The Internet straight to base method indeed extracts DMT from M. hostilis roots. However, DMT is not purified and the exact composition of the extracts and its toxicology is unknown. Thus, recreational DMT users are exposing themselves to products with unknown composition and effects.

We have performed the straight to base technique for the extraction of DMT found on the Internet. The evaluation of DMT concentration in the organic solvents was performed via UPLC-ESI-MS/MS. No investigation was performed on other compounds in the solvents.

The psychoactive capacity of the alkaloid N,N-dimethyltryptamine (DMT) has been known for decades, and its presence in beverages used in religious contexts around the world – such as ayahuasca – has attracted growing attention from the scientific community due to its possible anxiolytic and antidepressant effects. Mimosa hostilis, popularly known as jurema preta in Brazil, is a plant known to be utilized for extracting DMT, especially for recreational use. In this study, we confirmed if five different organic solvents (n-hexane, ethyl acetate, n-butanol, dichloromethane, and chloroform) would extract non-purified DMT from M. hostilis and compared them in terms of DMT concentration found in the five organic solvents cited before.

Systematic Search for Previous DMT Extraction Techniques To investigate if the STB extraction technique had been previously made and different solvents were previously used to extract DMT from M. hostilis, a systematic search was made in the PubMed database until October 18, 2018. The following search terms were selected: (dimethyltryptamine OR M. hostilis OR Mimosa tenuiflora OR jurema) AND (extraction OR extraction method OR solvents). Thirty-eight results were found, but none of them referred to DMT extraction (most references were related to the quantification of DMT in plant material or human matrices). However, after handsearching the citations in one of these references (Gaujac, Aquino, Navickiene, & De Andrade, 2011), a procedure specifically for the DMT extraction was found (Gaujac, 2013). In an attempt to expand these results, another search with less selective terms was performed: (M. hostilis OR dimethyltryptamine) AND (extraction). Twenty-one studies were found, but no new reference was selected. Due to the lack of available sources, further research was conducted through the references of the selected text (Gaujac et al., 2011) and in the doctoral thesis of the same author (Gaujac, 2013). During this handsearch, three other studies were found: De Lima (1946); Meckes-Lozoya et al. (1990); and Nicasio, Villarreal, Gillet, Bensaddek, and Fliniaux (2005). Therefore, four references were found in the systematic search for extractions of DMT from M. hostilis. The main scientific information related to DMT extraction from each citation is described in Table 1. Table 1. Results of the systematic search for DMT extraction techniques from M. hostilis Botanic material Extraction solvent (Re)crystallization solvent Fusion point (°C) Techniques Source M. hostilis roots Xylene – 45.8–46.8 Various obsolete chemical techniques De Lima (1946) M. hostilis roots – Methanol 45.5–46.8 HPLC with c18 column Meckes-Lozoya et al. (1990) M. hostilis roots, flowers, and leaves Diethyl ether/chloroform + ammonia 49:1 – – HPLC with c18 column, UV absorption Nicasio et al. (2005) M. hostilis roots n-Hexane n-Hexane/acetonitrile First fraction: 55.5 NMR, GC-MS, IR-SPT, UV absorption, DSC, X-ray diffraction Gaujac (2013) Second fraction: 45

Materials and Methods Materials M. hostilis Barks and inner barks from M. hostilis roots were purchased on the Internet in a common marketplace website (www.mercadolivre.com.br). Due to the plants endemicity in Brazil’s northeastern region and the fact that it is not scheduled by the government regarding its cultivation, use, and distribution, M. hostilis roots are easy to find and can be promptly acquired in Brazil. Chemical reagents and solvents n-Hexane, ethyl acetate, n-butanol, dichloromethane, chloroform, anhydrous ethanol, sodium sulfate, sodium chloride, hydrochloric acid, sodium hydroxide, and ammonium hydroxide were all acquired from Exodus brand, all being laboratory grade. Methanol for resuspension of high performance liquid chromatography grade was acquired from Merck (São Paulo, Brazil). Methods The “Lazyman’s Straight To Base” extraction technique found on the Internet was used as basis for the procedure (Dmt-Nexus, 2018). To do so, 600 ml of pure water was basified with slow addition of 60 g sodium hydroxide pellets. After cooling, this solution with pH 14 was divided in equal volumes into five 500 ml containers. To each of these containers were added 50 g of grinded M. hostilis roots, making up to 250 g of total botanic material, providing viscous dark brown solutions. After a week of daily agitation, 150 ml of pure water was added to each container in order to dilute the solution and make it easier to work with. Afterward, 100 ml of each solvent was added to each container, and after vigorously shaking, they were left sealed to rest at room temperature for another week. At the end of this period, the organic solvents were separated from the aqueous solution with a recovery rate varying from 80% to 95% volume utilized. All organic solvents were exposed to sodium sulfate to remove any water. A sample of 1 ml of each solvent was poured into microfuge tubes, dried out, and stored at −20 °C until analysis. All samples were discarded after the final analysis. Ultra performance liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization–tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-ESI-MS/MS) analysis Analyses were performed using a Waters UPLC Acquity System coupled to a Quattro Premier tandem MS with electrospray ionization (ESI) operated in the positive ion mode (Waters Corporation, Milford, MA, USA). Chromatographic separation was conducted on UPLC BEH C18 2.1 mm × 100 mm, ID 1.7 μm Acquity column using the following gradient elution: mobile phase A (2 mM ammonium formate buffer with 0.1% formic acid) and a mobile phase B (0.1% formic acid in methanol) at a constant flow rate of 0.3 ml/min; A:B 90:10 (0 min)–90:10 (0.1 min)–50:50 (7 min)–50:50 (7.1 min)–90:10 (8 min). Samples were analyzed using a 5 μl of injection volume. The tandem mass spectrometry analysis was performed using multiple reaction monitoring, the m/z transitions were 188.9 > 57.8, 116.7, 143.8* for DMT and 195.1 > 63.9, 114.9, 143.8* for the internal standard DMT-d6. Transitions used for quantification are indicated with an asterisk. Sample preparation Sample preparation consisted in a fully validated dilution procedure using 2 mM ammonium formate buffer with 0.1% formic acid (mobile phase A) to a final ratio of 1:20000. After dilution, 5 μl of the diluted sample was injected in the UPLC-ESI-MS/MS system. DMT-d6 was added in all samples as internal standard.

Results All organic solvents were found to contain non-purified DMT. The concentration of DMT in each solvent was evaluated via UPLC-ESI-MS/MS analysis. The concentration results are shown in Table 2 and the analysis spectra for each solvent are provided in Figure 1. Table 2. Results of the UPLC-ESI-MS/MS analysis Sample Organic solvent DMT (mg/ml) 1 n-Hexane 0.22 2 Ethyl acetate 1.28 3 Chloroform 2.03 4 n-Butanol 3.54 5 Dichloromethane 3.73 Figure 1. Download Figure

Download figure as PowerPoint slide Analysis spectra for each solvent utilized. Chromatograms obtained after serial dilution procedure and LC-MS/MS analysis of M. hostilis extracts performed with different organic solvents. DMT: dimethyltryptamine; DMT-d 6 : deuterated dimethyltryptamine (internal standard) Citation: Journal of Psychedelic Studies 3, 1; 10.1556/2054.2019.009