Ironically, the discovery of such huge fungi specimens rekindled the debate of what constitutes an individual organism. "It's one set of genetically identical cells that are in communication with one another that have a sort of common purpose or at least can coordinate themselves to do something," Volk explains.
Both the giant blue whale and the humongous fungus fit comfortably within this definition. So does the 6,615-ton (six-million-kilogram) colony of a male quaking aspen tree and his clones that covers 107 acres (43 hectares) of a Utah mountainside.
And, at second glance, even those button mushrooms aren't so tiny. A large mushroom farm can produce as much as one million pounds (454 metric tons) of them in a year. "The mushrooms that people grow in the mushroom houses&133;; they're nearly genetically identical from one grower to another," Smith says. "So in a large mushroom-growing facility that would be a genetic individual—and it's massive!"
In fact, humongous may be in the nature of things for a fungus. "We think that these things are not very rare," Volk says. "We think that they're in fact normal."
See what we're tweeting about
17 Comments
Add CommentAccording to Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_organism), the largest undisputed single organism is an aspen tree named Pando. This fungus, while genetically indentical throughout, has not been proven to be anything more than a colony of clones.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisyour scientific American newsletter really helped me to enhance my knowledge in every field.I am really grateful to you.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank you very much
This mushroom is pushing the bounds of classification. You are using Wikipedia to validate the studies here? For a while now, I have seen this observation quoted in many scientific books. Maybe when the general public catches on to whats happening in this field, someone will get around to changing the Wikipedia page.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe nature of individuality might work well for Vertebrates, you act on the snout of a blue whale and you will get a very quick reaction in the tail. To have that sort of action and reaction along the mycillia over several miles would be a lot harder to demonstrate.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEven to set up a stimulus or electro chemical wave and read it at a distance would be interesting, but if there is no relationship from one side of the organism to the other the situation is less interesting that it first appears.
Paul Stamets cites '6 ways mushrooms can save the world,' and though he does not invoke psychoactive mushrooms as Roland Griffiths of Johns Hopkins may, nonetheless makes a persuasive argument. Think it can be checked on a TED talk, somewhere...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs it edible?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://blog.ted.com/2008/05/paul_stamets.php
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere's the link to Paul Stamets talk on Ted.
How is it possible for a fungus to grow to such a ginormous size. Almost unbelievable.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat IS unbelievable. And here I thought that <a href="http://www.metalabsllc.com">foot fungus</a> was the only thing I had to worry about in Oregon; I guess I was wrong!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCan someone explain why 4 square miles equals 10 square kilometers if 4 miles equals roughly 6.4 km?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this4 square miles = 2 miles x 2 miles
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this2 miles = 3.218 kilometers
4 square miles = 3.218 kilometers x 3.218 kilometers = 10.356 kilometers
Thank you, I realize now how I misinterpreted what that meant. Appreciated!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI grew up in Eastern Oregon, and one of my fondest memories was going in the spring on a family expedition led by my music teachers, the MacDonalds, to the woods in the Blue Mountains to find and feast on Oyster Mushrooms. We built a campfire and sauteed them in butter right in the woods. I remember they were usually about the size of pancakes. That was probably in the late nineteen forties or early fifties. They would be at the roots of trees, hidden under the forest mulch, and looked a little like sprawling sponges -- rather fibrous and really delicious.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this2mi x 2mi = 4mi^2
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this2mi = 3.22km
so
3.22km x 3.22km = (roughly) 10km^2
Although, "worrying" might then be a desideratum .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@KenFresno
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this...if 4 miles equals 6.4 km then 2 miles equals 3.2 km.
...then 2x2 miles equals 4 sq mi as 3.2x3.2 equals 10.2 sq km.
...giving that nearly 4 sq mi equals 10 sq km.
@KenFresno asked:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Can someone explain why 4 square miles equals 10 square kilometers if 4 miles equals roughly 6.4 km?"
I'm with you, sir. I am no mathematical genius - never took anything higher than trigonometry and elementary analysis (and that over 4 decades ago) but when I square 6.4 (actually when I square 4/.62) I get roughly 41.6 square kilometers. The result in the article would seem to be off by a factor of 4.