Psychedelia.dk

Bluelighter
POSTS: 835
JOINED: Oct 2000
Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote

Adding NMT and DMT to shroom substrate 30-03-2005 01:25 (#2901100)
Now, first of all i find it ODD that there is not ONE attempt on a forum such as the shroomery, where people have added DMT (or DIPT/etc) to see if some of that DMT gets turned into psilocin/cybin making more potent mushrooms. As much 'advanced techniques' there, well i find it odd seeing comments "why waste a drug like DMT?" - when DMT is soooo easily obtainable, much much easier than growing mushrooms!

When I have the time/room someday, i will definitely experiment. Now I know there are sources (some kind of bark i think is good) that contain decent amounts of NMT, along with DMT (and possibly others) that could be extracted. Possibly adding this to substrate would make some mushrooms with a lot more 4-PO-NMT/baeocystin (what about 4-HO-NMT?). This could create some kick ass shrooms possibly (i forget if baeocystin is dangerous at certain levels). Also if it worked would allow more experimentation to be done to see how this compound changes a mushrooms trip. I remember a recent IV DMT report where a certain percent of the extract supposedly contained NMT, some kind of bark.

Are there many mushroom growers on BL? God, if i would've known how easy it is and cheap for me to get my own DMT quickly and almost effortlessly (well, compared to growing shrooms!) back when I have grown them, well I would've been experimenting.

I mean people try different strains, do this or that, to try and make their mushrooms more potent. From all i've read, adding a certain amount of DMT will do this, how much can you add before a limit is reached/etc? well we don't know yet because there hasn't been experimentation..

If i could right now, i'd do like 10 small jars, and maybe add DMT to 5 of them, in various amounts (like 100mg, 200mg, etc) and see what the turn out is (if they all succeed that is).

Also maybe another couple jars to add some DIPT to, ipropsilocin shrooms or whatever .

God damn, i just find it suprising this hasn't already been all figured out by now with so many people growing constantly

-03-2005 04:24 (#2901655)
They've fed Psilocybe species with DET and found 4-hydroxy and 4-phosphoryloxy DET after a short while. I'm not sure what the rate limiting step is with this pathway, but if it occurs before the DMT stage, them potentially, the sky's the limit.

As for different N,N-disubstituted tryptamines as substrates, I don't know if larger groups might have a negative effect on the appropriate enzymes because of their size (steric hinderance in the enzyme active site), but if they all work well, I think a really interesting one would be to use diallyltryptamine as the substrate. I know that somewhere Shulgin was musing on the possibilities of 4-hydroxy DALT being the quickest acting oral hallucinogen (think it's in the piece posted in a few places about 5-methoxy-N,N-diallyltryptamine and it's rapid oral onset)

.

Some fascinating studies have been done in Germany where the metabolically active mycelium of some Psilocybe species have been administered diethyltryptamine as a potential diet component. Normally, this mushroom species dutifully converts N,N-dimethyltryptamine (DMT) to psilocin, by introducing a 4-hydroxyl group into the molecule by something that is probably called an indole 4-hydroxylase by the biochemists. You put DMT in, and you get 4-hydroxy-DMT out, and this is psilocin. Maybe if you put Mickey Mouse in, you would get 4-hydroxy-Mickey Mouse out. It is as if the mushroom psyche didn't really care what it was working with, it was simply compelled to do its sacred duty to 4-hydroxylate any tryptamine it came across. It was observed that if you put N,N-diethyltryptamine (DET, not a material found in nature) into the growing process, the dutiful and ignorant enzymes would hydroxylate it to 4-hydroxy-N,N-diethyltryptamine (4-HO-DET) a potent drug also not known in nature. This is the title drug of this commentary. What a beautiful burr to thrust into the natural versus synthetic controversy. If a plant (a mushroom mycelium in this case) is given a man-made chemical, and this plant converts it, using its natural capabilities, into a product that had never before been known in nature, is that product natural? What is natural? This is the stuff of many long and pointless essays.

Jeg kunne egentlig også godt tænke mig at se 5-Meo-Mipt givet til en svamp, det ville være nogen VILDE svampe tror jeg,,,

Eh... hvorfor lige 5-MeO-MiPT ?

Allernødigst vil svampen 4-hydroxylere det til 4-HO-5-MeO-MiPT,
men som sagt har hverken jeg eller andre nogen idé (som jeg har kendskab til?) om hvorvidt 4-Hydroxy-5-Methoxy-tryptaminer er aktive.

Fatter ik hvorfor der ik er nogen som har lavet nogen forsøg med det her
Mvh. Astral

fordi disse RC kemikalier er meget dyre, og tror kun af en meget lille del af det vil bliver hydroxyleret, det meste vil nok gå til spilde...

Det kunne ihvertfald være interesant at være den første til at finde ud af det, medmindre der er nogen som sidder inde med en viden som vi andre ikke har...

Jamen, egentlig ville alle tryptaminer som er potentionelt aktive være interesante at 4-hydroxylere, det være sig, amt, dip, dipt, dalt, mipt, det, dut osv. i den dur...

Ja hvorfor ikke 4-hydroxy-LSD, selv om jeg nu tvivler på om det kan lade sig gøre og at hvis det kan, måske så enda ikke aktivt, men hvem ved, nogen som gider prøve?

DL-5-Hydroxytryptophan
5-Methoxy-DL-tryptophan
5-Methoxytryptophol
2-Methyl-DL-tryptophan
4-Methyl-DL-tryptophan
5-Methyl-DL-tryptophan
6-Methyl-DL-tryptophan
7-Methyl-DL-tryptophan
alpha-Methyl-DL-tryptophan
5-Nitro-DL-tryptophan

Jeg vil tro der er STOR forskel på substanser delvis, fuldstændig naturligt fremstillet og syntetisk fremstillede substanser.

Anyway, hvem siger at ikke både D og L er aktive, men udover det, så skal jeg da gerne indrømme at det ved nærmere eftertjek kunne undlade den fra listen som var pastet fra nettet, ja jeg bruger faktisk google

Men anyway, så vil jeg gerne se nogen eksperimenter, det er alt for nemt at holde sig fast på naturvidenskabens snævre grænser og bevæge sig ud i at foretage biokemiske synteser udfra levende medier.

Suk...



Du er en spasser fordi du ikke kan forstå det jeg siger (omtrent ligeså intelligente argumenter som du selv bruger)

Du er dum at du tror at alting kan måles og vejes og at alle virkninger er umidelbar mærkbare, du burde lære ordet kvalitet at kende!

Du tænker alt for kvantitativt, istedet så tænk KVALITATIVT og lad være med at opføre dig som en emsig pattegris

Naturen bygger kun levo-isomeren. Derfor er den den eneste aktive.

Bullshit! (med alt respekt for ko-lort)
Men det er sq et dårligt 3. klasse argument, der FINDES Dextro isomer som er aktive og der findes MASSERE af stoffer som er fremstillet syntetisk som er aktive aligevel, skulle dextro-amfetamin så heller ik være aktivt eller hva?
Det er heller ikke fremstillet i naturen.

Prøv at tag dig lidt sammen, har du overhoved PRØVET levo-isomeren af 5-htp i racemisk form?

Næppe...

Derfor spar os andr med dinne pseydovidenskabelige hypotetiske pladder og ævl

Prøv at tag dig lidt sammen, har du overhoved PRØVET levo-isomeren af 5-htp i racemisk form?
l

Hvis jeg stillede spørgsmål som dette ville jeg nok være meget påpasselig med hvem jeg kaldte en tåbe...