Abstract
Genus Lophophora (Cactaceae) has two species: Lophophora williamsii Coulter, which is called peyote, and L. diffusa Bravo. Although it was reported that L. williamsii contained mescaline and L. diffusa did not, we found L. williamsii specimens that did not contain mescaline. This finding indicated that the two species could not be differentiated in terms of mescaline content. Moreover, the relationship between mescaline content and morphology of the two species is also unknown. In this study, we attempted to clarify the difference in morphology, mescaline content, and DNA alignment of the chloroplast trnL/trnF region between L. williamsii and L. diffusa. As a result, L. williamsii specimens were classified into two groups. Group 1 had small protuberances on the epidermis, contained mescaline, and the analyzed region on the trnL/trnF sequence was 881 base pairs (bp) long in all except one (877 bp). Group 2 had large protuberances on the epidermis, did not contain mescaline, and the analyzed region was 893 bp long. On the other hand, L. diffusa had medium-sized protuberances on the epidermis, did not contain mescaline, and the analyzed region was 903 bp long. Also investigated was the potential application of the PCR–restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) method as a means of identification based on the trnL/trnF sequence. By applying the PCR–RFLP method, the two species could be distinguished and L. williamsii specimens could be differentiated into group 1 and group 2.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ishii Y, Inoue Y (1971) Encyclopedia of horticulture, vol 3. Seibundoshinkoshya, Tokyo, pp 1073–1074
Habermann V (1975) Two red flowering species of lophophora. Cact Succ J XLVII:157–160
Anderson EF (1980) Peyote. The divine cactus. University of Arizona Press, Arizona
Sato T (1996) Cactus handbook. Japan Cactus Planning, Fukushima, pp 144–145
Hirao H, Kodama E (1999) Cactus and succulent plant. NHK, Tokyo, pp 93–94
Ito Y (1988) The great lexicon of Cactaceae. Mirai-sha, Tokyo, pp 577–578
Britton NI, Rose JN (1963) The Cactaceae, vol III. Dover, New York, pp 83–85
David H (1999) CITES Cactaceae checklist, 2nd edn. Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, London, p 74
Christian R (2005) The encyclopedia of psychoactive plants. Park Street Press, Vermont, pp 326–341
Kostoudi S, Mironidou-Tzouveleki M (2006) Hallucinogenic cacti: complicated chemical factories. Rev Clin Pharmacol Pharmacokinet 20:214–215
Jan GB, Catarina B (1973) Alkaloids and ethnobotany of Mexican peyote cacti and related species. Econ Bot 27:241–251
Jan GB, Lindgren JE, Holmstedt B (1978) Peyote alkaloids: identification in a prehistoric specimen of Lophophora from Coahuila, Mexico. Science 199:1437–1438
Mclaughlin JL, Paul AG (1966) The cactus alkaloids. I: identification of N-methylated tyramine derivatives in Lophophora williamsii. Lloydia 29:315–327
Taberlet P, Gielly L (1991) Universal primers for amplification of three non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Plant Mol Biol 17:1105–1109
Bruhn J, Holmstedt B (1973) Early peyote research, an interdisciplinary study. Econ Bot 28:353–390
Todd S (1969) Thin-layer chromatography analysis of Mexican population of Lophophora (Cactaceae). Lloydia 32:395–398
Charles AB (2002) Molecular systematics of tribe Cacteae (Cactaceae: Cactoideae): a phylogeny based on rpl16 intron sequence variation. Syst Bot 27:257–270
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Aragane, M., Sasaki, Y., Nakajima, J. et al. Peyote identification on the basis of differences in morphology, mescaline content, and trnL/trnF sequence between Lophophora williamsii and L. diffusa . J Nat Med 65, 103–110 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11418-010-0469-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11418-010-0469-7