you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 3 days ago (1 child)

Let’s not forget thc, morphine, and psilocybin

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    Coca, cacao.

    Psilocybin isn't produced by plants but by fungi.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    You’re right. Mushrooms aren’t plants. I stand corrected

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

    Indeed they are not. They are their own category. Their cell structure is between plant cells and animal cells. A fungi cloud works similar to a brain. They are the things that make life possible. There are fungi living in our body which keeps us alive, we use them for bread, beer and penicillin among many other uses, they break down dead plants to create food for new plants, they divide food and communicate between trees, but they are themselves not plants. The largest living organism on earth is a fungi by the way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    I did not know that about the oldest living organism thing. where is this ancient fungi?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (2 children)

    Gone, but there used to be giant fungus "trees" called prototaxites

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototaxites

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 days ago* (1 child)

    there's actually new research saying prototaxites may not have been fungi, but belonged to an entirely separate kingdom that's now extinct. one of the defining characteristics of fungi are that their cell walls contain chitin, the same stuff that makes arthropod shells. prototaxites was found not to contain any chitin, while other ancient fungi of the same age as prototaxites already did, so it's not a feature of fungi that was adapted later. prototaxites was also found to contain microscopic structures that don't exist in any known fungus species

    edit: damn, someone beat me to it while I was trying to find the details

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago* (1 child)

    From your link.

    In 2026, research comparing fossils of a prototaxite species with other eukaryotic fossils in the same location found it to be structurally and chemically distinct, suggesting that Prototaxites is not a fungus and instead belongs to an extinct, previously undescribed kingdom of eukaryotic life.[1]

    https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12822639/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 child)

    Heh... learn something new every day

    Edit: it sounds like it's a hot topic

    It is widely considered a fungus, but the debate is ongoing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago* (1 child)

    From the paper I linked, it's really interesting. They think it might be a giant eukaryote previously undefined.

    We hypothesized that if P. taiti was a fungus, fossilization products resulting from the selective preservation or diagenetic alteration of glucan sugars would be present, derived from the original main composition of the cell walls including chitin (a polymer of N-acetyl glucosamine), or resulting from the recombination of glucan and protein into new melanoidin-like compounds, like those found in Fungi and arthropods in the Rhynie chert (39). To test this hypothesis, the previously assembled dataset of 47 samples, representing six higher taxonomic groups (39), was combined with 55 additional samples from these six groups and P. taiti (see the Supplementary Materials for full spectra for each sample, images of all sample spots, and details of taxonomic assignment). We then developed a novel analytic pipeline comprising two key steps: data exploration (step 1) and modelling (step 2) (fig. S3 and Supplementary Text Extended Methods). Step 1 aimed to show that biologically informative spectral bands correlated with taxonomic classification of specimens and that molecular fingerprints of organisms in the Rhynie chert retained information regarding their biological affinities, and to select the most relevant spectral features for further modelling. In step 2, we built classification models using supervised machine learning approaches to provide a robust statistical framework to accept or reject the taxonomic classification of each sample based on the selected spectral features.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments