Archaic info but still informative.
One consideration perhaps worthy of entertaining is that generalizations fail... generally speaking.
Speaking of all peruvianus, bridgesii and pachanoi as if all bridgesii are the same etc is problematic. It's like saying all white people are the same etc, it lacks accuracy.
There is significant diversity in the species.
There was a study in Peru published a few years back that focused solely upon mescaline concentrations and was not looking at other alkaloids, however in that study a decent range was found to exist. There are peruvianus and pachanoi that for all intents and purposes do not have much mescaline at all. They are properly identified plants. There are some forms known to have significant quantities of mescaline. The literature over the years mentions this. One area was known for having rather strong cacti and a tradition of use.
Years ago someone I know did bitterness testing. They found that some plants had zero detectable bitterness and then just a few days later were strongly bitter. Those plants may have produced alkaloid as a response to being cut for sampling and they were mostly peruvianus. Several bridgesii plants were strongly bitter and then again a short time later they seemed go increase in bitterness. Some pachanoi from the region known for potent cactus were extremely bitter and an increase was not detected.
In most plants the most bitter portion found was the new growth at the top, older growth in peruvianus was significantly less bitter on average. However in pachanoi the older growth was not apparent as less or more bitter.
When something is very bitter it kinda maxes out the flavor. Past a certain threshold more of the bitter substance does not taste more bitter because it is already so strong.
A friend once reported blending up and drinking dozens of small seedlings, each only a couple of inches tall and 1/2 to 1 inch wide. They were hybrids with genes of peruvianus, pachanoi and bridgesii, he reported them to be very strongly active and then regretted losing the genetics!
Older tissue and older plants may not always be stronger. In many plants the strongest concentration of alkaloids is at the soft vulnerable and sugar rich tender new growth. In many plants alkaloids are produced defensively and reactively. Some plants may have been inadvertently selected over time for accumulating greater concentration of alkaloid automatically instead of responsively. If such plants existed they would likely be found either in cultivation for use or in close proximity to those who use them. Pachanoi and bridgesii are both found in such situations. The plants growing in close proximity to people, in their yards and cities etc, are more likely to have resulted from selection than those growing in more isolated areas. While a few forms of peruvianus are grown for the witches market the species still just doesn't have the presence that bridgesii and pachanoi do.
Trouts TN3B contains some interesting information such as the GCMS of Juuls Giant showing 2 chemically distinct results from what was anecdotally said to be the same plant. The situation is not clear there however.
I read that private studies had been done about a decade ago showing some bridgesii, Bakers 5452 and SS02, to be strong sources of mescaline with no other alkaloids. It is said that Health Canada ordered some dried peruvianus incense a few years ago and found mescaline was present but was not the major alkaloid. It would be nice to learn more about this.
The ethnobotanical and anthropological literature makes mention of at least a half a dozen distinct forms and uses, however there is not much to go on there and it just isn't clear what they all are and things in the Andes have changed a lot over the last century.
The agriculture strategies of the Incas and their forbears were to encourage diversity and to select and propagate from that diversity. Find the ones you like and plant it in the yard or next to the city etc.
Ogunbodede did publish 4.7 but... why? Could it have had something to do with the testing equipment?
One consideration perhaps worthy of entertaining is that generalizations fail... generally speaking.
Speaking of all peruvianus, bridgesii and pachanoi as if all bridgesii are the same etc is problematic. It's like saying all white people are the same etc, it lacks accuracy.
There is significant diversity in the species.
There was a study in Peru published a few years back that focused solely upon mescaline concentrations and was not looking at other alkaloids, however in that study a decent range was found to exist. There are peruvianus and pachanoi that for all intents and purposes do not have much mescaline at all. They are properly identified plants. There are some forms known to have significant quantities of mescaline. The literature over the years mentions this. One area was known for having rather strong cacti and a tradition of use.
Years ago someone I know did bitterness testing. They found that some plants had zero detectable bitterness and then just a few days later were strongly bitter. Those plants may have produced alkaloid as a response to being cut for sampling and they were mostly peruvianus. Several bridgesii plants were strongly bitter and then again a short time later they seemed go increase in bitterness. Some pachanoi from the region known for potent cactus were extremely bitter and an increase was not detected.
In most plants the most bitter portion found was the new growth at the top, older growth in peruvianus was significantly less bitter on average. However in pachanoi the older growth was not apparent as less or more bitter.
When something is very bitter it kinda maxes out the flavor. Past a certain threshold more of the bitter substance does not taste more bitter because it is already so strong.
A friend once reported blending up and drinking dozens of small seedlings, each only a couple of inches tall and 1/2 to 1 inch wide. They were hybrids with genes of peruvianus, pachanoi and bridgesii, he reported them to be very strongly active and then regretted losing the genetics!
Older tissue and older plants may not always be stronger. In many plants the strongest concentration of alkaloids is at the soft vulnerable and sugar rich tender new growth. In many plants alkaloids are produced defensively and reactively. Some plants may have been inadvertently selected over time for accumulating greater concentration of alkaloid automatically instead of responsively. If such plants existed they would likely be found either in cultivation for use or in close proximity to those who use them. Pachanoi and bridgesii are both found in such situations. The plants growing in close proximity to people, in their yards and cities etc, are more likely to have resulted from selection than those growing in more isolated areas. While a few forms of peruvianus are grown for the witches market the species still just doesn't have the presence that bridgesii and pachanoi do.
Trouts TN3B contains some interesting information such as the GCMS of Juuls Giant showing 2 chemically distinct results from what was anecdotally said to be the same plant. The situation is not clear there however.
I read that private studies had been done about a decade ago showing some bridgesii, Bakers 5452 and SS02, to be strong sources of mescaline with no other alkaloids. It is said that Health Canada ordered some dried peruvianus incense a few years ago and found mescaline was present but was not the major alkaloid. It would be nice to learn more about this.
The ethnobotanical and anthropological literature makes mention of at least a half a dozen distinct forms and uses, however there is not much to go on there and it just isn't clear what they all are and things in the Andes have changed a lot over the last century.
The agriculture strategies of the Incas and their forbears were to encourage diversity and to select and propagate from that diversity. Find the ones you like and plant it in the yard or next to the city etc.
Ogunbodede did publish 4.7 but... why? Could it have had something to do with the testing equipment?
said that some PC are bitter and generally not high yielding.. But "generally" makes me think that this was data collected from different specimens, for example, one day someone tastes a bitter PC, the other day with another cutting someone extracts PC and is low yielding. But did anyone did controlled experiments of the same cutting ? Otherwise the data is not really valid.
