Stenocereus (Ritterocereus) hystrix
Posted 13 April 2005 - 01:12 AM
This cactus contains simmilar alkaloids to Trichocereus peruvianus, Trichocereus tershekki and Lophophora williamsii cacti. Comparable in quantity of alkaloids to Lophophora williamsii. We have this harvested and prepared nicely without the core, spines or white flesh present. Traditional dosage is equal to 10-40g's of material as the alkaloid content may be variable.
I am like wow - another spp of cacti and this one closer to home then the trich spp.
We have a simmilar looking cactus here- namely stenocerues (ritterocerues) griseus - here on the island - I am wondering what kind of alkaloids this spp might contain. The locals here eat it - cactus soup - very slimy. they say it is good for libido - if there is some truth to that then there might be an interesting alkaloid in it.
perhaps they probably do not eat enough of it to be psy-active....
of course still wondering how much truth there is to the Stenocerues hystrix.....
Posted 13 April 2005 - 02:12 AM
Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if it did.
Come on brian - history awaits you!
Posted 13 April 2005 - 02:26 AM
The most pertinent
1) Is the plant correctly identified? By whom was it identified?
2) Has it actually been bioassayed by humans? HOw many? Why did they do so originally?
3) Is the alkaloid content based on analysis or bioassay?
4) If there was an analysis, was it an isolative workup or a chromatographic assay? Where was this published? (Was is published?)
5) What country was it obtained from?
6) Who used this "traditional"ly? When and where? Was this published? If not, how was it discovered?
I really can't say much of anything meaningful without knowing the above.
I know of no reported use for the plant.
I am unaware of any reports of it containing alkaloids.
Lots of genera got lumped into Stenocereus including Lemaireocereus.
S. griseus and S. hystrix are both reported to contain saponins but not alkaloids.
I presently have no way to know what the story is for the material you ask about.
If answers to the above questions can be had, more might become known.
It would be novel, if not important, news for many reasons and in many areas of science including ethnobotany, entheobotany, taxonomy and phytochemistry. A first in many ways.
Based on my past experience with follow up on the myriad of claims for new active cactus species, I lean towards skepticism and suspect that this one may turn out like Wade Davis' claim of activity for Armatocereus laetus (ie Lemaireocereus laetus or Stenocereus laetus) and be based on someone else's purported claims of use rather than the person reporting it.
That is, if it is correctly identified.
If 10-40 grams of dried weight produces a good mescaline experience, my first guess would be that the material is misidentified. (Even taking into account the use of only outer layers in the prep)
There are at least several other equally plausible scenarios.
Whatever the story turns out to be, I would love to learn more too.
A simple summary of the reported chemistry for the "Lemaireocereus" species (almost all have multiple synonyms) is below (I hope this is not too long of a post?):
If for some reason anyone wants details for the references cited let me know.
Lemaireocereus aragonii (Weber) Britton & Rose
91.3% water by weight
Thought to contain an Amyrin mixture but never fully investigated due to insufficient material.
No ether soluble alkaloids.
Djerassi et al. 1955b [Wild collected; Costa Rica]
Lemaireocereus beneckei (Ehrenberg) Berger See as Stenocereus beneckei
Lemaireocereus chende (Gosselin) Britton & Rose See as Polaskia chende
Lemaireocereus chichipe (Gosselin) Britton & Rose See as Polaskia chichipe
Lemaireocereus deficiens (O. & Dietr.) Br. & R.
No saponins or terpenes. Hegnauer 1964
Traces of unidentified terpene(s). Djerassi 1957 cited unpublished observations by Djerassi & Mitscher
Lemaireocereus dumortieri Britton & Rose
Dumortierigenin (A triterpene lactone) 0.21% by dry wt.
No detectable alkaloid.
Djerassi et al. 1954b [Wild collected; Hildago, Mexico]
Lemaireocereus eruca Britton & Rose See as Stenocereus eruca
Lemaireocereus euphorbioides (Haw.) Werd. See as Neobuxbaumia euphorbioides
Lemaireocereus griseus (Haw.) Britton & Rose
Erythrodiol (0.58% dry wt.)
Longispinogenin (0.82% dry wt.)
Oleanolic acid (Isolated via the acetate methyl ester as 2% by dry wt.)
Betulin (Isolated via the acetate methyl ester as 4% dry wt.)
Unidentified lactone 0.12% [Thought identical with material from L. hystrix; i.e “hystrix lactone”)
Djerassi et al. 1956a [Venezuela]
Lemaireocereus gummosus Britton & Rose See as Machaerocereus gummosus
Lemaireocereus hollianus (Web.) Britton & Rose
86.5% water by weight. Djerassi et al. 1956a
No alkaloids present. Unger et al. 1980
Yielded only small amounts of a nonpolar substance that they believed was “probably similar” to the “aromatic” [?] alcohol they encountered with T. chiloensis and T. cuzcoensis. No triterpenes detected.
Djerassi et al. 1956a [Collected on Tehuacán-Puebla road 7 km from Zapotitlán, Mexico]
Lemaireocereus humilis Britton & Rose
No saponins or terpenes.
Traces of unidentified terpene(s).
Djerassi 1957 cited unpublished observations by Djerassi & Mitscher
Lemaireocereus hystrix (Haw.) Britton & Rose
79.7% water by weight
Unidentified neutral triterpene lactone (“hystrix lactone”; possibly isomeric with thurberogenin) [0.025% by dry wt]
Erythrodiol [0.067% by dry wt]
Oleanolic acid [(crude) 0.95% by dry wt ]
Longispinogenin [0.17% by dry wt]
Betulinic acid (0.025% by dry wt) [isolated via its methyl ester])
No detectable alkaloid.
Djerassi & Lippman 1954 [Collected in Mona district, Jamaica] Noted an almost identical qualitative composition as L. longispinus
Lemaireocereus laetus Britton & Rose
82.3% water by weight
[Concluded it was almost devoid of alkaloids or triterpenes. (Unable to resolve and separate. No ether soluble alkaloids. Much unidentified oily material (all neutral)]
Djerassi et al. 1955b [Wild collected; Peru].
This species needs further analysis. E. Wade Davis encountered it used on a local basis as a Trichocereus pachanoi substitute but apparently nothing further was reported. Analysis was purported to be ongoing (in Davis 1983) to be ongoing but the results of that study were curiously never mentioned in Davis 1997 or 1999. Correspondence with Davis in 2004 determined that no analysis was performed.
Lemaireocereus longispinus Britton & Rose
81.5% water by weight
“Rich source” of triterpenoid glycosides.
Erythrodiol [0.33% by dry wt]
Oleanolic acid [(crude) 2.76% by dry wt]
Longispinogenin [0.4% by dry wt]
Djerassi et al. 1953c [Guatemala; cultivated specimen from Guatemala City]
Lemaireocereus marginatus (DC) Berg. See as Pachycereus marginatus
Lemaireocereus mixtecensis (Purpus) Britton & Rose See as Polaskia chichipe
Lemaireocereus montanus Britton & Rose
Djerassi 1957 cited unpublished observations by Djerassi & Kan
Lemaireocereus pruinosus (Otto) Britton & Rose
89% water by weight. Djerassi et al. 1955b
Reported to show no detectable alkaloids in the screenings of Fong et al. 1972
Unidentified alkaloids detected by Brown et al. 1968
Oleanolic acid (an acidic triterpene; single component: 0.2% fresh wt/ 1.8% dry)
Djerassi et al. 1955b [Cultivated: California]
First analyzed by L.H. Liu (unpublished observation from Djerassi’s lab) according to Djerassi & Lippman 1954.
Lemaireocereus queretaroensis (Weber) Safford
Queretaroic acid (A dihydroxy triterpene acid) No isolation details included.
Djerassi et al. 1955a. Also in Djerassi et al. 1956b.
Oleanolic acid Djerassi et al. 1956b
Lemaireocereus quevedonis G.Ortega
87.2% water by weight
“hystrix lactone” (~0.4% yield dry wt)
Longispinogenin (1.42% yield dry wt.)
Djerassi et al. 1956a [Collected near Aculpulco, Mexico]
Lemaireocereus stellatus (Pfeiffer) Br. & R. See as Stenocereus stellatus
Lemaireocereus thurberi (Engelmann) Britton & Rose
AKA “Pitahaya dulce” or “Organ pipe”
84.9% water by weight Djerassi et al. 1953a [Kirscher 1972 reported 85%; Kirscher 1982 reported 77-80%]
No alkaloids- Based on negative Mayer test Djerassi et al. 1953a [Collected: Sonora, Mexico]
tlc examination showed the absence of alkaloids and the strong presence of triterpene glycosides: Kircher 1982
Oleanolic acid (an acidic sapogenin) 1.8% dry wt. Djerassi et al. 1953a (Also reported in Kirscher 1972)
Thurberogenin (a neutral triterpenoid lactone: first reported occurrence) 0.46% dry wt. Djerassi et al. 1953a. (This paper was the first report of triterpenes in cacti) (It was also reported in Kirscher 1972 & in Jolad & Steelink 1969)
Queretaroic acid (No details) Gibson & Horak 1978 cited H.W. Kircher (unpublished data); (Also reported in Kirscher 1972)
Thurberin (a pentacyclic triterpene; a lupenediol) Jolad & Steelink 1969 See comment under Calenduladiol below
Betulin Jolad & Steelink 1969
Calenduladiol (A triterpene diol; D-20,30-lupen-3b,12b -diol) Shown to be identical with Thurberin.
Kasprzyk et al. 1970 [Previously isolated from the Composite Calendula officinales (Marigold) by Kasprzyk & Pyrek 1968]
Kircher 1980 isolated the following (See also in Kircher 1982):
(3b,6aSterol diols were isolated as 2.6% of dry wt. Kircher 1980)
The following 5 sterol diols were isolated and identified in Kircher & Bird 1982. (No concentrations included)
Lipids determined to compose 10-17% of the dry weight (comprised of neutral Oleanene and Lupene mon-, di- and triols, 0.07% Phytosterols [Cholesterol, Campesterol & Sitosterol] and a large proportion of Dihydroxysterols.) Kircher & Bird 1982 cited Bird 1974.
Lipid content determined to be 11% by dry weight: Kircher 1982
Lemaireocereus treleasei Br. & R. See as Stenocereus treleasei
Lemaireocereus weberi (Coulter) Br. & R. See as Pachycereus weberi
It seems like an odd approach to publish an advertisement claiming what this claims if the seller wants it to remain untargeted for any duration. Its so strange how many people seem to lack basic survival skills or perhaps just common sense when it comes to selling plants containing substances regarded as illegal in some countries they plan to ship to. We've heard of a couple of instances where Customs had questions about dried plant material coming into the country and went to the vendor's website for information.
Its a tricky business of course. How DOES one advertise a complete unknown without tipping their hand?
Posted 13 April 2005 - 03:44 AM
Here is the only referrence that I could find so far, regarding it having alkaloids. Insufficient information.
Ethnogarden does have a garden in the Dominican Republic - And other sources do claim that it grows on Puerto Rico - so we know at least that.
Posted 14 April 2005 - 01:44 AM
It has indeed been analyzed via HPLC, GC/MS and TLC.
All reports are conclusive and active in the desired alkaloids.
There is still a slight possibility it may be hybridized but we have identified it through botanical channels and it has proven to be accurate with all those we have consulted.
This is one of the only Stenocereus to contained the alkaloids present.
he he - so now I should ask him " how about an analisis on Stenocerues Griseus ?"
Posted 14 April 2005 - 11:47 PM
This plant has changed names at least twice since it appeared on the site. (Same picture of product, live and dried flesh).
1. Trichocereus cuzcoensis
2. Trichocereus peruvianus hybrid
3. Stenocereus whateverthef@ck....
So, I am encouraged by the report of alkaloidal assay of the product, but my skepticism grows. I'm wondering in what species (or genus!) this highly touted cactus will eventually wind up settling.
I must say, I'm glad Trout has arrived because this is one of those sticky situations wherein botany must correct the marketplace.
What are your thoughts?
[ 14. April 2005, 08:54: Message edited by: Pisgah ]
Posted 20 April 2005 - 10:23 AM
Posted 21 April 2005 - 12:35 AM
Posted 21 April 2005 - 05:56 AM
Bottom line is that if Mark says his analysis indicates that this is an active one then it most likely is. This does not neccessarily mean that if you get some S.hystrix seeds and grow them out that you will get much of an effect
Just so there is no misunderstanding, I like both Mark and Jason and I purchase stuff off their respective businesses regularly. But as far as ID goes, we all try our best, but we all have different levels of method and confirmation .... caveat emptor
My Blog & Tradelist
Posted 21 April 2005 - 06:01 AM
I notice that Pachycereus marginatus is in the Stenocereus group now too. I can confirm that this one is active too, although I never managed to grow a full dose because they always rot to the base over winter
My Blog & Tradelist
Posted 21 April 2005 - 06:24 AM
I notice that Pachycereus marginatus is in the Stenocereus group now too. I can confirm that this one is active too, although I never managed to grow a full dose because they always rot to the base over winter.
Would you mind elaborating on this please Torsten.
What's considered an active dose?
It's quite common in this part of the world.
Posted 21 April 2005 - 07:31 AM
My Blog & Tradelist
Posted 21 April 2005 - 08:43 AM
This thread examined other clumnar cacti before
Mescalito also ate S marginatus and reported some effect. minor however.
If anyone else has eaten a strange cactus please feel free to add to that old thread
Keep in mind that a traditional dose of the andean cactus Pishicol - Armatocereus laetus is 6 foot!
[ 20. April 2005, 17:46: Message edited by: Rev ]
Posted 21 April 2005 - 02:29 PM
Posted 21 April 2005 - 03:41 PM
This possibility might imply some other possibilities
1 The alkaloid profile is the result of the combined genetic materials, perhaps even being a property that is found in neither of the parents. There are many instances of this in many families, examples in the Solanaceae abound.
2 The alkaloid profile is the result of dominant genes found in a pollen donor. This might be interesting, if mesc production can be identified with dominant genes then this is of important relevance to breeding efforts.
So if it is active we know that it is unusual for its attributed species. I hear that there are some Trichocereus entheogens that have less floral hair, has this material been genetically tested for its taxonomic affinity?
[ 21. April 2005, 00:43: Message edited by: Archaea ]
Posted 26 April 2005 - 04:36 AM
Another plant that's always intrigued me is Lophocereus schotti monstrous.
It's EXTREMELY slow growing and it even smells bitter.
Could never bring myself to try it though, it's too precious and beautiful.
[ 25. April 2005, 13:42: Message edited by: strangebrew ]
Posted 26 April 2005 - 10:47 AM
My Blog & Tradelist
Posted 26 April 2005 - 04:29 PM
They'd be pricey though wouldn't they, considering how slow they are?
Posted 26 April 2005 - 04:47 PM
Sells them for 17.50USD.
Perhaps one of our US friends could order one to test?
Does anyone own one of these cool looking cacti? I'd love a cutting!
A Flask of Wine, a Book of Verse -- and
Beside me singing in the Wilderness --
And Wilderness is Paradise enow.
Posted 26 April 2005 - 11:21 PM
I'll keep you in mind Apoth if you don't mind waiting a few years.
They have to be rooted in constant high temps too, low 20's or above from memory.
Posted 01 May 2005 - 06:40 PM
Perhaps one of our US friends could order one to test?
I'm on the case!
Posted 02 May 2005 - 01:28 PM
Posted 02 May 2005 - 09:03 PM
It is bitter but not as bitter as it smells.
If active at all, I think quite a bit would be needed.