very difficult.  I bet you could do it in an old mulch pile or even with your favorite way of fruiting Psilocybe species, maybe throwing some saw dust in with the mix for good measure.  It does not need a living host or anything of the sorts.  There isn’t really any breading that would be going on.  With mushrooms you kinda have to wait for random mutation to get anything specific.  It isn’t like growing a fruit tree and selective fertilizing that tree with another to get a better tree.

Bio?!  Are you saying that you ate a Jack-O-Lantern or a Big Laughing Gym?  If you ate a Jack I think you may have experienced more delirium than hallucination.

Whoever said “CHEMISTRY PROJECT!”, I could not agree with you more.  Any biochem majors out there that want an interesting project, here you go.  You could test the entire Omphalotus genus, who knows what interesting things you could.

Concerning mutation:  I wonder if those new u.v. light water purifiers, , would be enough to cause some mutations.  If you suspended some spores in h2o and stuck that u.v. water purifier in there, do you think anything significant would happen to the spores?!

[Bubbleplate]

shrooms!:

http://www.shaman-australis.com/~benjamin-thomas/Indole_in_Boletus_in_PNG.htm

[Rhodium]

Yes, you can start with Melatonin, by

hydrolyzing to 5-MeO-Tryptamine

(https://www.thevespiary.org/rhodium/Rhodium/chemistry/mexamine.html) which then can be

converted to 5-MeO-NMT

(http://www.erowid.org/library/books_online/tihkal/tihkal42.shtml) and then 

reacted with acetone to form 5-MeO-MIPT

(http://www.erowid.org/library/books_online/tihkal/tihkal40.shtml)

[bottleneck]

That's a good article Bubbleplate! Good, to hear Albert Hofmann still doing research, at least as of 2001!

Lloydia;1961;24;71-4;Tyler;Indole Derivatives in Certain North American Mushrooms

(http://www.geocities.com/botero56/Lloydia.1961.24.71-4.Tyler.pdf)

[abc_n_123]

Oh well, at least it was a good thought.  I knew it was to good to be true.  The only good the Jack is for is to look at it in the dark!  

[Bubbleplate]

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!

[sean1234]

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!

the decomposition of the ergot alkaloids...maybe true especially if they were heat dried. But I guess the question is would they be dumb enough to overlook that fact?

interesting topic though! certainly the mushroom is worth some tests however you feel about the likelyhood of containing precursors...we ARE scientists remember.

[Vibrating_Lights]

COuld someone contact KRZ and see if he can write a FAQ about doing one of these mutations.  If i remember correct he is very versed in that field.

[abc_n_123]

Thanks Bubbleplate, I really just scanned the article and did not read it closely   , and it said what I thought would be true.  But, indeed the age and the way they preserved the samples probably did affect(or effect I always get confused) the study.  I was still going to do a basic extraction and a simple test, more than likely a van Urk unless there are any other suggestions, but now my hopes have risen just a notch at there still may be some potential in ye' ole Jack.

[urushibara]

affect - to cause a change. effect - a result of an action