Poorly understood family of AYAHUASCA vines

[polytrip]

Snozz, but I think probably the issue is that the botanists havent gone far into it, no? Because the caapi with the nodes is clearly different than the normal "flat" caapi, no? Also, while there are no varieties, if we're talking about other species altogether such as what is apparently being sold by kiwi, then it isn't necessarily incorrect to sell other varieties of "ayahuasca".

Agreed. This is why I said "varieties of B. Caapi"...we have no clue what most vendors who are selling Red/Black ayahuasca are actually selling...is it B. muricata? Is it A. anisopetala? Is it a local varietal of B. caapi that produces a different colored brew?

The case of the two alleged caapi varieties that have never been described but to which differences of stem and physical shape have been attributed is not such a big issue. They have not been officially documented, but in looking at them (and recounting anecdotes) there are clear differences to these two plants which may both be varietals of B. caapi...but aside from kiwi (which refers to the "caupuri" as such) few vendors are making appropriate distinctions.

Kiwi lists the appropriate genus/species of the plants (or at least the presumed genus/species) and then notes that the local name is "griss ayahuasca" or "black ayahuasca" or "red ayahuasca". This is my point...a vendor who is selling "red" and "black" varieties of "caapi" has not only deviated from the two unofficially attributable varieties (caupuri and tukanaca) but is potentially, actually listing plants that are not caapi (i.e. B. muricata or A. anisopetala). It is impossible, from our end (short of testing/IDing and/or contacting the vendor) to determine what plants these really are, assuming that black and red ayahuasca are not (speaking generally and across the board, a large assumption based on admittedly lacking data) B. caapi.

Hmm. I´ve had a red-caapi extract from this vendor, and i was so positive about how it felt so much deeper and powerfull than all the other forms of caapi that i had been familar with at the time that i even made apost about it here (don´t remember the name of the thread)..and now it looks that it could have been anything, from great quality caapi, to muricate or maybe even something else.
It was great stuff though...very warm and pleasant. Like mother nature embracing you.

It´s great that you guys are doing this research so we can one day know wich is wich and spread the knowledge around.
You guys are realy doing justice to the term etheogenic university here,

 

[jamie]

^if you had muricata it would have produced a brew that is deep red. I have had "red" caapi vine also once that was not red when brewed so not muricata..though I did really like that vine as well..I have still never seen B.colorada and have a feeling that some "caapi" may be that variety. This is just a feeling thouugh becasue muricata does look so much like caapi, and I would assume colorada(being a banisteriopsis as well) would also..so it would make sense they are sometimes sold as "B caapi".

 

[joedirt]

The final GC-MS results should come in two weeks, so lets be patient

This is killing me. My patients are dangling by a thin thread. Let's have some results!

BTW thanks a lot man for doing this endless. VERY COOL.

Peace

 

[Zaka]

^if you had muricata it would have produced a brew that is deep red. I have had "red" caapi vine also once that was not red when brewed so not muricata..though I did really like that vine as well..I have still never seen B.colorada and have a feeling that some "caapi" may be that variety. This is just a feeling thouugh becasue muricata does look so much like caapi, and I would assume colorada(being a banisteriopsis as well) would also..so it would make sense they are sometimes sold as "B caapi".

Irie,
Can anyone give me an exact id on this B.colorada vine.?
I can't find any reference to it in the herbariums?
I have however found banisteriopsis calcicola....is this the same thing?
Been studying the different strains for a while now.....A work in progress..
Respect,
Z

 

[Kambogahuascanga]

Mary Poppins said...

my experiences with muricata
micro and macro
are lending me to believe that

some of the alkaloids in the muricata
might be longer acting (?-permanent-?) mao inhibitors ...????

no scientific data
just that the effects are lasting days from macro
and 24 hours from micro ????

AMEN. And it only takes a few ML more for it to take me from 4-8 hour journey to 18-24 hours. I haven't even gone full tilt yet. But I can't wait. I love the intense Ayahuasca vine experiences that make my body shake like crazy and purges to extract near to the level of Kambo. What really baffles me is how this vine can lengthen the experience to the level of an Iboga journey. And I feel that by using the Tabernaemontana roots I can remember the experience as clearly as an Iboga flood.

Definitely has one me over to the fullest. My first brushes with her spirit were about 4 months ago at low doses so I had no idea how great she would be to me. If I can muster the guts I would like to have a full amount and see how life changing that will be over a long course of time.

Call it the Muricata flood.

 

[polytrip]

So if i´m correct, black ayahuasca could be: alicia macrodisca or alicia anisopetala.
Red vine could be: caapi or muricata, grey vine is likely to be tetrapteris methystica and only when you have yellow or white vine you can be relatively sure of the fact that you have caapi....
And furthermore, they all have MAO-inhibiting property´s but not because they all contain harmala alkaloids. And some contain unknown compounds that have extremely powerfull and long lasting effects.

 

[Zaka]

So if i´m correct, black ayahuasca could be: alicia macrodisca or alicia anisopetala.
Red vine could be: caapi or muricata, grey vine is likely to be tetrapteris methystica and only when you have yellow or white vine you can be relatively sure of the fact that you have caapi....
And furthermore, they all have MAO-inhibiting property´s but not because they all contain harmala alkaloids. And some contain unknown compounds that have extremely powerfull and long lasting effects.

Irie,
So when I got my seeds from Peru two or more years ago....

The Alicia sp. was labeled as "Cat's Claw".....
It wasn't till it flowered that I was able to id it as Alicia sp.

The B.muricata seeds were labeled "Black Caapi"....
I still haven't had my vines flower so can not verify it's id.

The seeds I got labeled "White Caapi" are a Stigmaphyllon sp.
I will be send endless some samples to test!

The seeds that were labeled "Yellow Caapi" appear to be the same as Cielo strain...

Respect,
Z

 

[endlessness]

Well before claiming they all have MAO inhibiting properties I think we should wait a bit, no? I mean, how many people have consumed the Alicia anisopetala (Black aya) and the Tetrapterys methystica (Grey aya), and under what conditions and with what admixtures?

One of the very few reports someone quoted the other day in the chat, from the aya forums, mentioned that someone took the leaf of black aya together with the vine, and had effects, but maybe this is just a supposition that it's MAOI+DMT? Maybe the alkaloids are completely different altogether? Also the quote mentioned a ridiculously high dose of black aya, like a few hundred grams IIRC (snozz, can you requote it here?).

I have some brew from both the red, grey and black already reduced, but I want to wait for the GC-MS results before consuming it.

Also for those claiming red aya (B. muricata) can make for a longer experience, can you quote what dosages were consumed and if you took it all at once or spread it out over a longer time, as well as if there were any admixtures added?


As for the leafs of those vines, Im still waiting for kiwi to ship me the samples so I can test, with the current speed I guess it will take a couple of months before we have those results, but the vines themselves, unless concentration is too diluted and I have to repeat, the results should come next week.

 

[Zaka]

Irie,
So B.colorada appears to be just a retail marketing name!
Unless anyone can refer me to a serious herbarium collection specimen, I'm gonna call it BS.
Respect,
Z

 

[endlessness]

Maybe it's not B. colorada but more like, a local name, "ayahuasca colorada", and in that case it will not be in herbariums (and it may or may not be synonyms with any of the other ayahuascas we've been discussing here ) ?

 

[polytrip]

Does anybody here think it´s necessary that people should be warned about differences in potency between all the ayahuasca vines available?
And if so, how?

I have always considered ayahuasca to be very safe. But then i´m talking about real caapi with a traditional DMT admixture plant like chacruna. The type of brew taken by the people from the santo-daime church. These other plants may be in a whole other legue and require a more cautious aproach. Maybe the strict diets do make sense with some of these more powerfull plants.

 

[jamie]

"Maybe the alkaloids are completely different altogether? Also the quote mentioned a ridiculously high dose of black aya, like a few hundred grams IIRC (snozz, can you requote it here?)."

The alkaloids in alicia do feel different from any other harmalas I have had..but they did feel like harmalas as well. It is a weird feeling. I am probly not the best souce for the potentcy of these vines in most people, because I was taking harmalas daily for over a year and feel like I hit a saturation point, where a full dose would make me trip for 24 hours at times(with any vine) and I was consistantly in a somewhat altered state on and off daily from these microdoses and macrodoses. I became saturated and so now my work with microdosing in that way is finished for the time being. It will be interesting to see how the muricata and alicia vine effect me after a few weeks away from daily microdosing.

The person you are talking about endless is chaliponga dream at the ayahuasca forums..and I am fairly certain he was using fresh alicia vine and leaf. That vine has so many pours and is so airy when dry that I would imagine it holds lots of water and wieghs a lot when wet. So hundreds of grams wet might make sense.

 

[jamie]

Irie,
So B.colorada appears to be just a retail marketing name!
Unless anyone can refer me to a serious herbarium collection specimen, I'm gonna call it BS.
Respect,
Z

Hmm that is interesting..I never looked into the colorada thing too much..only in passing and can not find much on it at all really.

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Irie,
So B.colorada appears to be just a retail marketing name!
Unless anyone can refer me to a serious herbarium collection specimen, I'm gonna call it BS.
Respect,
Z

Hmm that is interesting..I never looked into the colorada thing too much..only in passing and can not find much on it at all really.

No herbarium collection needed...the name was never published in any form. Good call Zaka :thumb_up:

Also, from the ayahuasca forums...

Hello, the Alicia anisopelata confirmed me to be very active, we took 45ml each in the group, we had nice experience lots of vomiting for some in the group full of light, this means that cooking the wood with its own leaves works exactly as our B.muricata black ayahuasca, for our B.muricata we need to take only 25ml, alicia works lighter but the MAOI is there definetely, the feeling is different than b.caapi in some aspects, but remenber when working with alicia you have to boil it down to deep extract nectar to obtain great results, as a simple tea it will not satisfy your expectations.

Sincerely

Chaliponga Dream

Hello, we used 10kg Alicia anisopetala vine and 1kg of Alicia Anisopetala leaves to obtain 700ml of pure divine nectar and the experience was great full of light but remenber when working with this vine you have to cook it real down to nectar if you make a simple tea it will not work.

Sincerely

Chaliponga dream

Even if we allow for a 60% weight loss due to the material being fresh (i.e. one kilo of Chaliponga Dream's anisopetala = 400gm of our dry anisopetala) that's still a massive amount of vine per person at our dried weight. 400g*10 = 4000/700ml = 5.714g/ml*45ml = 257g/dose

When I took 25gm of vine this weekend (60ml) with 125mg of freebase I got some slight warmth throughout my body and head, but that was the only telltale sign of aya...and it was just the faintest of onset indicators. There were no other acute effects, other than waking up early the next morning while feeling incredibly more refreshed than if I'd slept later/normal, which is common for me when taking ayahuasca. I hope to bump up to 50-75gm this weekend and if that doesn't produce results, I will be trying some yellow caapi and then seeing what happens when the anisopetala is added to the yellow caapi brew.

 

[Zaka]

Irie,
I'm narrowing down on the "White Caapi"....
Looking at Stigmaphyllon sinuatum syn.Stigmaphyllon fulgens.
White Caapi???
Respect,
Z

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Not sure if this will help you with ID'ing at all...but here's some info on S. sinuata (let me know if there's anything else I can get you/do to help with ID's from a distance):

On S. sinuatum, from Systematic Botany Monographs

 

[endlessness]

This thread is just lovely I must say

Anybody who has taken any of these vines from kiwi or other vendors please share your experiences. By themselves or with admixtures, what doses, etc.

Also we're wondering if others can check for UV shine of brews. Hopefully in one week now we have the results, and then will be nice to compare to the experiences people have been having

 

[Entropymancer]

Excellent thread! Looking forward to seeing the results from the suspected samples of Alicia anisopetala and Tetrapterys methystica.

----

Banisteriopsis rusbyana is not an accepted name. I thought it was a nomenclatural synonym for the accepted name Diplopterys cabrerana...but...this discussion has proven me (and wikipedia as well as Rätsch and others) incorrect! Banisteriopsis rusbyana is, in fact, a nomenclatural synonym for Diplopterys longialata.

Hmm, this is a curious bit of confusion. In virtually all of the literature from the mid-1980s until 2006, B. rusbyana is identified with D. cabrerana (by Dennis McKenna, Ott, Rätsch, etc.). Everyone cites a 1982 monograph by Bronwen Gates, Banisteriopsis, Diplopterys (Malpighiaceae), as the source of this identification. Yet in the 2006 article by Anderson & Davis, Expansion of Diplopterys..., the authors also claim to be following Gates when they identify B. rusbyana with D. longialata (similarly, the USDA GRIN database cites Gates for this identification). I think we need to take a look at Gates' monograph to see if we can figure out why these two contradictory identifications both cite the same reference. Most decent-sized universities appear to hold copies; if no one has access, I can probably borrow it through my local library.

----

It would seem that proper identification is the greatest difficulty in teasing out the differences between different vines offered by vendors. The plants are not being collected and identified by qualified botanists, nor are their suppliers providing them with the sort of detailed photographs that would allow for proper identification. And even if they were, there's always the element of trust: How confident could you be that the material you receive comes from the same species pictured in such photographs?

I'm reminded of a story from a few years back about fish served in sushi restaurants. The restaurants claimed to be selling red snapper, white tuna, etc., but many were actually substituting cheaper fish to cut costs. This fraud was revealed by a couple of high school students: they took samples of the fish, had portions of the DNA sequenced, then compared the sequences to a "DNA Barcode" database.

A similar technique could be applied to these vines. It costs less than $10 to have a segment of DNA sequenced. It's a little more expensive, but not prohibitively so, if you need to have the segment you're looking for amplified by PCR (a trivial task if you have a PCR thermocycler, but those cost several thousand dollars). At this point, the only barrier to this sort of identification is the fact that vouchered specimens of the more exotic vines haven't been sequenced, so getting a positive ID on something like Alicia anisopetala would be problematic. On the other hand, B. muricata already has an entry in the DNA Barcode database. With a little legwork on the academic side of things (sequencing DNA segments in positively identified specimens), confirming the identity of a vendor's product could become as easy as sending a small sample off to the lab.

 

[marypoppins]

i posted this today in the thread on suppliers called botanicum
but it seems like it belongs here

each time i brewed i brewed the muricta
it was brewed with acacia root bark or the inner tree bark
both of which are very red
so EVERYTHING i brew turns out red
in addition - i usually do not reduce down as much as most people
as i like my final 'nectar' much diluted for microdosing too
so the final product us never as dark

here is a standardized color chart maybe we can all use

http://www.w3schools.com/html/html_colornames.asp

that said and done - the brew cooks in what the chart calls maroon,
and get darker and deeper
(i usually do 3 washes of only 4 -6 hours - wonder what would happen at 12 hour a wash)

but as it cools down it turns to firebrick

i have some questions for everyone to ponder:
the vendors, even from peru, have always sold caapi in 4 colors: red, black, yellow, and white
and virtually none of those vines were as strong as the alicia or muricata

alberto who is now selling high quality muricat and alicia,
also currently sells caapi red
ie: alberto is selling muricata black, alicia red and caapi red
i think he might also have caapi black

julio down at dna who has great vine
sells caapi black and caapi red
and has never heard of either muricata or alicia

so it seems that the words red and black might apply to variations in caapi (which need 50 grams)
and muricat and alicia (which ironically alberto and alfonso labell opposite each other) which only needs 25 grams

in the rush to "discover" the real red and black we need to then not forget the caapi red and black

????????

i will try and brew some caapi by itself

and i awaiting for another delivery from alberto
so soon i will have side by side
muricata, alicia, and red caapi, (plus white caapi and yellow caapi)
all picked by alberto himself

i will try and get a camera

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Banisteriopsis rusbyana is not an accepted name. I thought it was a nomenclatural synonym for the accepted name Diplopterys cabrerana...but...this discussion has proven me (and wikipedia as well as Rätsch and others) incorrect! Banisteriopsis rusbyana is, in fact, a nomenclatural synonym for Diplopterys longialata.

Hmm, this is a curious bit of confusion. In virtually all of the literature from the mid-1980s until 2006, B. rusbyana is identified with D. cabrerana (by Dennis McKenna, Ott, Rätsch, etc.). Everyone cites a 1982 monograph by Bronwen Gates, Banisteriopsis, Diplopterys (Malpighiaceae), as the source of this identification. Yet in the 2006 article by Anderson & Davis, Expansion of Diplopterys..., the authors also claim to be following Gates when they identify B. rusbyana with D. longialata (similarly, the USDA GRIN database cites Gates for this identification). I think we need to take a look at Gates' monograph to see if we can figure out why these two contradictory identifications both cite the same reference. Most decent-sized universities appear to hold copies; if no one has access, I can probably borrow it through my local library.

Hey Entro...great of you to chime in (and with, what turns out to be a really interesting topic)! It's been a while :d

Ok...this is kind of funny...

Both of these entries are from Gates' 1982 monograph. D. cabrerana is obviously D. cabrerana and B. longialata was the old accepted name for what is now referred to as D. longialata (changed as a result of the 2006 "Expansion..." paper)

B. rusbyana is given as a synonym for both species in this 1982 monograph and appears in synonymy in standard form under B. longialata, with authors and without notes...BUT, if you look at the B. rusbyana under D. cabrerana, it says "sensu ethnobotanists, non (Niedenzu) Morton."

What this means is that the B. rusbyana synonym under D. cabrerana is "In the sense of ethnobotanists, NOT [the specimen] identified by Niedenzu and refined by Morton."

I assume that this means that ethnobotanists were calling D. cabrerana by B. rusbyana before they knew any better. I would guess that none of them ever tried to publish the B. rusbyana name...if they had tried to, they most certainly would have discovered that B. rusbyana was already published and was associated with a plant that had different morphology than the plant they were looking at.

In conclusion, ethnobotanical citations of B. rusbyana refer to D. cabrerana.

This is an area that, imo, needs more work, as a similar problem potentially lurks with D. McKenna's unpublished caapi varieties.