As to the idea that the snail would be more likely to take the mycoid to favorable locations… surely the predators of snails also frequent those locals? And likely several different ones over the course of a week? While a snail, on the other hand, is more likely to stay close to a single source of nutrition, as it takes so much longer for it to even search for another…

And have you considered that the snail itself may not be poisonous? Hiding beneath a toxic screen does not make it toxic of itself. I would assume that the regular predators know how to avoid the mushrooms in search of the tender flesh, if they have a problem with them at all.

Just the ideas that flow from the reading. Your works do spark a lot of thought. I look forward to seeing what is inspired by your next discovery.

Good work on your investigation of the carrier snail. I am, frankly, relieved to see you swimming in shallower waters than in your previous postings regarding the wraith.

Consider again the glow giving of by the poisonous mycoid. Would not such a glow attract the attention of a predetor? Would they not be especially visible from the air, even at a distance?

Heineman, dispite his previous and well-deserved reputation for the fantastic in scientific circles, has some small point. Consider whether your current theory and his are even mutually exclusive. Is this a case of either/or, or both?

Sincerely,

– M. Van Allen

Dr Heineman makes a good point, but I can suggest a possible answer. Your gastropod would certainly distribute the spores far less widely than a fast areal creature, but it would be far more likely to bring them into suitable environments, moist and rich in dead plant matter.

However, regarding your assertion that the moth pixies avoidance is based on cunning and not instinct, I must politely disagree. The assertions of K. Wolus and others in his camp that the moth pixie has anything more than a base (albeit higher than average) animal intelligence has not borne out in my research. It is true that they will on rare occasions demonstrate simple tool use, but poisoned weapons? Such an idea stretches my credulity a bit too far.

Surely the true or at least primary fellowship here is with the snail’s predator, immune to the toxin of the mycoid. The only puzzle here is the predator in question. The avoidance by moth pixies is somewhat of a puzzle, as these would be a natural vector. However, it may be that only some of the many varieties will serve, or that they not resistant per se, but are cunning enough to avoid the poison. K. Wolus has spoken of their use of toxins on weapons; perhaps the interaction is deeper even than might reasonably be extrapolated here.

Your servant,
Richard

Having recently read your musings upon the nature of the Carrier Snail and the Fungus which grows upon it, I was quite startled to see that you had missed a quite important Law of Nature. Creatures do not invest in change unless there is a benefit.
I draw your attention to certain frogs of the swamps and jungles. The Poison-Spear Frog. Hemmelson’s Pixie-Eating Frog. There are a great variety of these species all through the lands, all marked by vividly bright patterns on their skins. These serve no good as camouflage, therefore must serve the opposite purpose. They ‘warn’ predators away. It stands to reason that a creature from underground, as your mushroom and snail appear to be, would benefit not at all from bright colors, but illumination might just stand in for this in the dark places underground.