Change

Thanks for sharing, that was an interesting read. Ill kick start the discussion by sharing a few thoughts I had while reading the paper. In situ hybridization isn’t the best technique to demonstrate DMT is produced within brain tissues. In situ hybridization allows for visualization of mRNA. Ok so now we know INMT and AADC mRNA has been detected within these tissues. But do we know if INMT and AADC mRNA completes to process of translation to produce functional enzymes? They make a big deal in this study about being the first time to demonstrate INMT and AADC mRNA co-localise within the same cells. But this isn’t the important factor, the important factor is does translation occur allowing both enzymes to function within the same cell? I feel this paper would have been strengthened by examining the protein/enzyme levels not just the mRNA level. Secondly demonstrating the required enzymes mRNA exist in mice and human brain tissues, but only demonstrating the detection of DMT within mice tissues and not human tissues further weakens this publication. If they have the human brain tissues to perform in situ hybridization on, why not perform HPLC as well? Or maybe they did but didn’t publish the results because it didn’t confirm their hypothesis? This would be important data to publish because without it they are relying upon the assumption that INMT and AADC exclusively function to produce DMT when in reality they could perform their function upon a vast number of additional substrates that do not contribute to the DMT biosynthetic pathway. And finally, its amazing to think they have developed mice without pineal glands, and quite interesting that the mice with and without pineal glands produced statistically similar concentrations of DMT. Regardless of my minor criticisms it’s an interesting read and I hope this group gains additional funding, so they can continue their work in the future.

H202 (hydrogen peroxide), is an oxidising agent, so it has the potential to change chemical structures, but its far more likely that H202 will oxidise the cell wall rather than the metabolites within the cell, when exposed to a plant. Its highly unlikely that hormones could be causing chemical changes to plant metabolites. Hormones are signalling molecules that interact with receptors triggering conformational changes to receptors, or binding to DNA, triggering changes to gene expression. Enzymes perform biological chemical reactions, like for example there will be an enzymatic pathway which converts molecules step by step towards their final structure. So it may be possible for hormones to increase or decrease the rate at which enzymes are transcribed, which will affect the speed of metabolite accumulation. Often these pathways have bottlenecks, where one enzymatic reaction is performed at much lower rates then other parts of the pathway. Plant biologists study these enzymatic pathways looking for such bottlenecks, because if the enzymatic reaction is a 10 step process, but steps 3 & 4 are catalysed at slower rates then the rest of the pathway, its can be possible to use gmo technology to increase the rates of transcription for the enzyme that is slowing the pathway down, which will bring about overall yield increases of desired metabolites. For example; gmo poppies strains have been developed in this manner to specifically produce low accumulating alkaloids which are used to produce a lot of the semi synthetic opioids we see on the market today. If you want to find out if a plant hormone has the potential to change to rates of transcription of a specific gene/enzyme, you would need to locate the enzymes promotor sequence and search it for hormone response elements. If you find it, there is the potential this gene/enzyme is regulated by whatever hormone response element you have located, but even then it would take a lot more work to prove this experimentally.

Pollination is fascinating, like for example, How does the tricho know the difference between its own pollen and pollen from another tricho? After abit of pondering, I started connecting some dots which may or may not be related. So for fertilization to occur in animals, sperm needs to fuse with egg, but it’s not as simple as just putting a sperm and an egg together, the sperm must undergo a process termed “capacitation” whereby the biological fluids within the female reproductive tract trigger the sperm to change its motility, which allows for fertilization to occur. There is a lot of research being taken place, trying to work out how to trigger this “capacitation” in different animals, because it allows for successful IVF to occur. So to bring this back to pollen and ovules, for plant fertilization to occur, the pollen cant swim to the ovule, because it doesn’t have a tail and isn’t in solution. Instead the pollen germinates on the stigma, then grows as a single cell down the stigma towards the ovule. So the question becomes, why doesn’t the pollen of a tricho germinate on itself? but can germinate on a flower of a different tricho?; and how can we trick the pollen to start germinating on itself. Perhaps there is a similar process for plant pollen, alike to capacitation in animals, which allows for fertilization to occur. And perhaps EGs lime concrete dusting tek could be triggering this process, Ive tried it a few times without success but it would be interesting to know more about. Its possible to germinate pollen invitro, which is often used to test for pollen viability. But knowing the pollen is viable and knowing the pollen will fertilize are to different things, because (1) viable pollen can be taken from a tricho and used to make a cross with a different tricho, but if left along wont self-fertilize and (2) you can take viable pollen from one species and cross pollinate it with another species and generally no hybrids species will result, unless you’re very lucky. Pollination is super complex and not well understood, great to think about tho, I feel like breakthroughs in pollination between different plant species is like putting evolution on steroids, stepping things up to the next level. Which gets me thinking about why have some plants evolved self fertility while others have maintained the need to hybridise, and why and at what point do plants genomes decide enough with hybridisation i want to be self fertile and maintain my current form rather then expand genetic complexity continuously?

Due to their similar chemical structures and almost identical molar masses, separating thc from cbd is difficult, but not an impossible task. However i recall reading something written by Shulgin where he was very sceptical about analytical techniques used to quantify the different concentrations between these 2 chemicals due to the above mentioned issue. i also want to add, its very likely cbd will causes a false positive for thc due to the similar structures. Sorry i cant answer your question, it would be great if it were possible, but im pretty sure it wouldn't be legal for a company to offer that service at this point in time. And your right, cbd is so crazy expensive, hemp farmers will all be millionaires if they arent already.

wtf is wrong with you man? if this wasnt a forum and we were chatting in real life, would it be constructive to call someone "dumb as fuck" or are you just being a keyboard warrior. 6 post in a row in the same thread, your just talking to yourself mate. All of those points could have been made in a single post if you put abit of time into planning your post rather than raging on some knee jerk reaction. If your aussie and your awake this early on a Saturday morning, posting here instead of enjoying the eclipse, then it might be time to reconsider your priorities.

Hope your day is full of erotic pleasures Happy Birthday mate We should have a shin dig while we still have these warm summer nights Maybe a visit to the Hieroglyphs Hope all is well Catch up soon Change

Trade offers gone I was robbed last night and lost a significant proportion of my collection The worse part is there is only a small handful of people who have my address and how can i trust anyone now. FUCK

Im gutted, some of those plants are irreplaceable Like the Hamiltons crest hillbilly gifted me 5ish years back, it was the biggest one id ever seen, and would have taken two people to lift away in its large pot. And 2 huge button grafts, one was a triple header bigger than tennis balls, and other was a single central headed (tennis ball sized) with 6ish golfball sized pups wrapping around it, both were covered in flower buds, they were gifts from Sally two seasons ago. Then 12 pots of tbms, which would have been atleast 80 pups. They also destroyed the melted wax that I was trying to trade in this thread, pulling arms off it, leaving behind chunks of core hanging out at the base. It probably would have flowered this year, it had an arm taller than my shoulder and its been in the same pot for 5 years now. The list goes on but whats the point thinking about it.Who the fuck wrecks plants like that, bring a knife for fuck sake, or open your eyes, there was a knife on the table 2m away from the fucking plants. Thanks for the offers of help rebuilding, but Tobys right, i cant rebuild here because it will just happen again. 3rd day of Spring and all my remaining favorites now fill up a car space in a locked shed. Until I can sort out a better plan they’ll have to sit in the dark. If the thieves wanna take the rest they can try their luck. All the surrounding neighbors including a police officer are keeping watch for me. But all that being said this ends cactus collecting for me. The less your attached to the easier it is to be at peace with whats happening in the current moment, which is all that really matters. Sorry to bring my misfortunes to everyone’s attention.

If anyone sees any of my cactus for sale, please contact me

youll have to forgive my ignorance, im no soil expert. How does one measure the electromagnetic field of soil? Disrupting the electromagnetic field implies its causing a problem, which makes me wonder, how can one be certain a particular electromagnetic field makes soil good? Plants can experience iron deficiency, just like they can be deficient in copper, both are required for photosynthesis, as well as being important co-factors for enzymatic reactions. Rust is iron oxide, which also doesn't seem to be toxic to plants, in fact its used in some fertilizers because it reverses iron deficiency more efficiently than regular iron. So it could be argued that iron tools, rusting, and leaving behind traces of iron oxide is also increasing the trace elements within the soil.

I mean like, if you buy your Rosei clone from Fields nursery, you know you're getting the real deal because that's where the mother originated. But if you buy it from ebay, anyone could have just named a fat blue peru Rosei, so you can't be sure its an actual clone of what its named. Your plant is a real clone, from the mother it was taken from, therefore calling it Clone B wouldn't be as accurate as calling it Kakteen Haage's Penis. I name all my dicks after their previous owners. However unless one is particularly unique, and i propagate it in large numbers and spread it into circulation under that name, it will never be a real clone name, just a nickname i've given it.

Unless you know your cactus is a clone taken from a known mother plant, you can't be certain of anything. While certain clones for example Psycho0, Yowie, & Rosie all exhibit unique growth characteristics, they can still all exhibit phenotypic differences dependent upon the growth medium, geographic location, time spent in full sun, fertilizing regimes, age ect ect. Calling plants that look like clones, a clone, devalues the whole clone scene. In my opinion, TBM clone A and B is wishful thinking. In a decade or so when sequencing becomes cheaper, ill get all my tbms sequenced to compare, and i guarantee there will be more than 2 genotypes among my collection (which most would refer to as Clone A). That being said, if i'm wrong and there is only 2, i'd love to know who germinated the original clones and some of the history about how they spread across the world as they don't seem to be reported in the wild. However i'm pretty sure im right, one member on here traded me a tbm pup that pupped off the base of a wild type bridgesii, if that turns out to be the same genotype as clone A or B ill be extremely surprised. But back to the Pedroparks question, Yer it looks similar to what is commonly called Clone B in Australia

Looks like Springs about to arrive Today i saw 2 blue tongues getting some sun Spotted my first tricho buds for the season starting to fluff up And my first ever cappi buds have appeared

Best wishes for your move mate. It was always a pleasure to cross your path on campus.

Page 2 is pretty interesting, i'm sure Paul's thrilled that you took the time to share his hard work with all of us. "Copyright ©1983 Paul Stamets and J.S. Chilton. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer, who may quote brief passages in a review."

^idunno what you mean by "mother nature", so im going to assume that's your creative way of referring to evolution. Biochemical processes generated via hundreds and thousands of years of evolution are often times extremely far from perfect. I also struggle to see who would be able to profit from a biosynthesis. Doubtful, scientist have been able to synthesize psilocybin for quite some time now. The novelty associated with this innovation is that its a biosynthesis, using enzymes instead of a chemical synthesis. Even if it does not increase medical psilocybin research, its fantastic to see that researchers are working on increasing our understanding of this complex enzymatic process.

^ Yesterday on the radio i heard several people proudly proclaiming that Dick Smiths a racist. Seemed kinda strange, i always thought he was a patriot.

Birds are alot like fish, they just swim through an ocean composed of gasses, instead of liquid..... think about it But you never see blokes standing around with fishing rods, trying to catch birds for dinner using bread as bait...... its a strange time to be alive indeed. Maybe if you did, it would be called a birding rod.

Local councils still using weed killer glyphosate despite WHO warning it 'probably causes cancer' By the National Reporting Team's Josie Taylor Updated 21 minutes ago http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-16/councils-still-using-herbicide-that-probably-causes-cancer/7168464 Councils across Australia are using the weed killer glyphosate in sensitive areas like playgrounds, despite a World Health Organisation (WHO) warning the chemical probably causes cancer. Glyphosate was originally trade marked as "Roundup" and is commonly used by households, farms and local councils. Last year, the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) upgraded its assessment of the common herbicide from "possibly" to "probably carcinogenic to humans," placing it in the same category as red meat. The IARC found limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma, mostly in agricultural workers. The Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicine Authority (APVMA) and the Federal Department of Health are now re-assessing the risks it presents to humans. APVMA told the ABC it expected that investigation to be finalised in May or June. In a statement it said: "It is important to note that the hazard assessment conducted by IARC was not a complete regulatory risk assessment". "The APVMA, along with regulators in other countries, consider that current labels for glyphosate products contain appropriate instructions for use to keep those regularly handling glyphosate safe." The authority said about 50 per cent of its $33 million budget came from levies that companies paid to have their product registered in Australia, determined by the quantity of sales. Glyphosate products contribute $1.5 million. APVMA said there was no conflict of interest in investigating a product that contributed to its budget. "The existence of levies and or application fees paid by companies are not relevant or taken into consideration when the APVMA looks at the scientific basis of any review activity," it said. The industry body for agricultural chemicals, CropLife Australia, said it had not, and would not be making contact with the regulator regarding its re-assessment of glyphosate. But chief executive Matthew Cossey said CropLife's members had regular contact with the APVMA. "Of course they have to go through full assessment periods with them. The process of bringing a new product to market takes years," Mr Cossey said. "From an industry perspective, would we like government to fund the regulator? Absolutely." Mr Cossey reiterated that the industry believed glyphosate was completely safe, and said the vast body of research supported that. Countries including the Netherlands, Sri Lanka, and El Salvador have started banning glyphosate. Locals push for glyphosate ban Residents in Castlemaine and Bendigo in Central Victoria have petitioned their local councils to stop using glyphosate-based pesticides. "I have two kids, four and seven and I don't want them to have Roundup or any kind of glyphosate sprayed around their school, and I know it is," Bendigo resident Jacky Vincent said. Until Australian authorities change their assessment, local councils can continue to use the weed killer around schools, parks, and playgrounds and are not obliged to tell the public when and where they are spraying. Work Safe Victoria issued a statement to the ABC saying it was preparing new advice for councils about using glyphosate. "WorkSafe believes it is appropriate to alert Victorian employers to the issue. It will shortly issue guidance material advising employers of its reclassification," the WorkSafe statement said. Councils urged to consider other weed killing options New South Wales insurance body State Cover warned local councils to investigate other options to control weeds. "It is recommended that councils take a cautious approach and investigate their use of glyphosate and other hazardous chemicals used for weed control," State Cover told local NSW councils in a fact sheet. Public safety lawyer Dimi Ioannou from Maurice Blackburn said council workers could potentially sue their employers in the future if they developed a significant injury as a result of handling the product. "In the past we have ignored signs where products have been a dangerous good, such as asbestos, and years later thousands of victims have potentially made a claim for their pain and suffering," Ms Ioannou said. Yarra City Council in Melbourne is one of several councils around the country to trial alternative methods of killing weeds. Councillor Roberto Colanzi said using steam has proved to be more effective than herbicides. "Per unit cost it's probably more expensive but we tend to undertake the steam cleaning every six weeks rather than every four so that's an economic benefit, it seems to reduce the weed regrowth so that's an economic benefit," Cr Colanzi said. Tim Farrell is the CEO of Weedsteamers, a company local councils contract to steam weeds. Mr Farrell said there were about 30 local councils around the country, out of 560 councils in total, who were trialling or regularly using weed steaming in some areas. He admitted it was a slightly more expensive method than pesticide. "About the same as a cup of coffee and a cake. Per head, per annum. I think we can probably stretch to that as a community. And as a society, I don't think we have a choice to ignore it any longer," Mr Farrell said. On February 9, Mount Alexander Shire Council rejected a petition from Castlemaine residents calling for an end to glyphosate use. In a statement the council said: "Steam was trialled for weed control in 2014 but was not considered to be economically viable." The council said it had trialled a "plant-derived weed control product" last year but it was more expensive and less effective than glyphosate.

@siks3 Glaukus is just trying to help you mate, you would be wise to listen. No one's asking you to delete your account for being incorrect, they were simply offering you some constructive advice, base upon the fact your posting style is irrational which indicates the possibility of temporary psychosis. I know when i get myself into psychotic mind sets its really helpful having someone around that i can trust. Recent forum history shows you dont have the best track record when it comes to analyzing data and drawing accurate conclusions, but that doesn't mean your not welcome here, or that people aren't going to offer you advice when it looks like you need it. Take care of yourself.

Hey everyone, im trying to collecting some information. So im wonder, how many Tricho seeds have you germinated and how many monstrose cactus have popped up? Im not interested in the results from seed with freaky parents, but rather from normal healthy parents. So if you dont mind share your stats, im very interested to hear what kinda results have been achieved in the past. Ive germinated approximately 500 of each so far finding nothing to weird. Really interested to know whats happened to member who have germinated 1000's of seeds per year and are further along in the search for funky genetics then i.

How can you understand anything about a document you haven’t yet read? Im assuming you’ve read someone else’s opinions on the link you’ve provided, which makes me wonder, who’s opinions are you reading, and taking for granted then sharing before fact checking? And why do you place so much faith in these people’s opinions? This link you’ve provided isn’t a real scientific paper. I cant even work out where it was published, and the authors aren’t experts in their fields. Then the list of “The Undersigned Agree with the Conclusions of this Report:” is packed with retired experts in fields that are not relevant to this discussion. Its really weird to see in the first place, ive never seen a scientific paper that feels the need to present a long list of agreeing experts, normally science focuses on the evidence. But try goggling any of the names on that list, none of them work where they claim to, they are misrepresenting themselves in an attempt to trick others into believing they are experts. This vid some up your link nicely,