"White Peyote"

[M S Smith]

No but I tryed like hell...

No pictures exist of Lophophora brackii "White Peyote"...

And...

Lophophora brackii "White Peyote" only exist in 3 places in the world-

1) In it's only natural habitat just outside Viesca, Mexico.

2) In cultivation by Steven Brack at Mesa Gardens in the Western U.S.A.

3) The seeds I have.

That's it!

As soon as the seedling are old enough to tell anything, I'll take LOTS of pictures!

Teotz, you have single-handedly caused more confusion than I thought possible.

The completely mythological peyote mentioned here, and as part of an alleged "oral tradition," is said to have been from the Grand Canyon region, not from Viesca. Why you would associate the plants of Viesca as being the "ancient" "White Peyote" is beyond me unless of course you have simple-mindedly thought that since the plants of Viesca look white they must be the "White Peyote" of the oral tradition. This is the height of ignorant associations.

You probably haven't made the effort to consider any cactus of the Grand Canyon as possibly being this alleged "White Peyote" of the alleged oral tradition but rather have simply thought that since the term "peyote" is most closely associated with Lophophora then the "White Peyote" must itself be a Lophophora, and the Lophophora of Viesca in particular since it is "whiter" than other Lophophora. Again, more ignorance, but then you go a step further in re-naming the known plant from Viesca, L. fricii, as L. brackii, this when Steve Brack himself, and any other thoughtful student of the genus, recognizes only L. fricii as from Viesca.

But there is more, the site that has brought this garbage forward claims that L. brackii is from "Vizarrónan, in the central state of Querétaro, Mexico," but this is the location of L. diffusa, and clearly not anywhere near your "White Peyote" of Viesca.

L. fricii is not the alleged "White Peyote" as the latter is claimed to come from the Grand Canyon region, not Mexico. It should also be noted that the wiki page claims that "White Peyote" was "cold tolerant," but there is no doubt whatsoever that the L. fricii of Viesca would not "tolerate" the cold of northern Arizona.

So there is no "White Peyote." It exist only in an internet claim that says it exist in a oral tradition.

And there is no L. brackii, either from Vizarrónan (wiki), as these are L. diffusa, or Viesca (teotz), as these are L. fricii.

I'm actually not done tearing this very disturbing garbage to threads, but I am out of time. Teotz, I am shocked at your lack of thoroughness before opening your mouth.

~Michael~

[Teotzlcoatl]

Wiki is what put "White Peyote" and "Lophophora brackii" together... not me.

I was wondering about that too.

Again, more ignorance, but then you go a step further in re-naming the known plant from Viesca, L. fricii, as L. brackii, this when Steve Brack himself, and any other thoughtful student of the genus, recognizes only L. fricii as from Viesca.

No you are wrong. Both Lophophora fricii and Lophophora decipiens var. brackii are two distinct species.

More to come... just give me a bit...

Edited December 28, 2008 by Teotz'

[M S Smith]

If you mean the author of the wiki page put them together in the same subsection of the article you are correct, but they are not associated as being one and the same at all. The "White Peyote" is claimed to have existed in the Grand Canyon areas and is not at all associated with a supposed L. brackii. L. brackii is claimed to come from "near Vizarrónan, in the central state of Querétaro, Mexico" (not Viesca!), and is said to be "a high altitude domed 'white' peyote with 'Z' patterns and articulated ribbing." So this alleged L. brackii is "white," but this is not at all saying it is the "White Peyote."

According to who is Lophophora decipiens var. brackii a legitimate name or species? And why in the world are you putting so much trust in the wiki article?

I might also note that the wiki author says that "Peyote has been found carbon dated as 6000 years old in caves in Southern Texas and Arizona," but this is wrong, it has only been found in a cave in Texas, not Arizona. I hope you don't believe the wiki author in this as well Teotz. I personally think the author is engaging in intentionally misleading statements, otherwise known as lies, and not just on this matter, but throughout.

Teotz, if you made any effort to use this wiki page as a resource for a college paper of any sort you would be (or should be) scolded by the professor. And should you wish to pursue the subject further I fear you wouldn't be able to find one legitimate academic resource in support of what you seem so intent on defending.

Soon I will make these comments a little more thorough so that whenever this subject comes up again I will simply cut and paste from my files. I'll certainly include it in whatever revision I make of SMC.

~Michael~

[Teotzlcoatl]

I'll certainly include it in whatever revision I make of SMC.

SWEET!

Hopefully I can prove something by then to you!

Mr.Smith I would ask you read this whole thread over, beginning to end and tell me what you think...

(*Edit*- What the bloody hell? The Wiki page has been changed! Look at the qoutes in the beginning of this thread!)

Edited December 28, 2008 by Teotz'

[M S Smith]

You need not "prove" anything to me, only be able argue a position without having such obvious gaps.

None of the changes in the wiki page effect the matters here under discussion. Here is the piece as of today just in case someone changes it again.

The Fabled White Peyote of The Grand Canyon and Four Corners Area

Archaeological discoveries in Arizona and Southern Texas indicate that peyote has been used by the Southwestern Tribes and their ancestors since antiquity. Peyote has been found carbon dated as 6000 years old in caves in Southern Texas and Arizona. The mummified samples did not resemble modern peyote and were larger and more domed in comparison to modern populations of Lophophora williamsii. These samples also contained up to 6% mescaline by weight even after thousands of years in a desiccated state. Modern Lophophora varieties average 3% mescaline in comparison. The Diné (Navajo) oral traditions and those of other Southwest tribes indicate that a cold tolerant, high altitude variety of peyote existed in the area of the Grand Canyon in ancient times[citation needed], called "white peyote" which was rumored to be of cosmic potency.

Recent discoveries and botanical evidence indicates modern Lophophora species may in fact be divergent hybrids of Lophophora diffusa and a species recently named Lophophora brackii[citation needed], a high altitude domed "white" peyote with 'Z' patterns and articulated ribbing that originates from a single population confined to a mountain near Vizarrónan, in the central state of Querétaro, Mexico. Modern Lophophora varieties exhibit pollen structure which ranges from 3 pored pollen from its western ranges up to 9 pored pollen in the Eastern Range where Lophophora decipiens grows under extremely arid conditions, characteristics of a natural hybrid. Lophophora diffusa more closely resembles primitive cacti than the other Lophophora varieties and this species also exists as an isolated population in a mountainous area and is more cold tolerant[citation needed] than Lophophora williamsii populations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_Church

~Michael~

Edited December 28, 2008 by M S Smith

[Garbage]

The fabled white peyote of the Texas panhandle?

[Teotzlcoatl]

The location was changed from Viesca to Vizarrónan... As you stated, Diffusa grows in Vizarrónan, not Fricii or Decipiens.

Mr.Smith do you believe Mr.Brack can tell the difference between "decipiens" and "fricii"? He is the one who stated that their are a number of types of Lophophora cacti that grow around Viesca.... There is L. fricii in the lowlands (two types, one is albiflora) as well as L. decipiens "var. brackii" which grows above the L. fricii in the low-lands up in the hills.

Garbage, what the hell man? If your post doesnt contribute anything, please keep it to your self.

Edited December 28, 2008 by Teotz'

[Garbage]

Okay,there is no such thing as White Peyote and only a fool pays money for magical seeds.

[M S Smith]

That the location was changed only demands that even less credibility should be taken in the wiki piece.

Regardless of there being plants of the lowlands and plants of the highland this doesn't at all mean that they should be considered different species, and that Brack makes mention of the elevation difference of this population doesn't mean his name should be applied to anything.

~Michael~

[Teotzlcoatl]

Thats why I said "var. brackii" as Mr.Brack himself prefers not to call it that. I however think he, as the sole collector he desires his name in name, even if it's only a strain, perhaps "forma. brackii" would be more acceptable?

Recent discoveries and botanical evidence indicates modern Lophophora species may in fact be divergent hybrids of Lophophora diffusa and a species recently named Lophophora brackii[citation needed], a high altitude domed "white" peyote with 'Z' patterns and articulated ribbing that originates from a single population confined to a mountain near Vizarrónan, in the central state of Querétaro, Mexico.

The author changed the location from the true location of Lophophora decipiens "forma. brackii", in Viesca, to this other one which is were Diffua lives, as Mr.Smith stated. Hmm... strange... why would they do this? To hide the location, perhaps?

Look at my very first post in this thread, that qouted text is what Wiki said a few months ago...

Regardless of there being plants of the lowlands and plants of the highland this doesn't at all mean that they should be considered different species, and that Brack makes mention of the elevation difference of this population doesn't mean his name should be applied to anything.

Mr.Brack distinctly stated that they were two totally different species. I'm inclined to believe his judgement as he collected the cacti from Viesca and knows the cacti of that area very well.

Edited December 28, 2008 by Teotz'

[Garbage]

Wikipedis credibility takes a pouding,you saw it here first.

I'm assuming that like in Russia some are inventing spurious names simply because they know what they have in their collections is illegal in their countries.

I also suggest Edward Anderson was well aware of this when he decided to publish Lophophora comprising of two species,Williamsii-the banned one,and everthing else as Diffusa.

His lumping was not based upon morphology or genetics but mescaline and the law.

In court it is easier to make a distinction between two different species rather than several closely related and possibly hybrid/hybridiing species.

Elsewhere we do not have such laws which means taxonomising to suit the Courts is irrelevent.

In some of the more recent bannings of Lophophora the incidence of misuse is actually nill but online sales of drug plants possibly were a factor taken into consideration,as were other nations laws.

We should be all the same in the eye of global lawmakers!

Well no,we have seen how banning relatively harmless persuits spurs on some to ingest and make available more and more toxic substances.

Edited December 28, 2008 by Garbage

[M S Smith]

Thats why I said "var. brackii" as Mr.Brack himself prefers not to call it that. I however think he, as the sole collector he desires his name in name, even if it's only a strain, perhaps "forma. brackii" would be more acceptable?

Steve simply knows better than to apply a name where none is due, something you, and the anonymous wiki author, fail to understand. Now if one chooses to recognize L. fricii as plants of the lowlands near Viesca, and L. decipiens as plants of the highlands near Viesca, there is no grounds whatsoever to either make a "var. brackii" or "forma. brackii" unless you can argue that there are either variations or formas within the pre-existent and previously described species. These are the simplest rules of nomenclature. There is no ground for the application of "brackii" under the current circumstance. Teotz, you affectation on this subject is astounding, and no, there is no acceptable use of "brackii."

The author changed the location from the true location of Lophophora decipiens "forma. brackii", in Viesca, to this other one which is were Diffua lives, as Mr.Smith stated. Hmm... strange... why would they do this? To hide the location, perhaps?

To hide what? the location of a plant that people have known about for years? Would you suggest that the author doesn't want offer similar protection to the plants of Vizarrónan?

Mr.Brack distinctly stated that they were two totally different species. I'm inclined to believe his judgement as he collected the cacti from Viesca and knows the cacti of that area very well.

Go on and regard L. fricii and L. decipiens as two different species to your hearts delight, as do others, but what does any of that have to do with "White Peyote" or the use of "brackii"? Absolutely nothing!

~Michael~

[Garbage]

Perhaps he don't know about dry whiskey,the oral tradition,multiculturalism and the manifestations of confused vernaculars.

Prohibiting peyote for all but Indians could be construed as racist,who to sue?

[Teotzlcoatl]

The confusing surrounding Lophophora "decipiens" is staggering...

There are at least two types of Lophophora decipiens that I can tell... one is the "White Peyote" type with raised, pronouced, "diamond" or "Z" tubercles and the other is the diffusa-type with waxy low ribs... There are likely many more varieties tho...

Does anybody care to comment on this? Mr.Smith? Anybody?

[M S Smith]

The confusing surrounding Lophophora "decipiens" is staggering...

There are at least two types of Lophophora decipiens that I can tell... one is the "White Peyote" type with raised, pronouced, "diamond" or "Z" tubercles and the other is the diffusa-type with waxy low ribs... There are likely many more varieties tho...

Does anybody care to comment on this? Mr.Smith? Anybody?

How in the world can you feel there is any grounds whatsoever to bring up "White Peyote" when I so thoroughly discredited the concept in my comments above, comments which you are actively ignoring. I'm seriously starting to question your mental stability...again.

In addition, had you so far failed to read the Kaktusy Lophophora special that is posted in full and in color online at a site you are familiar with, and had you failed to take from this that there are described a small number of variable plants from the area you claim as the origin of L. decipiens, all of which are said to be forms of L. fricii? And should you like to argue the existence of a non-L. fricii in the region of Viesca are you prepared to argue how it differs from the regions L. fricii?

You are impossible to take serious anymore.

~Michael~

[Teotzlcoatl]

Do you disagree that there are multiply types of "decipiens"... thats all I was getting at with that post!

Can you link me to the Kaktusy Lophophora special?

[M S Smith]

Do you disagree that there are multiply types of "decipiens"... thats all I was getting at with that post!

Can you link me to the Kaktusy Lophophora special?

No, there are no multiple types of "decipiens", only multiple types of L. fricii, one or some of which also go my the improper name L. decipiens.

~Michael~

Edited January 13, 2009 by M S Smith

[kadakuda]

teotz, the article is posted here somewhere, the nook and the shroomery.

[Teotzlcoatl]

I just happened to be banned from 2 out of those 3 sites.

Edited January 15, 2009 by Teotz'

[weedRampage]

No, no...this is not an actual white cactus, it's a strain of Lophophora or perhaps a species.

I believe that thread simply talks about "albino" cacti, which are cool too, but not what I'm talking about.

 

I have seen one of these, years ago in an old guys mega collection. He was into rare and unusual stuff

and was selling rare seeds back into america.

Toetz is right. They're not albino or variegated. They're a cacky grey white colour with standard loph shape.

Unfortunately I went back to see his stuff again recently and he didn't have it anymore. Maybe he stashed it

out of public view. If anyone is interested in rare stuff I can take photos of his collection and post

because he is getting old and probably his son won't have the same enthusiasm for cacti. I picked up my

Mammalaria Heyderi for free off him coz it was so almost dead.

[zelly]

They're a cacky grey white colour with standard loph shape.

 

I have two just like that. cacky grey white colour.

One flowers, the other one doesn't.

Both are around 7cm wide.

When photographed against a cacky grey white background, they become invisible.

[Teotzlcoatl]

Guys its not just a Lophophora which is white... it's a strain or cultivar of Lophophora, probably williamsii var. brackii, but it may be it's own species for all we know.

Unless you got your seeds from Steven Brack at Mesa Garden or collected it yourself from Mexico then you DO NOT have Lophophora brackii A.K.A. "White Peoyte".

I highly doubt it exist anywhere outside North America.

Edited December 22, 2009 by Teotzlcoatl

[weedRampage]

I have two just like that. cacky grey white colour.

One flowers, the other one doesn't.

Both are around 7cm wide.

When photographed against a cacky grey white background, they become invisible.

 

Pictures?

[culebra22]

Sounds interesting.

Yes, photo please!

[Teotzlcoatl]

have two just like that. cacky grey white colour.

If it's like a powder of top of the skin you may be onto something... if the skin is sunburnt or something... then no... but like I said it can't be "white peyote" unless its from Steven Brack or Mexico.