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

Research The Cactus Analysis Thread

Research done by (or for) the DMT-Nexus community
Migrated topic.
I have TLC plates from bunk Police and Marquis reagent. I need to get another reagent though since I want test cactus and try growing and breeding Illinois bundleflower for increased alkaloids. Probably best to do 2 reagent test even better 3 reagent tests as outlined in one of the booklets that came with the kit.

I got enough cactus powder I made by removing spines, cutting off strips removing the core. I intend on using my soxhlet and extract with either ethanol or methanol , I got both. Yea I bought 10 pounds I now know I can get much better cactus for the money.

I have chromatography paper from a lab supply company. I was hoping to be able to use it since it cost much less. I might find I can't use it though. I can afford to buy 10-20 tlc plates a month but I know others might not be able to, and that's why I asked about using paper. I will experiment with the paper when I do the tlc plates and see if any thing useful comes from trying paper, spraying with the ninhydrin solution.

I feel pretty confident that I will obtain better stock after reading many threads and the very useful info I found in this thread. I think of screening cactus and growing them as an investment in the future that will benefit more than just me. I feel like I'm involved in something much larger than myself. I got about 20 trichs I started from seed and will start another 20 soon. I know that 10 years from now I will be glad I started this project. Thanks to all of you for the ground work you have done that makes this possible for people like me. I am still learning so any advise is welcomed.
 
permatrip said:
I took a sample to work with soon, I used a 5mm tube to get the sample, then froze and I think instead of using distilled water I will use the solvent provided with the kit. Methanol/ammonia solution. It seems to make sense to me.
Click to expand...

Preliminary data suggest that taking the sample at the bottom 1/5 of the live stem provides the most accurate quantification of M-content.

Be sure that your samples are identical as to surface area of green flesh. Variations in thickness seem less important than variations in surface area.

Using the ammoniacal methanol will convert M to its free-base; lowering its solubility in the water that is contained in the flesh and that gets mixed up in your sample solution. Also, both M-freebase and its salts are soluble in water, why using methanol at this wet stage? It also has a lower boiling point making it boil away in a pressure cooker (while when using water this hardly plays a role).

permatrip said:
Instead of pressure cooking I intend on mashing the sample, sealing the eppindorf vial and in a glass container keep warm in a water bath for a lenght of time perhaps 8hr. Then extract using a filter draw into a syringe to load into a cap tube for TLC/test.
Click to expand...

If you have a pressure cooker, I would say use it, be it for the sake of complete extraction and elimination of sliminess.

permatrip said:
I suppose I should do a second sample by freezing then pressure cooking the sample.
Click to expand...
:thumb_up:

permatrip said:
Has anyone any experience in testing using paper chromatography as paper is less expensive and was widely used and still is today as far as I read.
Click to expand...
If you want to semi-quantify your extracts afterwards with ninhydrin, all lab-procedures use TLC. It has a better resolution and thus leaves a more localized and reproducible spot to analyse.

I'm so glad you're willing to peer-review the document.:love: I'm sure it has value and together we can only further improve it. Thanks Permatrip and good luck. Be sure to post any results or questions.
 
Thanks An1cca, I will follow your instructions. I hadn't really thought it out, all you said makes sense. I thought extracting straight into the solvent system might help avoid the slimyness & avoid using the pressure cooker. I got a pc I'll put it to good use.

I just realized I am like the newbs I see all the time trying to grow their first mushrooms,not following tried and true methods that work. This was really useful to remind me not to try to innovate until I can create on my own. Don't know why I thought I could skip water extraction or pcing.

I find the separation kits to be inexpensive an a must have for serious cactus cultivators.

I realize I need to make a crystalline sample and get it tested to use as a reference in order to do anything worth posting about. Until then I'll research, read and live vicariously through you guys.
 
Just totally revamped the first post in this thread with a lot of updates, hopefully it will be more useful and organized now!

I'm also hoping more people will post their extraction results here (or here) so we can have better idea on cact yields and best cuttings.
 
Hi, would this kind of paper be more data that can be added? Haven't seen this paper mentioned here before (sorry if it has been and I missed it).

I think they conclude that a good approach is to get cacti from a local shaman's garden and not worry about much else 🙂 Makes sense, they probably tended for and selected plants for hundreds of years.

Ideally one would go to south america, visit with shaman's, and ask them for cuttings from their plants. I guess people have done that already (can anyone share stories of that?). I would love to get some of those cacti 💚🌵
 

Attachments

  • New_mescaline_concentrations_from_14_tax.pdf
    693.1 KB · Views: 1
  • Screenshot_20200608-110716.png
    Screenshot_20200608-110716.png
    256.4 KB · Views: 2
I've never been to South America. But all the photos and videos I've seen show that the shamans mostly select big fat Pachanois with very small spines. It is the classic short spined Ecuadorian Pachanoi type.

If you ever get a chance to watch the documentary "Eduardo the Healer" by Douglas Sharon, there is a scene in which the shaman says that the strongest San Pedros come from the northern part of Peru. I'm pretty sure he is referring to the short spined Ecuadorian Pachanoi type.

From my experience it is a very good type. Good potency and a very nice quality to the trip. But Bridgesii is still stronger from what I have found.
 
Its important to compare apples to apples when looking at yields. The 4.7% yield is from the fabled "Ogun" Pachanoi. But that is just the dried outer green flesh from a cutting from a large mother plant. The cutting sat in the dark in a box for months. There are reasons why that number is so high. Ogunbodede talks about it in his article and there has been extensive discussion surrounding that cactus on the internet forums. And it is of the phenotype that I am referring to.

The cacti have been traded and re-planted all throughout the Andes for many centuries. There are many Trichos growing in locations far from the original place of origin for that type. In the wild, in large numbers, the fat, small spined Pachanois originate predominantly in the area of southern Ecuador and northern Peru. They have been a favorite type for many for a long time.
 
im just gonna throw this out there

i had acquired severely stressed and aged PC clones, 5+ meters. a friend wanted to make a pedro brew and bought these and then asked for some help (it was a mistake on his part going for a "good deal", bridge was the initial suggestion)

i cooked it as well as i cook anything else, over a meter was required to begin to satisfy the pharmacological response desired. however it was still consderably mild for the friend that drank it and only because of the bodyload/discomfort did he not continue to drink his fill

i call bunk on stress being that much of a potentiator as well as site the instance where stressed plants lost potency. the correlation is vapor to me.
 
With all respect Chaska, and forgive me if I've misunderstood you, but most PC-type (Predominant Cultivar) pachs are known to be so weak that in some instances they could be considered effectively inactive.
I have heard of exceptions with very old, very thick segments. You could well get almost nothing from meters-worth of PC green flesh, as it's often measured so low in active alks that it still would do little to nothing compared to much shorter segments of non-PC pachs, Bridges, Scops, or many Peruvianus (and others).

Using any PC pach as your basis for "calling bunk" on the stressing effect of alk concentration would not be a great example-- because you're starting off with almost nothing in the first place.

There is quite a large number of people that report strength increases from "darking", or storing away from light for extended periods prior to brewing-- but there needs to be more testing in a formal environment (freshly-cut and after storage for "x" time) to honestly settle the question.

8)
 
Chaska what do you think is the most potent type of Tricho?

For me it has consistently been Bridgesii, regardless of the clone. Although I must admit that one of my most visually stimulating cactus trips was from a tea that was predominantly monstrose Pachanoi. I also find Scopulicola to be quite potent and visual. But Bridgesii has consistently been the strongest for me. What about you?
 
great info, thanks! <3

about a month ago i bought a san pedro, bolivian torch and a peyote to grow. at the moment they are just family, but one day i will no doubt cultivate my san pedro and my bolivian torch. this info is great to have for when it comes to that.

thanks <3
 
The Cactus Analysis Thread - Plant Analysis and Substance Testing - Mescaline content doubles when cuttings are kept in dark for ~3 months.
:|
 
In another thread, they are discussing this research paper:

Validation and exploratory application of a simple, rapid and economical procedure (MESQ) for the quantification of mescaline in fresh cactus tissue and aqueous cactus extracts

Objective: An effective way to protect the currently endangered wild populations of Lophophora williamsii is to select mescaline-rich specimens for selective propagation. Also, users of these and other entheogenic cacti are in need of an accessible way of dosing extracts. This research aims to...
zenodo.org zenodo.org

Looks like this 'MESQ'-technique might serve this thread very well...
 
There's a new interesting hypothesis pertaining to other molecules in pachanoi and Peruvian torch that "interfere" with mescaline in this thread TBM, Short Type: Mercilessly intense experience - Experience reports - Welcome to the DMT-Nexus.
I can't post in that thread due to me being a new member, but here's the quote.

Just a thought echoing what was already said. If a person took 200 grams of something that was 1% their dosage level would be 2 grams. If it was 2% double that, etcetera. Some of the bridgesii strains are coming back in the range of several percent or so, so adverse perceptions of bridgesii are likely due to unanticipatedly high dosages. Pachanoi and peruvianus often have other molecules like 3-methoxytyramine or DMPEA that competitively interfere with mescaline binding to receptors so are perceived of in a lighter way whereas so far only mescaline is being observed in bridgesii. An analytical project is underway as this is being written so eventually a lot more resolution will be available. Mescaline is a beautiful experience at an appropriate level but a really high dose is challenging and uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

This is opposite of what was believed perviously, that being that there were other molecules in bridgesii that potentiated the experience. I personally never understood where that hypothesis came from. There was never any evidence of bridgesii containing any other molecules other than trace amounts, and just about all of those molecules that were found in trace amounts were also found in pach and P torch.

So with all the being said, I don't really understand this new hypothesis either, nor do I understand the logic pertaining to how his hypothesis was derived. In the above quote, there's a statement,
Pachanoi and peruvianus often have other molecules like 3-methoxytyramine or DMPEA that competitively interfere with mescaline binding to receptors so are perceived of in a lighter way whereas so far only mescaline is being observed in bridgesii
Click to expand...

For starters, this seems to be a direct contradiction to the analyses that is on this very thread, which has 3-methoxytyramine and DMPEA in trace amounts in all three cacti species.

I also don't understand how DMPEA would interact with mescaline. It seems as though the molecule is broken down by enzymes in the gut, and has absolutely no psychedelic effects. I believe Alexander Shulgin tested this molecule himself, and deemed it non psychoactive.

Lastly, 3-methoxytyramine is a dopamine metabolite, and to my knowledge, does not interact with 5ht2 receptors what so ever. Even if there was some small psychoactive effect from this molecule, and that's a big if, I revert to my first point being this molecule is found in TRACE amounts in all three cacti.

I'd be interested to hear what others have to say. Maybe there's some data that I have not seen. But my current knowledge about these "other molecules", and the assays that I have read all point to the difference in experience being solely that of bridgesii containing more mescaline.
 
jingamin said:
Please report new analysis. I follow this thread all the time.
Click to expand...

I will for sure, but gotta be patient :)

An1cca said:
In another thread, they are discussing this research paper:

Validation and exploratory application of a simple, rapid and economical procedure (MESQ) for the quantification of mescaline in fresh cactus tissue and aqueous cactus extracts

Objective: An effective way to protect the currently endangered wild populations of Lophophora williamsii is to select mescaline-rich specimens for selective propagation. Also, users of these and other entheogenic cacti are in need of an accessible way of dosing extracts. This research aims to...
zenodo.org zenodo.org

Looks like this 'MESQ'-technique might serve this thread very well...
Click to expand...

Thank you , that is definitely a relevant article, it has a lot of very relevant information one can learn from!

I'll add some info from that paper to the initial post, like this:

mescaline concentration is highest at the top, which facilitates comparison of specimens as early as possible in their growth. Future research should perform a detailed analysis of the concentration gradient near and at the top in order to determine the most appropriate position for standardized biopsy. Anyway, in order not to disrupt growth, biopsies should be taken at a safe distance from the growing tip.
Click to expand...


skelly0311 said:
There's a new interesting hypothesis pertaining to other molecules in pachanoi and Peruvian torch that "interfere" with mescaline in this thread TBM, Short Type: Mercilessly intense experience - Experience reports - Welcome to the DMT-Nexus.
I can't post in that thread due to me being a new member, but here's the quote.

Just a thought echoing what was already said. If a person took 200 grams of something that was 1% their dosage level would be 2 grams. If it was 2% double that, etcetera. Some of the bridgesii strains are coming back in the range of several percent or so, so adverse perceptions of bridgesii are likely due to unanticipatedly high dosages. Pachanoi and peruvianus often have other molecules like 3-methoxytyramine or DMPEA that competitively interfere with mescaline binding to receptors so are perceived of in a lighter way whereas so far only mescaline is being observed in bridgesii. An analytical project is underway as this is being written so eventually a lot more resolution will be available. Mescaline is a beautiful experience at an appropriate level but a really high dose is challenging and uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

This is opposite of what was believed perviously, that being that there were other molecules in bridgesii that potentiated the experience. I personally never understood where that hypothesis came from. There was never any evidence of bridgesii containing any other molecules other than trace amounts, and just about all of those molecules that were found in trace amounts were also found in pach and P torch.

So with all the being said, I don't really understand this new hypothesis either, nor do I understand the logic pertaining to how his hypothesis was derived. In the above quote, there's a statement,
Pachanoi and peruvianus often have other molecules like 3-methoxytyramine or DMPEA that competitively interfere with mescaline binding to receptors so are perceived of in a lighter way whereas so far only mescaline is being observed in bridgesii
Click to expand...

For starters, this seems to be a direct contradiction to the analyses that is on this very thread, which has 3-methoxytyramine and DMPEA in trace amounts in all three cacti species.

I also don't understand how DMPEA would interact with mescaline. It seems as though the molecule is broken down by enzymes in the gut, and has absolutely no psychedelic effects. I believe Alexander Shulgin tested this molecule himself, and deemed it non psychoactive.

Lastly, 3-methoxytyramine is a dopamine metabolite, and to my knowledge, does not interact with 5ht2 receptors what so ever. Even if there was some small psychoactive effect from this molecule, and that's a big if, I revert to my first point being this molecule is found in TRACE amounts in all three cacti.

I'd be interested to hear what others have to say. Maybe there's some data that I have not seen. But my current knowledge about these "other molecules", and the assays that I have read all point to the difference in experience being solely that of bridgesii containing more mescaline.
Click to expand...

I think you make some good points and I also want to know more info about that hypothesis. I think difference in mescaline content and self-suggestion might explain a lot, but it would be good to have some more info on the pharmacology of those compounds, possible entourage effects, but also simple analysis of the plants that supposedly have a "different alk content" to see if it's true.

Some years back I've tested some chaliponga that someone swore felt like 5-MeO-DMT, definitely not DMT, and in the end it only had DMT, albeit a large amount. So just because one feels something doesn't mean we are interpreting correctly. Even within the same substance and dose, effects can vary so widely that it's hard to make absolute claims based on one's subjective experience.
 
Hey, this might be a little off topic, but i wonder if that trick to make mushrooms produce miprocin by feeding mycelium with MiPT, would also work with cacti?

Do we know the precursor within the cactus, for mescaline, and if so, could it be injected in cacti to make them produce more mescaline?
 
Back
Top Bottom