B
BuzzBoy
great discussion i ewnjoyed reading thus far
-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Differences of Indica and Sativa - A RealTime Photo Essay
- Thread starter HawaiianGrown
- Start date
G
Guest
Those look like my a.m. crossword.... 
G
Guest
The abstract of the paper posted by baseado...
http://www.amjbot.org/cgi/content/a...c=relevance&fdate=1/1/2003&journalcode=amjbot
A chemotaxonomic analysis of cannabinoid variation in Cannabis (Cannabaceae)1
Karl W. Hillig2 and Paul G. Mahlberg
Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405 USA
Cannabinoids are important chemotaxonomic markers unique to Cannabis. Previous studies show that a plant's dry-weight ratio of 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to cannabidiol (CBD) can be assigned to one of three chemotypes and that alleles BD and BT encode alloenzymes that catalyze the conversion of cannabigerol to CBD and THC, respectively. In the present study, the frequencies of BD and BT in sample populations of 157 Cannabis accessions were determined from CBD and THC banding patterns, visualized by starch gel electrophoresis. Gas chromatography was used to quantify cannabinoid levels in 96 of the same accessions. The data were interpreted with respect to previous analyses of genetic and morphological variation in the same germplasm collection. Two biotypes (infraspecific taxa of unassigned rank) of C. sativa and four biotypes of C. indica were recognized. Mean THC levels and the frequency of BT were significantly higher in C. indica than C. sativa. The proportion of high THC/CBD chemotype plants in most accessions assigned to C. sativa was <25% and in most accessions assigned to C. indica was >25%. Plants with relatively high levels of tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV) and/or cannabidivarin (CBDV) were common only in C. indica. This study supports a two-species concept of Cannabis.
Key Words: cannabinoid • Cannabis • chemotaxonomy • evolution • genetics • taxonomy • tetrahydrocannabinol
http://www.amjbot.org/cgi/content/a...c=relevance&fdate=1/1/2003&journalcode=amjbot
A chemotaxonomic analysis of cannabinoid variation in Cannabis (Cannabaceae)1
Karl W. Hillig2 and Paul G. Mahlberg
Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405 USA
Cannabinoids are important chemotaxonomic markers unique to Cannabis. Previous studies show that a plant's dry-weight ratio of 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to cannabidiol (CBD) can be assigned to one of three chemotypes and that alleles BD and BT encode alloenzymes that catalyze the conversion of cannabigerol to CBD and THC, respectively. In the present study, the frequencies of BD and BT in sample populations of 157 Cannabis accessions were determined from CBD and THC banding patterns, visualized by starch gel electrophoresis. Gas chromatography was used to quantify cannabinoid levels in 96 of the same accessions. The data were interpreted with respect to previous analyses of genetic and morphological variation in the same germplasm collection. Two biotypes (infraspecific taxa of unassigned rank) of C. sativa and four biotypes of C. indica were recognized. Mean THC levels and the frequency of BT were significantly higher in C. indica than C. sativa. The proportion of high THC/CBD chemotype plants in most accessions assigned to C. sativa was <25% and in most accessions assigned to C. indica was >25%. Plants with relatively high levels of tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV) and/or cannabidivarin (CBDV) were common only in C. indica. This study supports a two-species concept of Cannabis.
Key Words: cannabinoid • Cannabis • chemotaxonomy • evolution • genetics • taxonomy • tetrahydrocannabinol
Last edited:
HawaiianGrown
Active member
Don't forget your Ruderalis
Don't forget your Ruderalis
Aloha,
Very technical stuff, but what of the Cannabis Ruderalis and the hybrids like SAGE.
Always thought three genus species of cannabis?
Don't forget your Ruderalis
Aloha,
Very technical stuff, but what of the Cannabis Ruderalis and the hybrids like SAGE.
Always thought three genus species of cannabis?
G
Guest
"Ruderalis",a/ka 'Russian Ruderalis' and Missouri Ditch-Hemp are,essentially,the same.
Ask Sam The Skunkman,he'll tell you that 'ruderalis' isn't a 'third genus' at all,but simply,HEMP.
Neville tried a bit of mucking about with rudy's auto-flower tendencies but was never successful in producing anything deemed 'acceptable' when using 'rudys'.
'Lowryder' might have a hint of rudy,am not sure.
SAGE is an indica/sativa hybrid,a simple combination of complex parents,really.
The differences,that is :smile:
Ask Sam The Skunkman,he'll tell you that 'ruderalis' isn't a 'third genus' at all,but simply,HEMP.
Neville tried a bit of mucking about with rudy's auto-flower tendencies but was never successful in producing anything deemed 'acceptable' when using 'rudys'.
'Lowryder' might have a hint of rudy,am not sure.
SAGE is an indica/sativa hybrid,a simple combination of complex parents,really.
Easy enough,and the above simplifies it nicely,in scientific terminology.
The differences,that is :smile:
For our purposes, hemp is the plant called `cannabis sativa.' There are other plants that are called hemp, but cannabis hemp is the most useful of these plants.
`Hemp' is any durable plant that has been used since pre-history for many purposes. Fiber is the most well known product, and the word `hemp' can mean the rope or twine which is made from the hemp plant, as well as just the stalk of the plant which produced it.
I copy/pasted that from Hempnation, so all that weed we love is hemp and there are manymanymany cannabis species else than just indica, sativa, chinensis, ruderalis etc. :smile:
" Lowryder claims direct descendance from superior William’s Wonder and Northern Lights no.2 indica, while keeping the identity of its third, more exotic ruderalis-type ancestor a secret." Ruderalis indeed :wink:
`Hemp' is any durable plant that has been used since pre-history for many purposes. Fiber is the most well known product, and the word `hemp' can mean the rope or twine which is made from the hemp plant, as well as just the stalk of the plant which produced it.
I copy/pasted that from Hempnation, so all that weed we love is hemp and there are manymanymany cannabis species else than just indica, sativa, chinensis, ruderalis etc. :smile:
" Lowryder claims direct descendance from superior William’s Wonder and Northern Lights no.2 indica, while keeping the identity of its third, more exotic ruderalis-type ancestor a secret." Ruderalis indeed :wink:
HawaiianGrown
Active member
Ruderalis certainly exists
Ruderalis certainly exists
Phylogeny
The family Cannabaceae was formerly placed with the nettles in the order Urticales, but is now considered to be in the order Rosales. There is phylogenetic controversy as to whether the cultivated varieties of the plant are of a single species (Cannabis sativa) or represent distinct species (such as those called Cannabis indica, Cannabis ruderalis, or Cannabis americana). That there are different strains of cannabis has not been in question; whether these strains possess qualities of a true species or lesser taxonomic designations, such as races, ecotypes, cultivates, chemovars, and so on, has been at issue (Schultes and Hofmann 1980). Current research indicates the classification consists of more than one species. Botanists such as Richard E. Schultes at Harvard University and Loran C. Anderson at Florida State University conclude sufficient scientific evidence exists to support three species of cannabis: Cannabis sativa, Cannabis indica, and Cannabis ruderalis. C. sativa grows to a height of 18 feet (6 metres), is loosely branched, and thrives in cool, damp climates. C. indica grows from 3.5 to 4 feet (1.3 metres), is conical in shape, and thrives in hot, dry climates. C. ruderalis grows from 1 to 2.5 feet (0.4 to 0.7 m), is dense and never branches, and is found primarily in Russia. There are other distinguishing features as well, related to cell and leaf structures. There are gelatinous fibers in the wood and vessels that exist singly or in small groups in C. sativa. C. indica has liberiform fibers in its wood and its vessels occur in large groups. C. ruderalis is mostly intermediate in these characteristics. Although the number of leaflets may vary within a species, C. sativa normally has seven leaflets, C. indica has nine, and C. ruderalis has three. The leaflet of C. sativa is narrow, or lanceolate. The C. indica leaflet is broad, or oblanceolate. And the C. ruderalis leaflet is oval, or elliptic, being broadest at the mid-length of the leaf (Anderson 1974, 1980). All three species contain THC; C.indica produces the most and C. ruderalis the least. Cannabis has been cultivated for thousands of years for its intoxicating flowering tops and leaves, its fibrous stems and branches, and its nutritious seeds. A strain that is high in one of these three qualities tends to be low in the other two. C. indica, for example, is very low in fiber content but generates the most potent marijuana. C. sativa produces the hemp fibers that have been used for centuries for making rope and coarse woven produces, but races of C. sativa high in this quality contain very little THC (less than 0.5 percent). The seeds of C. sativa can also be harvested for use as animal feed and for producing oil that is used in cooking and in making paint.
Ruderalis certainly exists
Phylogeny
The family Cannabaceae was formerly placed with the nettles in the order Urticales, but is now considered to be in the order Rosales. There is phylogenetic controversy as to whether the cultivated varieties of the plant are of a single species (Cannabis sativa) or represent distinct species (such as those called Cannabis indica, Cannabis ruderalis, or Cannabis americana). That there are different strains of cannabis has not been in question; whether these strains possess qualities of a true species or lesser taxonomic designations, such as races, ecotypes, cultivates, chemovars, and so on, has been at issue (Schultes and Hofmann 1980). Current research indicates the classification consists of more than one species. Botanists such as Richard E. Schultes at Harvard University and Loran C. Anderson at Florida State University conclude sufficient scientific evidence exists to support three species of cannabis: Cannabis sativa, Cannabis indica, and Cannabis ruderalis. C. sativa grows to a height of 18 feet (6 metres), is loosely branched, and thrives in cool, damp climates. C. indica grows from 3.5 to 4 feet (1.3 metres), is conical in shape, and thrives in hot, dry climates. C. ruderalis grows from 1 to 2.5 feet (0.4 to 0.7 m), is dense and never branches, and is found primarily in Russia. There are other distinguishing features as well, related to cell and leaf structures. There are gelatinous fibers in the wood and vessels that exist singly or in small groups in C. sativa. C. indica has liberiform fibers in its wood and its vessels occur in large groups. C. ruderalis is mostly intermediate in these characteristics. Although the number of leaflets may vary within a species, C. sativa normally has seven leaflets, C. indica has nine, and C. ruderalis has three. The leaflet of C. sativa is narrow, or lanceolate. The C. indica leaflet is broad, or oblanceolate. And the C. ruderalis leaflet is oval, or elliptic, being broadest at the mid-length of the leaf (Anderson 1974, 1980). All three species contain THC; C.indica produces the most and C. ruderalis the least. Cannabis has been cultivated for thousands of years for its intoxicating flowering tops and leaves, its fibrous stems and branches, and its nutritious seeds. A strain that is high in one of these three qualities tends to be low in the other two. C. indica, for example, is very low in fiber content but generates the most potent marijuana. C. sativa produces the hemp fibers that have been used for centuries for making rope and coarse woven produces, but races of C. sativa high in this quality contain very little THC (less than 0.5 percent). The seeds of C. sativa can also be harvested for use as animal feed and for producing oil that is used in cooking and in making paint.
HawaiianGrown
Active member
Here's a good article on Ruderalis
Here's a good article on Ruderalis
Aloha,
While this thread isn't really about it, Here is a pretty good article about what ruderalis is and has been used for.
http://cannabisculture.com/articles/3033.html
Here's a good article on Ruderalis
Aloha,
While this thread isn't really about it, Here is a pretty good article about what ruderalis is and has been used for.
http://cannabisculture.com/articles/3033.html
HawaiianGrown
Active member
This makes sense too
This makes sense too
Here is someone's opinion over at the other site.
Makes sense to me.
Most plant taxonomists do not adhere to the “biological species concept” that different species cannot interbreed and produce fertile offspring, because it would be impossible to test this criterion for all the millions of plant species that are recognized. Besides, just because two species are capable of interbreeding in a laboratory does not mean that they do so in nature. It is well known that orchids assigned to different genera (let alone species) can be artificially hybridized, but this rarely happens in nature because they have specialized pollinators. Most plant taxonomists rely on stable, phenotypic differences to differentiate plant species. In the case of Cannabis there are few if any qualitative differences (like a different number of chromosomes) between putative taxa, but that does not necessarily mean there is only one species. Numerical taxonomy can provide a means of distinguishing groups of plants on the basis of quantitative traits (like leaflet width/length ratio, plant height, seed length, etc.), none of which alone are adequate for distinguishing important taxonomic groups. This method requires that the plants be grown together in a common-garden to eliminate variation due to environmental differences. Ernest Small conducted such an experiment and found that “intoxicant” and “non-intoxicant” strains can be discriminated with a high degree of accuracy based on morphological differences, but he argued that the methodology is too tedious for practical purposes. Instead of using morphological differences to differentiate sativa and indica, Small and Cronquist used “intoxicant potential” to distinguish the two taxa based on average CBD and THC content of a given population. They assigned these two groups (indica and sativa) to different subspecies of Cannabis sativa L. (L. stands for Linnaeus, who first named the species). They might just as well have recognized C. sativa and Cannabis indica Lam. (Lam. stands for Lamarck) as different species based on morphological and biochemical differences, but some people think that Small was biased toward a single-species concept. Small argued that his concept served the “needs of society” because of the legal definition of marijuana as C. sativa. Other taxonomists took issue with this non-scientific reasoning, most notably Richard Schultes, the renown ethnobotanist of psychoactive plants. Schultes and coworkers recognized three species of Cannabis, C. sativa, C. indica, and C. ruderalis Janisch. (Janisch. stands for Janischewsky) on the basis of morphological differences. Schultes et al. assigned short, conical, heavily branched plants that he encountered in Afghanistan to C. indica, and tall, laxly branched plants to C. sativa. This is the concept that most marijuana aficionados use to distinguish “sativa” from “indica” drug strains. Loren Anderson later differentiated C. sativa, C. indica, and C. ruderalis based on leaf characters, as well as other phenotypic traits. To be precise, the so-called “indica” drug strains should be called “C. indica sensu Schultes et al. and Anderson,” to distinguish them from C. indica sensu Lamarck, who described C. indica as having narrower leaflets than C. sativa. Schultes et al. and Anderson lumped Lamarck’s concept of C. indica in with C. sativa, so hemp strains and narrow-leaflet drug strains were treated as the same species. Karl Hillig (2004) recently published a chemotaxonomic analysis of Cannabis (American Journal of Botany, 91(6): 966-975) in which he recognized C. sativa and C. indica as different species. He assigned the narrow-leaflet “sativa” drug strains and the wide-leaflet “indica” drug strains in his collection to different “biotypes” of C. indica. He also assigned the hemp strains from southern and eastern Asia to C. indica because of their relatively high THC content. It is not true that all hemp strains are naturally low in THC and high in CBD. The hemp landraces from Europe and central Asia that Hillig assigned to the hemp biotype of C. sativa were segregating for this trait, although there was a much lower proportion of high THC/CBD individuals in these populations than in C. indica.
Hillig’s working hypothesis for the taxonomy of Cannabis:
C. indica hemp biotype
C. indica narrow-leaflet drug (NLD) biotype
C. indica wide-leaflet drug (WLD) biotype
C. indica feral biotype
C. sativa hemp biotype
C. sativa feral biotype
C. ruderalis (synonymous with C. sativa feral biotype?)
Hillig believes that C. sativa and C. indica diverged as a result of geographic isolation followed by genetic drift, natural selection, and the gradual accumulation of genetic mutations in both gene pools over thousands of years. He hypothesizes that the two gene pools diverged prior to human meddling in the affairs of Cannabis, and not as a result of domestication. Whether or not Cannabis consists of a single species or multiple species depends on what criteria one uses to differentiate species. The purpose of taxonomy is to assign unique names to important groups so that they can be referred to unambiguously. What taxonomic concept you choose to use is up to you, but it helps to understand the concept on which your terminology is based.
Om Shiva Shankara
Hari Hari Ganja
Uncle Bug
This makes sense too
Here is someone's opinion over at the other site.
Makes sense to me.
Most plant taxonomists do not adhere to the “biological species concept” that different species cannot interbreed and produce fertile offspring, because it would be impossible to test this criterion for all the millions of plant species that are recognized. Besides, just because two species are capable of interbreeding in a laboratory does not mean that they do so in nature. It is well known that orchids assigned to different genera (let alone species) can be artificially hybridized, but this rarely happens in nature because they have specialized pollinators. Most plant taxonomists rely on stable, phenotypic differences to differentiate plant species. In the case of Cannabis there are few if any qualitative differences (like a different number of chromosomes) between putative taxa, but that does not necessarily mean there is only one species. Numerical taxonomy can provide a means of distinguishing groups of plants on the basis of quantitative traits (like leaflet width/length ratio, plant height, seed length, etc.), none of which alone are adequate for distinguishing important taxonomic groups. This method requires that the plants be grown together in a common-garden to eliminate variation due to environmental differences. Ernest Small conducted such an experiment and found that “intoxicant” and “non-intoxicant” strains can be discriminated with a high degree of accuracy based on morphological differences, but he argued that the methodology is too tedious for practical purposes. Instead of using morphological differences to differentiate sativa and indica, Small and Cronquist used “intoxicant potential” to distinguish the two taxa based on average CBD and THC content of a given population. They assigned these two groups (indica and sativa) to different subspecies of Cannabis sativa L. (L. stands for Linnaeus, who first named the species). They might just as well have recognized C. sativa and Cannabis indica Lam. (Lam. stands for Lamarck) as different species based on morphological and biochemical differences, but some people think that Small was biased toward a single-species concept. Small argued that his concept served the “needs of society” because of the legal definition of marijuana as C. sativa. Other taxonomists took issue with this non-scientific reasoning, most notably Richard Schultes, the renown ethnobotanist of psychoactive plants. Schultes and coworkers recognized three species of Cannabis, C. sativa, C. indica, and C. ruderalis Janisch. (Janisch. stands for Janischewsky) on the basis of morphological differences. Schultes et al. assigned short, conical, heavily branched plants that he encountered in Afghanistan to C. indica, and tall, laxly branched plants to C. sativa. This is the concept that most marijuana aficionados use to distinguish “sativa” from “indica” drug strains. Loren Anderson later differentiated C. sativa, C. indica, and C. ruderalis based on leaf characters, as well as other phenotypic traits. To be precise, the so-called “indica” drug strains should be called “C. indica sensu Schultes et al. and Anderson,” to distinguish them from C. indica sensu Lamarck, who described C. indica as having narrower leaflets than C. sativa. Schultes et al. and Anderson lumped Lamarck’s concept of C. indica in with C. sativa, so hemp strains and narrow-leaflet drug strains were treated as the same species. Karl Hillig (2004) recently published a chemotaxonomic analysis of Cannabis (American Journal of Botany, 91(6): 966-975) in which he recognized C. sativa and C. indica as different species. He assigned the narrow-leaflet “sativa” drug strains and the wide-leaflet “indica” drug strains in his collection to different “biotypes” of C. indica. He also assigned the hemp strains from southern and eastern Asia to C. indica because of their relatively high THC content. It is not true that all hemp strains are naturally low in THC and high in CBD. The hemp landraces from Europe and central Asia that Hillig assigned to the hemp biotype of C. sativa were segregating for this trait, although there was a much lower proportion of high THC/CBD individuals in these populations than in C. indica.
Hillig’s working hypothesis for the taxonomy of Cannabis:
C. indica hemp biotype
C. indica narrow-leaflet drug (NLD) biotype
C. indica wide-leaflet drug (WLD) biotype
C. indica feral biotype
C. sativa hemp biotype
C. sativa feral biotype
C. ruderalis (synonymous with C. sativa feral biotype?)
Hillig believes that C. sativa and C. indica diverged as a result of geographic isolation followed by genetic drift, natural selection, and the gradual accumulation of genetic mutations in both gene pools over thousands of years. He hypothesizes that the two gene pools diverged prior to human meddling in the affairs of Cannabis, and not as a result of domestication. Whether or not Cannabis consists of a single species or multiple species depends on what criteria one uses to differentiate species. The purpose of taxonomy is to assign unique names to important groups so that they can be referred to unambiguously. What taxonomic concept you choose to use is up to you, but it helps to understand the concept on which your terminology is based.
Om Shiva Shankara
Hari Hari Ganja
Uncle Bug
HawaiianGrown
Active member
Here is Small's UN report
Here is Small's UN report
This is a good read
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/bulletin/bulletin_1975-01-01_3_page002.html
Semantics or taxonomy?
Here is Small's UN report
This is a good read
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/bulletin/bulletin_1975-01-01_3_page002.html
Semantics or taxonomy?
hg
Thanks for taking the time to post so much info - appreciate it!!!!!
Thanks for taking the time to post so much info - appreciate it!!!!!
G
Guest
Hi HG!
My grow is going to be closed until September as soon as I harvest my last Mango Sativa momma (done today at about 90 days or so
). After which I have a number of strains that I've been requested to test out that have been waiting patiently (along with their breeders) and will have precedence, not to mention my entry to the 2006 IC Cup which will have to go in the grow in September to be properly cured and ready for April. If I had a warehouse to grow in, I'd do 'em all at once and be more than happy....unfortunately I only have a cab to grow in. I'll get to them as soon as I have room, complete with unbiased grow/smoke report, in the meantime I'll kick back and watch the thread....looks interesting :smile:
Hehe, it has to be that 6 months minimum oh yeah, mine goes to curing jars in july, gonna be a great party next april.....
HawaiianGrown
Active member
The Girls at one week outside
The Girls at one week outside
Aloha,
Back to the pics (for those not inclined to learn the opinions of others)
Indica, Sitiva, Haze
They have been out for one week to flower.
Yes, we flower in the middle of 13 1/2 hour day Summers here in Hawaii?!!
The Indica is chugging along.
Replacement Sativa is too.
Haze is wider than she is tall.
you all will love it in about three weeks when things start to really fatten up.
Hope the links I posted help people understand that genetic phenotypes can indeed be described and diagnosed by many diffferent criteria, and that it is the overall combination of criteria combined with the specific geographical environmental conditions that dictate taxonomic delineation.
Mahalo
The Girls at one week outside
Aloha,
Back to the pics (for those not inclined to learn the opinions of others)
Indica, Sitiva, Haze
They have been out for one week to flower.
Yes, we flower in the middle of 13 1/2 hour day Summers here in Hawaii?!!
The Indica is chugging along.
Replacement Sativa is too.
Haze is wider than she is tall.
you all will love it in about three weeks when things start to really fatten up.
Hope the links I posted help people understand that genetic phenotypes can indeed be described and diagnosed by many diffferent criteria, and that it is the overall combination of criteria combined with the specific geographical environmental conditions that dictate taxonomic delineation.
Mahalo
HawaiianGrown
Active member
Pics are ready, IC mag isn't
Pics are ready, IC mag isn't
Aloha,
Was going to put up more photos today as I usually do, but I have no permission. The errors and problems with the site are being worked on as we speak, but I don't want to spend a thousand words describing each picture.
All plants are looking good as the photos will soon show.
What happened to our great debate?
Pics are ready, IC mag isn't
Aloha,
Was going to put up more photos today as I usually do, but I have no permission. The errors and problems with the site are being worked on as we speak, but I don't want to spend a thousand words describing each picture.
All plants are looking good as the photos will soon show.
What happened to our great debate?
HawaiianGrown
Active member
Pics
Pics
Aloha (you thousands of viewers)
Here are the girls at two weeks flower ie outside
Indica Sativa Haza
The following show the HawaiianGrown Sativa as it appears when grown only oudoors. Big Diff Huh?
Here is a shot of the widely spaced Sative nodes Any other plant would'nt survive the cut with gps like that, but she is so sweet and tropical that it is well worth it.
Aloha and happy extra day off weekend.
Pics
Aloha (you thousands of viewers)
Here are the girls at two weeks flower ie outside
Indica Sativa Haza
The following show the HawaiianGrown Sativa as it appears when grown only oudoors. Big Diff Huh?
Here is a shot of the widely spaced Sative nodes Any other plant would'nt survive the cut with gps like that, but she is so sweet and tropical that it is well worth it.
Aloha and happy extra day off weekend.
TheFlyinHaWyn!
Active member
nice show mate. i like the way you are handling the criticisms that come and rebound with a respectable answer. nice differences between all of the plants. i've read the thread, but just wanted to ask anyway, did you breed those Hawaiian Sativa/Indica? i saw that you did, but wanted to find out more information about your program. i have a sativa i grow from Hawai'i (not the island) that has been grown in my friend's family for generations. it has thin leaves toward the end (i read the debating part about the leaves, even though i agree with your statement about the different climates and such having an effect on the physical characterisitics of the plant), starts out with semi-broad leaves, and finishes with running, poddy calyxes, with a sativa type high for me, but finishes quickly outdoors. roughly about 55-70 days. i like what you've got. Volcano is kickass. i grew there indoors. although i have never Volcanoed there, just smoked huge dubies. aloha.
HawaiianGrown
Active member
3 weeks flower
3 weeks flower
Aloha all,
Here are shots of the girls after 20 days outside.
The Indica isn't as fast as she should be. Huhmmm.
The Sativa is a big girl for short veggin and right on track.
The Haze is making me Happy.
Wide plant, Hazey Leaves and sweeter than tropical gardenias.
Thanks, Flying Hawaiian,
The Sativa leaves do get thinner later on, they just make good use of the sun energy available for veggin.
See you in a week.
3 weeks flower
Aloha all,
Here are shots of the girls after 20 days outside.
The Indica isn't as fast as she should be. Huhmmm.
The Sativa is a big girl for short veggin and right on track.
The Haze is making me Happy.
Wide plant, Hazey Leaves and sweeter than tropical gardenias.
Thanks, Flying Hawaiian,
The Sativa leaves do get thinner later on, they just make good use of the sun energy available for veggin.
See you in a week.
HawaiianGrown
Active member
28 Days o' Flower
28 Days o' Flower
Aloha,
Lovin' those Hazy Daze of Summer.
Indica, Sativa, Hawaiian Haze.
Indica is starting to throw purple stems.
This pheno is not like my others.
Not as fast and not as big white pistils.
Could be pullin blueberry from a cross. We'll see.
Here is slower darker Hawaiian Indica.
Here is long tall Sally, really takin her time like a good Sative.
Here is the really looking and even already smellin good Hawaiian Haze.
Take your knowledge of Haze and just remember the flavour. Now add some tropical sweetness. Now Imagine fast flowering, Indica-noded, Good yielding and even non-whispy Haze Budz.
Stop Imagining and check it out.
28 Days o' Flower
Aloha,
Lovin' those Hazy Daze of Summer.
Indica, Sativa, Hawaiian Haze.
Indica is starting to throw purple stems.
This pheno is not like my others.
Not as fast and not as big white pistils.
Could be pullin blueberry from a cross. We'll see.
Here is slower darker Hawaiian Indica.
Here is long tall Sally, really takin her time like a good Sative.
Here is the really looking and even already smellin good Hawaiian Haze.
Take your knowledge of Haze and just remember the flavour. Now add some tropical sweetness. Now Imagine fast flowering, Indica-noded, Good yielding and even non-whispy Haze Budz.
Stop Imagining and check it out.
HawaiianGrown
Active member
Purple and White
Purple and White
Here is a pic of the purple stems and it looks like the big white hairs have showed on the Hawaiian Indica.
Just thought you'd like to see.
Purple and White
Here is a pic of the purple stems and it looks like the big white hairs have showed on the Hawaiian Indica.
Just thought you'd like to see.
