Paradox
©
Fisana

Jump to content


- - - - -

Skipping the acid extraction w/spice teks??


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_sweatloaf13_*

Guest_sweatloaf13_*
  • Guest

Posted 27 November 2006 - 09:52 AM

Does anyone know the pros/cons to skipping the acid extraction step of MHRB extract. Teks and moving straight on to basification? Is this a quicker version with similar results,or just a fiend way to get a blast-off a little sooner?Input is appreciated folks.......:headbang:

#2 condo_pygmy

condo_pygmy

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 480 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 12:00 PM

It's definitely a quicker tek & yeilds are supposed to be much better,
Although i've yet to try this tek & wonder if heating the base solution will speed it up even more ? :rolleyes:

#3 Guest_sweatloaf13_*

Guest_sweatloaf13_*
  • Guest

Posted 27 November 2006 - 12:07 PM

hmmmmm....I usually follow your tek,using vitamin c as my acid with great results always!! I have a big pkg coming tomorrow from BBB so I wanna see if it's worth my while.Thx tho condo...

#4 condo_pygmy

condo_pygmy

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 480 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 12:21 PM

I'm going to try this new tek real soon, will post results...:eusa_doh:

#5 Guest_cap_*

Guest_cap_*
  • Guest

Posted 27 November 2006 - 12:26 PM

really anxious to hear how it went for ya condo, plz do keep us updated!

#6 cheech

cheech

    wizard of sorts

  • Expired Member
  • 574 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 12:45 PM

can someone point me to this tek?
i'm interested and haven't seen it before.
tia

#7 Guest_sweatloaf13_*

Guest_sweatloaf13_*
  • Guest

Posted 27 November 2006 - 01:09 PM

it's on blackclover.com.au
Lazymans tek(I think)

#8 sesshin

sesshin

    Mycophiliac

  • Expired Member
  • 24 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 01:51 PM

i dont think the yields are much better. from what i've read they are slightly lower. i would rather do that extra step in there if it increases my yield somewhat. i'm not in any hurry.

#9 synth

synth

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 853 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 02:32 PM

i dont think the yields are much better. from what i've read they are slightly lower. i would rather do that extra step in there if it increases my yield somewhat. i'm not in any hurry.


that's consistent with what i've read.

#10 entheogen23

entheogen23

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 157 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 05:17 PM

Yes, the acid phase can only help increase yeilds, as it helps increase the solubility of the spice salts. There is really no way I can see how a base-only extract would result in greater yeilds, that make no logical sense. It might be the same or less w/o acid phase, but no way greater.

There is a good thread on this @ The Nook:

http://www.thenook.o...showtopic=49655

And heating always helps speed any chemical reaction.

#11 synth

synth

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 853 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 05:19 PM

yeah, that is a good thread.

anyways, lightly acidifying, defatting, and then proceeding as usual
[all with heat] seems like the best method to me. [thanks entheogen, you opened my eyes
on that one]

#12 Chaos

Chaos

    Mocksvillian

  • Expired Member
  • 426 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 06:44 PM

That thread doesnt work for me, Can you post it here?

#13 entheogen23

entheogen23

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 157 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 07:35 PM

oops, gotta register to view on the Nook (great place, so I'd recommend it)

Here is the entire thing cut/pasted:

Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Heating reactions
Nook Forum > Cultivation & Tek Discussions > The Ionic Virtual Laboratory - Chemistry
Not-so New Guy
Nov 11 06, 09:51 AM GMT
Ok, I've heard a few times that you don't need to heat the acidic mhrb solution, but in everythying I've EVER read heating is an important step.

I'll continute to waste time heating until I see someone go toe to toe w/ me in a bout.

Anybody interested?

I know a few people got the same stuff as me. I'll try to find out who and ask you personally if you wanna do a test if nobody happens to want to do it in here. I'd like the MHRB to be the same, but a test is still worth the shot to see if you get better yields w/ heating.
me!
Nov 11 06, 11:06 AM GMT
any extraction will yeild better if heated. it is irrelevant what compound one is extracting from what material, solubility of almost anything in almost anything is greater at elevated temeratures than at lower ones.

i find this debate about "acidless extractions" and dmt kind of silly. what line of reasoning would cause one to first add acid to an extraction, then add base on top of that? In the first place, lye alone is far better at breaking down plant cells than HCl or other acids. In the second place, for every mole of acid you add to your extraction, you will have to add one mole of base to neutralize it before the base can begin the real work of basing out the alkaloid. All one is really doing by adding acid is wasting lye.

I think a better way to do these rootbark extractions would be to reflux the powdered bark in first hot xylene then discard the xylene. Reflux it in naptha (or heptane) and then discard the naptha. These steps should remove the bulk of the colored impurities... Then add fresh naptha (or heptane), lye and reflux again. Then seperate off the naptha (or heptane), add a fresh layer and reflux again. Repeat the reflux three times with a fresh non-polar layer each time. Then combine all three non-polar layers, boil them down and crash cystals out in freezer. I would expect very, very high yeilds of very, very clean product. Notice the entire thing is done at elevated temperatures...
Wobbly
Nov 15 06, 07:50 PM GMT
Think about it this way, you want to make coffee, you use hot water or cold water.

The use of Acid is for solubility.

DMT contains an amine, this amine is actually kind of basic, hence there term alkaloids, Alky- inferes basicity.

Anyways what I'm getting at is that the amine, (dimethyl amine) is readily protinated, probably by water, but its in equilibrium, so to push the equlibrium all the way other to all DMT, being N+ species you use acid.

The reason to protinate this amine is to increase solubility in the aqueous phase. Water is farily polar, and likes to solubilize polar or ionic things. Think about how much salt you can put into water NA+ Cl-.

You protinate the amine forming the amonnium cation alkylchain--N(Me)2 negative H+, this is much more soluable in water.

ME! you are correct you can pull the organics out of the root back with NP and base, but I don't know how selectivivity of the compounds you are pulling out of there.
McHennemAn
Nov 20 06, 12:44 PM GMT
People are doing it all the time with cactus: Grind, add base, add non polar, acid: crystallize.
I don’t see the added use of a initial acid soak. Besides dH2O is already slightly acidic.

A dry defat would be more efficient than defatting a aqueous solution. Only problem with the acid less technique would be if the spice is (partly) in the free-base form in the root, which seems unlikely because the spice a secondary metabolite and the cytosol and vascular bundles are all polar.

The only question I have is: When you go strait from base to nonpolar (without defat) like in the mesc teks and then precipitate in the freezer will the fats and goo in the naphta prevent the spice from crystallizing out clean?
mycofile
Nov 20 06, 02:47 PM GMT
QUOTE
Besides dH2O is already slightly acidic.


Really?
entheogen23
Nov 20 06, 07:48 PM GMT
QUOTE(me! @ Nov 11 06, 11:06 AM GMT)

i find this debate about "acidless extractions" and dmt kind of silly. what line of reasoning would cause one to first add acid to an extraction, then add base on top of that? In the first place, lye alone is far better at breaking down plant cells than HCl or other acids. In the second place, for every mole of acid you add to your extraction, you will have to add one mole of base to neutralize it before the base can begin the real work of basing out the alkaloid. All one is really doing by adding acid is wasting lye.


It seems many are reporting no need to use acid since MHRB is already slightly acidic, but my understanding from what I have read is that the acid helps speed the extraction of the alkaloids from the woody root bark and ensures those alkoloids are polar soluable. Until recently ALL of the DMT extraction teks had the acid H20 phase. Dunno if anyone has tested neutral pH vs. varying levels of acidic (I usually aim for pH of 4) to see if there is any appreciable difference in end yeilds. Sounds like you say there would be none Me!, and since your chem skills are godlike compared to mine, I'll take your word on this!


QUOTE(me! @ Nov 11 06, 11:06 AM GMT)

I think a better way to do these rootbark extractions would be to reflux the powdered bark in first hot xylene then discard the xylene. Reflux it in naptha (or heptane) and then discard the naptha. These steps should remove the bulk of the colored impurities... Then add fresh naptha (or heptane), lye and reflux again. Then seperate off the naptha (or heptane), add a fresh layer and reflux again. Repeat the reflux three times with a fresh non-polar layer each time. Then combine all three non-polar layers, boil them down and crash cystals out in freezer. I would expect very, very high yeilds of very, very clean product. Notice the entire thing is done at elevated temperatures...


Now this sounds like a interesting thing to try. If someone tries this, post the results here! I don't know anyone who has the gear to do this correctly, so I'll stick with my standard way for now which includes 3X DH20 extractions, 3X defats, and 3X water washes (with either sodium carbonate or ammonia), which has given very clean results (nearly white).
Wobbly
Nov 20 06, 10:09 PM GMT
distilled h20 is not acidic, however if you expose it to air, it absorbs s carbon dioxide and makes it acidic.

One of the reasons why global warming is bad, mmm kay.

Sorry my mistake from above, you get the ammonium cation, and the chloride of sulfate if you used sulphuric acid anion.

---- NHMe2(+) (Cl)- .
McHennemAn
Nov 21 06, 03:15 AM GMT
QUOTE(mycofile @ Nov 20 06, 10:47 PM GMT)

QUOTE
Besides dH2O is already slightly acidic.


Really?


QUOTE
The pH of pure water (H20) is 7 at 25oC, but when exposed to the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere this equilibrium results in a pH of approximately 5.2. Because of the association of pH with atmospheric gases and temperature, it is strongly recommended that the water be tested as soon as possible.


I will give it a go with 100 gr rootbark:

Pulverize -> Soak in hot MQ H2O -> Add Base KOH -> Heat in waterbath/stirr -> Add distilled Coleman 3x50 Ml -> strirr -> Seperate -> Freeze precipitate
winder
Nov 21 06, 04:05 AM GMT
Water is simulataneously both acidic and alkaline at pH 7. The very definition of pH is the negative logarithm of the hydrogen cation concentration.

pH = - log [H+]
If there is a pH, there are H+ ions.
At pH =7, there are 10^-7 H+ ions per liter.
Since the ionization product of water, Kw = 10^-14, there so happens to be an equal concentration of OH- ions at pH=7.

But this is missing the point.
Sodium hydroxide, a base, doesn't dissolve in water because water is an acid.
Sodium hydroxde dissolves in water because sodium hydroxide dissociates and water can associate with the ions of sodium and hydroxide that are formed.

Alkaloids can form ions when dissolved in water regardless of their state before dissolution. Some alkaloids are moderately effective bases, so they will take a proton available from water, even at a neutral pH. This shifts the equilibrium so that more H+ ions form to maintain the ionization product of [H+] * [OH-] = 10^-14 moles^2/liter^2. If there is water present, then the product of [H+] * [OH-] MUST = 10^-14; that is a fact of life.
McHennemAn
Nov 21 06, 05:16 AM GMT
I thought that depending on the pH of the ‘solvent’ the alkaloids will be ‘pushed’ into their freebase or salt form.

-If the alkaloid is already in its salt form then it will dissolve in pure water.
-If the alkaloid is in its freebase it will not dissolve in water but only dissolve in non polar solvents.

If the alkaloid fraction is partly salt and partly freebases then it is wise to add acid to insure that all alkaloids have been converted to salt before defatting/filtration.

Adding the base will insure conversion of the natural salt form alkaloid into their freebase so they can be extracted with nonpolar. While most cell/plant crap is water soluble, and thus will be excluded.

I believe freebase alkaloids are not present in living organisms. They will always be in their salt form. So extraction with pure water is just as efficient as with acids…

Or am I wrong: Is the solubility of alkaloid salts higher in acidic water then in pure water?
(If yes than people are losing alot of mescaline going from cactus to base to nonpolar!)
EDIT: well maybe the alkaloid-Chloride salt is more soluble in H2O than the naturally occuring salts...anybody a clue?
Coja
Nov 21 06, 08:34 PM GMT
QUOTE(entheogen23 @ Nov 21 06, 02:48 AM GMT)

Until recently ALL of the DMT extraction teks had the acid H20 phase. Dunno if anyone has tested neutral pH vs. varying levels of acidic (I usually aim for pH of 4) to see if there is any appreciable difference in end yeilds.


Back in the days of the "Yoda extraction" there was a certain Raver who'd reported better, cleaner results from doing a B/A/B extraction rather than the standard A-solvent wash/defat-/B extraction. Though I don't recall if he was using Desmanthus, Mimosa or both at various times.
McHennemAn
Nov 22 06, 01:49 AM GMT
This is the Raver's tek:

http://ethnobotany.y...net/alkext.html

QUOTE
This step converts the alkaloid acid salts that are the naturally occurring form of the alkaloid into its insoluble basic salt. It may seem contradictory as a first step, but it is far easier to convert the bound alkaloidal salt to its base, and then to it's hydrochloride salt than it is from one acidic salt to another...


If this is true the only reason for going from salt to base back to salt would be because one would like to defat. In that case Me!'s suggestion of a dry defat is more effiecient.
And if the fats do not interfere with freeze precipetation defating makes no sense at all...
Going straight to base to nonpolar would be the way to go.
Not-so New Guy
Nov 25 06, 02:56 PM GMT
A defat of MHRB is arguably not needed. One pull w/ naptha gives me crystal clear IV ready crystals EVERY time.

This whole process is so simple it's silly to argue how many grains of sand are showing when it's known.

winder
Nov 25 06, 05:21 PM GMT
I have been asked to offer an opinion on this topic.

Many aqueous extractions from plant are done with acid and this makes much sense.
The lignins in plant matter are soluble in alkaline solutions, which is why kraft paper making uses lye. The lye solubilizes the lignin into the black liquor and this is later burned in the recovery boiler. So lye on plant matter turns some of the plant matter soluble. But that soluble fraction is likely to stay in the alkaline solution.

Acid solutions will not solubilize the lignins since the lignins are polyphenols, very weak acids themselves.

Therefore, either acidification to solubilize the alkaloids or strong alkaline solutions to favor later partitioning into the non-polar solvent could work.

My guess, not having tried this, is that acidic water is better to start with. The acids are lower molecular weight and less viscous than alkaline solutions.

Having to add some more inexpensive lye to an acidic solution is a small price to pay for being able to keep the mixture relatively light colored. Ending up with something too dark to see through, which I imagine could happen with a lot of lignin containing bark (again, I haven't tried this) would seem a worthwhiel trade.

So acidifying, extracting, separating aqueous solution from solids, basifying the acidic solution, and extracting the alkaline solution with a non-polar would seem the cleanest, albeit not the least expensive or lowest material usage, means of getting from rootbark to product.

But I am hypothesizing...
McHennemAn
Nov 26 06, 04:30 AM GMT
Winder you are absolutely right,

We decided to put it to the test. 250 grams of bark were hand broken into small pieces no bigger then a cm and not thicker than 0,5 cm and placed in a 3 L pyrex Erlenmeyer.

Just enough hot water was added to completely cover the bark. This was kept at around 90 ˚C for about an hour. Then enough saturated KOH solution was added to turn the mix completely black. A messy unable to see true black soup was the result. This was heated to 90 ˚C for 2 hours and left at room temperature overnight. The next day the soup was heated again and 100 mL of distilled Coleman fuel was added and stirred in. A thin layer of naphtha formed on top of the soup. This was sucked of using a pipette. 3 more 100 ml pulls were preformed and only 150 mL of naphtha were recovered. Were did the rest go? We figured it evaporated since everything was done near the boiling temperature of the Coleman.

The initial 150 mL were evaporated to yield a measly no more then 200 mg of spice. It was however quite clean, slightly yellow.
More pulls were needed;

The Erlenmeyer was cooled and a good 200 mL of naphtha were added again. Because the Erlenmeyer was to big to easily suck off the thin layer we decided to pour it over into a smaller vessel. Upon pouring a thick snotty emulsion formed and now it is impossible to distinguish between naphtha and MHRB soup. A seperatory funnel was no use either. The emulsion was in fact so thick it clogged the tap.

The plan now is to heat the Erlenmeyer again to boiling point of the naphtha. Layers should separate. More solvent will probably be needed. Since we ran out of distilled (pain in the ass but cheap) naphtha we will probably go for HPLC hexane or cyclohexane.

I will keep you updated but as far as I am concerned; having done both marsofolds tek and this tek, I can say, this tek is supposed to be easy but the black snot soup is a pain in the ass and the emulsion is the worst I ever witnessed. So far yields are meagre. Go for the acid and filter!

Some questions for you guys:

Is cyclohexane a good choice to continue with?

Will the spice dissolve in the KOH water soup? Or will it form a precipitate and remain in suspension or drop to the bottom of the Erlenmeyer? If so I will filter the stuff using vacuum through a buchner and extract the dry Filtrand with more solvent.

Thanks!
entheogen23
Nov 26 06, 07:02 AM GMT
yeah, acidifying, defatting, and filtering seem well worth the hour or two extra time to me.

as far as cyclohexane, others here may be know better (I am no chemist guru) but it seems that it should work as well or perhaps better than distilled colemans (which is likely mostly heptane with a bit of hexane).

Just read this:

QUOTE

Cyclohexane has the lowest angle and torsional strain of all the cycloalkanes, as a result cyclohexane has been deemed a 0 in total ring strain, a combination of angle and torsional strain. This also makes cyclohexane the most stable of the cycloalkanes and therefore will produce the least amount of heat when burned compared to the other cycloalkanes.


http://en.wikipedia....iki/Cyclohexane

Not sure what impact the stability would have on things, but it seems like a good thing.

Where did you get Cyclohexane?

McHennemAn
Nov 26 06, 07:32 AM GMT
When our department had to move from the old lab to the new one most of the older equipment and chemicals were deemed for disposal/replacement. I was so free to save a bit here and there...

Anybody have any thoughts on filtering the plant material and solids out of the basified goo and washing this filtrand with cyclohexane?
I can imagine that the alkaloids crash out of solution when the pH goes up. If one would centrifuge/filter out the crashed out alkaloids and the plant material from the water, then extraction of these solids would be far more efficient than having to fish the alkaloids (particles?) out of an excess of soup. Right?
winder
Nov 26 06, 08:05 AM GMT
Glad I could be of some service.

I proved to myself last night what can be done with some knowledge, theory, patience, and some slight skill.
Not-so New Guy
Nov 27 06, 01:43 AM GMT
I would suggest using a funnel w/ fitted filter paper and a flask that you hook up a pump to (forget name).

It sounds like your goo/material is going to be a pain in the ass to recover the goods out of. What I've done when I have had similar problems is get everything in the funnel and carefully pour more HCL solution over the stuff. You'll probably have to scrape the goo out a few times and change filter disks a couple times.

Oh, you've already basified. Hmm. Use Lye? Next time use KOH it does seem to help mhrb emulsions a little. When I have an emulsion inside my sep. funnel I spin around the contents (like a glass of wine before smelling) and the emultion will let loose of the sides and sink to the bottom below the solvent.

Since you're clogged I'd turn her upside down into the funnel and get out all the crud. Pour the emultion into a different container tho, just filter the other matter. Then put the emultion back into your sep. funnel and maybe add some extra base solution. Shake her up and let sit over night.

Other than slowly gathering the goods out of the emultion w/ these ideas I don't have any lab knowledge on how to fix a stubborn emultion. I had to discard my first go around ever w/ this stuff because of the same problem. I got a good return so I don't think very much goodies get trapped in the emulsions.

Hope I'm understanding your predicament right, and hope this helps.
entheogen23
Nov 27 06, 08:14 AM GMT
Good suggestions Not-so New Guy. The sep funnel swirl works great for breaking up and releasing any emulsion stuck to the sides (especially when the sep funnel is left to soak in really hot tap water in a sink or bucket first)

I have had some really nasty emulsions in past A/B extractions, when I didn't know better and shook the hell out of the basified soltution with NP solvent in it and got loads of bubbly, sticky goo. I was able to reduce and/or get rid of the most stubborn ones using some or all of the following tricks:
Heat: get the sep funnel really warm by filling a large enough bucket with as hot as your tap water goes and soak it in there for 15 mins, then remove and swirl and/or vibrate (see below), and then soak more.
Add NaCL (non-iodized salt, such as kosher salt) to the mix. I have added as much as 1/3 or more of a cup to 800-1000ml of solution. I never measure the salt, just keep adding it and swirling/inverting till it dissolves. Salt makes the H20 even more polar and helps break down the emulsions. Just don't want so much that it comes out of solution (which is less likely the warmer you have the solution of course)
Vibrate!! I built a wooden stand for my sep funnel, which has rubber feet on it. I hold a orbital palm sander (without sandpaper on it!) up to the stand and turn it off and on 10-20 times. This generates a lot of various frequency vibrations that will often resonate harmonically with the stand and funnel, causing it to "boil" with vibrations and popping most of the emusion bubbles, as well as helping separate the layers. I have read about people using one of those cheap, hard-plastic sex toy vibrators (clean of course, LOL) and inserting it into the sep funnel to accomplish the same thing. They make expensive vibration units that do the same thing for use in labs, but an orbital sander works great! Plus harmonics are cool to watch.
Swirling (as Not-so New Guy suggests), and gentle inverting, while heating in the water bath in-between
Filtering: Run the entire thing of soltution, NP and goo through a buchner vacuum filtration, using either lab filter disks, or just a few layers of cheese cloth (if the filter disks get plugged up too fast). Filtering helps break the goo globs down a lot.
Time: I have had to let things soak in the hot water for 4-8 hours to get the emulsion to settle. I used a 5 gal bucket in the shower, and dumped/refilled it every 2 hours or so.

Best of luck! Emulsions suck!!

-e23
McHennemAn
Nov 27 06, 10:26 AM GMT
I already used KOH, who knows, NaOH might have been worst
Thanks for your help!

Here's what I did:

I separated the particles and plant matter from the black liquid. I drowned these semi-dry solids in Petroleum ether in a jar with glass stopper. Looks nice and clean, I give it a good chance of pulling out the remaining spice!

I then added 200 mL of petroleum ether to the remaining (black liquid) emulsion and it formed a nice layer on top and I could see the naphtha bubbles in the emulsion break into the petroleum ether.

Now we wait...

Another question for you guys. Should I heat the Jar and the flask before collecting / sucking off the petroleum ether layer?

Thanks!
entheogen23
Nov 27 06, 10:40 AM GMT
QUOTE(McHennemAn @ Nov 27 06, 10:26 AM GMT)


Another question for you guys. Should I heat the Jar and the flask before collecting / sucking off the petroleum ether layer?


I would for sure, as the heat can help speed the Xfer of the spice to the pet ether, and heat shouldn't cause any problems, other that blowing up if you use flame or something dumb like that.
McHennemAn
Nov 27 06, 11:04 AM GMT
I am not as dumb as I look...;-)

I use a hot water bath outside away from heat source. Since the boiling point of my petroleum ether is 50-70*C much hotter would be silly.

I will let it soak for a few more days, then I'll heat it, and seperate, evaporate.
entheogen23
Nov 27 06, 11:12 AM GMT
you might want to do a freezer precipitation (after reducing down by 50%) to get cleaner initial crystals, and then evap down the remaining pet ether and recrystalize the results for more purity.

let us know how it goes!

#14 cheech

cheech

    wizard of sorts

  • Expired Member
  • 574 posts

Posted 28 November 2006 - 07:35 PM

i clicked the link given to me and just got a blank page.

#15 synth

synth

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 853 posts

Posted 28 November 2006 - 10:59 PM

http://www.thenook.o...showtopic=49655 you mean?

works for me..

in any case, it can be found:

Nook Forum > Cultivation & Tek Discussions > The Ionic Virtual Laboratory - Chemistry > Heating reactions

#16 Vapor

Vapor

    Mycophiliac

  • Expired Member
  • 93 posts

Posted 28 November 2006 - 11:07 PM

I suggest reading a tek by Vortex regarding this subject. Apparently, the unadulterated spice is a salt,...so what is the point of acid extracting it into a salt form when it is already one. As for soluability, the base suggested is so strong that it breaks down the material and extracts more completely than an acid extraction could possibly do and thus the higher yeild. It knocks the spice right out of the root bark and simultaneously converts the salt to the free base form rather than freeing it from an acid acqueous sollution.
I don't know for sure as this activity is against the law so I can't validate the findings. However, the line of thinking makes sense.
The thread should, IMHO, be based upon understanding and testing the findings of those who have actually experimented with the approach rather than in getting involved in " what if " flights of chemical masterbation of sorts. No offence meant.

#17 papalion

papalion

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 211 posts

Posted 28 November 2006 - 11:48 PM

I understand the chemistry behind the A/B extraction and know why it 'should' work better with the extraction of an amine. I am also a pragmatist and know that going straight to basification of mhrb produces TWICE the product of similar if not identical quality. This is based on experience and actual mass of products done in a country where it is legal to do so

You can guess which step I don't take.

#18 entheogen23

entheogen23

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 157 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 12:03 AM

I suggest reading a tek by Vortex regarding this subject. Apparently, the unadulterated spice is a salt,...so what is the point of acid extracting it into a salt form when it is already one. As for soluability, the base suggested is so strong that it breaks down the material and extracts more completely than an acid extraction could possibly do and thus the higher yeild. It knocks the spice right out of the root bark and simultaneously converts the salt to the free base form rather than freeing it from an acid acqueous sollution.
I don't know for sure as this activity is against the law so I can't validate the findings. However, the line of thinking makes sense.
The thread should, IMHO, be based upon understanding and testing the findings of those who have actually experimented with the approach rather than in getting involved in " what if " flights of chemical masterbation of sorts. No offence meant.


Well, I'd love to hear someone who has time to test both the standard A/B method compared to Vortex's tek (base only) with the exact same bark, and report back on both yeild and quality. Over on the DMT nexus (which is down right now) people are reporting greater yeilds w/ Vortex's tek, so perhaps it is a better method. It sure would be faster, that is for sure.

from DMT nexus:

A standard A/B extraction of one kilo MHRB yielded 4.55 g of spice from the freeze precip.
Noman's version of this tek on 100 g of the same bark yielded 900 mg from the freeze precip.
Both extracts were washed with 10% ammonia and ended up at 3.6 g and 550 mg respectively. They look, taste, smoke, and recrystalize identically.
I don't know why it works better either. My friend has noticed that no sludge cake forms on the bottom of his vessel like it does with an A/B. The only part that doesn't dissolve is the fibrous bits of the bark.


I may come to eat my words about "no way it could be better". :D

-e23

#19 entheogen23

entheogen23

    Mycophage

  • Free Member
  • 157 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 12:18 AM

I understand the chemistry behind the A/B extraction and know why it 'should' work better with the extraction of an amine. I am also a pragmatist and know that going straight to basification of mhrb produces TWICE the product of similar if not identical quality. This is based on experience and actual mass of products done in a country where it is legal to do so

You can guess which step I don't take.



missed this post before my last reply. ok, I am sold on this potential viability of this method. I'll tell my FOAF (who lives at the North Pole, where this is all legal of course) to try it out and report back.

#20 Vapor

Vapor

    Mycophiliac

  • Expired Member
  • 93 posts

Posted 29 November 2006 - 12:50 AM

Entheogen23I see that you have an open mind. That's the rarest extraction around.
Academically, I think that you have practically applicable thoughts concerning the heating. However, as Vortex or someone else surmised limits should be respected and your FOAF should note this.
Apparently, one can boil the shit out of acid aqueous sollutions although this is usually not done. The spice seems to be relatively tenacious about not evaping in this form.
However, if too heated it can escape from the base as a vapor. Hypothetically, all of the goodness can be lost. I think Vortex recommends against going over 120 degrees and suggest to play it safe around 100. The initial base sollution may have to cool before it is added to the bark and a thermometer would be an asset.
The ph of the base, ideally, should be at or over 13 1/2. Vortex strongly recommends copious amounts of solvent to accomplish the multiple pulls and a final pull that can last days.
I wish your FOAF all of the best.




Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!