-
ICMag with help from Phlizon, Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest for Christmas! You can check it here. Prizes are: full spectrum led light, seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Dutch pilot experiment: LEGALLY growing organic female hemp flowers high in CBD
- Thread starter DutchHempCBD
- Start date
DutchHempCBD
Member
Thanks, yes I will keep posting. As for your comment about most of the seed companies being in the Netherlands. I don't know if that's true. I know that a LOT of the Dutch seed companies actually grow their seeds in Spain and Portugal where the law is less strict p.s. communicate in ENGLISH please....
DutchHempCBD
Member
DutchHempCBD
Member
I'd like to measure the cannabinoid content of the hemp. At least from the last part of flowering phase all throughout the seed maturation phase. By analysing at least the CBD(a) content, but preferably also the CBN, CBG(a) and THC(a) content I hopefully can determine what the most ideal time for harvesting is.
@Sam or other Dutchies. Do you know a place where HPLC or UPLC analysis can be done? Preferably with little or no charge €. GC analysis is also an option, although less preferable. TLC analysis is not accurate enough in this case.
@Sam or other Dutchies. Do you know a place where HPLC or UPLC analysis can be done? Preferably with little or no charge €. GC analysis is also an option, although less preferable. TLC analysis is not accurate enough in this case.
Point taken.
http://www.testlabamsterdam.nl/services.html
But I don't know what there method of testing is. I asked them when they first started, but they never answered. I guess they use TLC just like the rest of us do around here.
I know Canna lab owns the standards of the stuff you want tested but, for obvious reasons, they don't provide any testing service in this area. I would give these guys a call if I where you.
http://www.testlabamsterdam.nl/services.html
But I don't know what there method of testing is. I asked them when they first started, but they never answered. I guess they use TLC just like the rest of us do around here.
I know Canna lab owns the standards of the stuff you want tested but, for obvious reasons, they don't provide any testing service in this area. I would give these guys a call if I where you.
Didn't know there were so many hemp varieties , gives me ideas...
BT
BT
DutchHempCBD
Member
Thanks for thinking along. Both Test Lab Amsterdam and Canna lab use TLC testing. This will not be sufficient for this project.
DutchHempCBD
Member
Wow, that looks and sounds interesting. It uses GC though which measures the content of you product by heating it and bringing compounds in gas phase. Not so suitable for my project because I'd want't to know the cannabinoid content in its acid form.
It's not a GC but an electronic nose (chip-based vapour sensor). Not sure if this gadget determines THCA and THC or both but with the used technique it should be possible because both are slightly volatile, acid or not.
I'm wondering if it really holds what it promises...
DutchHempCBD
Member
yep, you're right, it's not an GC. Still it doesn't measure acid cannabinoids. The technique is more or less the same as GC as in that it heats up the material. The heat will decarboxylate the material before vaporisation. Still a cool and nifty device.
If it works. I consider the money at risk until I find out.
As far as I know you can add roughly 15 % to the total neutral content for an estimate in acid form content.
Any ideas already on what to do with the remaining fibers? for I am researching the possibilities of building a hempcrete house and the minimum needs seems to be a hectare of hemp fiber.
Any ideas already on what to do with the remaining fibers? for I am researching the possibilities of building a hempcrete house and the minimum needs seems to be a hectare of hemp fiber.
DutchHempCBD
Member
Your statement on the acid content is incorrect. It's not that simple. In raw uncurred buds almost all of the THC present is in the ACID form.
Cool to hear that you are working on hempcrete. As for the fibers we don't have an idea yet of what to do with the fibers. Do you live in the Netherlands?
There is a conversion factor being used but I stand corrected on the 15%
As some of you in the medical cannabis analysis community already know, Restek is currently unable to provide our cannabinoids standard (34014 – CBD, d9-THC, CBN) for potency testing due to raw material unavailability, specifically for d9-THC. On behalf of our company, I apologize for the impact this might have on your operations. But I have been working with the materials we do have to try and create an interim solution for you that involves using delta-8-THC, or d9-THCA, the acid compound found in cannabis that is decarboxylated to d9-THC during vaporizing or cooking or smoking, or injecting it into a hot GC inlet for potency determination. You can find conversion values in the literature for THCA versus THC, but I estimated my specific conversion value using the conditions shown under the chromatogram referencing it from analysis of delta-8-THC (NOT the acid form). I analyzed an equal-concentration (167 ng/µL each), mixed standard that I built from individual stocks. I’ve listed the part numbers and current availability (as of 1030 EST, Oct 30 2013) below (name, catalog number, conc in µg/mL, ampules available in Restek stock):
Cannabichromene, 34092, 1000, 13
Cannabidiol, 34010, 1000, 5
delta-8-THC, 34090, 1000, 32
delta-9-THCA, 34093, 1000, 28
Cannabigerol, 34091, 1000, 38
Cannabinol, 34011, 1000, 23
As you can see from the chromatogram below, delta-9-THC from hot GC inlet analysis of THCA is reduced in response versus all other non-acid cannabinoids, not surprising based on previous scientific literature in this regard. But the thrust of this work is to try and provide a starting point for estimating delta-9-THC concentrations based on other approaches, since the standard GC-FID approach may not be available due to the lack of the delta-9-THC standard. Here are some possible approaches:
Use delta-8-THC for GC-FID quantification of delta-9-THC. - In my work, using the d8-THC for d9-THC quantification (from a retain 34014 standard) resulted in a d9-THC value of 179 when the concentration was at 167 ng/µL, which is approximately 7% high, not bad.
Use delta-9-THC from d9-THCA for quantification of d9-THC by GC-FID. - This results in a relatively high value if you are currently using d9-THC for quantification. For example, when analyzing the retained 34014 mix (which contains d9-THC) and quantifying against d9-THC from THCA, instead of 167, I get 256 ng/µL.
Use a “correction factor” for d9-THC quantification if using d9-THCA for GC-FID quantification. In this case, my correction factor, based on d8-THC response, would be 0.7 (i.e. multiply d9-THC values determined with quantification using d9-THCA by 0.7 to get values more in line with historical values quantified using the non-acid d9-THC).
Use any of the other cannabinoids (e.g. CBC, CBD, CBG, CBN) to estimate GC-FID quantification for d9-THC since the range of normalized response factors is relatively narrow (97-108, in my example).
I also know that some analysts are determining the acids (e.g. THCA, CBDA, etc.) using LC, which will provide the most accurate answer for their concentration in cannabis. We have an LC application for THCA here:
Restek Advantage 2011
An interesting discussion for another day is how to tie any cannabinoids in cannabis determination using either GC or LC back to the actual dosage of THC (and CBD, etc.) delivered to the patient, since that dosage is impacted by partial conversion of acids to non-acids during vaporization or smoking. Perhaps food could be the most accurate delivery system, since presumably the acid forms of the compounds of interest are decarboxylated during the cooking process, and with proper sample preparation and analysis, THC and CBD and other cannabinoid concentrations can be determined directly.
As some of you in the medical cannabis analysis community already know, Restek is currently unable to provide our cannabinoids standard (34014 – CBD, d9-THC, CBN) for potency testing due to raw material unavailability, specifically for d9-THC. On behalf of our company, I apologize for the impact this might have on your operations. But I have been working with the materials we do have to try and create an interim solution for you that involves using delta-8-THC, or d9-THCA, the acid compound found in cannabis that is decarboxylated to d9-THC during vaporizing or cooking or smoking, or injecting it into a hot GC inlet for potency determination. You can find conversion values in the literature for THCA versus THC, but I estimated my specific conversion value using the conditions shown under the chromatogram referencing it from analysis of delta-8-THC (NOT the acid form). I analyzed an equal-concentration (167 ng/µL each), mixed standard that I built from individual stocks. I’ve listed the part numbers and current availability (as of 1030 EST, Oct 30 2013) below (name, catalog number, conc in µg/mL, ampules available in Restek stock):
Cannabichromene, 34092, 1000, 13
Cannabidiol, 34010, 1000, 5
delta-8-THC, 34090, 1000, 32
delta-9-THCA, 34093, 1000, 28
Cannabigerol, 34091, 1000, 38
Cannabinol, 34011, 1000, 23
As you can see from the chromatogram below, delta-9-THC from hot GC inlet analysis of THCA is reduced in response versus all other non-acid cannabinoids, not surprising based on previous scientific literature in this regard. But the thrust of this work is to try and provide a starting point for estimating delta-9-THC concentrations based on other approaches, since the standard GC-FID approach may not be available due to the lack of the delta-9-THC standard. Here are some possible approaches:
Use delta-8-THC for GC-FID quantification of delta-9-THC. - In my work, using the d8-THC for d9-THC quantification (from a retain 34014 standard) resulted in a d9-THC value of 179 when the concentration was at 167 ng/µL, which is approximately 7% high, not bad.
Use delta-9-THC from d9-THCA for quantification of d9-THC by GC-FID. - This results in a relatively high value if you are currently using d9-THC for quantification. For example, when analyzing the retained 34014 mix (which contains d9-THC) and quantifying against d9-THC from THCA, instead of 167, I get 256 ng/µL.
Use a “correction factor” for d9-THC quantification if using d9-THCA for GC-FID quantification. In this case, my correction factor, based on d8-THC response, would be 0.7 (i.e. multiply d9-THC values determined with quantification using d9-THCA by 0.7 to get values more in line with historical values quantified using the non-acid d9-THC).
Use any of the other cannabinoids (e.g. CBC, CBD, CBG, CBN) to estimate GC-FID quantification for d9-THC since the range of normalized response factors is relatively narrow (97-108, in my example).
I also know that some analysts are determining the acids (e.g. THCA, CBDA, etc.) using LC, which will provide the most accurate answer for their concentration in cannabis. We have an LC application for THCA here:
Restek Advantage 2011
An interesting discussion for another day is how to tie any cannabinoids in cannabis determination using either GC or LC back to the actual dosage of THC (and CBD, etc.) delivered to the patient, since that dosage is impacted by partial conversion of acids to non-acids during vaporization or smoking. Perhaps food could be the most accurate delivery system, since presumably the acid forms of the compounds of interest are decarboxylated during the cooking process, and with proper sample preparation and analysis, THC and CBD and other cannabinoid concentrations can be determined directly.
Additionally (from what I guess while trying to decipher the quotation), the 15% seem to me like a mathematical conversion to estimate one with the FID (?) response on a GC of the other... the rest looks more like a mess to me & proper citations would really help 
.
All that has nothing to do with the e-nose and does only apply to an identical GC-FID quantification .
.All that has nothing to do with the e-nose and does only apply to an identical GC-FID quantification
.DutchHempCBD
Member
Thanks for all the reactions. Lets not get to carried away though.... As far as I'm aware LC analyses is the only proper way of measuring the cannabinoid content as it is in the plant. ACID & decarboxylated.
UPDATE: I have done a germination test with the Finola seeds. Soaked a hand full in water (2x 8 hrs) and then washed them every 10 hrs, just keeping them moist. GREAT result, about 80% germination rate. So happy with that. So it's going to be banging!
Further more, we will most likely be sowing somewhere next week. I'll keep you posted.
UPDATE: I have done a germination test with the Finola seeds. Soaked a hand full in water (2x 8 hrs) and then washed them every 10 hrs, just keeping them moist. GREAT result, about 80% germination rate. So happy with that. So it's going to be banging!
Further more, we will most likely be sowing somewhere next week. I'll keep you posted.
i am a newbie so thanks for leading me in the way of proper quotation
A mathematical conversion is indeed what I mean, so you can actually use that sniffer.
Due to a aprox. 95% conversion rate and some additional losses in the process it wont be a 1:1 conversion
Getting access to a certified lab and LC analyse for cannabis seems to me as fairly impossible in the Netherlands, but if you are registered at the chamber of commerce and with the proper paperwork, you might.
A mathematical conversion is indeed what I mean, so you can actually use that sniffer.
Due to a aprox. 95% conversion rate and some additional losses in the process it wont be a 1:1 conversion
Getting access to a certified lab and LC analyse for cannabis seems to me as fairly impossible in the Netherlands, but if you are registered at the chamber of commerce and with the proper paperwork, you might.
