Quest for mold-resistant strains, Hawaii outdoor greenhouse grow

[Mitchell Florn]

Then of course there's a bunch of research that says there is NO molecular difference between the two. And in most breeder culture they no longer even use the terminology "indica" and "sativa", and have replaced them with broad leaf, and narrow leaf.

OR THIS STUDY....??

Indica or Sativa - No genetic distinction after analysing cannabis samples

The Indica and Sativa labels on cannabis are often wrong and misleading. Patients and consumers would benefit from a more scientific approach.

bedrocan.com

 

[Mitchell Florn]

Then of course there's a bunch of research that says there is NO molecular difference between the two. And in most breeder culture they no longer even use the terminology "indica" and "sativa", and have replaced them with broad leaf, and narrow leaf.

ADDITIONALLY, I THINK READERS WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THIS ARTICLE REGARDING CANNABIS NOMENCLATURE....

Cannabis labelling is associated with genetic variation in terpene synthase genes - Nature Plants

By quantifying over 100 Cannabis samples for terpene and cannabinoid content and genotyping them for over 100,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms, this study finds that Cannabis labelling is associated with genetic variants in terpene synthase genes.

www.nature.com

 

[cbdhemp808]

Hey Braddah,

Interesting, thanks.

Then of course there's a bunch of research that says there is NO molecular difference between the two. And in most breeder culture they no longer even use the terminology "indica" and "sativa", and have replaced them with broad leaf, and narrow leaf.

Hmm... the article (2020) says,

"In reality, no scientific evidence supports this dichotomy because on a molecular level, indica and sativa strains don't have pattern differences that set the two "types" apart from each other."​

I think that's not exactly true. Genetic expression governs chemical expression, more or less. I don't see this as an issue of nuanced responses to environmental conditions. I think at the root, there is something more intrinsic going on.

Here's an article (2021) about a Canadian study...

"The research shows that genetically it is impossible to prove whether a cannabis plant is an Indica or Sativa. There is no difference in the genes. “What our study mainly shows is that you should not just rely on those labels, but that you should look at the specific terpene profile,” says Van Velzen. “For example, cannabis labelled as Sativa often contains higher concentrations of single terpenes with tea-like and fruity aromas, while Indica samples generally contain higher concentrations of terpenes with an earthy smell such as myrcene...”​

​

But the distinction that the researchers found is not convincing: "It really is about these specific, individual terpenes that make the difference. The overall chemical profile, like the genetics, shows no apparent difference between the labels. We also found only a small number of regions in the cannabis genome that likely contribute to the earthy aroma associated with the Indica label,..."​

​

So that's all a bit contradictory. There are differences in what's regarded as indica and sativa, and those differences are found in the terpene profiles. And, the expression of those terpenes is, in fact, part of the genome. Sure, I can see that those expressions may be effected somewhat by environmental factors, but I see that as being secondary.

There's also the obvious fact that there are genomic variations, such as between hemp and chemotype 1 (high THC). You can grow both in a controlled, ideal environment indoors – or in the same field under the same conditions outdoors – and you will get two very different looking plants. That has to be the genome at play. And you will certainly have major differences in cannabinoid expression and terpene expression.

Earlier in this thread, I touched on terpinolene as being associated with sativa effects, and indica (likely) not being associated with terpinolene-dominance.

Is it true that a landrace or heirloom sativa – i.e. a 100% sativa strain – would be terpinolene dominant, and would have classic sativa effects? Is it also true that a landrace or heirloom indica – i.e. a 100% indica strain – would not have terpinolene-dominance, and would have classic indica effects?

Let's take a quick look at dominant terpenes in the five oldest landraces...

Afghani (indica): myrcene; others - terpinolene, pinene, caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Nepalese (indica): myrcene; others - caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Hindu Kush (indica): limonene; -or- close mix of dominance - caryophyllene, myrcene, humulene, limonene. (One source says limonene dominant, followed by caryophyllene, carene, pinene, linalool and ocimene.)​

​

Thai (sativa): terpinolene (1/3) and myrcene (1/3); others - pinene, ocimene, caryophyllene, limonene.​

[source: Ace Seeds]​

​

Aceh (sativa): pinene and ocimene; others - caryophyllene, humulene. (Very sparse info on this one.)​

And, which are the terpenes commonly associated with classic sativa and indica effects?

(Note: limonene is said to amplify both sativa and indica effects, so I will list it in both categories below.)

Terpenes associated with "awake", "stimulating", "energizing", "invigorating":

• terpinolene​

• pinene​

• ocimene​

• terpineol​

• limonene​

Terpenes associated with "relaxing", "sedating", "sleepy":

• myrcene​

• linalool​

• caryophyllene​

• humulene​

• limonene​

Conclusions:

Not withstanding the crap-shoot of trying to arrive at definitive terpene profiles online...

If you go back to the oldest recognized landrace indicas and sativas, there seems to be a clear correlation between commonly recognized terpene effects and classic indica and sativa effects. It would be interesting to extend this little analysis to newer landraces as well.

Stare at the color codings and you'll see interesting patterns pop out. Greens and cyan are associated with "energizing", while blues and purple are associated with "relaxing". You can see the importance of the dominant one or two terpenes (in terms of imparting the classic effects), and then the lesser influence of the secondary terpenes.

It's easy to see where 50/50 hybrid strains, or even indica- and sativa-leaning strains (i.e. most modern cannabis strains) would not necessarily adhere to these primary correlations. Hence, I can understand the popular position that there is no reliable correlation of effects to be applied to the many hybridized strains that are presently labelled as 50/50, sativa-dominant, or indica-dominant. But as the article above states, "you should look at the specific terpene profile" to attempt to arrive at what effects the strain will have.

HI-BISCUS is a good example of a 50/50 hybrid. Dominant terpenes are terpinolene, myrcene, and pinene. It's known to have sativa-type energizing and creativity effects, and I can vouch for that. But, it also has indica effects at the same time, in terms of a noticeable, muscle-relaxing body high.

 

[cbdhemp808]

ADDITIONALLY, I THINK READERS WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THIS ARTICLE REGARDING CANNABIS NOMENCLATURE....

Cannabis labelling is associated with genetic variation in terpene synthase genes - Nature Plants

By quantifying over 100 Cannabis samples for terpene and cannabinoid content and genotyping them for over 100,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms, this study finds that Cannabis labelling is associated with genetic variants in terpene synthase genes.

www.nature.com

perfecto... can't wait to check that one out. thanks!

 

[Mitchell Florn]

Hey Braddah,

Interesting, thanks.


Hmm... the article (2020) says,

"In reality, no scientific evidence supports this dichotomy because on a molecular level, indica and sativa strains don't have pattern differences that set the two "types" apart from each other."​

I think that's not exactly true. Genetic expression governs chemical expression, more or less. I don't see this as an issue of nuanced responses to environmental conditions. I think at the root, there is something more intrinsic going on.

Here's an article (2021) about a Canadian study...

"The research shows that genetically it is impossible to prove whether a cannabis plant is an Indica or Sativa. There is no difference in the genes. “What our study mainly shows is that you should not just rely on those labels, but that you should look at the specific terpene profile,” says Van Velzen. “For example, cannabis labelled as Sativa often contains higher concentrations of single terpenes with tea-like and fruity aromas, while Indica samples generally contain higher concentrations of terpenes with an earthy smell such as myrcene...”​

​

But the distinction that the researchers found is not convincing: "It really is about these specific, individual terpenes that make the difference. The overall chemical profile, like the genetics, shows no apparent difference between the labels. We also found only a small number of regions in the cannabis genome that likely contribute to the earthy aroma associated with the Indica label,..."​

​

So that's all a bit contradictory. There are differences in what's regarded as indica and sativa, and those differences are found in the terpene profiles. And, the expression of those terpenes is, in fact, part of the genome. Sure, I can see that those expressions may be effected somewhat by environmental factors, but I see that as being secondary.

There's also the obvious fact that there are genomic variations, such as between hemp and chemotype 1 (high THC). You can grow both in a controlled, ideal environment indoors – or in the same field under the same conditions outdoors – and you will get two very different looking plants. That has to be the genome at play. And you will certainly have major differences in cannabinoid expression and terpene expression.

Earlier in this thread, I touched on terpinolene as being associated with sativa effects, and indica (likely) not being associated with terpinolene-dominance.

Is it true that a landrace or heirloom sativa – i.e. a 100% sativa strain – would be terpinolene dominant, and would have classic sativa effects? Is it also true that a landrace or heirloom indica – i.e. a 100% indica strain – would not have terpinolene-dominance, and would have classic indica effects?

Let's take a quick look at dominant terpenes in the five oldest landraces...

Afghani (indica): myrcene; others - terpinolene, pinene, caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Nepalese (indica): myrcene; others - caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Hindu Kush (indica): limonene; -or- close mix of dominance - caryophyllene, myrcene, humulene, limonene. (One source says limonene dominant, followed by caryophyllene, carene, pinene, linalool and ocimene.)​

​

Thai (sativa): terpinolene (1/3) and myrcene (1/3); others - pinene, ocimene, caryophyllene, limonene.​

[source: Ace Seeds]​

​

Aceh (sativa): pinene and ocimene; others - caryophyllene, humulene. (Very sparse info on this one.)​

And, which are the terpenes commonly associated with classic sativa and indica effects?

(Note: limonene is said to amplify both sativa and indica effects, so I will list it in both categories below.)

Terpenes associated with "awake", "stimulating", "energizing", "invigorating":

• terpinolene​

• pinene​

• ocimene​

• terpineol​

• limonene​

Terpenes associated with "relaxing", "sedating", "sleepy":

• myrcene​

• linalool​

• caryophyllene​

• humulene​

• limonene​

Conclusions:

Not withstanding the crap-shoot of trying to arrive at definitive terpene profiles online...

If you go back to the oldest recognized landrace indicas and sativas, there seems to be a clear correlation between commonly recognized terpene effects and classic indica and sativa effects. It would be interesting to extend this little analysis to newer landraces as well.

Stare at the color codings and you'll see interesting patterns pop out. Greens and cyan are associated with "energizing", while blues and purple are associated with "relaxing". You can see the importance of the dominant one or two terpenes (in terms of imparting the classic effects), and then the lesser influence of the secondary terpenes.

It's easy to see where 50/50 hybrid strains, or even indica- and sativa-leaning strains (i.e. most modern cannabis strains) would not necessarily adhere to these primary correlations. Hence, I can understand the popular position that there is no reliable correlation of effects to be applied to the many hybridized strains that are presently labelled as 50/50, sativa-dominant, or indica-dominant. But as the article above states, "you should look at the specific terpene profile" to attempt to arrive at what effects the strain will have.

HI-BISCUS is a good example of a 50/50 hybrid. Dominant terpenes are terpinolene, myrcene, and pinene. It's known to have sativa-type energizing and creativity effects, and I can vouch for that. But, it also has indica effects at the same time, in terms of a noticeable, muscle-relaxing body high.

YOU RAISE SOME INTERESTING CORRELATIONS....Is it true that a landrace or heirloom sativa – i.e. a 100% sativa strain – would be terpinolene dominant, and would have classic sativa effects? Is it also true that a landrace or heirloom indica – i.e. a 100% indica strain – would not have terpinolene-dominance, and would have classic indica effects?

I TRIED TO FIND PEER REVIEWED PAPERS WITH RESPECT TO TERPINOLENE DOMINANTS WITH RESPECT TO THE PERSPECTIVE LANDRACE STRAINS....NOT VERY CLEAR DATA. I'M NOT IN DISAGREEMENT....LOL....I'M VERY DATA DRIVEN!! YOU MAKE VERY VALID POINTS MY FRIEND.....VERY VALID!! WHAT IS YOUR PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND? I ENJOY INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ANALYTICAL .....MAKES FOR INTERESTING CONVERSATION.

 

[Mitchell Florn]

Hey Braddah,

Interesting, thanks.


Hmm... the article (2020) says,

"In reality, no scientific evidence supports this dichotomy because on a molecular level, indica and sativa strains don't have pattern differences that set the two "types" apart from each other."​

I think that's not exactly true. Genetic expression governs chemical expression, more or less. I don't see this as an issue of nuanced responses to environmental conditions. I think at the root, there is something more intrinsic going on.

Here's an article (2021) about a Canadian study...

"The research shows that genetically it is impossible to prove whether a cannabis plant is an Indica or Sativa. There is no difference in the genes. “What our study mainly shows is that you should not just rely on those labels, but that you should look at the specific terpene profile,” says Van Velzen. “For example, cannabis labelled as Sativa often contains higher concentrations of single terpenes with tea-like and fruity aromas, while Indica samples generally contain higher concentrations of terpenes with an earthy smell such as myrcene...”​

​

But the distinction that the researchers found is not convincing: "It really is about these specific, individual terpenes that make the difference. The overall chemical profile, like the genetics, shows no apparent difference between the labels. We also found only a small number of regions in the cannabis genome that likely contribute to the earthy aroma associated with the Indica label,..."​

​

So that's all a bit contradictory. There are differences in what's regarded as indica and sativa, and those differences are found in the terpene profiles. And, the expression of those terpenes is, in fact, part of the genome. Sure, I can see that those expressions may be effected somewhat by environmental factors, but I see that as being secondary.

There's also the obvious fact that there are genomic variations, such as between hemp and chemotype 1 (high THC). You can grow both in a controlled, ideal environment indoors – or in the same field under the same conditions outdoors – and you will get two very different looking plants. That has to be the genome at play. And you will certainly have major differences in cannabinoid expression and terpene expression.

Earlier in this thread, I touched on terpinolene as being associated with sativa effects, and indica (likely) not being associated with terpinolene-dominance.

Is it true that a landrace or heirloom sativa – i.e. a 100% sativa strain – would be terpinolene dominant, and would have classic sativa effects? Is it also true that a landrace or heirloom indica – i.e. a 100% indica strain – would not have terpinolene-dominance, and would have classic indica effects?

Let's take a quick look at dominant terpenes in the five oldest landraces...

Afghani (indica): myrcene; others - terpinolene, pinene, caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Nepalese (indica): myrcene; others - caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Hindu Kush (indica): limonene; -or- close mix of dominance - caryophyllene, myrcene, humulene, limonene. (One source says limonene dominant, followed by caryophyllene, carene, pinene, linalool and ocimene.)​

​

Thai (sativa): terpinolene (1/3) and myrcene (1/3); others - pinene, ocimene, caryophyllene, limonene.​

[source: Ace Seeds]​

​

Aceh (sativa): pinene and ocimene; others - caryophyllene, humulene. (Very sparse info on this one.)​

And, which are the terpenes commonly associated with classic sativa and indica effects?

(Note: limonene is said to amplify both sativa and indica effects, so I will list it in both categories below.)

Terpenes associated with "awake", "stimulating", "energizing", "invigorating":

• terpinolene​

• pinene​

• ocimene​

• terpineol​

• limonene​

Terpenes associated with "relaxing", "sedating", "sleepy":

• myrcene​

• linalool​

• caryophyllene​

• humulene​

• limonene​

Conclusions:

Not withstanding the crap-shoot of trying to arrive at definitive terpene profiles online...

If you go back to the oldest recognized landrace indicas and sativas, there seems to be a clear correlation between commonly recognized terpene effects and classic indica and sativa effects. It would be interesting to extend this little analysis to newer landraces as well.

Stare at the color codings and you'll see interesting patterns pop out. Greens and cyan are associated with "energizing", while blues and purple are associated with "relaxing". You can see the importance of the dominant one or two terpenes (in terms of imparting the classic effects), and then the lesser influence of the secondary terpenes.

It's easy to see where 50/50 hybrid strains, or even indica- and sativa-leaning strains (i.e. most modern cannabis strains) would not necessarily adhere to these primary correlations. Hence, I can understand the popular position that there is no reliable correlation of effects to be applied to the many hybridized strains that are presently labelled as 50/50, sativa-dominant, or indica-dominant. But as the article above states, "you should look at the specific terpene profile" to attempt to arrive at what effects the strain will have.

HI-BISCUS is a good example of a 50/50 hybrid. Dominant terpenes are terpinolene, myrcene, and pinene. It's known to have sativa-type energizing and creativity effects, and I can vouch for that. But, it also has indica effects at the same time, in terms of a noticeable, muscle-relaxing body high.

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN THIS ARTCLE....FROM THE AMERICAN BOTANICALLY COUNCIL

ABC Herbalgram Website

ADDITIONALLY YOU MAY ALSO FIND THIS LEGAL DOCUMENT / PDF FILE INTERESTING REGARDING CANNABIS TAXONOMY

https://law.siu.edu/_common/documents/law-journal/articles-2018/summer-2018/9-throgmorton-sm.pdf

I'M INTERESTED IN YOUR THOUGHTS AND PERSPECTIVES!

 

[Braddah Waiheesohai]

Hey Braddah,

Interesting, thanks.


Hmm... the article (2020) says,

"In reality, no scientific evidence supports this dichotomy because on a molecular level, indica and sativa strains don't have pattern differences that set the two "types" apart from each other."​

I think that's not exactly true. Genetic expression governs chemical expression, more or less. I don't see this as an issue of nuanced responses to environmental conditions. I think at the root, there is something more intrinsic going on.

Here's an article (2021) about a Canadian study...

"The research shows that genetically it is impossible to prove whether a cannabis plant is an Indica or Sativa. There is no difference in the genes. “What our study mainly shows is that you should not just rely on those labels, but that you should look at the specific terpene profile,” says Van Velzen. “For example, cannabis labelled as Sativa often contains higher concentrations of single terpenes with tea-like and fruity aromas, while Indica samples generally contain higher concentrations of terpenes with an earthy smell such as myrcene...”​

​

But the distinction that the researchers found is not convincing: "It really is about these specific, individual terpenes that make the difference. The overall chemical profile, like the genetics, shows no apparent difference between the labels. We also found only a small number of regions in the cannabis genome that likely contribute to the earthy aroma associated with the Indica label,..."​

​

So that's all a bit contradictory. There are differences in what's regarded as indica and sativa, and those differences are found in the terpene profiles. And, the expression of those terpenes is, in fact, part of the genome. Sure, I can see that those expressions may be effected somewhat by environmental factors, but I see that as being secondary.

There's also the obvious fact that there are genomic variations, such as between hemp and chemotype 1 (high THC). You can grow both in a controlled, ideal environment indoors – or in the same field under the same conditions outdoors – and you will get two very different looking plants. That has to be the genome at play. And you will certainly have major differences in cannabinoid expression and terpene expression.

Earlier in this thread, I touched on terpinolene as being associated with sativa effects, and indica (likely) not being associated with terpinolene-dominance.

Is it true that a landrace or heirloom sativa – i.e. a 100% sativa strain – would be terpinolene dominant, and would have classic sativa effects? Is it also true that a landrace or heirloom indica – i.e. a 100% indica strain – would not have terpinolene-dominance, and would have classic indica effects?

Let's take a quick look at dominant terpenes in the five oldest landraces...

Afghani (indica): myrcene; others - terpinolene, pinene, caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Nepalese (indica): myrcene; others - caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Hindu Kush (indica): limonene; -or- close mix of dominance - caryophyllene, myrcene, humulene, limonene. (One source says limonene dominant, followed by caryophyllene, carene, pinene, linalool and ocimene.)​

​

Thai (sativa): terpinolene (1/3) and myrcene (1/3); others - pinene, ocimene, caryophyllene, limonene.​

[source: Ace Seeds]​

​

Aceh (sativa): pinene and ocimene; others - caryophyllene, humulene. (Very sparse info on this one.)​

And, which are the terpenes commonly associated with classic sativa and indica effects?

(Note: limonene is said to amplify both sativa and indica effects, so I will list it in both categories below.)

Terpenes associated with "awake", "stimulating", "energizing", "invigorating":

• terpinolene​

• pinene​

• ocimene​

• terpineol​

• limonene​

Terpenes associated with "relaxing", "sedating", "sleepy":

• myrcene​

• linalool​

• caryophyllene​

• humulene​

• limonene​

Conclusions:

Not withstanding the crap-shoot of trying to arrive at definitive terpene profiles online...

If you go back to the oldest recognized landrace indicas and sativas, there seems to be a clear correlation between commonly recognized terpene effects and classic indica and sativa effects. It would be interesting to extend this little analysis to newer landraces as well.

Stare at the color codings and you'll see interesting patterns pop out. Greens and cyan are associated with "energizing", while blues and purple are associated with "relaxing". You can see the importance of the dominant one or two terpenes (in terms of imparting the classic effects), and then the lesser influence of the secondary terpenes.

It's easy to see where 50/50 hybrid strains, or even indica- and sativa-leaning strains (i.e. most modern cannabis strains) would not necessarily adhere to these primary correlations. Hence, I can understand the popular position that there is no reliable correlation of effects to be applied to the many hybridized strains that are presently labelled as 50/50, sativa-dominant, or indica-dominant. But as the article above states, "you should look at the specific terpene profile" to attempt to arrive at what effects the strain will have.

HI-BISCUS is a good example of a 50/50 hybrid. Dominant terpenes are terpinolene, myrcene, and pinene. It's known to have sativa-type energizing and creativity effects, and I can vouch for that. But, it also has indica effects at the same time, in terms of a noticeable, muscle-relaxing body high.

Interesting. I think the genetic argument is tripping us up, because your article states as well that there is no significant difference between the two labels we have invented for cannabis.

I do like where you're going narrowing in on specific terpenes that give you the results you're looking for, and agree that the entourage effect of all the compounds in each strain will dictate the high.

Its probably too simplistic to say 'Indicas are downers" and 'sativas are uppers'. In reality the effect of these terpenes have as much to do with the body chemistry of the person ingesting them. I know lots of people who get sleepy on sativas and wired on indicas. Not saying there won't be a statistically dominant response. Documenting that response has valid uses in guiding us towards creating a desired outcome for the most users we can. But I don't think we can make definitive statements about cannabis based genetic expression and terpenes.

 

[cbdhemp808]

Interesting. I think the genetic argument is tripping us up, because your article states as well that there is no significant difference between the two labels we have invented for cannabis.

The article about the Canadian study? They also state that part of the genome is responsible for the expression of the terpenes, which makes sense. So they are contradicting themselves to a degree. Genetics cause terpene expression, and terpenes are associated with specific effects. I'm not saying there aren't nuances, nor am I saying that experienced effects are strictly due to one or two terpenes alone. Adding to the complexity (and confusion) are phenotypic differences within particular strains.

Again, I made the point about obvious genomic differences in cannabis, for example a tall hemp plant with low cannabinoid production vs. a medium-size, chemotype 2, high-THC plant. These are different genotypes.

I like Dutch Passion's definition of genotype:

"The genotype (genetic code) carries the essential genetic information which will control subsequent growth and appearance of the cannabis plant. The genotype is not a rigid and unmovable set of genetic instructions which the cannabis plant must obey at all costs. It’s more accurate to think of the genotype as the basic genetic boundaries which define a range of possibilities. The growing environment which you give the plant defines which specific parts of the genotype will be available for use."​

No matter how you grow that tall hemp plant, you're not going to get it to approximate the outcome of the chemotype 2 plant. If you look at the genome of the two plants, you will see differences with respect to plant height and cannabinoid production, correct? Isn't the tall hemp plant considered to be representative of the sativa archetype? Hence, terpene production is also reflected in the genome, and why not also assign it to sativa or indica archetypes?

I do like where you're going narrowing in on specific terpenes that give you the results you're looking for, and agree that the entourage effect of all the compounds in each strain will dictate the high.

Am I going for specific terpenes to match the outcome I'm looking for? No I don't think I did that. I objectively looked at terpenes associated with the oldest landraces, and then looked at terpenes that are associated with the classic sativa and indica effects. My sample size was small (5 landraces) and terpene data limited. But the outcome was nonetheless interesting.

Its probably too simplistic to say 'Indicas are downers" and 'sativas are uppers'. In reality the effect of these terpenes have as much to do with the body chemistry of the person ingesting them. I know lots of people who get sleepy on sativas and wired on indicas. Not saying there won't be a statistically dominant response.

The thing is, we just don't know. We don't know why or why not. The plant has been suppressed, and the science has been suppressed. But things are changing. I'm just trying to make some inroads out of curiosity. Same as when I made some observations about possible correlation between terpenes and resin production, and bud-rot resistance.

By the way, does anyone know of a strain/pheno that has terpinolene dominant, high resin production, and isn't bud rot resistant?

Documenting that response has valid uses in guiding us towards creating a desired outcome for the most users we can. But I don't think we can make definitive statements about cannabis based genetic expression and terpenes.

Agreed, we need more science re: terpenes, entourage, indica vs. sativa, genotypes, and a range of effects – not just "energizing" and "relaxing", although that's a very convenient and significant "polarity".

At this point, what statements can we make about genetic-based expression of terpenes?

 

[Danishoes21]

The article about the Canadian study? They also state that part of the genome is responsible for the expression of the terpenes, which makes sense. So they are contradicting themselves to a degree. Genetics cause terpene expression, and terpenes are associated with specific effects. I'm not saying there aren't nuances, nor am I saying that experienced effects are strictly due to one or two terpenes alone. Adding to the complexity (and confusion) are phenotypic differences within particular strains.

Again, I made the point about obvious genomic differences in cannabis, for example a tall hemp plant with low cannabinoid production vs. a medium-size, chemotype 2, high-THC plant. These are different genotypes.

I like Dutch Passion's definition of genotype:

"The genotype (genetic code) carries the essential genetic information which will control subsequent growth and appearance of the cannabis plant. The genotype is not a rigid and unmovable set of genetic instructions which the cannabis plant must obey at all costs. It’s more accurate to think of the genotype as the basic genetic boundaries which define a range of possibilities. The growing environment which you give the plant defines which specific parts of the genotype will be available for use."​

No matter how you grow that tall hemp plant, you're not going to get it to approximate the outcome of the chemotype 2 plant. If you look at the genome of the two plants, you will see differences with respect to plant height and cannabinoid production, correct? Isn't the tall hemp plant considered to be representative of the sativa archetype? Hence, terpene production is also reflected in the genome, and why not also assign it to sativa or indica archetypes?


Am I going for specific terpenes to match the outcome I'm looking for? No I don't think I did that. I objectively looked at terpenes associated with the oldest landraces, and then looked at terpenes that are associated with the classic sativa and indica effects. My sample size was small (5 landraces) and terpene data limited. But the outcome was nonetheless interesting.


The thing is, we just don't know. We don't know why or why not. The plant has been suppressed, and the science has been suppressed. But things are changing. I'm just trying to make some inroads out of curiosity. Same as when I made some observations about possible correlation between terpenes and resin production, and bud-rot resistance.

By the way, does anyone know of a strain/pheno that has terpinolene dominant, high resin production, and isn't bud rot resistant?


Agreed, we need more science re: terpenes, entourage, indica vs. sativa, genotypes, and a range of effects – not just "energizing" and "relaxing", although that's a very convenient and significant "polarity".

At this point, what statements can we make about genetic-based expression of terpenes?

Excellent piece CBd.

 

[cbdhemp808]

I TRIED TO FIND PEER REVIEWED PAPERS WITH RESPECT TO TERPINOLENE DOMINANTS WITH RESPECT TO THE PERSPECTIVE LANDRACE STRAINS....NOT VERY CLEAR DATA. I'M NOT IN DISAGREEMENT....LOL....I'M VERY DATA DRIVEN!! YOU MAKE VERY VALID POINTS MY FRIEND.....VERY VALID!!

thanks for searching. thank you!

WHAT IS YOUR PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND? I ENJOY INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ANALYTICAL .....MAKES FOR INTERESTING CONVERSATION.

I'll just say that I'm very science-minded and analytical. I've got a unique mixture in my background.

 

[Mitchell Florn]

The article about the Canadian study? They also state that part of the genome is responsible for the expression of the terpenes, which makes sense. So they are contradicting themselves to a degree. Genetics cause terpene expression, and terpenes are associated with specific effects. I'm not saying there aren't nuances, nor am I saying that experienced effects are strictly due to one or two terpenes alone. Adding to the complexity (and confusion) are phenotypic differences within particular strains.

Again, I made the point about obvious genomic differences in cannabis, for example a tall hemp plant with low cannabinoid production vs. a medium-size, chemotype 2, high-THC plant. These are different genotypes.

I like Dutch Passion's definition of genotype:

"The genotype (genetic code) carries the essential genetic information which will control subsequent growth and appearance of the cannabis plant. The genotype is not a rigid and unmovable set of genetic instructions which the cannabis plant must obey at all costs. It’s more accurate to think of the genotype as the basic genetic boundaries which define a range of possibilities. The growing environment which you give the plant defines which specific parts of the genotype will be available for use."​

No matter how you grow that tall hemp plant, you're not going to get it to approximate the outcome of the chemotype 2 plant. If you look at the genome of the two plants, you will see differences with respect to plant height and cannabinoid production, correct? Isn't the tall hemp plant considered to be representative of the sativa archetype? Hence, terpene production is also reflected in the genome, and why not also assign it to sativa or indica archetypes?


Am I going for specific terpenes to match the outcome I'm looking for? No I don't think I did that. I objectively looked at terpenes associated with the oldest landraces, and then looked at terpenes that are associated with the classic sativa and indica effects. My sample size was small (5 landraces) and terpene data limited. But the outcome was nonetheless interesting.


The thing is, we just don't know. We don't know why or why not. The plant has been suppressed, and the science has been suppressed. But things are changing. I'm just trying to make some inroads out of curiosity. Same as when I made some observations about possible correlation between terpenes and resin production, and bud-rot resistance.

By the way, does anyone know of a strain/pheno that has terpinolene dominant, high resin production, and isn't bud rot resistant?


Agreed, we need more science re: terpenes, entourage, indica vs. sativa, genotypes, and a range of effects – not just "energizing" and "relaxing", although that's a very convenient and significant "polarity".

At this point, what statements can we make about genetic-based expression of terpenes?

YOU MAY FIND THIS USEFUL....AND I TOO AGREE THAT MORE RESEARCH IS NEEDED....

Terpenes in Cannabis sativa – From plant genome to humans

Cannabis sativa (cannabis) produces a resin that is valued for its psychoactive and medicinal properties. Despite being the foundation of a multi-bill…

www.sciencedirect.com

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/pld3.412

 

[Mitchell Florn]

thanks for searching. thank you!


I'll just say that I'm very science-minded and analytical. I've got a unique mixture in my background.

MEE TOO!! MY UNDER
GRAD STARTED WITH MARINE INVERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY....THEN DEGREED IN MICROBIOLOGY, THEN ANATOMY & PHYSIOLOGY AS WELL AS BOTANY.....WORKED IN BIOPHARMACEUTICALS FOR 30YEARS....LOL....NOW OLD , RETIRED AND CHILLAX'N EVERYDAY

 

[Mitchell Florn]

thanks for searching. thank you!


I'll just say that I'm very science-minded and analytical. I've got a unique mixture in my background.

MY THING NOW IS RESEACH BIO-HYBRID , BIOMIMETIC POLYMORPHIC MATERIALS AND NANOPARTICLES/ NANOMATERIALS SUCH AS GRAPHENE OXIDE, BOROPHENE, GRAPHYNE....ETC FOR NEUROSCIENCE.....NEURO- REINTEGRATION....LOL....TO ME INTERESTING BUT OTHERS I'M SURE IT'S BORING.....

 

[BeccaBuds]

MY THING NOW IS RESEACH BIO-HYBRID , BIOMIMETIC POLYMORPHIC MATERIALS AND NANOPARTICLES/ NANOMATERIALS SUCH AS GRAPHENE OXIDE, BOROPHENE, GRAPHYNE....ETC FOR NEUROSCIENCE.....NEURO- REINTEGRATION....LOL....TO ME INTERESTING BUT OTHERS I'M SURE IT'S BORING.....

Not boring when you correlate and integrate all factors that facilitate not only the growth of the plant but the expansion of the mind of the grower. OM

 

[Mitchell Florn]

TRUE!! AND THANKS!!

 

[cbdhemp808]

Greetings Growmies,

I've entered the harvest window for my Grape Ape clone, which is my first attempt with Grape Ape, and just a test grow. I notice the dreaded onset of senescence prior to full ripeness, causing dead bracts inside buds. Some bud rot has started and some stigmas are showing infection as well. My plan is to clip out the bud rot (remove infected buds), and then douse the plant with peroxide solution. I may need to harvest tomorrow or the next day. A 7 gal. pot is definitely not big enough for Grape Ape. Will go 15 gal. over the summer.

Here's some pics from today...

Good resin production, but not crazy. Fragrance is not strong.

Trichome report: Clear and some milky, with slight chance of amber on the sugar leaves.

Some dead stigmas showing the start of fungal infection.

More rot getting started on dead stigmas.

I only found one spot of this so far... need to look thoroughly and clip it all out. I am seeing some dead bracts inside buds... that's fertile ground for bud rot to start. This all points to premature senescence as a huge factor in the appearance of bud rot. Yet, stigmas becoming infected shows the plant is inherently vulnerable. Below is a photo of HI-BISCUS at harvest time, for comparison.

For comparison... over-winter HI-BISCUS harvested May 3. Plenty of dead stigmas and bracts, with virtually no sign of botrytis at all. The dominant terpenes in HI-BISCUS are terpinolene, myrcene, and pinene. At harvest time, resin production was very high and terpene odor very strong. (Grape Ape's dominant terpene is myrcene, followed by caryophyllene and pinene.)

 

[cbdhemp808]

Grape Ape Update:

All done... I removed a couple handfuls of more-or-less bud rotty buds. Then I power washed with peroxide solution: 8 fl oz of 3% peroxide in pure water, in the pump sprayer (1/2 gal pump sprayer from ACE). Just plain, no soap added. The wooden deck below the plant was soaked and bubbling white. I was sticking the sprayer tip into some of the colas and blasting.

Thinking tomorrow is chop day, but will inspect again. Best not to take too much risk.

It's 4:20 in Hawaii!

 

[Azimuth]

Then I power washed with peroxide solution: 8 fl oz of 3% peroxide in pure water, in the pump sprayer (1/2 gal pump sprayer from ACE). Just plain, no soap added.

Power washed. Yikes!

 

[cbdhemp808]

Hey Growmies,

It's time once again for another episode of Moldsville!

Actually, it's pretty much a rerun of a past episode... Blueberry's Bud Rot.

Friday, the Grape Ape had hardly any detectable bud rot (1 or 2 spots).

Sunday I had to harvest early. This was a salvage harvest. Bud rot was all over the place – crazy rapid onset.

I will likely grow Grape Ape again from one of the clones, and this time I'll pay a lot more attention to her, including inoculating the soil with some beneficial bacteria and trichoderma, and using a 15 gal fabric pot. Stay tuned!

This result from Grape Ape happened even though we've been having plenty of sunshine. Blueberry on the other hand was harvested during a rainy period.

Here's tonight's harvest report for Grape Ape...

Grape Ape (90% indica)

category	score
Leaf mold resistance* (low, med, high): med	2
Bud rot resistance* (low, med, high): low-	0.5
Bug resistance (low, med, high): med+	2.5
Resin production (low, med, high): med	2
Fragrance: subtle, sweet, cheese	--
Harvest status (minus, neutral, plus): minus harvested early due to bud rot	1
Yield (low, med, high): med ignoring the rot	2
Overall rating:	10/18 = 56%

* Low and med resistance implies peroxide or some other foliar spray was used on leaves and/or buds.

Top colas (left), and all that was salvaged from them (top right). Threw out about 90% of buds. It was mostly just the start of bud rot, but it was everywhere... just not worth messing with.

Grape Ape Terpenes

Grape Ape (90% indica): myrcene; others - pinene, caryophyllene, limonene.

Compared to Blueberry...

Blueberry (80% indica): myrcene; others - pinene, bisabolol, caryophyllene, terpineol, limonene, linalool.​

Compared to indica landraces...

Afghani (indica): myrcene; others - terpinolene, pinene, caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Nepalese (indica): myrcene; others - caryophyllene, limonene.​

​

Hindu Kush (indica): limonene; -or- close mix of dominance - caryophyllene, myrcene, humulene, limonene. (One source says limonene dominant, followed by caryophyllene, carene, pinene, linalool and ocimene.)​

 

[Azimuth]

I know you're trying to find varieties that will work well in your climate, but why not try one of the strains you like but have rot issues with, with @Danishoes21 's willow water spray and see if that would be effective?

More work to be sure but, if it were successful, that would open up your choices.