Help me write a brief for a Mycologist.

[Smallclub]

8 minutes ago, Jeremy Festa said:

100%. Very surprised with Denali's post. Didn't even think about the possibility and process the starches could play. 

Without being an idiot, although I cannot help myself, are the crystaline structures actually sugars? Are they the by-product of moulds, or precursor to them?

You can't deduct anything related with this thread from Denali's post. Pipe tobacco is totally different on all means, it's a mix of baccies from different provenances, even the "cleanest" blends contains tons of added products (glycol propylen to start with), added sugars, etc. And it's enclosed in vacuum in a metal box. How to make a valid comparison with a cuban puros?

Every tobacco tins collectors are familiar with this crystallization, it's totally usual, while “plume” on habanos is rare and no one really knows when and why it happens…

Let's refocus…

[Jeremy Festa]

2 minutes ago, Smallclub said:

You can't deduct anything related with this thread from Denali's post. Pipe tobacco is totally different on all means, it's a mix of baccies from different provenances, even the "cleanest" blends contains tons of added products (glycol propylen to start with), added sugars, etc. And it's enclosed in vacuum in a metal box. How to make a valid comparison with a cuban puros?

Every tobacco tins collectors are familiar with this crystallization, it's totally usual, while “plume” on habanos is rare and no one really knows when and why it happens…

Let's refocus…

Could have just let me be an idiot. 

But you couldn't help yourself. 

Please refrain from telling me what I can and cannot deduct. Even though I already did it. 

#starches 

[JLFIRST]

Good point and basically agree on this problem. And that is why I would rather recommend not to label or pre-interpret structures in any way in advance (reasoning for my statement to Jeremy). We - Rob, or a panel of FOH members, as you suggest - should "simply" describe (as comprehensively as possible) and document what they see (and smell), perhaps add a "suspicion" of what it might be, but nothing more. Send it away for analysis and see what we get. Only at hindsight, we may then hopefully be able to classify what it is - or perhaps not.... That will probably be up to some surprise. But I think it will be important to approach this whole thing as much unprejudiced as possible.

Anyhow, as soon as a suitable lab or work group has been identified, the particular study set-up needs to be discussed and agreed upon closely with the scientists involved anyway.

There is definitive proof of plume. I need to go back and check my reference books. Macroscopic analysis of tobacco leaves, filler, binder and rolling. In layman's terms, plume is oils that have leached out of the filler leaves into the roller leaf and crystallized on it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[JLFIRST]

AMAZING.

 

 

 

The Aromatics are what give tobacco most of its flavor.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[Fugu]

15 hours ago, Smallclub said:

You can't deduct anything related with this thread from Denali's post.

....

Let's refocus…

Right indeed - there is a lot of stuff, amongst it quite frequently sugars, artificially added to pipe tobacco, and crystallizing is a quite common phenomenon. Always nicely to observe in flake, curly cut or plug, the more strongly pressed varieties.

But please, folks..... don't take the cited PIPE-post at face value. There is quite a bit of nonsense and mixing up of things contained. Don't want to dissect it, but it would have certainly been wiser had the author left the writing up to his son, the expert...

[PigFish]

14 hours ago, JLFIRST said:

There is definitive proof of plume. I need to go back and check my reference books. Macroscopic analysis of tobacco leaves, filler, binder and rolling. In layman's terms, plume is oils that have leached out of the filler leaves into the roller leaf and crystallized on it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
 

The question remains; is, what is currently written about plume 'definitive proof' or definitive speculation? I have read and witnessed 'experts' express with absolute confidence compete falsehoods.

Looking for evidence in order to establish some facts is a far cry from making a good guess!

-Piggy

[JLFIRST]

The question remains; is, what is currently written about plume 'definitive proof' or definitive speculation? I have read and witnessed 'experts' express with absolute confidence compete falsehoods.

Looking for evidence in order to establish some facts is a far cry from making a good guess!

-Piggy

No one is talking about making any kind of guesses. I worked with many experts and people who've had 50 plus years in tobacco R&D. This is an issue that will take time, work, and people working together to reach the ultimate answer.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[El Presidente]

3 hours ago, PigFish said:

 

Looking for evidence in order to establish some facts is a far cry from making a good guess!

-Piggy

Ray, that is what I hope we are all seeking. 

I would be more than thrilled to have my assumptions (not that I have many) proved wrong. 

[Williamos]

Prez,

I have a previous scientific background.  Since the 17th century science has followed the circular "scientific method".  A simple schematic from Wikipedia is attached.  

You're at the Hypothesis stage:  already on the forum people have developed general theories; made observations; and thought of plenty of interesting questions.  When formulating the Hypothesis, something any scientist needs before engaging in an experiment of this nature, the scope of the experiment needs to be very specific (as Fugu points out in detail above).  The more wide-ranging the hypothesis, the more time consuming and expensive the experiments.  

Here's a first attempt at a hypothesis based on the many questions raised in this thread:

Under certain storage conditions (specifically temperature, rH and duration of storage) some specific cigar tobaccos develop various observable biological coatings.  These are thought to be either mould, flume or plume.  Using supplied examples of cigars with these biological coatings, identify the coatings and determine the optimal environmental factors for their growth.

That's where I'd start.  Firstly, you'll learn what kind of mould or plume or bloom you're talking about.  You can match moulds on cigars to those same moulds cultivated on agar culture (petri dishes).  If it turn out that plume is an actual thing that's different from mould, you'll learn what its chemical constitutes are.  From this point I imagine there'd be a new hypothesis regarding plume begin to emerge and a subsequent set of experiments - and this sounds like a fascinating pHd thesis in the making to me.

 

[JLFIRST]

Prez,

I have a previous scientific background.  Since the 17th century science has followed the circular "scientific method".  A simple schematic from Wikipedia is attached.  

You're at the Hypothesis stage:  already on the forum people have developed general theories; made observations; and thought of plenty of interesting questions.  When formulating the Hypothesis, something any scientist needs before engaging in an experiment of this nature, the scope of the experiment needs to be very specific (as Fugu points out in detail above).  The more wide-ranging the hypothesis, the more time consuming and expensive the experiments.  

Here's a first attempt at a hypothesis based on the many questions raised in this thread:

Under certain storage conditions (specifically temperature, rH and duration of storage) some specific cigar tobaccos develop various observable biological coatings.  These are thought to be either mould, flume or plume.  Using supplied examples of cigars with these biological coatings, identify the coatings and determine the optimal environmental factors for their growth.

That's where I'd start.  Firstly, you'll learn what kind of mould or plume or bloom you're talking about.  You can match moulds on cigars to those same moulds cultivated on agar culture (petri dishes).  If it turn out that plume is an actual thing that's different from mould, you'll learn what its chemical constitutes are.  From this point I imagine there'd be a new hypothesis regarding plume begin to emerge and a subsequent set of experiments - and this sounds like a fascinating pHd thesis in the making to me.

 

Excellent way of explaining the scientific method correctly. I also this would make an impact as a PhD thesis. I've been thinking about this since Prez posted it. This is going to be a very long process taking time to insure things are done correctly. There are multiple factors that will take different types of scientists. I look forward to this.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[PigFish]

5 hours ago, JLFIRST said:

No one is talking about making any kind of guesses. I worked with many experts and people who've had 50 plus years in tobacco R&D. This is an issue that will take time, work, and people working together to reach the ultimate answer.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
 

 

23 hours ago, JLFIRST said:

There is definitive proof of plume. I need to go back and check my reference books. Macroscopic analysis of tobacco leaves, filler, binder and rolling. In layman's terms, plume is oils that have leached out of the filler leaves into the roller leaf and crystallized on it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
 

I am not going to start a pissing match with you mate, but in quote #2 you said there is definitive proof of plume...

Where is it?... You can save some people a lot of trouble if it exists!

Finding a book with so called cigar experts saying 'what they think it is,' is not proof. That was my point. You say it has been definitively proven, then you say this issue will take time, work and people working together...

Which is it?

Maybe I misunderstood you. Will this take work by my friend Rob here and others, or do you have the proof now?

Cheers! -Piggy

[PapaDisco]

"Mycologist?"  Why would we want to hear from someone studying your colon?  

[JLFIRST]

I am not going to start a pissing match with you mate, but in quote #2 you said there is definitive proof of plume...

Where is it?... You can save some people a lot of trouble if it exists!

Finding a book with so called cigar experts saying 'what they think it is,' is not proof. That was my point. You say it has been definitively proven, then you say this issue will take time, work and people working together...

Which is it?

Maybe I misunderstood you. Will this take work by my friend Rob here and others, or do you have the proof now?

Cheers! -Piggy

"Mycologist?"  Why would we want to hear from someone studying your colon?  

I also said that I had to go back and check in all of my Reference books concerning Plume. My work on this was done over 15 years ago while I was in R&D for a tobacco company working on different types of mold strains in tobacco. Just because I said there is definitive proof of plume. It still doesn't answer many questions such as determining factors. These could vary widely and there could also be different types of plume. Proof of something does not give you cause.
I said what the Prez is wanting to do will take a lot of time.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[PigFish]

1 hour ago, JLFIRST said:

 

 

 

 

I also said that I had to go back and check in all of my Reference books concerning Plume. My work on this was done over 15 years ago while I was in R&D for a tobacco company working on different types of mold strains in tobacco. Just because I said there is definitive proof of plume. It still doesn't answer many questions such as determining factors. These could vary widely and there could also be different types of plume. Proof of something does not give you cause.
I said what the Prez is wanting to do will take a lot of time.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
 

 

 

 

 

I have lesser interest in a cause, I have to wonder if that is what this venture is about, but more about the existence and identity. That is neither here nor there!

If you have, or can lay your hands on the data, I for one would love to see it, and would be appreciative of you posting it.

Count me one that is critical of the existence of plume, other than a mythical substance mainly represented by mold that vendors claim as an asset when in fact at worst is a liability.

I clearly got caught up on the word definitive. That is like me, to hang on a detail... With experts everywhere in the cigar world, few willing to prove anything they suppose or espouse, definitive proof, would be a value to me and a breath of fresh air.

If you do come across your data, I would like to see it. As a doubter, I like to edified at any opportunity. Cheers! -Piggy

[JLFIRST]

Mistake posting

[JLFIRST]

I have lesser interest in a cause, I have to wonder if that is what this venture is about, but more about the existence and identity. That is neither here nor there!

If you have, or can lay your hands on the data, I for one would love to see it, and would be appreciative of you posting it.

Count me one that is critical of the existence of plume, other than a mythical substance mainly represented by mold that vendors claim as an asset when in fact at worst is a liability.

I clearly got caught up on the word definitive. That is like me, to hang on a detail... With experts everywhere in the cigar world, few willing to prove anything they suppose or espouse, definitive proof, would be a value to me and a breath of fresh air.

If you do come across your data, I would like to see it. As a doubter, I like to edified at any opportunity. Cheers! -Piggy

Mold is a living organism and can be cultured in a petri dish. Plume cannot because it has a crystalline structure.
I got to looking around and found this in one of my notebooks. As you can tell, it is from a cited source. Plume is a crystallization of oils from the cigar wrapper, and it appears as a fine spray of sugar, more or less evenly distributed across the surface of the stick. Mold, on the other hand, is a living and social creature that likes to gather in colonies. Well, maybe not social, but you get the point — it shows up in discrete separate spots, making your cigar look like a petri dish.
 
The Havana Cigar: Cuba’s Finest, Charles Del Tedesco. Abbeville Press, 1997

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[Jeremy Festa]

Lads. Just a gentle reminder that there is never any scientific proof! Apart from the field of maths.

We are simply talking about support (or not) of a hypothesis, an eventual study, and possible experimentation.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fugu]

14 hours ago, Williamos said:

Here's a first attempt at a hypothesis based on the many questions raised in this thread:

Under certain storage conditions (specifically temperature, rH and duration of storage) some specific cigar tobaccos develop various observable biological coatings.  These are thought to be either mould, flume or plume.  Using supplied examples of cigars with these biological coatings, identify the coatings and determine the optimal environmental factors for their growth.

8 hours ago, PigFish said:

I have lesser interest in a cause, I have to wonder if that is what this venture is about, but more about the existence and identity. That is neither here nor there!

Yep - as it seems, first and foremost, we will have to become clear about which path we want to take. Whether we'd want to take a plain analytical approach (what have we got here?), or an experimental approach (why and how is it being generated?). The latter will be an entirely different task.

 

[PigFish]

1 hour ago, Fugu said:

Yep - as it seems, first and foremost, we will have to become clear about which path we want to take. Whether we'd want to take a plain analytical approach (what have we got here?), or an experimental approach (why and how is it being generated?). The latter will be an entirely different task.

 

Perhaps some clarification is due from Rob. I see this first and foremost from my perspective. Does it exist, and what is it. I thought that was what this is all about.

I still see it in two parts. Not only what is it, assuming that it is greater than myth, but is it (something that is) easily identified by smokers as named. You see tobacco cold have many chemicals found on its surface. Only the one that presumes to be called plume is of interest to me. For plume to exist as plume, smokers must be able to 'see it' and positively identify it as such.

Part three would more naturally be what causes it. Perhaps those that believe it exists find this the next logical step. That is sensible. They are then one step ahead of me. How it comes to be could very well be a tediously controlled experiment lasting for decades... I was not under the impression that form of commitment was being made here. Perhaps I am wrong!

Water bath humidors with closed loop, desiccant stabilized water sources... Can I supply the controllers??? -LOL Sounds like something requiring federal funding! Oh, toss in a few chilled mirror hygrometers, I can hardly wait...

Well, I could be dead before conclusions, if any, are reached.

8 hours ago, JLFIRST said:

Mold is a living organism and can be cultured in a petri dish. Plume cannot because it has a crystalline structure.
I got to looking around and found this in one of my notebooks. As you can tell, it is from a cited source. Plume is a crystallization of oils from the cigar wrapper, and it appears as a fine spray of sugar, more or less evenly distributed across the surface of the stick. Mold, on the other hand, is a living and social creature that likes to gather in colonies. Well, maybe not social, but you get the point — it shows up in discrete separate spots, making your cigar look like a petri dish.
 
The Havana Cigar: Cuba’s Finest, Charles Del Tedesco. Abbeville Press, 1997

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
 

... I know what mold is!

When someone claims to have definitive proof of something somehow I conjured a vision of published papers regarding the chemical make up of a crystalline structure sometimes found on cigar leaf, not a romantic picture book of yet another cigar enthusiast.

Comments from cigar collectors, speculators, vendors and romanticists is not proof of anything...

I own this book, another beautiful book I might add. A Swiss based romanticist this time... Hardly a scientific text of any sort.

Your response at least puts another wild goose chase to rest, thanks for responding! -Piggy

[PigFish]

When looking for proof, I was looking more for something the nature of the following, which makes for some interesting reading, but not exactly the answer to the questions that I seek!

-Piggy

tive.

The second approach  involves  study  of bacterial isolates from tobacco or soil for their ability to oxidize nicotine. Frankenburg and Vaitekunas (1955) found that microorganisms derived from the surface of tobacco seeds de­ graded nicotine to 6-hydroxynicotine, 3-pyridyl propyl ketone, 3-pyridyl methyl ketone, 3- succinoyl-6-hydroxypyridine, nicotinic acid, methylamine, ammonia, oxalic acid, traces of malonic and succinic acids, and an amino acid which is possibly a glutaconic  acid  derivative with its a-carbon linked to a N-methylpyrrolidine ring. These products were schematically  sepa­ rated into three pathways for bacterial nicotine degradation.

A purple  crystalline  substance  was  isolated from bacterial cultures growing on nicotine (Wenusch, 1942; Burcherer, 1942 and 1943). Wenusrh (1942) also isolated N-methylmyosmine as a fermentation  product.

 

[Fugu]

32 minutes ago, PigFish said:

I was not under the impression that form of commitment was being made here. Perhaps I am wrong!

That has also been my understanding so far. An experimental setup will - my guess - in the case of moulds be somehow manageable, but in the case of bloom be quite demanding to achieve experimentally. For the latter, it will need a whole lot of work, time and instrumental effort, as well as having quite a fair bit of risk of total failing involved. A risk that will at least be hard to justify exposing a post-grad to, with the very limited amount of time available for e.g. a Ph.D. thesis.

And I strongly agree, any claims for "proof" of anything will need to furnish evidence by citing peer-reviewed original papers. That's the only currency that will help us any further, here.

[PigFish]

3 minutes ago, Fugu said:

That has also been my understanding so far. An experimental setup will - my guess - in the case of moulds be somehow manageable, but in the case of bloom be quite demanding to achieve experimentally. For the latter, it will need a whole lot of work, time and instrumental effort, as well as having quite a fair bit of risk of total failing involved. A risk that will at least be hard to justify exposing a post-grad to, with the very limited amount of time available for e.g. a Ph.D. thesis.

I believe we are looking at "recognize and collect suspects, then categorize and identify suspects." I am still very interested in the endeavor and applaud Rob for taking it on!

To this:

...any claims for "proof" of anything will need to furnish evidence by citing peer reviewed original papers. That's the only currency that will help us any further, here.

I wholeheartedly agree!

Goo, I believe if we agree that creates a quorum! -LOL

Bravo mate! -Ray

[Fugu]

8 minutes ago, PigFish said:

Goo, I believe if we agree that creates a quorum! -LOL

Haha, indeed, my mate, indeed...

 

[JLFIRST]

... I know what mold is!

When someone claims to have definitive proof of something somehow I conjured a vision of published papers regarding the chemical make up of a crystalline structure sometimes found on cigar leaf, not a romantic picture book of yet another cigar enthusiast.

Comments from cigar collectors, speculators, vendors and romanticists is not proof of anything...

I own this book, another beautiful book I might add. A Swiss based romanticist this time... Hardly a scientific text of any sort.

Your response at least puts another wild goose chase to rest, thanks for responding! -Piggy

You need patience for someone to gather their papers and research. Especially when it was done under contract for another company. I only used that to show you the difference between mold and plume. I left out the pictures of the crystalline structure and other things because frankly, I'm tired of you trying to pick apart anything I post. Being in R&D for tobacco and also an Organic chemist, I don't need to argue with anyone about things I've done in the past. That also goes for things that others have done that have been published. I'm going to step away from this now and you have fun with it.

Sorry, I left off a few of the sources from that article. Before you bash it from being from CA, find out who wrote the piece.

“Wrapped Up: Some of the World’s Best Cigars Use Connecticut Tobacco Wrapper Leaves” Cigar Aficionado, Winter 1992

The Havana Cigar: Cuba’s Finest, Charles Del Tedesco. Abbeville Press, 1997

“Land of Fire: Ecuadoran Cigar Wrapper Tobacco Thrives in a World of Volcanoes and Perpetual Cloud Cover” Cigar Aficionado, March/April 2000

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Cigars, Ted Gage. Alpha, 1997

Cheers, JLFIRST

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[JLFIRST]

You need patience for someone to gather their papers and research. Especially when it was done under contract for another company. I only used that to show you the difference between mold and plume. I left out the pictures of the crystalline structure and other things because frankly, I'm tired of you trying to pick apart anything I post. Being in R&D for tobacco and also an Organic chemist, I don't need to argue with anyone about things I've done in the past. That also goes for things that others have done that have been published. I'm going to step away from this now and you have fun with it.

Sorry, I left off a few of the sources from that article. Before you bash it from being from CA, find out who wrote the piece.

“Wrapped Up: Some of the World’s Best Cigars Use Connecticut Tobacco Wrapper Leaves” Cigar Aficionado, Winter 1992

The Havana Cigar: Cuba’s Finest, Charles Del Tedesco. Abbeville Press, 1997

“Land of Fire: Ecuadoran Cigar Wrapper Tobacco Thrives in a World of Volcanoes and Perpetual Cloud Cover” Cigar Aficionado, March/April 2000

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Cigars, Ted Gage. Alpha, 1997

Cheers, JLFIRST

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

There are numerous labs that will be happy to take your money and do these test. I would think you'd use a tobacco lab though and they are out there for hire.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk