Solid storage vs Liquid storage. (Extraction to liquid too)

[gibran2]

If you look at the thread I linked in the earlier post, you'll see burnt says that you can essentially keep on pulling from your jungle spice with heptane and you'll keep getting pure dmt. The less selective solvents do pull more product...that product is ~95% dmt and ~5% 2-MTHBC...there's a couple threads around on it, if you search for things relating to jungle spice they should pop up. There's some great analytical data as well as subjective stuff.

What I’m suggesting is this: Pull as much DMT as you can get using naphtha, then pull whatever remains using xylene or something similar. The question then is what does the xylene pull contain and how much? Are you saying that it’s mostly DMT? I don’t think so.

Actually, that's pretty much what I understood burnt's analysis to show, unless I'm mistaken.

That makes no sense. If DMT dissolves in naphtha, then one can get essentially all of the DMT out of solution using naphtha. It’s not like some magical point is reached where DMT is suddenly no longer soluble in naphtha, but is soluble in other solvents.

 

[MySmelf]

If you look at the thread I linked in the earlier post, you'll see burnt says that you can essentially keep on pulling from your jungle spice with heptane and you'll keep getting pure dmt. The less selective solvents do pull more product...that product is ~95% dmt and ~5% 2-MTHBC...there's a couple threads around on it, if you search for things relating to jungle spice they should pop up. There's some great analytical data as well as subjective stuff.

What I’m suggesting is this: Pull as much DMT as you can get using naphtha, then pull whatever remains using xylene or something similar. The question then is what does the xylene pull contain and how much? Are you saying that it’s mostly DMT? I don’t think so.

Actually, that's pretty much what I understood burnt's analysis to show, unless I'm mistaken.

That makes no sense. If DMT dissolves in naphtha, then one can get essentially all of the DMT out of solution using naphtha. It’s not like some magical point is reached where DMT is suddenly no longer soluble in naphtha, but is soluble in other solvents.

Maybe its DMT-oxide the other solvents are pulling. Thats the only way it makes sense to me.

 

[q21q21]

Just wanna throw this test I did. It is nowhere near the scientific-ness or burnt's analysis and really the amounts are DMT are not too significant but it is useful to note that jungle DMT seems to be sparingly soluble in naptha and it does not precipitate in the freezer but can be salted.

I definately was thinking it but I did not explicitly mention that SALTING CAN BE DONE WITH NAPTHA TOO.

 

[SnozzleBerry]

If you look at the thread I linked in the earlier post, you'll see burnt says that you can essentially keep on pulling from your jungle spice with heptane and you'll keep getting pure dmt. The less selective solvents do pull more product...that product is ~95% dmt and ~5% 2-MTHBC...there's a couple threads around on it, if you search for things relating to jungle spice they should pop up. There's some great analytical data as well as subjective stuff.

What I’m suggesting is this: Pull as much DMT as you can get using naphtha, then pull whatever remains using xylene or something similar. The question then is what does the xylene pull contain and how much? Are you saying that it’s mostly DMT? I don’t think so.

Actually, that's pretty much what I understood burnt's analysis to show, unless I'm mistaken.

That makes no sense. If DMT dissolves in naphtha, then one can get essentially all of the DMT out of solution using naphtha. It’s not like some magical point is reached where DMT is suddenly no longer soluble in naphtha, but is soluble in other solvents.

Do we know that that is the case? If so, how many pulls does it take and can a less selective solvent do it in less pulls? Can heptane exhaust a solution of its DMT in the same number of pulls as naphtha? Perhaps it's not that you can't get more dmt with naphtha, but the returns are remarkably diminished when compared to a less selective solvent. This makes sense to my non-chemist mind.

 

[gibran2]

Do we know that that is the case? If so, how many pulls does it take and can a less selective solvent do it in less pulls? Can heptane exhaust a solution of its DMT in the same number of pulls as naphtha? Perhaps it's not that you can't get more dmt with naphtha, but the returns are remarkably diminished when compared to a less selective solvent. This makes sense to my non-chemist mind.

I’m not a chemist either. Maybe at low concentrations, DMT moves more freely between the aqueous layer and the NP layer? Maybe at a certain concentration an equilibrium is established? I don’t know.

I’m sure that some solvents can exhaust a solution of DMT in fewer pulls than others, but I’m assuming (incorrectly?) that a NP solvent that can pull some DMT can pull all DMT given enough pulls.

 

[q21q21]

Just evaporated pulls 2 through 5 of 292g and combined them with the liquid from pull 1.
So far I've got 3.62g-4.33g Jimjam acetates in tincture @ 5-6mg per drop (20 drops measured .10g after thorough evaporation then .12g when I put it on again. My cheap scale *rolles eyes*)
More pulls to come.

Just posting cause I'm pretty stoked going from a having 0.00g to 3 or 4 grams

 

[jamie]

I personally think that your assumptions are wrong here gibran. What are your yields gibran with naptha? LOTS of people have pulled 2% with other solvents. Saying that the rest is all other alkaloids etc makes no sense here since the extra jungle has the same effects at 25mg as another dose of the same quantity of naptha crystals. Also, I trust burnt's analysis when it is also backed up by my own experience as well as others here over random speculation. Try it if you are unsure. I can guarantee you will get alot more DMT if you pull with xylene or limonene as compared to naptha..if this were not the case so many people wouldnt be using xylene instead with claims of larger yields.

Also gibran, something you might not have concidered yet is that naptha will NOT pull oxides of DMT. I will agree with you that yes, xylene and limo pulls after the bark is exhausted from naptha pulls might not pull a product that is largely DMT..but oxides of DMT. IMO there is no reason to not want the oxides..many prefer them but personally I dont notice a difference. If you throw the bark without pulling the oxides than it is just a giant waste IMO. It is not an extra 50mg we are talking about with say 100g of bark..1% is a good yield when it comes to naptha..but other solvents can and do pull 2%..so there is ALOT going to waste there if you just pull with naptha only and do not pull the "jungle" after with another solvent.

Of course it is a goo. DMT oxides do not form crystals when in freebase form. Goo does not mean it is impure or smokes any less smooth. All it might mean is there is oxides in there.

 

[HermeticShaman]

@fractal Enchantment:

Your post here actually cleared up some other questions I was having and I think it will make future extractions simpler and more effective.

I do very much enjoy pulling with naptha as I love to get those nice, easy to handle crystals, but I haven't been following my naptha pulls with xylene or d-limo pulls. I'll have to start doing that.

I'm still pretty frustrated with dealing with acetate mess, but I better learn how, because I don't want any spice to go to waste But according to the BLAB tek, washing soda can be used to convert it to a solid freebase. I just like my solids... Maybe that bias will pass with time.

 

[ragabr]

@HermeticShaman, I would suggest trying out fumaric acid. It's extremely easy to work with, and super cheap as well. Check out here if you're having trouble finding some at a reasonable price locally.

 

[gibran2]

I personally think that your assumptions are wrong here gibran. What are your yields gibran with naptha? LOTS of people have pulled 2% with other solvents. Saying that the rest is all other alkaloids etc makes no sense here since the extra jungle has the same effects at 25mg as another dose of the same quantity of naptha crystals. Also, I trust burnt's analysis when it is also backed up by my own experience as well as others here over random speculation. Try it if you are unsure. I can guarantee you will get alot more DMT if you pull with xylene or limonene as compared to naptha..if this were not the case so many people wouldnt be using xylene instead with claims of larger yields.

Also gibran, something you might not have concidered yet is that naptha will NOT pull oxides of DMT. I will agree with you that yes, xylene and limo pulls after the bark is exhausted from naptha pulls might not pull a product that is largely DMT..but oxides of DMT. IMO there is no reason to not want the oxides..many prefer them but personally I dont notice a difference. If you throw the bark without pulling the oxides than it is just a giant waste IMO. It is not an extra 50mg we are talking about with say 100g of bark..1% is a good yield when it comes to naptha..but other solvents can and do pull 2%..so there is ALOT going to waste there if you just pull with naptha only and do not pull the "jungle" after with another solvent.

Of course it is a goo. DMT oxides do not form crystals when in freebase form. Goo does not mean it is impure or smokes any less smooth. All it might mean is there is oxides in there.

I’m just looking for an explanation. If a hypothetical extraction of 100g MHRB yields on the first pull let’s say 0.9g of crystals using 75ml of naphtha, we know that 75ml of naphtha can hold at least 0.9g of crystals (whatever those crystals might be). After 2 more pulls, we’ve pulled a total of 1.8g crystals. A fourth pull yields only 20mg. At this point we stop with a total yield of 1.820g.

So here’s the question: How much DMT remains in the MHRB aqueous solution?

My guess is that there’s very little. If you disagree, I’d like to know why. Why would naphtha not pull it all?

I agree that xylene will pull additional alkaloids, but if naphtha removes most of the DMT, then the alkaloids pulled by xylene will not be DMT. Burnt’s analysis was of a xylene-only extraction, not a naphtha extraction followed by a xylene extraction. My guess is that if a naphtha extraction is followed by a xylene extraction, the xylene result will be mostly non-DMT alkaloids. As you said, mostly DMT oxides and smaller amounts of other alkaloids.

So it’s true that if you want a full spectrum alkaloid mix, then using a less-selective solvent such as xylene is the way to go. But if you want to consume relatively pure DMT, then a more-selective solvent such a naphtha is the way to go.

 

[Infundibulum]

If you look at the thread I linked in the earlier post, you'll see burnt says that you can essentially keep on pulling from your jungle spice with heptane and you'll keep getting pure dmt. The less selective solvents do pull more product...that product is ~95% dmt and ~5% 2-MTHBC...there's a couple threads around on it, if you search for things relating to jungle spice they should pop up. There's some great analytical data as well as subjective stuff.

What I’m suggesting is this: Pull as much DMT as you can get using naphtha, then pull whatever remains using xylene or something similar. The question then is what does the xylene pull contain and how much? Are you saying that it’s mostly DMT? I don’t think so.

Actually, that's pretty much what I understood burnt's analysis to show, unless I'm mistaken.

That makes no sense. If DMT dissolves in naphtha, then one can get essentially all of the DMT out of solution using naphtha. It’s not like some magical point is reached where DMT is suddenly no longer soluble in naphtha, but is soluble in other solvents.

It makes sense if you think that dmt also resides in clathrate (or chelating) pockets within the basic MHRB soup. Such "pockets" have not been directly demonstrated, yet the theory is that the affinity of dmt for such "hiding places" is stronger than its affinity for naphtha but much less so for e.g. aromatic or terpene solvents. Which means that Naphth pulls can remove as much dmt does not hide in clathrates (i.e. clathrate structures < dmt), after which point a "better" solvent is required.

 

[gibran2]

It makes sense if you think that dmt also resides in clathrate (or chelating) pockets within the basic MHRB soup. Such "pockets" have not been directly demonstrated, yet the theory is that the affinity of dmt for such "hiding places" is stronger than its affinity for naphtha but much less so for e.g. aromatic or terpene solvents. Which means that Naphth pulls can remove as much dmt does not hide in clathrates (i.e. clathrate structures < dmt), after which point a "better" solvent is required.

That DOES make sense. So then the question is, what percentage of DMT is bound to clathrates? Is it significant?

And if it is significant, then is this how one would get a higher yield of relatively pure DMT:

1 – Extract with xylene or similar solvent.
2 – Salt out alkaloids with acetic acid (vinegar).
3 – Basify the alkaloid salts with NaOH.
4 – Extract from the basified alkaloid solution using naphtha.

 

[jamie]

^ if you did that tek, but added a zinc reduction before the naptha pulls you should get even more since all the oxides will be converted to DMT and thus pulled as well.

 

[Infundibulum]

It makes sense if you think that dmt also resides in clathrate (or chelating) pockets within the basic MHRB soup. Such "pockets" have not been directly demonstrated, yet the theory is that the affinity of dmt for such "hiding places" is stronger than its affinity for naphtha but much less so for e.g. aromatic or terpene solvents. Which means that Naphth pulls can remove as much dmt does not hide in clathrates (i.e. clathrate structures < dmt), after which point a "better" solvent is required.

That DOES make sense. So then the question is, what percentage of DMT is bound to clathrates? Is it significant?

And if it is significant, then is this how one would get a higher yield of relatively pure DMT:

1 – Extract with xylene or similar solvent.
2 – Salt out alkaloids with acetic acid (vinegar).
3 – Basify the alkaloid salts with NaOH.
4 – Extract from the basified alkaloid solution using naphtha.

Yup, that's pretty much what one could do!

SWIM has also witnessed that after naphtha pulls do not give anything, xylene will pull tons. By "tons" SWIM means roughly doubling the yield of white dmt. One side note though, these naphtha-then-xylene observations were done in STBs, which is a far "busier" and complex environment, possibly providing many such hiding places places.

In A/B (especially if one gets anal leaving the brew in the fridge o/n for more crap to settle, then decant supernatant) one may be getting rid of a good number of hiding places, in which case naphtha can pull far more dmt. So please people make note on the technique you're using along with the observations made!

And to answer your question, SWIM's empirical observations suggests that in STB even as much as 50% of the dmt may be hiding, but hell knows about A/B. I think in the comparison jbark did (pulling with naphtha) A/B had double the yield in white dmt compared to STB, which is consistent with the hiding places theory.

 

[MySmelf]

If you're getting a red goo then it can't be all DMT. DMT is not RED neither is DMT-N-oxide, its got to be an impurity.
Also I've been able to get close to 2% yield with naphtha STB and consider 1% kinda on the low side.

As less select solvents go, I perfer Toluene over Xylene or D-limonene. Mainly because I refuse to use Xylene, its "it makes the paint on my walls peel" nasty! and D-limonene is dirty, it failed the evap test and left a thick sticky tacky residue, though it smells nice.
I've only done a side by side test on a cactus extract with Toluene vs D-limonene and got a larger and much cleaner result with Toluene.

As for storage, I just can't see the advantage in evaporating some liquid every time I want to smoke. Its so easy to scoop some crystal/powder out of a vile with a pre-measured spoon. For oral its really easy to just dissolve a precise amount in a few milliliters of vinegar and stir it in a glass of water.

I have a question though and maybe this has been covered already but I'm not sure. If you're salting it directly out for storage, how can you be sure of your yield without evaporating and weighing? How do you know when you've exhausted the MHRB? How can you be sure of mg/drop with diminishing returns at the end? Even if it only varies by 2-3mg a drop that can add up at 5 or more drops a dose. Just doesn't seem that precise to me but I'm probable wrong here. :?

 

[endlessness]

Limonene isnt "dirty", its just not supposed to be evaporated. Thats why you salt it out like all limonene-using teks say

 

[SnozzleBerry]

If you're getting a red goo then it can't be all DMT. DMT is not RED neither is DMT-N-oxide, its got to be an impurity.

If by impurity you mean tannins or 2-MTHBC then this is the exact conclusion that burnt's analysis came to using analytical equipment. The percentage of tannins is fairly negligible...it's all in the links posted.

Also, limo failing the evaporation test is like xylene failing the freeze precipitation test; as endless said, you have to salt out of it.

 

[Infundibulum]

Guys the discussion here has gone in a totally different direction to the one the OP pointed!

As for burnt's analysis, do not forget the cut-off of the GC, that was 290 celsius. There's still space in the imagination for what else might be in the spice. Plus, color is a bitch (and it often does not mean much), colored substances can change the color in minuscule concentrations. Red dmt may as well have 0.001% of the stuff that dyes it red.

Also I've been able to get close to 2% yield with naphtha STB and consider 1% kinda on the low side.

But you're not really saying anything here; how much you'd get if you'd done A/B? how did you do the STB? how do you know that you got all of the dmt? I do not find it surprising that eventually you can get all the dmt out even from STB. After all (and given sufficient time) lye may be able to degrade whatever may be hindering dmt's migration to naphtha.

 

[SWIMfriend]

I agree that the subject has drifted from the title of the thread--and that's what I'm interested in.

What do people have to say about liquid storage? For me the draw is two things: 1) Dosing can be arranged to be precise--more precise than you could get with solid material even with a very good scale. 2) The interesting potential for "hiding material in plain sight." People (the people in blue) looking for "drugs" are looking for powder or leaf, and virtually not at all for liquid. I can think of some interesting ways to hide a small quantity of a liquid that appears to be water or alcohol--that I defy anyone to work up enough nerve to say "This little bit at the bottom of this bottle should be tested at the lab" without worrying he'll look like an idiot.

So...

Freebase in alcohol? Freebase in naptha (stored in the garage with the paint left over from that decorating project)? Salt in water? Measure a dose in drops, allow to evaporate, and use.

How would they keep? Would it help to have some N2 in the bottle, as per the link I made before?

EDIT: Don't forget the "hide the Nobel prize gold from the Nazi's" story.

 

[Infundibulum]

SWIMfriend, the focus is on the dosing or the stealthiness?

I do not feel that the drops are more accurate than a scale - in contrast I think otherwise; a drop can vary a lot unless you're using molecular biology pipettes and you do not have much control over the dropper. The balance on the other hand is a more flexible instrument and you either use it correctly or you don't; even the cheapest mg balance can give reproducible measurements if it is used correctly, i.e. in an draft-free environment, properly calibrated, properly zeroed, placed in a as-horizontal-as-possible surface (NOT a pillow or bed!), avoiding vibrations, you get the idea. Which means it is a matter of preference; if one cannot be bothered taking time to make a proper measurement, then the dropper is a good alternative.

As for the stealthiness, liquid in a bottle does look better compared to some random powder. It can be disguised as a pharmaceutical tincture and placed in the medicines cabinet. In which case ethanol would be a good choice since it can dissolve freebase freely and evaporates fairly fast. It'd take ~5min or less to go from liquid to smokeable freebase.