High CBD strain Lists and Descriptions

[heady blunts]

congrats to MEDTREE, another award for TOCI, taking third place in the CBD flower category!

dont know what the deal is with this photo---apparently she's too fire for the camera

 

[Rubber Chicken]

They're only small so far.

 

[Mate Dave]

The BtBt / BdBd hypothesis has been shown to be incorrect through sequencing. Etienne de Meijer noted this possibility in his orginal inheritnce of chemical phenotype paper, so even when wrong, he was right.

CBDAS and THCAS are actually the result of a gene duplication, and are located on the same chromosome approximately 8 centimorgans from each other, resulting in very tight linkage.

The functional CBDAS is tied to a very minimally-functional THCAS, and the functional THCAS is linked to a minimally-functional CBDAS in most drug populations. Major point being is that they are not allelic as previously thought, and the suspected B locus is really two separate, but tightly linked loci.

-Chimera

How can the A or B Gene act theoretically with it's linked pair as opposed to without it? It's more homogenous? Potent? Complicated to breed?

Is it the result of hybridisation or inbreeding?

 

[Rubber Chicken]

I read earlier in the thread that high CBD plants can often have a cherry aroma, of the 4 CBD crew seeds i have grown, all have an orange-ish aroma, has anyone had the same experience?

Is the Cannatonic i think they used an orange smelling strain?

(I read the 'Perkins cut' Cannatonic has a sour citrus smell, so i guess i'm ok i'm excited to see how they work)

Thanks.

 

[paladin420]

Both Canna 4 and Perkins are more cherry than citrus... At finish, in oils.. In veg and flower? I can't speak to really

 

[Rubber Chicken]

Both Canna 4 and Perkins are more cherry than citrus... At finish, in oils.. In veg and flower? I can't speak to really

I sent CBDcrew an email and they said that Cannatonic was something they used but it wasn't the mother and that orange citrus smells can come from the mother(s), so i learned something.

I smoked a premature flower the other day and it still had a different effect than regular low cbd, i'm looking forward to see how it is.

 

[heady blunts]

I had mentioned some 99% isolate I had tried tasted cherry.

I have since tried other hemp cbd extractions that have no cherry flavor, so I'm back to being skeptical about that cbd=cherry notion.

 

[Huel Perkins]

I read earlier in the thread that high CBD plants can often have a cherry aroma, of the 4 CBD crew seeds i have grown, all have an orange-ish aroma, has anyone had the same experience?

Is the Cannatonic i think they used an orange smelling strain?

(I read the 'Perkins cut' Cannatonic has a sour citrus smell, so i guess i'm ok i'm excited to see how they work)

Thanks.

It's been a while since I've logged in here. Different people describe different smells in my cut, I personally get a lemon/lime/mango while others get cherry or orange. Here is a terpene analysis I hade done on her oil, hope it helps. Either way it's a complex aroma...

 

[Chimera]

Thanks for posting this Huel!

This profile that Huel Perkin posted above is very typical of the CBD varieties available on the marketplace- almost all of them are Myrcene dominant. Interesting that your sample is almost devoid of sesquiterpenes being an extract. Do you have a lab report showing the terpenes present in the flower?

How do you make the extract may I ask? Most extracts are lower in monoterps but preserve the less volatile sesquiterpenes.

It's a little weird that PSI labs uses GC/MS for terps, not that there is anything wrong with MS detectors, but most are using GC/FID for terps these days, since the compounds can be identified using standards rather than comparing to a database. (Maybe I answered my own question here, could it be they are trying to save on analytical standards?)

I have seen a couple of their lab reports now, and there is always something a little wonky going on. Can you spot the problem with their report? Something is wrong here...

 

[paladin420]

Here is a flower test of there's

Atonic is your Cut Huel x Bodhis male of good medicine.



Thanks again for gettin her out there Mr Perkins

 

[Chimera]

Do you have a flower terp assay result by chance?

 

[paladin420]

I'm actually checking with the grower/breeder as I believe he does.

 

[Chimera]

Thanks Paladin!

Its great always to have a terp assay of the flower and the extract/oil. Sometimes things are lost or created in the extraction process, so to really know what the genetic produces, a flower assay is the most useful.

Having both also allows one to see how their extraction process in affecting the result, essentially we are comparing what goes in with what comes out.

I appreciate your effort paladin, thanks for taking the time.

 

[Huel Perkins]

Thanks for posting this Huel!

This profile that Huel Perkin posted above is very typical of the CBD varieties available on the marketplace- almost all of them are Myrcene dominant. Interesting that your sample is almost devoid of sesquiterpenes being an extract. Do you have a lab report showing the terpenes present in the flower?

How do you make the extract may I ask? Most extracts are lower in monoterps but preserve the less volatile sesquiterpenes.

It's a little weird that PSI labs uses GC/MS for terps, not that there is anything wrong with MS detectors, but most are using GC/FID for terps these days, since the compounds can be identified using standards rather than comparing to a database. (Maybe I answered my own question here, could it be they are trying to save on analytical standards?)

I have seen a couple of their lab reports now, and there is always something a little wonky going on. Can you spot the problem with their report? Something is wrong here...

That is the only terpene test I've done, the lab did say it was the highest myrcene and total terpene percentages they'd ever tested. What is the problem with their report? The only test of done with flowers of this cut was just for cannabinoids...

 

[Chimera]

Why does the lab report have Caryophyllene listed twice? Worse yet, why are the levels different?

Here's why- one of the bars on the graph would represent, presumably, Caryophyllene oxide. It's not labelled as such, which brings into question why they would be sloppy in their reporting- perhaps they assume everyone knows that the bar on the right of the graph labelled Caryophyllene is actually the oxide? That's sloppy, and my immediate question becomes- what else have they been sloppy with?

Easily they could have labelled Caryophyllene (correctly, Beta-Caryophyllene) as BCP. They could have then labelled the oxide BCP-O. Or something. It doesn't matter what, but they didn't do that, they left it for the interpreter of the report to figure out. I'm sure most missed it, but I didn't.

I have actually received another lab report from the same company from a client, and it had an interesting (rare) terpene profile. So rare in fact, it's almost never seen. Now here is the kicker- how can I trust that their assay is solid and reliable, to the point that I can't write off their result as a mis-analysis?

We then look at their methodology. GC-MS.

GC-MS is a very powerful tool, you can use it to identify unknown compounds, great, but it needs some interpretation from a skilled chemist.

Knowing that the typical (and most often used) terpene assay is GC-FID, one has to wonder, could their chemist be mis-interpreting results, and perhaps misidentifying compounds? I trust their results for the cannabinoids, GC-MS is a validated technique and not too complicated with really just THC and CBD to identify in almost all samples.

But the terps have to come into question (in my mind) since the monoterps and sesquiterps, respectively, have the same molecular weight as each other. That means they fragment similarly in the MS detector, and split into the same pieces. We know from the literature, that there are unidentified terpenes that GC-MS can't identify.

When you use GC-FID, you make calibration curves of mixes of analytical standards that you run through the machine. When you know that your standard for myrcene elutes at a retention time of say X minutes, when you then have an unknown sample mixture that has a peak that also elutes at X minutes, you can be pretty sure it's the same compound - myrcene (if all other parameters remaining the same, flow rate, GC oven conditions, carrier gas, etc, etc).

For me at least, this bring the results into question. I'm not saying they are wrong, but its weird, and IMO it's sloppy lab reporting. It's not clear, and it has to be clear to be useful. Again, not trying to shit on Psi Labs, but this is problematic. And if there is one problem, I have to question if there are any others. If I were compiling data, I would have to omit this data point as unreliable, and I don't like that.

Not trying to talk shit here or criticize, just saying 'hey, there's an issue to consider'.

-Chimera

 

[Chimera]

Oh, and BTW- 4% Myrcene is approaching high- for a flower.

Terps totaling 5-6% by weight in an extract? That is definitely not high.

Again, it makes me question their results. Not criticizing, just saying again, something is up here.

I really appreciate you sharing your results H.P. and allowing me to comment. Much respect.

-Chimera

 

[Huel Perkins]

Good info Chimera. As for the terpene %, I'm just going off what they told me. I looked through tons of their public results and most of the extracts were between 2-3% terps, even HT cup winners...

 

[Betterhaff]

I understand what you're saying about the testing methods Chimera but if you look at the chart listing the terp percentages on that report it does list the 2nd Caryophyllene as the oxide (with no value). For some reason the full name doesn't appear on the graph.

Isn't the oxide what dogs are trained to alert to?

 

[theJointedOne]

Just picked up a pack of kushtonic from resin seeds.

 

[Chimera]

I understand what you're saying about the testing methods Chimera but if you look at the chart listing the terp percentages on that report it does list the 2nd Caryophyllene as the oxide (with no value). For some reason the full name doesn't appear on the graph.

Boom, hammer drop!

You are right of course Betterhaff, I neglected to look at the list of terps elsewhere on the report. (I often do, since the absolute values are relative and more tied to environment than genetics). My bad - thanks for keeping me honest.

I still say it's sloppy to label a compuond as something other than it is.

Labs are funny- it's easy when you have run a validated lab method to question other lab's results until you can see they are accurate. We ring tested a series of labs in California, and most mis-identified at least one compound. (We did this by grinding up the same flowers to remove intra-lot variation, then divided the samples to be sent to a series of labs- this way they all received the same thing). Like I said, most mis-identified at least one peak- be it a terpene or cannabinoid.

Isn't the oxide what dogs are trained to alert to?

This is what they say in the literature, good catch! I'm not sure if this is still the standard method; surely some dogs are trained with actual flowers.

Beta-Caryophylllene is produced by other plants too, so naturally they would also show the oxide which is produced simply by oxidation (exposure to Oxygen).

I use the oxide as an indicator of post-harvest oxidation and breakdown of the product, higher BCP-O levels would indicate a lower quality extract or flower treatment post harvest, so we can see that Huel Perkin's process is not degrading the oil, at least by this assay.