fyzygy

I think the idea of putting them inside beside a window is that condensation from the glass will provide humidity during the night. Whether they need it during dormancy, I'm not sure. I don't water any of my cactus plants over winter.

Like a lot of these plants, T. tetragonioides makes an excellent ground cover. I don't know why it's such an uphill battle persuading people to cook it and eat it. I think people are (literally) sold on supermarket varieties of fresh food. As for "weeds," even if they are superfoods ... forget it. Definitely needs cooking but, and I wonder if that has an effect on medicinal value?

Reproductive fitness, sure. Hence the compulsory sterilisation (etc.) of certain subgroups deemed (by a process of artificial, not natural selection) "unfit" to reproduce their genes. So there is a lot of play in the meaning of "fitness" in sociobiological contexts (physical, moral as well as biological meanings of the term). In colonial Australia, the decline of Indigenous populations was construed as a sign of their evolutionary unfitness, and the best white Australia could hope to do was "soothe the pillow of a dying race." That's not Darwinism, to be sure; but rather, "social darwinism" -- and the same could be said of any eugenics program. Darwin himself didn't believe in contraception, much less forced sterilisation. As for ecology (the ultimate arbiter of evolutionary fitness), it's absurd that Europeans would be better-adapted to the Australian climate than its native population. So environmental factors were eliminated from the calculus of social darwinism, in order to justify the "superiority" of the European mind, perceived as a biological inheritance which transcended climate and geography. In the second half of the 19th century, social darwinism justified dispossession (in tandem with the legal fiction of terra nullius, which it tended to reinforce): Indigenous Australians came to be seen as sub-human, some kind of "missing link" to primate ancestors. This was not Darwinism per se, but his biological theory was used, in practice, to legitimate the expansion of European empires in the name of (colonial) science.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/3ak84j/guerilla-gardeners-magic-mushrooms

I don't think "survival of the fittest" is an appropriate model for human society. Darwinian sociobiology is theory, not fact (otherwise Richard Dawkins would be out there disseminating his genes as widely as possible, by any means necessary). Darwin overlooked almost entirely the ethological insight that "mutual aid" (cooperation, as opposed to competition) is an equally significant driver of evolution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Aid:_A_Factor_of_Evolution I don't blame Darwin for modern eugenics movements, although he is often credited as their inspiration. I think perhaps Nietzsche, rather than Darwin, was the more malignant influence upon Nazism. Philosophy without compassion is detrimental to the human spirit. Darwin himself harboured a few regrets on that score, by the end of his lifetime.

Hey all, I have decided to downsize my Trichocereus collection by stripping out a few varieties I can live without. Smallish but handsome, healthy clones, all on established roots. Expect the odd blemish. If you've been looking for any of the above, PM for details and we can probably sort something out.

Me too, as the one I was promised by another forum member (their part of an exchange) failed to materialise.

Periodic rotation of the pots is a good idea for container-grown cactus, and that's where the fabric is liable to fail, i.e. movement of the container. Expanded clay would hardly provide enough ballast for a 2.5m+ cactus. Cactus are a lot heavier than e.g. cannabis plants. A plastic pot doesn't weigh much on its own, but is much stronger to hold soil, stones, bricks, what have you, for ballast. Cactus love being in-ground. As long as the red soil isn't clay, they should thrive. All but the largest containers will restrict growth, to some extent.

I have small pups to spare, of both.

^ Looking good! What variety are they? And how long potted up until they kick off? Stuff I've rooted in water seems to root well in sphagnum moss as well, only the roots seem tougher and better adapted for soil than do water-roots. Any reason why laying the leaf segment flat on potted media (e.g. soil) wouldn't also work? That's a traditional method of cloning from a single leaf. Actually, I think you can get 2 plants from a single leaf that way. Depends on the species I think. Cloning from a single leaf doesn't work for all plants -- e.g. a certain Salvia, which grows roots but nothing further, in my experience.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03336398 A ketamine trial for tinnitus? Where do I sign?

Yes, those quotation marks are intentional. This plant was grown from (expensive) imported seed, supposedly spineless (maybe, when it gets big enough), supposedly "landrace" genetics from Matucana, supposedly "legendary" etc. etc. Not to complain, it's very beautiful but also ... spiny AF, at least for now. Snails seem to love it, at any rate. Of my three survivors, one was tall, one was stout, and one was blue. This is the tall one, though lately it's been giving the blue one a run for its money. (The stout one, alas, has long since gone to a new home). 20cm pup, loads of character. Maybe it's worth $2/cm including delivery, or make me an offer, if interested.

Nangs in the news: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-21/calls-to-regulate-nitrous-oxide-nang-sales-after-death/101997190 Are those miniature dispensers any good? Maybe you're supposed to buy a pack of condoms at the same time, to hold the gas.

The more freely available the medicine is, the less viable their monopolistic business model will be. Legalisation would be the end of it, or would at least put an end to extortionate price-gouging. If only there were another aggressive, well-heeled lobby group like MMA ... but a lot more democratic.

From about the 50-minute mark, investigative report into TGA approval process, discussion of who benefits, etc. https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/sundayextra/sunday-extra/102057916

Tried sharing link but apparently it's not working? I don't have FB myself.

Someone sent me this link (below), I'm not related to this retailer nor even a customer of theirs. Some nice varieties on offer (browse by price> lowest to highest). But only a generic photo of each, it seems. Hey , Just letting you know... The store is packed a load of 'Ugly Ducklings' in need of new homes, and Hundreds of Trichocereus Australia hybrids, at a smooth $5ea, or $4ea when you pick 10+! Use code 'TRICHO20' in checkout. thecactiguys.com.au/our-store

I would have thought that "landrace genetics" (in my case) if it meant anything at all, would have meant: hand-pollinated. But on second thought, how does any of this sit with self-sterility? I'm starting to think that "landrace" is not applicable at all to Trichocereus spp. (just marketing hype?). Surely in some traditional locale with a favoured variety, the custodians would simply clone the thing vegetatively? If it set seed, it probably would have been "open pollinated" (i.e. productive of hybrid form)? Yours looks similar to mine, I'm still hoping it will show spineless characteristics on maturity. I'll try and find it for a photo session. The cutting I listed above has gone to a good home.

Bunnings Coburg: those PC pachanoi were tucked away indoors, underneath a table, for the past few months. Severe etiolation probably now a selling point. Still >$50 each. And a bunch of interesting-looking Mesembryanthemum spp. in the "Pigface" section, dwarf pink, pale pink, and white flowering.

Chacruna Institute seeks input in formulating a response. https://chacruna.net/foia-brings-to-light-deas-problematic-report-ayahuasca-risks-to-public-health-and-safety/?utm_campaign=later-linkinbio-chacruna.institute&utm_content=later-33484504&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkin.bio&mc_cid=a425161ff7&mc_eid=cbbc326c01

Tissue culture lab. As found on eBay, here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_Beauty_and_the_Bloodshed