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

The Average Cactus Mescaline Content Mega-Thread (post your yields!)

Migrated topic.

endlessness

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
I've been working on this table (attached) which collects results from different cactus analysis. I added first of all journal publications, also underground assays. I've been careful to add sources to everything

It has 111 entries so far (as of 15/10/2018
130 as of 17/10

Ideally this will give us a good idea on mescaline content in cactus around the world, averages, distributions, being able to cross data such as growth/harvest conditions, vendor/geographical source, etc.

If you look at the excel table I also made sheets to separate per species, and on the bottom I added median/averages/deviation, as well as a scatter graph to catch outliers.

Please post any results you may have had and all the info you can on the sample (pics, growth/harvest info, extraction method, whatever you can)

Let me know what you guys think!


TL : DR, This is a database on cact mesc content, so far median value = 0.51% dry, average = 0.78% dry. Add your results by posting here to help this grow
 

Attachments

  • Cactus+analysis+february+7+2023.xlsx
    128.8 KB · Views: 8
  • Captura+de+tela+2023-02-07+004245.jpg
    Captura+de+tela+2023-02-07+004245.jpg
    26 KB · Views: 5
Frickin' awesome! I'll send some data to add in the near future. Makes me happy that most of my trich forest are bridges with a few random pachanoi for variety :)

edit: can we add a YES/NO column for mesc purifying/cleaning? perhaps the type of mesc salt too?
 
awesome! wouldn't it be a good idea to add the used extraction tek to the table?
by the way this graph direction/order looks way better then the one before!
 
Hey friends

padawan, awesome, good luck with your cact garden :)

Yes I can definitely add more columns to it to include purification/clean up.

Generally, the data is for pure mescaline, so the measurement is exact. The only cases where it might be simply talking about extract weight, which could be crude/impure/mixed with other alks, is when in the OBS column it says "not confirmed with analysis".

Ideally I'd like to find someone who can program a front end search engine for that database so we can filter search results according to different criteria (for example just show results that are confirmed with analysis, or just show nexus results, or just show results from cuttings that were kept in the dark after harvesting, etc), maybe even make automatic graphs, etc. Anyways, that's another idea for the future.

In the meanwhile I'm adding your suggestions, and adding more results when I find new publications or find other info from people around the nexus or other forums. I've also changed the % conversion between dry<->fresh values. I've been using Poisson 1960 value of 93.5% water content so making the dry as 6.5% the fresh value. It also seems closer to what Nexians have been getting according to Urtica and DansMaTete's experiments with drying cact, instead of the 10% value I was using before (therefore some of the values from earlier database version will have increased)

pete666, I'm happy if you can bring data from whatever you find, and I hope this database will help you find the best named clones!

grollum, yeah it does look better now, been tinkering a bit with how to display the data. And yeah I can def add something regarding extraction method.. In the meanwhile, if you go to "info source" column, all of the sources are hyperlinked either to the original publication where you can read about the extraction method, or to the post where the forum member is describing it.

Thanks again for the feedback, y'all!
 
Major updates in the original xls file!

I've added all the extraction teks/methods used, whether from publications or from underground extractions. Also added info whether there are pics available of cactus or extracts, and made it clear whether tests were confirmed with GC-MS or other analytical methods.

Also added a few more results, now we're up to n=130 .. :)
 
DansMaTete said:
Here is a bunch of new numbers from my babies if you want to add it

DansMaTete, not bad numbers. Were they preselected in any way or is it 11 randomly selected seeds you sowed and have grown up?
 
Peruvianus and Bridgesii were generic seeds (no special name) and each time an extraction is done i note down the result, so no preselection.
 
Bump!

If anyone has been doing cactus extractions, please share the yields (and general info on cutting/growth and harvest conditions/extraction methods), so we can update the averages :)
 
Hi endlessness - here is a sheet of a few I have done. Hope its not too confusing. All CIELO tek (mostly with citric but some fumaric).
 

Attachments

  • Tricho+Processing.xlsx
    16.2 KB · Views: 2
merkin said:
Hi endlessness - here is a sheet of a few I have done. Hope its not too confusing. All CIELO tek (mostly with citric but some fumaric).

Hey!

Thanks for the info, will add to the first post! Please clarify a couple of things.. For example when you say FUMARIC, is that only for the item immediately below it?

and if you have several CIELO % results, does that mean from the same cutting you extracted several different times?

The storage means staying in the dark for that time?

And what do you mean with the split in the powder weight?

and all those 0% results are different extractions from the same last bridgesii that you got 1.97% from too? or what where does results?
 
I find it poetically wonderful that merkin's champion plant is the one by the gate. How could it be any different? :D

My interpretation was that the entries annotated 'FUMARIC' refer to the percentage directly below - because the column is headed 'CITRIC unless otherwise noted' and there's a clue from the field annotated 'split 100g'. Underneath it, the fumaric- and citric-treated amounts (52g and 48g respectively) add up to 100g.

And it looks to me like the multiple identical 238g/0.00% results at the bottom are copy/paste debris.

I was also wondering whether the blank fields that I see in the yield (g) column are zeroes that somehow got lost by the system (sounds familar...) Was it misinterpreted data from opening an excel spreadsheet in LibreOffice Calc, or were they were simply left blank? Does this mean that the 0.00% yield results are what they are? A blank column needs to be treated differently than a zero for the purpose of calculating averages.
 
I want to add:
Mescaline Sulphate from typical A/B xylene tek with re-x from acetone/water or isopropanol/water
2 different T. Bridgesii monstrose short section form cacti: yield 3.1% and 2.7%
Another extraction of TBM long section form (penis): 2.9%
 
Extracted 2 grams of mescaline citrate via CIELO from 47.78 grams of bridge monstrous short form dried, spines included. That's 4.2% mescaline citrate, 2.6% mesc HCL. Did not stress at all, although the previous winter the cactus was inside with minimal sun exposure.
 
skelly0311 said:
Extracted 2 grams of mescaline citrate via CIELO from 47.78 grams of bridge monstrous short form dried, spines included. That's 4.2% mescaline citrate, 2.6% mesc HCL. Did not stress at all, although the previous winter the cactus was inside with minimal sun exposure.

What did you think of the TEK? Any feedback? It's slowly maturing, stabilizing, and being robust to people's issues (if they happen), but feedback welcome especially if you came across any problems. Thanks!
 
endlessness said:
when you say FUMARIC, is that only for the item immediately below it?
Yes - I split the EA liquid extraction in 2 basically to try the salting with Fumaric and Citric. I was just cautiously testing the Fumaric process and hedged my bets as it were.

endlessness said:
and if you have several CIELO % results, does that mean from the same cutting you extracted several different times?
Yes - I only do max 100g powder at a time but had got more powder than that from drying and grinding.

endlessness said:
The storage means staying in the dark for that time?
Correct

endlessness said:
And what do you mean with the split in the powder weight?
The extraction powder was 100g, split the EA into two. I split the powder weight numbers based roughly on the volume split of the solvent liquid before salting. It was just a way of calculating/estimating the yield. The beaker that was salted with Fumaric had a little less solvent in it than the one that got citric. Make sense?

endlessness said:
and all those 0% results are different extractions from the same last bridgesii that you got 1.97% from too? or what where does results?
Those are just cells copied down to keep the calculations. I have lost my notes for about 4 other plants and was going to add them but couldn't (yet)

The spreadsheet is made in Apple Numbers and I exported an xls from that. Don't have a real Excel to check if there were errors! My apologies if some weirdness exported.

downwardsfromzero said:
I find it poetically wonderful that merkin's champion plant is the one by the gate. How could it be any different? :D
Funny that, when I got her (the seller insisted I take it against my wishes) I had read they were lowest in alk content so gave all the love and position to the Pedros. Turned out the opposite! I have many copies of her now all over to try and make up for my lack of faith. The plant at the gate is the mother of all the others - my gardener decided to top her while I was away at some point so I had a bunch of unexpected cuttings to replant.

downwardsfromzero said:
My interpretation was that the entries annotated 'FUMARIC' refer to the percentage directly below - because the column is headed 'CITRIC unless otherwise noted' and there's a clue from the field annotated 'split 100g'. Underneath it, the fumaric- and citric-treated amounts (52g and 48g respectively) add up to 100g.
You are correct, I was trying to grow fumaric crystals but got mostly powder. Anyway as above I hedged my bets...

downwardsfromzero said:
And it looks to me like the multiple identical 238g/0.00% results at the bottom are copy/paste debris.
Indeed, awaiting more data :)
Some of the 0.0% I just havent processed the powder yet, but plant was dried and ground.

downwardsfromzero said:
I was also wondering whether the blank fields that I see in the yield (g) column are zeroes that somehow got lost by the system (sounds familar...) Was it misinterpreted data from opening an excel spreadsheet in LibreOffice Calc, or were they were simply left blank? Does this mean that the 0.00% yield results are what they are? A blank column needs to be treated differently than a zero for the purpose of calculating averages.

They are just a means of copying the formatting and formulas etc down for more entries. I'm not to smart with spreadsheets lol The ones to the right are space for new results as I still have powder left from many of those plants as you can see. Just haven't had a gap to do some more work.
 
Loveall said:
skelly0311 said:
Extracted 2 grams of mescaline citrate via CIELO from 47.78 grams of bridge monstrous short form dried, spines included. That's 4.2% mescaline citrate, 2.6% mesc HCL. Did not stress at all, although the previous winter the cactus was inside with minimal sun exposure.

What did you think of the TEK? Any feedback? It's slowly maturing, stabilizing, and being robust to people's issues (if they happen), but feedback welcome especially if you came across any problems. Thanks!

I think the TEK's great! Super easy and intuitive. For me, I'd like to get a better understanding of the actual chemical processes that are happening. Probably gonna brush up on my chem
 
Loveall said:
What did you think of the TEK? Any feedback? It's slowly maturing, stabilizing, and being robust to people's issues (if they happen), but feedback welcome especially if you came across any problems. Thanks!

Next silent reader here - and very fascinated by that cool CIELO TEK. I read the traditional DCM extracts were causing terrible emulsions when pulling from basified powder. Your pictures on the wiki look so cool that I might want to do it also soon???

Extracted DMT some times, but the cactus just has a more interesting catch to me actually :d

So I read on this website that extracted powder is different from cactus tea.

Cactus tea will make you quite a big chance of getting nausea. But the experience will feel 'deeper'?

Is that more of a placebo effect because of ingesting an unrefined, less *chemically tempered* product? Or is there indeed a catch to it which should me more make the *full spectrum tea* instead of the CIELO?

MFG
 
Back
Top Bottom