Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

Reply to thread

Message

Exactly, SWIM's FOAF thinks that centrifugation could have made the difference. He did not really wait for the clouds in the basic solution to settle; the centrifuge does that in seconds. The amount of water in this guy's case was not in excess, it was kept to the minimum (i.e. enough to dissolve the citrate salts)

Now, the solubility of freebase bufotenine is certainly increased by the hydroxyl group. This contributes to hydrogen bonds between the freebase bufo and water molecules. But on the other hand, the freebase dmt which is fairly water insoluble has polar groups (it has two nitrogens) that are both hydrogen acceptors, while the indolic nitrogen is a also a hydrogen bond donor.

The addition of a hydroxyl group to the dmt molecule effectively introduces an extra hydrogen bond donor (the "H" ) and an extra hydrogen bond acceptor (the "O" ). That is why the partition coefficient of bufotenin is reduced to 1.6 from 2 (dmt's partition coefficient). Which SWIM's FOAF interprets as such : bufo s more water soluble than dmt but not necessarily totally water soluble. On the other hand, Salvinorin A is full of hydrogen bond acceptors but it is extremely poorly soluble in water.

In any case however, this guy's precipitates were active. He assumed he had precipitated bufotenine, and he did in fact bioassayed bufotenine in the precipitates. But this is his interpretation of his observations. In essence, things are more complicated; his batch could have been bunk. He has not done many bufo extractions so he admits that he has made only limited cross-observations among different batches.

BUT! In any case, if a certain basic pH causes precipitation of the brown crap alkaloids (but not bufotenine) it can be employed effectively for cleaning the solution from the latter prior to pulling with NP solvent. SWIM's FOAF thinks that this approach still holds some promise, even though he needs to experiment more.

He is also very interested to see how pure bufo behaves in basic solutions, this will clear up a lot of this confusion.

Thanks!

<blockquote data-quote="Infundibulum" data-source="post: 3236886" data-attributes="member: 769">Exactly, SWIM&#039;s FOAF thinks that centrifugation could have made the difference. He did not really wait for the clouds in the basic solution to settle; the centrifuge does that in seconds. The amount of water in this guy&#039;s case was not in excess, it was kept to the minimum (i.e. enough to dissolve the citrate salts)Now, the solubility of freebase bufotenine is certainly increased by the hydroxyl group. This contributes to hydrogen bonds between the freebase bufo and water molecules. But on the other hand, the freebase dmt which is fairly water insoluble has polar groups (it has two nitrogens) that are both hydrogen acceptors, while the indolic nitrogen is a also a hydrogen bond donor. The addition of a hydroxyl group to the dmt molecule effectively introduces an extra hydrogen bond donor (the &quot;H&quot; ) and an extra hydrogen bond acceptor (the &quot;O&quot; ). That is why the partition coefficient of bufotenin is reduced to 1.6 from 2 (dmt&#039;s partition coefficient). Which SWIM&#039;s FOAF interprets as such : bufo s more water soluble than dmt but not necessarily totally water soluble. On the other hand, Salvinorin A is full of hydrogen bond acceptors but it is extremely poorly soluble in water. In any case however, this guy&#039;s precipitates were active. He assumed he had precipitated bufotenine, and he did in fact bioassayed bufotenine in the precipitates. But this is his interpretation of his observations. In essence, things are more complicated; his batch could have been bunk. He has not done many bufo extractions so he admits that he has made only limited cross-observations among different batches. BUT! In any case, if a certain basic pH causes precipitation of the brown crap alkaloids (but not bufotenine) it can be employed effectively for cleaning the solution from the latter prior to pulling with NP solvent. SWIM&#039;s FOAF thinks that this approach still holds some promise, even though he needs to experiment more. He is also very interested to see how pure bufo behaves in basic solutions, this will clear up a lot of this confusion. Thanks!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Infundibulum, post: 3236886, member: 769"] Exactly, SWIM's FOAF thinks that centrifugation could have made the difference. He did not really wait for the clouds in the basic solution to settle; the centrifuge does that in seconds. The amount of water in this guy's case was not in excess, it was kept to the minimum (i.e. enough to dissolve the citrate salts) Now, the solubility of freebase bufotenine is certainly increased by the hydroxyl group. This contributes to hydrogen bonds between the freebase bufo and water molecules. But on the other hand, the freebase dmt which is fairly water insoluble has polar groups (it has two nitrogens) that are both hydrogen acceptors, while the indolic nitrogen is a also a hydrogen bond donor. The addition of a hydroxyl group to the dmt molecule effectively introduces an extra hydrogen bond donor (the "H" ) and an extra hydrogen bond acceptor (the "O" ). That is why the partition coefficient of bufotenin is reduced to 1.6 from 2 (dmt's partition coefficient). Which SWIM's FOAF interprets as such : bufo s more water soluble than dmt but not necessarily totally water soluble. On the other hand, Salvinorin A is full of hydrogen bond acceptors but it is extremely poorly soluble in water. In any case however, this guy's precipitates were active. He assumed he had precipitated bufotenine, and he did in fact bioassayed bufotenine in the precipitates. But this is his interpretation of his observations. In essence, things are more complicated; his batch could have been bunk. He has not done many bufo extractions so he admits that he has made only limited cross-observations among different batches. BUT! In any case, if a certain basic pH causes precipitation of the brown crap alkaloids (but not bufotenine) it can be employed effectively for cleaning the solution from the latter prior to pulling with NP solvent. SWIM's FOAF thinks that this approach still holds some promise, even though he needs to experiment more. He is also very interested to see how pure bufo behaves in basic solutions, this will clear up a lot of this confusion. Thanks! [/QUOTE]