Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Capsules

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
Invisiblebekyndnunwind
Psychenaut

Registered: 03/05/05
Posts: 80
San Pedro Question
    #5247023 - 01/31/06 02:01 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

I'm deciding on if I want a San Pedro Cactus or a Peruvian Torch Cactus and want some input.

I would have to keep the plant indoors because of the climate where I live and was wondering how well they do as an indoor plant.  Are there types of Peyote that are better for indoors?

I want to start from a 6 inch cutting and plant it in potting soil.

If anyone can give me suggestions as to which cacti to pick I would really be greatful, thanks ahead of time.
:grin:

Edited by bekyndnunwind (01/31/06 06:08 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKoala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: bekyndnunwind]
    #5247165 - 01/31/06 02:40 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

All lophs are ideal for indoors, or nicely shaded outdoors. They'll do well in a windowsill. But they're easily scortched outside.

As far as pachanoi vs. peruvianus, I've said it a hundred times by now (not that I expect you to have read it, just that I feel silly repeating it) so I'll just quote myself.

Quote:

I'm among the M.S. Smith logic followers. Everyone knows that the different "peruvianus" being sold all over the place aren't the same. So what are they?

The majority of the ones raised, grown, and sold in the USA are thought to be T. Cuzcoensis, a cactus containing very little alkaloids. This includes most popular vendor's peruvianus.

Then, there are the different species that entho vendors in Peru ship to the US claimed to be T. Peruvianus. It is thought that these, often reasonably potent ones are T. Macrogonus, and thats what Icaro's pictures have been identified as.

Finally, there is the short spines peruvianus. I haven't read as decisive a conclusion on that one. Could be a kind of pachanoi, the "true" peruvianus, or a hybrid of some sort?

I hope that accurately sums up his viewpoint, the most reasonable suggested theory I've read on the subject.





So, essentially, if you're buying from a US vendor, like BBB, don't bother with a peruvianus. Peruvian torch is often considered the better of cacti around these parts, but you so often hear about people buying them and feeling nothing, wonder why?

According to test dats, they can be more potent than pachanoi, or it can go the other way around. But the ones tested aren't the ones you can find at these vendors. Some shops in peru that sell dry cactus flesh (often of potent nature) also sell cuttings of "peruvianus". These are quite obviously nothing like. In fact, here's a shroomerite flipping out at a peruvian vendor selling good cacti. He is under the assumption that it is fake peruvian torch, really pachanoi being mislabled. When it is quite possible just his inability to recognize the different kinds of things being called peruvianus, none of which being correct, but this one being better anyway.

http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat...rue#Post4779801

So, if you want to import a cactus, or can find someone selling T. Macrogonus, I say go for it. If they're just being generically called "peruvian torch" or t. peruvianus (even from the most respectable vendors in the world), don't bother unless you just want a pretty cactus (and it is far from the prettiest imo) as it'll never be good for dosage, most likely.

I'd play it safe, and get some standard pachanoi and maybe some bridgesii too.


--------------------
You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefaslimy
Dead Man
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/04/04
Posts: 3,436
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: Koala Koolio]
    #5247436 - 01/31/06 03:59 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

just get bridgesii.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKoala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: faslimy]
    #5247482 - 01/31/06 04:12 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Hehe.


--------------------
You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinepharao
^^^^^
Male

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 65
Last seen: 17 years, 14 days
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: faslimy]
    #5247500 - 01/31/06 04:16 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

elgr : thank you for this information. But why is this? Is Peruvian torch very rare? I have 35 Peruvian torch cactus I have grown from seeds, seeds was bought from SuccSeed.com in Sweden (a very respected cactus vendor), is there any reason to believe that they are not true Peruvian torch's? Or is this a problem on cuttings from us vendors only I have also San Pedro seedlings and they look very different that the Peruvian torch seedlings, San Pedro is shorter and rounder while the torch is thinner and taller. Sorry if this is a stupid question.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKoala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: pharao]
    #5247582 - 01/31/06 04:34 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

It's a bigger picture kind of problem, not the responsibility of any vendor. The respectable sources of the seeds are in the same position.

You could have active cacti, theres just no telling what they are. When they grow out a little (or if they have already) try to get some possible ID's over at thenook.org forum.

It isn't a matter of rarity, just the crazy mislabeling of peruvian cacti, that many would place partial blame on Karel Knize. Apparently he's a really irresponsible cactus vendor in south america. He finds, labels specimens and ships them to the US. But apparently his seeds really aren't constant, and he does a crappy job. KK242 is one of the species he sent up. It is what is sold as peruvian torch.


--------------------
You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKoala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: Koala Koolio]
    #5247608 - 01/31/06 04:39 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

It should be noted that this isn't "officially" recognized information. The taxonomy of these cacti is a complete mess, but there are those who try to make sense of the mess.

I suppose I should give the direct quote of MS Smith, as to not misrepresent him.

Quote:


The long-spined KK242 is the one most of us consider as "T. peruvianus." But this plant matches none of the descriptions offered as T. peruvianus by Britton & Rose, Backeberg, or others. This KK242 doesn't even appear to grow in the Matucana region as claimed. So Karol Knize screwed thing up by selling seed to a plant that isn't the T. peruvianus of the books, but is rather a plant that seems quite accurately to be T. cuzcoensis. I doubt he intentionally committed this fraud, but his reputation indicates his failings and certainly it would not be beyond the possible?or even the likely.

Therefore the commonly sold plant with long central spines, and the swollen bases, that all of us know as T. peruvianus KK242 is, I contend, T. cuzcoensis. It is the one I have suggested be relabeled ?T. peruvianus, KK242 (T. cuzcoensis?)?.

The description of T. macrogonus by Salm-Dyck, followed by Riccobono, are taken from plants in cultivation, and its natural range and how it grows under these conditions was clearly unknown. But those descriptors later added to T. macrogonus by Backeberg, and which indicate his observation of more mature specimens, though still under cultivation, show great similarity to the descriptions of T. peruvianus as first recorded by B&R.

I content that T. macrogonus is in fact the forerunner to the name T. peruvianus, and that should B&R who first described T. peruvianus as a "new species" been aware of the features of a mature T. macrogonus they might have seen that the two are synonymous. B&R do appear to have had access to a T. macrogonus at the New York Botanical Garden (originally from the Kew), but they appear to have the same ideas regarding the plant as their predecessors, Salm-Dyck, and Riccobono, all of whom had viewed cultivated plants. B&R admitted to T. macrogonus being in all likelihood more slender in cultivation than they were in nature and this obviously suggests that they were aware that the plant wasn?t in its optimal growth conditions, and also that it would get both taller and thicker in diameter when grown under conditions more reflective of its natural habitat.

It is interesting to note from the picture record, that T. macrogonus (the non-Bolivian form), and T. peruvianus (the non-KK242 form) bear great similarities in their growth habits, but also a great degree of dissimilarity due to environmental factors. This has caused great confusion between the two, especially in descriptions of plant diameter and spine length, features that I have noticed on my own T. peru/T. macro are highly variable, particularly due to light exposure (time and intensity).

The ?bluing,? its glaucus nature, is something common in the descriptions of T. macrogonus, and it is clearly present on the T. peruvianus that are growing in Matucana, at least as this is suggested in the photo record. The blue tone is quite radically present on the large stands of T. peruvianus photographed by Icaros. These I think are in fact T. macrogonus, mature plants of those which were previously described only in cultivation. Should the two names be collapsed together? I think they should, if my thinking regarding their synonymy is correct of course, and that since the name T. macrogonus preceded T. peruvianus it should be the one to survive. Maybe the name T. peruvianus can be applied to the plant I?ve called the ?short spined T. peruvianus,? but that might violate the code regarding nomenclature.

As for the short spined T. peruvianus, well, I still have many unanswered questions, as it does appear to come from areas surrounding Matucana and La Oroya. As I?ve said in my book, it may be a hybrid or an undescribed species. But on this matter I feel I am guessing a lot more than I am doing on the above matters regarding the ?KK242? as T. cuzcoensis, and T. peruvianus and T. macrogonus as being synonymous, both of which I think I have adequate support for at least suggesting. If others want to challenge my thinking on this I would be quite happy, as I?m looking for answers, and nothing else.





But, I do agree that if you want things simple: get a bridgesii.


--------------------
You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblebekyndnunwind
Psychenaut

Registered: 03/05/05
Posts: 80
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: Koala Koolio]
    #5247756 - 01/31/06 05:10 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

elgr, I have another question maybe you can help with. Say I had a 12 inch cutting from a San Pedro...in order to prepare it for ingestion could i blend the green inner part and drink that without boiling it down, or would it be a higher potency if i blended then boiled for about 3 hours? I am seeing disagreeing opinions when I search.

Another question is when i searched for bridgesii I found this:

Quote:

Trichocereus bridgesii is also quite commonly available and has the advantage of needing much less plant material for the same effect. Only 6 inches of this much thinner cactus (<7cm) is needed for the same effects. It should be noted though that genetics, climate and other growing conditions will probably be responsible for the largest variance in alkaloid content.




Wondering what your thoughts are.

Thanks again, you've been much help thus far.

Edited by bekyndnunwind (01/31/06 05:23 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKoala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: bekyndnunwind]
    #5247842 - 01/31/06 05:35 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Potency always varies. I would certainly not say it is always as good as that person described. However, it is rarely as bad as the worst of 'peruvianus' or pachanoi (which can be very, very weak). There are too many factors involved...

As far as preparation... I don't' know why people always consider blending and drinking. I could never imagine doing this. Have you seen blended cactus? Have you seen it when you try to pour it? It is foam. Foam of death. :smile:

Follow MJ's tek. It is lurking around here, but easier to find on the erowid cactus page. It is basically what you described, blending and boiling. You use the entire cactus. No de-spining, no de-coring.

Thanks for the compliment, but I'm just relaying information I've learned from others. You'll do the same sooner or later.


--------------------
You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleToolTroll
tourettic
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/02/04
Posts: 2,326
Loc: N. Cack
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: Koala Koolio]
    #5250541 - 02/01/06 10:10 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Hey elgr, thanks for the info. I remember reading that somewhere and thinking it might interest some Shroomerites. Of course as much as it explains some things, there's still many questions unanswered. It seems a taxonomical trainwreck. :smile:

I personally have seedlings of Pachanoi, "Peruvianus", Bridgesii, and Terscheckii. Mostly too small to tell a difference, though.


--------------------
"This whole idea that different is bad, that a change in consciousness is in itself harmful, is really one of the fundamental problems inherent in the drug war.” - Rick Doblin
my cactus collection
You vote with your dollars. Everyday. Vote responsibly.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinepharao
^^^^^
Male

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 65
Last seen: 17 years, 14 days
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: ToolTroll]
    #5250927 - 02/01/06 12:39 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Well I have talked to the seed vendor today and he could assure me that my peruvians were peruvians , and I have orderet two new varities he have gotten one from Rahuapampa, Peru and another varity from San Marcos, Peru. He had T. Macrogonus but he havent put these up for sale but had them in his private collection. he also told me that my san pedros were from Caraz, Peru.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKoala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: pharao]
    #5250994 - 02/01/06 12:59 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

"Well I have talked to the seed vendor today and he could assure me that my peruvians were peruvians , and I have orderet two new varities he have gotten one from Rahuapampa, Peru and another varity from San Marcos, Peru."

You're missing the point. He doesn't KNOW what the actual classification is. It's messed up from the start. Officially, KK242 are considered peruvianus. I didn't suggest that everybody's vendors are lying to them.

Simply because it comes from peru doesn't mean it's peruvianus. The whole point was that t. peruvianus might simply not exist, and that it would've been macrogonus if properly identified in the first place.

But, since your seeds came directly from peru, they're probably something interesting, could be anything, even very potent... Tons of triches there. As they are directly from wild cacti, they probably aren't the standard "fake" peruvianus we see, the kk242. So, the idea that you can't properly identify it as peruvianus stays true, but without the aspect of it being the "weak", oversold in the US, kk242. (which also came from peru... cuzco) The guys collecting and selling cacti in peru usually don't know exactly what they have, which is understandable. At least those who aim for the alkaloid content (and not whoever collected that bunk peruvian torch shamanspalace used to have, heh) are selling good seeds, even if mislabeled. The varieties that knize has pumped out, like kk242 would not be ideal for enthogenic purposes.

As far as the pedros go, if they're directly from peru, those'll vary too. I don't think pedros of any genetics tend to look anything like the backeberg clones everyone in the US sells. So, you'll never grow from seed one that is like what BBB has, etc, as it'll need to have been pollinated with another pachanoi, often drastically different. (if your seeds are even really of backeberg-pachanoi x other pachanoi). Also consider that in some areas in south america, trichocereus bridgesii are called "san pedro". But having good bridgesii genetics from peru would hardly be something to complain about.


--------------------
You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinepharao
^^^^^
Male

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 65
Last seen: 17 years, 14 days
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: Koala Koolio]
    #5251757 - 02/01/06 04:07 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

ok elgr, I understand better now the deal(and after have read ms smiths posts at the nook), i noticed this

Are the spines swollen at the base, is young growth green? You have TRICHOCEREUS CUZCOENSIS.

Are the spines NOT swollen at the base, is young growth lighter, having a waxy/frosty appearance? You have TRICHOCEREUS PERUVIANUS.


and my peruvianus seedlings does have a waxy apperance and lighter in color than my san pedros , im not sure about swollen at the base what that means tho but I think its too early to tell anyways but I realize I need to study cactus alot more., heh

Well I guess the future will tell me what is what, and if they arent that active well its nice to grow them anyways.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKoala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: pharao]
    #5252418 - 02/01/06 07:15 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Is the quote you gave actually from MS Smith? Seems to be by someone else. It is relevant in the determination of what is a cuzcoensis and all. But, further than that even, is the decision of what the other cactus is, a "real" peruvianus, or macrogonus, etc.

And, depending on how old your seedlings are, they aren't always great for getting a positive identification until they've grown out a bit.


--------------------
You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinepharao
^^^^^
Male

Registered: 05/05/04
Posts: 65
Last seen: 17 years, 14 days
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: Koala Koolio]
    #5254056 - 02/02/06 04:07 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

oh my bad, no it isnt I should have mentioned that, it was sunchild I quoted,
anyways I got a second email from my seed vendor where he could tell me (this is my poor translation)

"If you want material that is mixed, hybrids or digged up from nature KK is a good alternative, I have heard many stories about KK  and his trades with cactus, I have done buisness with KK myself in the 80s so I know. when it comes to kk242 I have only seen pictures of this on the internet.

when it comes to peruvianus it seems to be a variable cactus from place to place, I have heard Graham Charles say he have seen populations with both short and long spines.

Of course I cannot guarantee you that your peruvianus is what you are looking for (he knows what i am looking for) but my connections have usually sent me the real deal.

T peruvianus from Aricapampa Peru. "looks like
pachanoi with less spines, green blue".

regards,,"

Well at least the tone changed from guaranteed peruvianus to this but I keep my hopes up. out of 3 diffrent peruvianus I will cutlivate I hope to find one thats useful for entheogen purposes :smile:

anyways, I have orderet bridgesii seeds as well. and a couple of other san pedro varities also.

Edited by pharao (02/02/06 04:09 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKoala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: pharao]
    #5254546 - 02/02/06 10:00 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Anyone who has a high amount of respect for KK should be looked at very cautiously as a serious seed vendor. KK is known to have sent out totally mislabeled (or just random collections) of seeds. Some have joked that he just sweeps them off the floor to send to people, hehe.

Theres nothing wrong with getting some of his to see what the fuck becomes of them, or if you can make any sense out of it. Just don't make your collection rely on his identifications, or anyone who takes his seriously.


--------------------
You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefaslimy
Dead Man
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/04/04
Posts: 3,436
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: Koala Koolio]
    #5255538 - 02/02/06 02:18 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

still, he has collected thousands of plants which we might not have otherwise... even has one named after him.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKoala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
Re: San Pedro Question [Re: faslimy]
    #5255708 - 02/02/06 03:01 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

I agree that his ability to collect and distribute are valuable, it's just a shame that he wasn't very professional about it.


--------------------
You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Capsules


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Four ribbed San Pedro questions Peace_Patrol 2,174 4 10/10/02 11:07 PM
by Floydian
* San Pedro question... AmericaNightmare 1,507 7 07/02/03 01:12 PM
by AmericaNightmare
* growing san pedro questions 1stimer 2,265 6 02/06/03 03:05 PM
by AJ420
* san pedro question.. SevHoeSev 1,531 6 04/21/03 09:54 AM
by neuro
* San Pedro question. cdchriscd 922 7 06/15/03 05:46 AM
by EvilGir
* San Pedro question silversoul7 718 7 11/24/03 07:06 PM
by medicinebag
* san pedro question *DELETED* blacksabbathrulz 804 7 01/20/04 11:38 AM
by canid
* San pedro question SuperSpun 839 4 03/10/03 03:03 PM
by ShrewDigsby

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Mostly_Harmless, A.k.a
3,579 topic views. 0 members, 5 guests and 11 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.02 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 14 queries.