Looking to create a sustainable method of harvesting acacia bark long term I've been avidly trying to digest the huge amounts of data in this thread (let alone the broader content on Nexus). I can see the passion of those posting in the thread and wish to contribute further.

I have a little land in rural VIC and space in the garden in Melbs to pot/plant a fair amount of Acacias. My reasons are not wholly altruistic as yes, I'm looking to harvest decent levels of tryptamines so I can enjoy their benefits without having to contribute to the damage done in the local area and Australia as a whole. But, I also want to choose a few different varieties of the lesser known acacias and maybe those that are in danger with a view to feed data back in to this community in the long term. I'm around to stay!

There seems to be a number of VIC based members on the Nexus and I'd politely ask if I can tap in to their knowledge by recommending a few varieties. I'm conducting my own investigations and not looking for short cuts, just information to further my own knowledge and journey.

I thank you all in advance.

I had a couple questions actually regarding rainfall and bark on dead trees as well..

1. how is it that the rainfall reduces the alkaloid content? is it literally washing the alkaloids out of the plant? or is it more to do with the way the rain effects the tree's chemical synthesis? or both?

2. do you think rainfall would affect the alkaloid levels in dying material which has snapped off the tree .. eg a large branch snapped off some time ago where the bark is semi fresh but beginning to dry out and is regularly exposed to rain? the reason I asked is because if the latter option of the first question is the factor in play then I wouldn't think that the tree's synthesis patterns after rain would effect material that has snapped off and retains no contact with the living tree.. and going by this logic would mean that fallen material would be ok to take after rain

Maybe with 2. the constant acidic rain water lyses the cells leaving them exposed to be washed out?

..thank you all contributors..

kingofsnakes..the only really sustainable way of using bark is either twigs or branches..the content is the same..this has been mentioned a few times..

--Shadow wrote: ..it's been discussed a little, and has been anecdotally agreed with by a few, but there is no definitive controlled study so to speak..
i will try and find the post, but the last time i recall looking at the rain issue, i found evidence that in fact the alkaloids had migrated from the bark to the phyllodes..
in terms of dead/discarded material, i think DreaMTripper is right that leaching will eventually occur..
the general drop of alkaloids with increased rainfall, noted in a variety of plants, i would tend to believe, acacian, to be a metabolism issue, not one of discarding..
Why excess rain drops alkaloid content, and what increases it [started by --Shadow]

ultimately, the direction this all leads is - Know Thy Tree..

Acacias are not a standardised plant, and they will not always behave how they might be expected to..

keep on with the study, acacians..and be well..
.


please be kind to trees..
.

..here's an interesting recent announcement regarding Acacia rigidula (now Vachellia rigidula), which we've looked at a few times, and has some conflicting findings regarding alkaloidal constituents [see p.5, 9, 44, 75 & 85]

Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals Refutes Harvard Researcher's Claims in Full and Robust Response on Acacia Rigidula


(see also http://troutsnotes.com/2-acacia-species/ )

and so the controversy over this desert and brushland US acacia (vachellia) and it's contents continues..

..from the report:
...


..below A. rigidula (Blackbrush) in flower and ally, the Lark Bunting, in the Rio Grande...

(please look after our wild allies)

my understanding is that the narrow phyllode variant has a very clean adlkaloid profile of somewhere around 98% (i think that was the % in nen's test that endlessness had analysedbut it might be an idea to check the thread) dmt.. if i remember correctly it was the broad leaf variety which had reports of oral activity.. contained a smaller % of dmt in conjuntion with the other alkaloids.. i'm afraid my net is too slow to jump over to the analysis thread for now.. but I doubt you'll get oral activity from the narrow phyllode variety

also thats awesome news about your finding in such old material.. does it rain much in the area or is it pretty dry?

..an African Acacia (now Seneglia) which has confirmed medicinal activity, was shown last year to contain alkaloids (also triterpenes, amongst other things) ..
Acacia ataxacantha (Flame Thorn, or Flame Pod)
it's widespread in tropical west Africa, down through Zimbabwe and south into KwaZulu-Natal..

extracts have had impressive anti-diabetic activity: 'Lipid Profile, Antidiabetic and Antioxidant Activity of Acacia ataxacantha Bark Extract in Streptozotocin- Induced Diabetic Rats' Arise et al.
..again, though the identity of the alkaloids was not determined (or published) -
'Acacia Ataxacantha (Bark): Chemical Composition And Antibacterial Activity Of The Extracts', Amoussa, Lagnika, Sanni 2014

'ataxacantha' means 'random thorns'..bees also like it..

pictured below

(Trees give us so much, let's give back to Them)

beautiful tree.. love the sparse flower rods... reminds me a little of mimosa hostilis

just thought i'd let people know that i just finished a 2nd successful extraction from Acacia Mucronata subs. Mucronata .. multiple alkaloids seemed to be present including dmt. ..extracted from phyllodes and twigs.. yield was very small (a yellow oil) so it may be better to test at a later time of year (winter is very wet in the dandenongs - often raining several days a week)

..the extract is a heavy one.. some uncomfortable physical sensations were felt to begin with but they evened out nicely as the effects progressed.
tasted much differen't to that of purer dmt extracts but there was a hint of the tryptamine taste present..

..effects felt were immediate upon exhalation ..a strong sinking feeling entailed and was a definite focal point of the experience..and the visions, though mild, were neatly synonymous with this sensation.. my head felt a jarring 'boxed-in' feeling when i tried to look around...the rhythm of the extract came through best with stillness and focused submission to the heavy physical effects. mild ribbons of geometry wrapped around the trees and shrubs..

phyllodes were less narrow and stiff compared to other subs. mucronata specimens though still grew quite erect. I suspect the phyllodes may change a little with age as it has been noticed with other specimens that the phyllodes are not as prickly or erect and grow longer, broader and a little softer as the growth habit of the tree changes with age. this is speculative though

personally i'm a little reluctant to label it so definitively as subs. mucronata but it is obviously very close in relation and distinctly different to subs. longifolia... unfortunately there is very little literature on subs. mucronata and even less visual documentation

^..thank you for that report, acacian, and for cautious bioassay of an unknown extract, and the associated possible risks..such pioneering is not for everyone, and i would not suggest to most to even attempt this..

..we obviously can't be sure without testing what's in the extract..we do know that the sample of sub.sp longifolia which i had tested by endlessness contained (in order of predominance)
- NMT, tryptamine, betacarbolines, probable trace DMT, and unknown traces..
it was bioassayed a couple of years ago back here ..as i commented "[simple] tryptamine seems to produce physical sensations in muscles & chest.."
certainly mixed tryptamine samples can produce strong, and sometimes unsettling, physical effects..

in terms of the differences between the subspecies of A. mucronata, that whole section of the section Juliflorae needs serious revision, as i've said before..but the basic differences are:
ssp. longifolia - longer phyllodes (more than 9cm) and usually less predominant veins (than) ssp. mucronata - which are usually less than 9cm long, and wider, and then there is the Tasmanian ssp. dependens, which has much wider phyllodes..ssp. mucronata is likely what you have..though of course there's always the hybrid factor with other section Juliflorae..
.



i thank the Nexus for it's sustainable and ethical model,
and to those who care about and are kind to trees and their environments..

hmm..my understanding was that subs. mucronata is actually not very common in victoria at all.. "world wide wattle" claims it only occurs naturally in tasmania whereas subs. longifolia is native and widespread to victoria and some areas of NSW. the subs. mucro specimens i've come accross are occasionally planted in reserves or roadsides but by no means abundant - I certainly havent found a great deal of them growing wild in any of the bushland, but usually in urban areas...subs. longifolia I find growing everywhere around where I live - it seems to have more needly, leathery phyllodes which vary greatly in length and are variably thinner and thicker than than those of subs. mucronata (which seems to be a little variable itself).. i've come accross some specimens of subs. longifolia recently with phyllodes as long as 20cm.. it really does vary from tree to tree (even specimens which grow within metres of each other!).. many variations of mucronata indeed.. they are a species which interests me a lot...

and I agree 100% about the need for botanical revision..I reckon if there was more investigation there would more than likely be new forms of mucronata recognised.. intermediates perhaps between the already known species. I've been doing my best to document the variability within mucronata subs. longifolia lately so maybe sometime I'll show the photos to a botanist and get their opinion

i thought i'd include a few photos of the tree i was gifted the alkaloids from as well as the more common subs. longifolia below it. the first three (the one tested above) seem to be leaning towards subs. mucronata but the phyllodes are longer, whicker and slightly more papery. the subs. longifolia's phyllodes seem more leathery, and independently/upwardly erect - they will often point to the sky despite the stem hanging downwards (while others are looser but buoyant), whereas those of subs. mucronata are more erect in the direction of the stem.

I've noticed some of these variabilities aren't very well documented with subs. longifolia so perhaps the botanists who wrote of their taxonomy visited a limited number of locations.. i could go on all day about the variations of mucronata's taxonomy as it is an issue with almost every specimen I see, but i think its better to show people the trees in person.. as photos can be very misleading - and trying to describe the differences could also wrongly determine the plant's identification due to the at times black and white nature of identification keys

Ive seen subs longifolia (needle phyllode type) absolutely everywhere in the Yarra ranges...

..yeah it's a confusing one, mucronata..thanks for that acacian..
i'll take world wide wattle's word for it (though they are occasionally wrong, e.g. obtusifolia reproducing by suckering, which is completely wrong) .. but what to me seems to be more common in vic is what i'd think was ssp. mucronata..i guess it's a 'broad leaf' form of ssp. longifolia..but this throws the division between subspecies into almost un-seperableness..hence the need for a revision..

keep up the great work, research and keen eyesight acacian!

i think there are a few key differences which may still help in identification; i've noticed are that the phyllodes of subs. mucronata are pointier and while erect in their own way, are not leathery the way subs. longifolia are .. nor as thick, and are perhaps closer in some ways to the foliage of floribunda (though lacking in the abundant inflorescence, less hairy and soft, and the overall growth habit is erect despite the varying stiffness of the individual phyllodes)... making it even harder to pinpoint, I have a strong feeling that these traits of subs. mucro change as the tree ages and grows thicker branches (phyllodes grow on the thicker stems, but once they form more (and thicker) branches and develope a more tree like habit I think they start to develope in bursts at the end of branches rather than growing all the way down the branches as they do in younger age.. there are limited specimens to confirm this with though.. if I could only find somewhere with large stands of them in the wild rather than individual trees, I could be more sure whether these variabilities are due to individual cases of hybridisation - or whether they are actual variabilities within the species that can be consistently observed

the unbloomed flower rods of subs. longifolia are a little shorter than mucro and have a more light brownish/red tinge to the stalk, whereas the flower stalk of subs. mucronata seems to be a more pale colour .. the inflorescences on the stalks have a more yellowy green compared to the more lime coloured ones of subs. mucronata. the flowering subs. longifolias I've seen have had quite pale yellow flowers, whereas the subs. mucronata more often have a pure white colouring.. though I remember you mentioning that subs. longifolia should be more white, so it may just be my area... I suspect the colour of the flowers is as variable as the rest of the tree - one thing I noticed as far as photography goes is that some of the images on google have had their saturation turned down which removes some of the colour..

the bark of this form of presumed subs. mucronata is smoother than that of subs. longifolia, and often a sort of shiny grey - as opposed to the dark brownish grey bark of subs.longifolia which can vary in texture

phyllodes also seem a little lighter and more variable in shade than subs. mucro which from my observation are usually a darker green

I think that the subs. mucronata may be a little differen't in victoria to the tasmanian variety too and the mature active ones i've tested seem to have much less mucronate phyllodes taking on a softer texture. there also seems to be another form with shorter, more curved and broader phyllodes (below is one from google images and one I took from my garden which seems to be of the same variety.. phyllodes don't exceed 7cm in length).. quite sharp and "mucronate".. the one in my garden is a tall tree well over 5m in height

anyways I think I have rambled enough about this species for a little while so I'll let others do their thing hope everybody is doing well

Has anyone done extensive work on A Pycnanta?

Starting this Spring and continuing for a year,
I plan on extracting from several Acacia Pycnantha's, at different times of each season, see if someone can crack this tree.

theres has been the odd finding here and there but no extensive research has been done on it yet... it is definitely a candidate worth investigating .. widespread too

There an abundance of it around me.
I'll try to collect phyllodes, flowers?, trunk bark and root bark at different times of each season (start, mid and end? ) And different soil types then extract and see what happens.

i'd ask that you please refrain from taking trunk and especially rootbark from trees it can often kill or badly damage them.. taking rootbark is especially a no no and is pointless for alkaloids considering if they are present they will also be abundant in other areas of the tree. if you are set on extracting from bark just collect twigs/stems or a prune a thick branch if you must.. the bark is the same all over the tree content wise - so if it is in the trunk it will be in the twig/stem in pretty much the same amounts.. as is the case with most acacia.. and if it is in the trunk it will likely be in the phyllodes too but often in smaller amounts.. good luck with it this tree would be a special one to learn the ways of considering its cultural significance

No worries man, I'll only work with phyllodes
Wasn't sure if I should use the bark, so I just put it out there.
Thanks for the input and I hope I can get some learnings out of this tree

no worries its not necessary to completely avoid bark as long as you are careful and respectful in your harvesting method..i was mainly referring to the root/trunk which is difficult to take without causing harm. pruning a few branches is a good way to aquire useable amounts of bark with minimal harm required..

..if you find a large stand of trees (which won't be a problem with such a widespread and common tree like pycnantha) you'll be able to generate a sufficient amount of material from simply pruning a branch here and there... plus you'll get a mix of phyllodes and twig/stem bark which you can test separately in order to understand the tree a little better.. be on the lookout for fallen branches too as they are a common occurrence after storms.. fallen material will often still contain alkaloids in good amounts

keep us posted