Public chemotype data sources?

[zif]

It’s more than suspicious that labs are going dark - it’s alarming!

It is easy to fall into an art vs. science trap when thinking about lab results. Much better to pursue art + science. Or art informed by science. Or hi-tech alchemy....

If you see the numbers as a messy and unreliable *map*, it’s possible to use them wisely. If people have different destinations, they’ll try to get there, map or not.

I don’t think more testing will lead to boring, everywhere the same plants.

”The market” and/or corporate cannabis? Maybe. Tests? No.

 

[bsgospel]

I think there are a couple of dimensions to that

1. Priorities. I'll use Ace as an example- We all love Ace and even more so because they have results posted for nearly 99% of their products. But, some never get made public or some get outdated. We don't get too hacked off if they don't update constantly because we know they're some ambitious cats and they are always going to be killing it on the next great thing on their plate.

I think the same idea can be held for breeders and labs themselves. We may not be super interested in every thing they're all about the way we are about Ace but people are constantly moving onto their next thing. Sometimes, you just move on and that thing you never posted a result for is done and in the past. I come from the dispensary world and I have to get a test for every ten pounds dry. Like...every ten pounds, every harvest, no exceptions. I have no choice legally. But updating the website every time I get a sample tested just for informative purposes? (We do keep the most up to date on hand in the store for consumers.) It turns into thousands of uploads if we provide a test for every batch. Our best option is to pick a good representative result for each strain and maybe update yearly.

I think labs run into this fatigue as well. It's not like their website it connected to their GC. And fundamentally, these tests are only conducted because a client says, 'please check this'. Testing labs aren't testing just to test- they're only testing what licensed entities pass them (for the most part; I'm stoked that MCR accepts home samples and I will use them in the future for this purpose.) So already, the scope of what a lab can tell you is already limited by who or how many clients they have.

I'm with you- a badass public database is super desirable but I'm not sure we can ask privately operated labs to fill in every gap. There's just no such governance. Props to dispensaries that allow their results to be published publicly but I also understand why capitalist decisions makers at certain entities are keeping some numbers close to their chest. Not an endorsement but I get it.

2. Verification. Variability is reallllly high in cannabis. Astonishingly so. If I was a testing lab, I would not want to put my reputation/valuable time on the line by opening myself up every time I post a result. "How did you get THIS terpinoline value six months ago and NOW, ALL of a SUDDEN it's this?! Either you switched the samples or you don't know what you're doing!" And that's not to say that's how it would go down every time, but the more you publish, the more questions from a typically un-educated base you have to answer. Chemists don't have time for that kinda jazz.

 

[Oregonism]

Kannapedia has some great info. Not as many samples as some but uniquely constructed way to identify siblings and profiles, highly underrated.

 

[zif]

Anyone find a new one?

I added Ace to the list for really setting a new standard for breeder terpene reports.