Clarification of Cannabis Identification

[pjlive]

Gee, I guess I'll have one more thing to contemplate besides the unusual consistency of Tofu Rare Cheesecake over this coming weekend.

Thanks to everyone so far for such a great conversation...

 

[H e d g e]

The fact that a sample does not match the CBD subpopulation does not mean that it has no CBD.

I didn’t say it did, hemp for example is about 15% I think but unrelated to Cannatonic. I’m saying that I’ve not found a variety in there that’s considered pure landrace and contains any cbd.
The Lebanese you posted the cbd thc ratios for is a good example, highly related to/contaminated by hemp.

 

[H e d g e]

My interpretation of that is that it means that the modern varieties are closely related. Genetic bottlenecking, no doubt due to heavy use of Skunk, Haze, NL, and other familiar names to people on the forum... Whereas with landraces there is less of that.

It makes me wonder what’s been lost behind those blocks, oldtimers haze is as inbred/bottle necked as it gets being maintained indoors in the U.K. for so long and yet looks no different to a traditionally maintained pure Thai, both considered pure landrace, no solid blocks of colour.
I know which Phylos category I’d rather be smoking, and it’s not hemp.

 

[Mudballs2.0]

It's the subpopulation reference bar, they're visual graphs representing the genetic make up of the different subpopulations they use to categorize their findings. So "skunk" is represented with red, hemp by yellow, berry by purple, landrace by green, cbd by orange and kush by blue. So if we look at the skunk graph we can see it's predominantly red (the genes that define that subpopulation) with fairly equal amounts of blue and yellow and small amounts of purple, green and orange. It doesn't tell us when things were crossed or if they even were or if we're just seeing the same genes in different populations, all it shows is how they're related to one another genetically by how much of their genes are composed of the different subpopulations. Berry is a good example of that, it doesn't mean they're related to blueberry just that they have the same gene combinations which express those traits which the varieties were listed under. I hope that makes sense.

Sooo the X axis is time?...OG Kush and landrace was pure but over time became a 50/50 mix of skunk and hemp??

 

[Somatek]

Sooo the X axis is time?...OG Kush and landrace was pure but over time became a 50/50 mix of skunk and hemp??

Sorry, don't know how I missed this. I can't remember as it was a long time ago that I read about it, probably close to when they started before pissing everyone off. It wasn't time though, I think it had to do with the amount of samples tested more then anything though

 

[Mudballs2.0]

Sorry, don't know how I missed this. I can't remember as it was a long time ago that I read about it, probably close to when they started before pissing everyone off. It wasn't time though, I think it had to do with the amount of samples tested more then anything though

as long as we keep getting high off our own supply...i don't care what they call it or classify it as.

 

[pjlive]

I'm gearing up to take a better look into this subject over the weekend. Just off the surface, though, it's clear there won't be any type of definitive answer to any of the questions. The current information swirling about on cannabis identification and classification is without question convoluted and, for lack of a better word, murky at best.

Once again I find myself writing: we wouldn't be in this type of fogged out territory if people around the world had been allowed to openly study the plants over past decades. Now we're in a phase that presents a swirl of conflicting published data littered with ad nausium question marks on a topic that should have at least some well documented scientific foundation. But, no.

Very interesting stuff none-the-less.

 

[pjlive]

as long as we keep getting high off our own supply...i don't care what they call it or classify it as.

And I can definitely understand this kind of sentiment, too.

 

[goingrey]

Sooo the X axis is time?...OG Kush and landrace was pure but over time became a 50/50 mix of skunk and hemp??

That's a good question. What is the X-axis in the subpopulation reference bars?

 

[Mudballs2.0]

That's a good question. What is the X-axis in the subpopulation reference bars?

He doesn't remember.

 

[goingrey]

He doesn't remember.

I guess one row is one sample in their galaxy and sorted from left to right by how closely the sample is related to the reference sample in question?

 

[Mudballs2.0]

Im siding with soma's
The galaxy doesn't show that hashplants have been crossed with or polluted by those other varieties, just that they share a predominant amount of genes with them showing that they're genetically closer then other samples

i dont care if it's all mixed, it's more fire than garbage out there and there's plenty of connoisseurs sitting on unpolluted stock....dont worry. I just need that whack foxtailing to stop! Get the word out to junior breeders, foxtailing bad! Stop doing it!

 

[goingrey]

Im siding with soma's
The galaxy doesn't show that hashplants have been crossed with or polluted by those other varieties, just that they share a predominant amount of genes with them showing that they're genetically closer then other samples

i dont care if it's all mixed, it's more fire than garbage out there and there's plenty of connoisseurs sitting on unpolluted stock....dont worry. I just need that whack foxtailing to stop! Get the word out to junior breeders, foxtailing bad! Stop doing it!

That would surely be in reference to an individual sample (the stacked bar chart). But yes, "genetically closer" is a more accurate way of putting it than "how closely related".

 

[pjlive]

Also, based on some of the chemotype identifications brought about by classical TLC, OPLC, AMDI, GC-MS, HPLC-MS techniques it seems possible that accurate broad spectrum identifications might not be possible at this time. For example, a pure domestic plant can contain multiple individual phenotypical expressions that vary in concentrations of THC, CBD, CBN, CBG, etc. One phenotype might contain all, one phenotype might produce an abundance of CBD and little else.

There's a plant specific variable spectrum of ranges to consider here as well.