From egrunden@prairienet.org Fri Feb  9 23:40:42 EST 1996
Article: 3377 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!rutgers!oitnews.harvard.edu!purdue!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!prairienet.org!egrunden
From: egrunden@prairienet.org (Eric Grunden)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Ban the fungi imperfecti.......
Date: 4 Feb 1996 05:39:06 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <4f1gpq$gdq@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>
Reply-To: egrunden@prairienet.org (Eric Grunden)
NNTP-Posting-Host: firefly.prairienet.org


Does anyone else feel that the existence of the so-called
Deuteromycetes is unscientific and many times redundant?
After all, these fungi all have (or have had) sexual states
and so should be placed where they properly belong to best
demonstrate their phylogenetic relationship to other fungi.
I'm at a loss to understand what their placement in a grab-bag
class teaches us, other than their sexual states are rarely
observed. Big Deal! If the caterpillar state of a certain
butterfly is rarely observed, we don't place the butterfly
in a different classification. Help me out here, I'm not
trying to start a flame-war with the deutero-people, just
trying to understand why such an unscientific classification
continues to persist. Can't we just run an analysis on their
ribosomal DNA and place them where they belong?
-- 
			*******************
The Spirit of Nature, a powerful force,
	belongs and returns to its creative source.
- Excerpted from The Collective Works of Johnny Pokerface -


From crusberg@wpi.edu Fri Feb  9 23:40:43 EST 1996
Article: 3378 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.ultranet.com!bigboote.WPI.EDU!reno.WPI.EDU!crusberg
From: "Theodore C. Crusberg" <crusberg@wpi.edu>
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology,bionet.microbiology,bionet.general
Subject: Graduate Fellowships
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 09:42:19 -0500
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960203104436.14731A-100000-100000@reno.WPI.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: reno.wpi.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
To: BCEPP@relay.adp.wisc.edu, BIOTECH@UMDD.UMD.EDU
Xref: bigblue.oit.unc.edu bionet.mycology:3378 bionet.microbiology:4675 bionet.general:18615

Please advise your students interested in the Ph.D. degree in 
BIOTECHNOLOGY or BIOTECHNOLOGY/INTERDISCIPLINARY or BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES 
of the following fellowships:

Worcester Polytechnic Institute (Worcester MA) has been awarded 8 3-year 
fellowships by the U.S. Department of Education in an "Area of National 
Need" (GAANN).  Each fellowship carries a stipend of $14,400 + tuition + 
$1,000 for travel and other research-related expenses.  Applicants must 
be US citizens or perm. residents, have a record of academic excellence 
and be committeed to a career in teaching and research.  Preference will 
be given to students who have completed a MS or MA degree and to talented 
women and minority students.  Please contact Dr. Joseph Bagshaw at 
508-831-5930 or bagshaw@wpi.edu for more information and application 
materials.




From c264299@mizzou1.missouri.edu Fri Feb  9 23:40:44 EST 1996
Article: 3379 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!ukma!news.missouri.edu!MU.missouri.edu!c264299
From: c264299@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Janet Horton Kelly)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: FAQ???
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 00:53:05 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <c264299.57.31140371@mizzou1.missouri.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizzou-ts10-03.missouri.edu
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

I'm collecting health related FAQs for my research in health communication. If 
you have a regularly published FAQ regarding an issue addressed in this news 
group, I would appreciate receiving a copy of it. Thank you for your 
assistance.
Janet

PS. Note to mycologists: I am interested in only those FAQs that may pertain 
to human health issues. Thanks!


From dgeiser@mendel.berkeley.edu Fri Feb  9 23:40:46 EST 1996
Article: 3380 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!rutgers!uwm.edu!msunews!agate!kosh-321-1.berkeley.edu!dgeiser
From: David Geiser <dgeiser@mendel.berkeley.edu>
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: Ban the fungi imperfecti.......
Date: 5 Feb 1996 06:18:44 GMT
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 88
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4f47g4$41b@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <4f1gpq$gdq@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kosh-321-1.berkeley.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Nuntius 2.0.4_68K
X-XXMessage-ID: <AD3AE13F52025832@kosh-321-1.berkeley.edu>
X-XXDate: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 22:18:39 GMT

In article <4f1gpq$gdq@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> Eric Grunden,
egrunden@prairienet.org writes:

>Does anyone else feel that the existence of the so-called
>Deuteromycetes is unscientific and many times redundant?

Yes.  In fact,  I think that even most supporters of the
Deuteromycetes would agree,  to some extent.

>After all, these fungi all have (or have had) sexual states
>and so should be placed where they properly belong to best
>demonstrate their phylogenetic relationship to other fungi.

This is exactly the problem.  First of all, the sole purpose of 
taxonomy isn't to demonstrate phylogenetic placement of taxa;  some 
would argue that this is not the purpose at all.  The purpose of 
taxonomy is to provide a framework for understanding biology and 
identification,  and phylogenetic placement may not be the most
useful way of doing that.  I am a big supporter of taxonomic schemes
that reflect phylogeny,  but there is more to it than just making
the trees and circumscribing taxonomic groups on that basis.

>I'm at a loss to understand what their placement in a grab-bag
>class teaches us, other than their sexual states are rarely
>observed.  Big Deal! If the caterpillar state of a certain
>butterfly is rarely observed, we don't place the butterfly
>in a different classification.

You have to realize that taxonomy has been going on for centuries 
and there is an important historical component to it.  The current
system has been in place for a very long time.  Placing all 
of the  deuteromycetes in other genera would be a mess,  as it would 
make the 100+ years of literature using the old names obsolete. If you 
were to change everything today,  all of the pre-1996 literature 
would use one set of names,  all future literature another.  Wouldn't 
THAT be confusing?

Plus,  people don't like to change the names they use,  and for
good reason.  Non-taxonomists don't like it when someone comes
along and changes the name of the research organism they've been
working on for thirty years.

Now,  there are provisions for transferring the deuteromycetes
into other groups,  and there always have been.  Personally,  I'd
love to see the deuteromycetes integrated based on phylogentic
information.  But there are some major sticking points to doing
it.  You will find many of the pros and cons described here:

The Fungal Holomorph:  Mitotic, Meiotic and Pleomorphic Speciation
in Fungal Systematics.  1993  D.R. Reynolds and J.W. Taylor,  eds.
CAB International,  Wallingford, UK.

 Help me out here, I'm not
>trying to start a flame-war with the deutero-people, just
>trying to understand why such an unscientific classification
>continues to persist.

Think of taxonomy as a language.  Even with the deuteromycetes,
it's more logical than,  say,  English.

Can't we just run an analysis on their
>ribosomal DNA and place them where they belong?

Is rDNA going to tell you the phylogenetic truth?  Which isolates
are you going to run?  How many per species?  Who's going to pay
for it?  Are you going to run parsimony on every species all at once? 
Wait, you can't:  you'd better choose taxa.  Which taxa are you 
going to choose?  What if the ITS gives you one answer and the
mitochondrial small subunit gives you another?  These are not 
unassailable barriers by any means,  but it's not as simple as
running an rDNA analysis and getting a clean answer.

Besides,  what are you going to do about the keys?  What if some
kind of "artificial" classification system is easier to use for
identification than a phylogenetically-based system?  Is the
phylogenetic system better?

I'm not saying you're wrong;  in fact,  I don't like the
deuteromycetes and would like to see them integrated.  But it
would be a major task to do so.  In my opinion,  we have more
important things to do first,  such as going out and finding the
~95% of the fungi we don't even know about, and understanding the
nature of fungal species and populations.  How can we create
ANY scientific taxonomic system based on only ~5% of the species,
and when we don't even know what a species IS?


Dave Geiser


From poei@telebyte.nl Fri Feb  9 23:40:47 EST 1996
Article: 3381 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!sun4nl!Utrecht.NL.net!rubens.telebyte.nl!news
From: "Peter Oei (ECO Consult)" <poei@telebyte.nl>
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: fruiting medium for Dictyophora
Date: 5 Feb 1996 20:08:34 GMT
Organization: ECO
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <4f5o42$c81@rubens.telebyte.nl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nm-0-14.telebyte.nl
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)

Who has performed any cultivation experiments with Dictyophora indusiata, 
the Veiled lady? I obtained a good strain from China and deposited at 
two culture collections (it can be ordered from the CBS, the Netherlands, 
or MUCL, Belgium) 

The fruiting substrate in China consists of various bamboo wastes, like 
leaves, twigs, and even logs. These are very hard to obtain in the 
Netherlands. Can they be replaced by agricultural wastes which are 
present in Europe, like mulch, straw, sawdust?


Peter Oei



From ZUBP40A@prodigy.com Fri Feb  9 23:40:48 EST 1996
Article: 3382 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!prodigy.com!usenet
From: ZUBP40A@prodigy.com (David Pinero)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: A test; please ignore
Date: 6 Feb 1996 04:00:06 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY
Lines: 2
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4f6jo6$2u48@useneta1.news.prodigy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: inugap5.news.prodigy.com
X-Newsreader: Version 1.2

I'm investigating a technical problem. Please ignore this note.



From ZUBP40A@prodigy.com Fri Feb  9 23:40:50 EST 1996
Article: 3383 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsjunkie.ans.net!prodigy.com!usenet
From: ZUBP40A@prodigy.com (David Pinero)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: aba: fungi imperfecti
Date: 6 Feb 1996 04:05:14 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY
Lines: 26
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4f6k1q$2924@useneta1.news.prodigy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: inugap5.news.prodigy.com
X-Newsreader: Version 1.2

SUBJECT: Re: Ban the fungi imperfecti....... 
David Geiser <dgeiser@mendel.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>In article <4f1gpq$gdq@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> Eric Grunden,
>egrunden@prairienet.org writes:
>
>>Does anyone else feel that the existence of the so-called
>>Deuteromycetes is unscientific and many times redundant?
>
>>After all, these fungi all have (or have had) sexual states
>>and so should be placed where they properly belong to best
>>demonstrate their phylogenetic relationship to other fungi.
>


I partly agree with this statement. With your same arguments, I learned 
it is correct to use the "sexual name" instead of the imperfect one. For 
example, we refer to Aspergillus Chevalieri as Eurotium Chevalieri; 
Monilia (Chrysonilia) sp. as Neurospora sp., and so forth. But many of 
the fungi imperfecti do not have a known Telomorph. Take Aspergillus 
Niger, or Penicillum Chrysogenum for example; two well known species with 
no known sexual stage. If all fungi imperfecti had easily recognised 
sexual stages, why deal with this confusing classification? Since this is 
not the case, we just have to live with it. 




From chris@xs4all.nl Fri Feb  9 23:40:51 EST 1996
Article: 3384 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!sun4nl!xs4all!chris
From: chris@xs4all.nl (Chris)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: tuber melanosporum odour analyzed??
Date: 6 Feb 1996 02:29:59 GMT
Organization: XS4ALL, networking for the masses
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <4f6ef7$jqm@news.xs4all.nl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xs1.xs4all.nl
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #666 (NOV)

Does anyone know of any attempts of analyzing chemically the typical 
flavours of T. melanosporum? Or even synthesizing the "truffle essence" ?

Any literature refs (or info available on the net) are more than welcome.

Chris Poirot


From kklein@vax1.mankato.msus.edu Fri Feb  9 23:40:52 EST 1996
Article: 3385 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!urvile.msus.edu!nitrogen.mankato.msus.edu!usenet
From: kklein@vax1.mankato.msus.edu (Keith Klein)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: mushroom newsletter
Date: 6 Feb 1996 17:48:11 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <4f848r$sth@nitrogen.mankato.msus.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 134.29.9.220
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

Hello.
Does anyone out there know the address/phone of the Mushroom Growers
Newsletter out of Idaho? The address in the back of Paul Stamets' book
appears to be defunct.
Thanks in advance.
Keith Klein


From AshleyB@halcyon.com Fri Feb  9 23:40:52 EST 1996
Article: 3386 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!nwnews.wa.com!news.halcyon.com!blv-pm3-ip15.halcyon.com!user
From: AshleyB@halcyon.com (Ashley Branchfeather)
Newsgroups: alt.config,rec.drugs.psychedelic,bionet.mycology,rec.food.cooking,alt.drugs,alt.drugs.psychedelic
Subject: PROPOSAL: alt.mushrooms
Followup-To: alt.config
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 11:23:27 -0800
Organization: The Cascadian Maypole Society
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <AshleyB-0602961123270001@blv-pm3-ip15.halcyon.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: blv-pm3-ip15.halcyon.com
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.1.7
Xref: bigblue.oit.unc.edu alt.config:97288 rec.drugs.psychedelic:9324 bionet.mycology:3386 rec.food.cooking:216264 alt.drugs:154661

Originaly suggested by The Magic Mushroom Man, alt.mushrooms will be an
unmoderated newsgroup for discussion of everything related to mushrooms of
all kinds: hunting, growing, cooking, eating, studying, whatever.

Follow-up comments to alt.config, please.

If there is no reason not to, I will create this group on Saturday.

-- 
Ashley Branchfeather


From jhayter.niab.hr@GTNET.GOV.UK Fri Feb  9 23:40:54 EST 1996
Article: 3387 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!biosci!GTNET.GOV.UK!jhayter.niab.hr
From: jhayter.niab.hr@GTNET.GOV.UK (Jeremy Hayter)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: Ban the fungi imperfecti.......
Date: 5 Feb 1996 06:35:01 -0800
Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Molecular Biology
Lines: 53
Sender: daemon@net.bio.net
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <9602051430.AB15332@ginas.gtnet.gov.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net.bio.net

>Does anyone else feel that the existence of the so-called
>Deuteromycetes is unscientific and many times redundant?
I should think that most of us do, at least occasionally!

>After all, these fungi all have (or have had) sexual states
>and so should be placed where they properly belong to best
>demonstrate their phylogenetic relationship to other fungi.
>I'm at a loss to understand what their placement in a grab-bag
>class teaches us, other than their sexual states are rarely
>observed.
The taxonomic rules say that both perfect and imperfect states may be
treated as species but that the perfect binomial name may be used for either
the perfect or imperfect stage.  The name of the perfect form also takes
precedence.  In theory therefore, it is not that the sexual stages are
rarely observed, but rather that either i) sexual stages do not exist, ii)
sexual stages have never been observed or iii) sexual stages have been
found, but they have not yet been linked with the asexual stages of the same
fungus.

>Big Deal! If the caterpillar state of a certain
>butterfly is rarely observed, we don't place the butterfly
>in a different classification. 
But we might if there was a butterfly that did not have any caterpillars, or
even one that did not have to have caterpillars.

>Help me out here, I'm not
>trying to start a flame-war with the deutero-people, just
>trying to understand why such an unscientific classification
>continues to persist. Can't we just run an analysis on their
>ribosomal DNA and place them where they belong?
This would be OK if the results were unambiguous.  It would certainly be
interesting, but would probably just give us another reference framework in
addition to the taxonomic one.  If we were subsequently able to associate a
perfect stage with an asexual one we would end up having to rename/move the
fungus again.  Eventually we should be able to determine the relationships
between these fungi and "perfect" forms, but I suspect that this will be a
long process whatever methods we use, particularly as more
strains/isolates/species are likely to be discovered whilst we are still
struggling with those that we already know about!

Best wishes
Jeremy


(Dr) Jeremy (Hayter)
Department of Statistics and Information Technology,
National Institute of Agricultural Botany,
Huntingdon Road,
Cambridge
CB3 0LE
tel (01223) 342227 (direct)
fax (01223) 277602



From d.holdom@ctpm.uq.edu.au Fri Feb  9 23:40:55 EST 1996
Article: 3388 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!quarters!d.holdom
From: d.holdom@ctpm.uq.edu.au (David Holdom)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: Ban the fungi imperfecti.......
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 11:56:15
Organization: Centre for Tropical Pest Management
Lines: 89
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <d.holdom.63.000BF05E@ctpm.uq.edu.au>
References: <4f1gpq$gdq@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <4f47g4$41b@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: quarters.ctpm.uq.oz.au
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

In article <4f47g4$41b@agate.berkeley.edu> David Geiser <dgeiser@mendel.berkeley.edu> writes:
>From: David Geiser <dgeiser@mendel.berkeley.edu>
>Subject: Re: Ban the fungi imperfecti.......
>Date: 5 Feb 1996 06:18:44 GMT

>In article <4f1gpq$gdq@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> Eric Grunden,
>egrunden@prairienet.org writes:

>>Does anyone else feel that the existence of the so-called
>>Deuteromycetes is unscientific and many times redundant?

>>After all, these fungi all have (or have had) sexual states
>>and so should be placed where they properly belong to best
>>demonstrate their phylogenetic relationship to other fungi.


>>I'm at a loss to understand what their placement in a grab-bag
>>class teaches us, other than their sexual states are rarely
>>observed.  Big Deal! If the caterpillar state of a certain
>>butterfly is rarely observed, we don't place the butterfly
>>in a different classification.

You can rear the caterpiller to the adult stage.  The same developmental 
sequence does not always occur for fungi.  For example, as far as I am aware, 
the sexual stage of the insect pathogen _Metarhizium anisopliae_ has never 
been observed in the lab or field, despite thousands of infected 
insects collected. and thousands of cultures obtained and studied over a 
hundred years or more.  It would be vey nice to place the Deutermycetes where 
they all belong, but right now we simply do not know that for many species,  
and so cannot do this in a consistent way. 

>Now,  there are provisions for transferring the deuteromycetes
>into other groups,  and there always have been.  Personally,  I'd
>love to see the deuteromycetes integrated based on phylogentic
>information.  But there are some major sticking points to doing
>it.  You will find many of the pros and cons described here:

>The Fungal Holomorph:  Mitotic, Meiotic and Pleomorphic Speciation
>in Fungal Systematics.  1993  D.R. Reynolds and J.W. Taylor,  eds.
>CAB International,  Wallingford, UK.

> Help me out here, I'm not
>>trying to start a flame-war with the deutero-people, just
>>trying to understand why such an unscientific classification
>>continues to persist.

>Think of taxonomy as a language.  Even with the deuteromycetes,
>it's more logical than,  say,  English.

>Can't we just run an analysis on their
>>ribosomal DNA and place them where they belong?

 IMO DNA technology is a powerful and vauluable tool, but it still has a way 
to go before we can interpret results reliably.  The variation in 
_Metarhizium_ for example is astonishing.  It is more than a matter of "just" 
running their ribosomal DNA.  There are some huge complexes to be worked out.  
maybe in 20 years, resources permitting.......................


>Is rDNA going to tell you the phylogenetic truth?  Which isolates
>are you going to run?  How many per species?  Who's going to pay
>for it?  Are you going to run parsimony on every species all at once? 
>Wait, you can't:  you'd better choose taxa.  Which taxa are you 
>going to choose?  What if the ITS gives you one answer and the
>mitochondrial small subunit gives you another?  These are not 
>unassailable barriers by any means,  but it's not as simple as
>running an rDNA analysis and getting a clean answer.

exactly

>Besides,  what are you going to do about the keys?  What if some
>kind of "artificial" classification system is easier to use for
>identification than a phylogenetically-based system?  Is the
>phylogenetic system better?

>I'm not saying you're wrong;  in fact,  I don't like the
>deuteromycetes and would like to see them integrated.  But it
>would be a major task to do so.  In my opinion,  we have more
>important things to do first,  such as going out and finding the
>~95% of the fungi we don't even know about, and understanding the
>nature of fungal species and populations.  How can we create
>ANY scientific taxonomic system based on only ~5% of the species,
>and when we don't even know what a species IS?

I agree

>Dave Geiser

Dave Holdom


From dlwheels@crl.com Fri Feb  9 23:40:55 EST 1996
Article: 3389 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!crl13.crl.com!not-for-mail
From: dlwheels@crl.com (Don Wheeler)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: How to preserve specimens?
Date: 5 Feb 1996 09:27:03 -0800
Organization: home
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <4f5el7$dc9@crl13.crl.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: crl13.crl.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Anybody have any thoughts on how I can permanently preserve specimens I 
have found in the field? I've considered casting resin--but that could 
get costly. Is there a way I could dry out the mushrooms without ruining 
their general shape and color?


From todell@u.washington.edu Fri Feb  9 23:40:56 EST 1996
Article: 3390 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!gt-news!cc.gatech.edu!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.u.washington.edu!homer17.u.washington.edu!todell
From: Thomas O'Dell <todell@u.washington.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.config,rec.drugs.psychedelic,bionet.mycology,rec.food.cooking,alt.drugs,alt.drugs.psychedelic
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: alt.mushrooms
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 09:03:10 -0800
Organization: University of Washington
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.91j.960207090150.122004B-100000@homer17.u.washington.edu>
References: <AshleyB-0602961123270001@blv-pm3-ip15.halcyon.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: homer17.u.washington.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
NNTP-Posting-User: todell
In-Reply-To: <AshleyB-0602961123270001@blv-pm3-ip15.halcyon.com>
Xref: bigblue.oit.unc.edu alt.config:97330 rec.drugs.psychedelic:9385 bionet.mycology:3390 rec.food.cooking:216507 alt.drugs:154753


What will this accompish that bionet.mycology doesnt?
its not like this group is oveewhelmed with traffic or anything :)

On Tue, 6 Feb 1996, Ashley Branchfeather wrote:

> Originaly suggested by The Magic Mushroom Man, alt.mushrooms will be an
> unmoderated newsgroup for discussion of everything related to mushrooms of
> all kinds: hunting, growing, cooking, eating, studying, whatever.
> 
> Follow-up comments to alt.config, please.
> 
> If there is no reason not to, I will create this group on Saturday.
> 
> -- 
> Ashley Branchfeather
> 
> 

todell@u.washington.edu
Mycology is better than Urology!



From rwinder@PFC.Forestry.CA Fri Feb  9 23:40:57 EST 1996
Article: 3391 of bionet.mycology
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!gt-news!cc.gatech.edu!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.nwnet.net!news.pfc.forestry.ca!PFC.Forestry.CA!RWINDER
From: rwinder@PFC.Forestry.CA (Richard Winder)
Subject: Re: Re[2]: aba: fungi imperfecti
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: pfc.pfc.forestry.ca
Message-ID: <DMF0Bq.KCy@yew.pfc.forestry.ca>
Sender: news@yew.pfc.forestry.ca (Usenet News)
Reply-To: rwinder@PFC.Forestry.CA
Organization: Forestry Canada (Pacific Forestry Centre)
References: <117e89b0@fri.cri.nz>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 16:55:02 GMT
Lines: 26

In article <117e89b0@fri.cri.nz>, RIDLEYG@fri.cri.nz writes:

[snip]

>surly that is what the deut's are. You make an isolation and obtain an asexual 
>state but can not find a sexual form, it appears to be a new species so you go 
>to the deut's for a name, a tag, a handle, what ever you want to call it, its a 
>means of filing information in a retrievable system.

It goes even beyond this.  In my line of work, I isolate weed pathogens.  I am
constantly working with deuteros, because the imperfect (asexual) spore forms
tend to dominate during the warmer part of the year when I am interested in
using the fungi for weed control.  Although this is not a hard-and-fast thing,
many sexual type spores in the ascomycetes tend to form during colder weather
or other special conditions.  It is very convenient (and reasonable) to have
the deuteros grouped together for ID purposes, because of their similar 
biology, ecological niche, etc.  Even if the DNA people were to outlaw this
group after establishing all of the "true" taxonomic affinities, I doubt if 
you can make it go away- it reflects natural order.  Sure its artificial- but 
who cares, as long as it gets the job done, and the established perfect 
connections can be found in a list?  Just my 2 cents.   -RSW


  RICHARD WINDER                    Title: Research Scientist
  Canadian Forest Service           Phone: (604) 363-0773
  Victoria, B.C.                    Internet: RWINDER@A1.PFC.Forestry.CA


From Peter.Kulmburg@AUG.UKL.UNI-FREIBURG.DE Fri Feb  9 23:40:58 EST 1996
Article: 3392 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!biosci!AUG.UKL.UNI-FREIBURG.DE!Peter.Kulmburg
From: Peter.Kulmburg@AUG.UKL.UNI-FREIBURG.DE (kulmburg@aug.ukl.uni-freiburg.de)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: glyoxylate enzymes   inhibitors known?
Date: 5 Feb 1996 23:04:30 -0800
Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Molecular Biology
Lines: 27
Sender: daemon@net.bio.net
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <v02140b02ad3cadf754db@[193.196.230.229]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net.bio.net

Dear collegues,

I do not adhere to your list, however, Iwould like to get some infos.
Please reply to my private address and not to the list. Thank you in
advance.

Yeast and other funghi are known to be able to grow on acetate as a sole
carbon source due to the enzymes from the glyoxylate cycle. We now are
working with an Aspergillus strain that does not really die on acetate but
does not really grow either. It seems to be leaky as growth on ethanol is.

We are thus looking for chemical agents that allow us a more stringent
selection on enzymes of the glyoxylate cycle. Are there substances around
(other than acetate) that allow glyoxylate-positive cells to survive
because they can detoxify the agent by metabolization and, the opposite,
are there substances known killing only cells that do have the glyoxylate
cycle.

I have been asked by my students today and could not answer. Can anybody
help me? I am especially interested in the biosynthesis of methionine.

Thank you very much for your help          Peter Kulmburg

Peter KULMBURG        at home  Tel./Fax:+49 761 80 84 39
at work:    Tel.: +49 761 270/7207 or 7208        Fax: /7217




From poei@telebyte.nl Fri Feb  9 23:40:59 EST 1996
Article: 3393 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-server.ncren.net!taco.cc.ncsu.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!sun4nl!Utrecht.NL.net!rubens.telebyte.nl!news
From: "Peter Oei (ECO Consult)" <poei@telebyte.nl>
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: How to preserve specimens?
Date: 5 Feb 1996 20:04:18 GMT
Organization: ECO
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <4f5ns2$c81@rubens.telebyte.nl>
References: <4f5el7$dc9@crl13.crl.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nm-0-14.telebyte.nl
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: dlwheels@crl.com

dlwheels@crl.com (Don Wheeler) wrote:
>Anybody have any thoughts on how I can permanently preserve specimens I 
>have found in the field? I've considered casting resin--but that could 
>get costly. Is there a way I could dry out the mushrooms without ruining 
>their general shape and color?


Freeze drying is one way to presevre mushrooms in their original shape 
and even colour (if they are kept in the dark) in a dry place. They do 
become very brittle. however.

Peter Oei



From 1stchoice@infoback.com Fri Feb  9 23:41:00 EST 1996
Article: 3394 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.rio.com!p05.t0.rio.com!user
From: 1stchoice@infoback.com (1stchoice)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.proteins.7tms_r,bionet.molbio.proteins.fluorescent,bionet.molbio.rapd,bionet.molbio.yeast,bionet.molec-model,bionet.mycology,bionet.n2-fixation
Subject: HAD ANY GOOD MODELS LATELY?
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 1996 11:38:41 -0800
Organization: Northwest Internet Services, Inc.	
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <1stchoice-0402961138410001@p05.t0.rio.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p05.t0.rio.com
Xref: bigblue.oit.unc.edu bionet.molbio.proteins.7tms_r:519 bionet.molbio.rapd:1367 bionet.molbio.yeast:4488 bionet.molec-model:617 bionet.mycology:3394 bionet.n2-fixation:24

for more info email 1stchoice@infoback.com


From RIDLEYG@fri.cri.nz Fri Feb  9 23:41:02 EST 1996
Article: 3395 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!biosci!fri.cri.nz!RIDLEYG
From: RIDLEYG@fri.cri.nz
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re[2]: aba: fungi imperfecti
Date: 6 Feb 1996 14:49:32 -0800
Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Molecular Biology
Lines: 47
Sender: daemon@net.bio.net
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <117e89b0@fri.cri.nz>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net.bio.net


>Why not just give it ONE name, and describe all of its known
>states? Two names is misleading and confusing. If a fungus
>has no known sexual state, just give it a name and say ;
>"no known sexual state" or "sexual state unobserved as yet"
>or something like that. If both states have been observed
>call it X and describe its perfect and imperfect states.
>To lump fungi as different as asco's and basidio's together
>under one classification, just because we haven't seen their
>sexual states, is silly. Come on, let's all take a stand and
>refuse to recognize the deuteromycetes. There are no such things...
 

I do not follow this argument at all? And what do you mean just give it a name, 
surly that is what the deut's are. You make an isolation and obtain an asexual 
state but can not find a sexual form, it appears to be a new species so you go 
to the deut's for a name, a tag, a handle, what ever you want to call it, its a 
means of filing information in a retrievable system. Fifty years later someone 
finds the sexual state, proves the connection between sexual and asexual state, 
it to is a new species so the finder gives it a new asco name. The asco name 
takes precedence and the asexual just become a synonym. What is the problem with
that. 

If you find a new species with both sexual and asexual forms present then you 
give it the asco or basidio name, and make a reference to the deut or form genus
that the asexual form is referable to. No competent taxonomist would propose a 
new asexual binomial as well as the sexual.

We have to be practical and realise the first function of taxonomy is 
information retrieval. And if two names allows this to occur than two names 
there will have to be.



-----------------------------------------------------------
Dr Geoff Ridley                                   
Mycologist/ Forest Pathologist

New Zealand Forest Research Institute          
Private Bag 3020                                  
Rotorua, New Zealand

e-mail: ridleyg@fri.cri.nz
Phone:  +64 7 347 5899
Fax:    +64 7 374 5333




From D.BRAYFORD@cabi.org Fri Feb  9 23:41:03 EST 1996
Article: 3396 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!rutgers!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!lamarck.sura.net!ns1.faseb.org!biosci!cabi.org!D.BRAYFORD
From: D.BRAYFORD@cabi.org ("David Brayford ", IMI)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: RE: FGSC up and running
Date: 8 Feb 1996 00:43:55 -0800
Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Molecular Biology
Lines: 28
Sender: daemon@net.bio.net
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3119B76A@msm.cgnet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net.bio.net


Kevin
Could you please post the address where we can find this info?  Thanks.
DaveB

 ----------
From: BIOSCI-REQUEST
To: mycology
Subject: FGSC up and running
Date: 07 February 1996 4:34

I have just finished fixing the FGSC methods area.  Seems I somehow
lost a " which rendered the listing of methods in the FGN
meaningless.  It works and now there is a succinct listing of
a variety of techniques which have been published in the FGN.
Visit and you will find techniques for nucleic acid extraction,
transformation, and PCR, plus descriptions of a variety of
cloning vectors and tools for filamentous fungi.
Also at the FGSC methods area are recipes for growing Aspergillus and
Neurospora. -dont have any recipes for  Nihilcleista flavioides tho.

If you are already familiar with the FGSC web site, please check your
address, I am about to do a major update.

Thanks,

Kevin McCluskey



From nathan@D2.COM Fri Feb  9 23:41:04 EST 1996
Article: 3397 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!biosci!D2.COM!nathan
From: nathan@D2.COM (Nathan Wilson)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: Help identifying leccinum to species
Date: 8 Feb 1996 17:34:47 -0800
Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Molecular Biology
Lines: 25
Sender: daemon@net.bio.net
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <v01530505ad402ef7d052@[198.211.52.243]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net.bio.net

>In Dr. Harry Thiers monograph of the boletes of California (California
>Mushrooms, A Field Guide to the Boletes, Hafner Press, 1975,
>out-of-print), one white Leccinum is listed, _Leccinum californicum_.
>But it is listed as being known only from the type locality in El
>Dorado Co. and having a context that is "unchanging when exposed". The
>spores of L. californicum are listed as 14.5-17.5 X 5.5-6.5 microns.

I recently heard from Dr. Alan Bessette that older work on Leccinum
(pre-1990?  as I remember he specifically mentioned work done by A.H.
Smith) did not use a reliable technique for judging staining reactions.
This has resulted in a confusing set of invalid species which are only
distinguished by the fact that they are "unchanging when exposed".  I think
the previous standard was to cut the specimen and not to explicitly bruise
them after cutting.  If this was the case for L. californicum you could
have a reasonable identification.  Unfortunately Alan is not on the net,
but I will try to get more details from him.

   -------------------------    _________
         Nathan Wilson         <_________>
         nathan@d2.com            _|_|_       It is no dream!
                                  \___/    Matsutake are growing
       Minister Emeritus           | |        On the belly of the mountain.
Fungus Federation of Santa Cruz    \_/ *83--                -Shigetaka




From nathan@D2.COM Fri Feb  9 23:41:05 EST 1996
Article: 3398 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!biosci!D2.COM!nathan
From: nathan@D2.COM (Nathan Wilson)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: Amanita phalloides look alikes in S.E. Asia?
Date: 8 Feb 1996 17:37:04 -0800
Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Molecular Biology
Lines: 21
Sender: daemon@net.bio.net
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <v01530507ad402f48e384@[198.211.52.243]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net.bio.net

>only that
>it was "straw mushroom" and that it had the same "growth patterns"
>as Amanita phalloides (they didn't explain what they meant by that).

The "straw mushroom" usually refers to Volvariella volvacea, but this is
probably *not* what the Asians are getting A. phalloides confused with.
What they probably are getting it confused with are other species of
Amanita.  According to Gary Lincoff (this is from memory so please don't
hold *him* responsible for the info) there are no deadly Amanitas in at
least some of the Asian countries.  In addition, there are several color
forms of Amanita hemibapha including a pure white one, a brown one and a
light yellow one that are sold in markets.  Amanita hemibapha (a.k.a.
Caesar's Mushroom or Amanita caesarea) occurs here in the eastern US and is
commonly eaten by experienced mushroom collectors.  I don't know of any web
pictures for these species, but the _Fungi of Japan_ has at least some of
them (Volvariella volvacea, A. hemibapha subsp. similis (brown) and A.
hemibapha subsp. javanica (yellow)).  Note that _Fungi of Japan_ also lists
A. virosa, so there are at least some deadly species in Asia.  A.
phalloides, however, appears to be completely absent.




From larryc@teleport.com Fri Feb  9 23:41:05 EST 1996
Article: 3399 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!rutgers!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!nntp.teleport.com!not-for-mail
From: larryc@teleport.com (Larry Caldwell)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: URGENT! Hallucinogenic fungi & legislation
Date: 8 Feb 1996 01:02:06 -0800
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016
Lines: 35
Distribution: bionet
Message-ID: <oNTGx0O5Io1b084yn@teleport.com>
References: <4eku14$c04@mserv1.dl.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linda.teleport.com

In article <4eku14$c04@mserv1.dl.ac.uk>,
"Erast Parmasto" <erast@park.tartu.ee> wrote:

>    Just now, some years later than needed, Estonian parliament
> is going to discuss a law on use of narcotics. The question is,
> is it regulated by law in some country to control the use of
> hallucinogenic fungi, their commercial or home production,
> and propaganda of their use in media (newspapers, books,
> TV, radio)?
>    Our mycologists here in Estonia have some few weeks to give
> their expert opinion about what may be included to the new law.
>    Any information will be appreciated.

I'm not aware of any amanita regulations in the USA.  They may exist,
but amateur consumption of amanita sp. is a self-limiting practice. :)
Once the general public becomes aware of the potential death penalty
for eating the wrong amanita, good sense prevails.

Psilocybin is classed legally with the narcotics, and possession is
illegal.  Technically, most farmers with a cow or a woodlot are
criminals, since p.semilanceata is common in cow pastures and 
p.cubensis grows well in wood chips.  Laws against cultivation are
rarely enforced, since most police don't even notice mushrooms.
P.semilanciata is a common contaminant in exhausted agaricus bisporous 
beds.

Despite the general lack of enforcement, psilocybin use in the USA is
not perceived as a major social problem, since it is generally seasonal,
nonaddictive, and nontoxic.  The main danger is an inexperienced 
collector mistaking galerina autumnalis for p.semilanceata.

Limiting discussion in publications is likely to be self-defeating, since
new varieties of euphoric mushrooms are still being discovered.  

-- Larry


From Regis.Courtecuisse@phare.univ-lille2.fr Fri Feb  9 23:41:07 EST 1996
Article: 3400 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!jussieu.fr!univ-lille1.fr!usenet
From: Regis.Courtecuisse@phare.univ-lille2.fr (Regis.Courtecuisse)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: Help identifying leccinum to species
Date: 9 Feb 1996 11:16:36 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <4ffaek$anh@netserver.univ-lille1.fr>
References: <4ep57a$c9s@olympus.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bolet.univ-lille2.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.10

In article <4ep57a$c9s@olympus.net>, 7seas@olympus.net says...
>
>I am an amateur with access to equipment (microscope) but
>poor library.
>
>We found what appears to be a leccinum both by its
>stature and the scabers on the stipe.
>
>It was pure white about 8 inches tall and both the
>stipe and the pileas changing slowly to blue where
>cut or bruised.  We dried a portion of one specimen.
>

Hi !

The blue staining of your fungus sounds somehow disquieting for a 
Leccinum species...
Some species have bright bleu-green colour at the stipe base but bleu 
staining is unknown to me in the genus (usually outer parts don't 
clearly stain when bruised and flesh turns pink, red, violet, grey, 
black...).
We have a very good monograph of Leccinum in Europe for a few months 
(Lannoy & Estades). I can send you the reference to get it if you are 
interested. The book encloses plentyfull of very good colour plates.
The only Leccinum with pure white basidiome and prominent blue (already 
on the unbruised specimens, at the base of the stipe) colour is 
L.cyaneobasileucum, so far recorded only from France and rather rare.
A more complete description and good illustrations would be usefull to 
trace the identity of your specimen. Dis you notice some chemical 
reactions (they are very useful in the genus)...
Hope this helps.
Sincerely.

		regis



From Regis.Courtecuisse@phare.univ-lille2.fr Fri Feb  9 23:41:08 EST 1996
Article: 3401 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!jussieu.fr!univ-lille1.fr!usenet
From: Regis.Courtecuisse@phare.univ-lille2.fr (Regis.Courtecuisse)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: tuber melanosporum odour analyzed??
Date: 9 Feb 1996 11:22:29 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <4ffapl$anh@netserver.univ-lille1.fr>
References: <4f6ef7$jqm@news.xs4all.nl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bolet.univ-lille2.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.10

In article <4f6ef7$jqm@news.xs4all.nl>, chris@xs4all.nl says...
>
>Does anyone know of any attempts of analyzing chemically the typical 
>flavours of T. melanosporum? Or even synthesizing the "truffle essence" 

Hi !

Some french researchers did the job. I don't have the reference at hand 
right now, but the team leader was Thierry TALOU, working if I remember 
well in Toulouse. Artificial fragrance is also actual I think.
Probably people at the INRA Mushroom Research Station would reply to you 
more efficiently.
I don't have electronic address but the FAX is (33).56.84.31.78.

Hope this helps.
Sincerely.

		regis



From Regis.Courtecuisse@phare.univ-lille2.fr Fri Feb  9 23:41:09 EST 1996
Article: 3402 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!jussieu.fr!univ-lille1.fr!usenet
From: Regis.Courtecuisse@phare.univ-lille2.fr (Regis.Courtecuisse)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: Re: Amanita phalloides look alikes in S.E. Asia?
Date: 9 Feb 1996 11:26:03 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <4ffb0b$anh@netserver.univ-lille1.fr>
References: <4fdffa$b9p@onramp.arc.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bolet.univ-lille2.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.10

In article <4fdffa$b9p@onramp.arc.nasa.gov>, watson@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov 
says...
>
>
>Recently there has been another rash of mushroom
>poisonings in our area due to Amanita phalloides.
>From what I read in the newspaper, the victims were
>immigrants from Asia, and mistook Amanita phalloides
>for an edible Asian variety.  What the paper didn't 
>mention was exactly what was that muchroom, only that
>it was "straw mushroom" and that it had the same "growth patterns"
>as Amanita phalloides (they didn't explain what they meant by that).

Hi ! Probably some Volvariella species ? Usually cultured in Asia.
Differences are the absence of a ring and the pink spores (when mature!)

Sincerely

		regis



From watson@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov Fri Feb  9 23:41:11 EST 1996
Article: 3403 of bionet.mycology
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.coast.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!onramp.arc.nasa.gov!pioneer.arc.nasa.gov!watson
From: watson@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (John S. Watson - FSC)
Newsgroups: bionet.mycology
Subject: I've found morels!!!
Date: 7 Feb 1996 23:41:50 GMT
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center
Lines: 13
Distribution: na
Message-ID: <4fbdbu$16u@onramp.arc.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pioneer.arc.nasa.gov

At lunch time, I decide to take a stroll by 
my favorite morel patch here at work.
I didn't really expect to find anything there
since it's only February 7th, but there they were!  
More than a half a dozen scrumptious yellow morels 
standing there just waiting for me to pick!

Joy!
John S. Watson                  
NASA Ames Research Center MS/257-7, Moffett Field, CA 94035
<a href="http://ccf.arc.nasa.gov/~watson/watson.html">John S. Watson</a>

"The smell of sulphur is strong, but not unpleasent to a sinner." --- M.T.


