G
Guest
I'm not sure when these titles were assigned to distinguished Cannabis types. These terms became increasingly utilized leading up to legalization because, hey, it's cool to acknowledge straight forward surface level information about topics you hold casual interest in, right? The average consumer loves 2 party categorizations. It gives them choice.
From an objective perspective, and relative only to each other, these are the known associations of "Sativa" and "Indica":
Sativa is a fiber varietal by nature. Indica being a drug varietal. This is seen in the gendered characteristics of the plant; masculine, vegative growth of the equitorial varieties, and feminine, reproductive focus of the Middle Eastern varieties.
"Sativa" masculine, vegetation focused
Long narrow leaf
Long internode
Expansion
Small roots
Non-uniform bud
Auxin dominant
Driven by:nitrate, potassium, calcium, chloride
Associations:Oxidation, Acidic, Heat
"Indica" feminine, bloom focused
Short wide leaf
Short internode
Larger roots
Uniform bud
Contraction
Cytokinin dominant
Driven by: ammonium, phosphorus , manganese
Associations: Reduction, Basic, Cold
How do masculine/feminine traits influence the cannabinoids/effects?
Honestly I don't think it's any more complicated than this: What we smoked in the 70s can be recreated today by simply harvesting hybrids extremely early. The anxiety complaint does not originate from pure cannabis, but from tainted cannabis via feeding methods. If you've never grown Cannabis without nutrients, you owe yourself the insight as to why this plant was grown for thousands of years [without fertilizer] with no regard for profit.
We didn't know what ripe, plump flower was in the 70s, because Sativa lacked the hormonal power for bloom, evidenced by lengthy flower times. Today we see multiple techniques employeed claiming to speed growth yet parallel known methods for increased senescence. I'm a small operation but even at my scale you can see the correlation between browning cannabis resin and short flowering. The commercial indica is over ripe, speed aged Cannabis, by all definitions. While the heavy body feeling of traditional indica varieties is a known characteristic, the groggy, sleepy substitute the commercial consumer experiences, a sad substitute for legitimate couch lock, is a degraded cannabis association.
If my theory is correct, we should be able to reduce the flowering time of Sativa significantly through nutritional hormone steering without inducing premature senescence. I believe this was more commonly obtained in the 90s before information became clouded by disinfo agents intent on driving liquid supply sales. After thousands of years, we went from under ripe cannabis to over ripe cannabis in a matter of decades. The difference between Indica and Sativa as observed in the legal markets? Only the degraded Cannabis variety exists. 90s weed is peak Cannabis in theory and in practice.
From an objective perspective, and relative only to each other, these are the known associations of "Sativa" and "Indica":
Sativa is a fiber varietal by nature. Indica being a drug varietal. This is seen in the gendered characteristics of the plant; masculine, vegative growth of the equitorial varieties, and feminine, reproductive focus of the Middle Eastern varieties.
"Sativa" masculine, vegetation focused
Long narrow leaf
Long internode
Expansion
Small roots
Non-uniform bud
Auxin dominant
Driven by:nitrate, potassium, calcium, chloride
Associations:Oxidation, Acidic, Heat
"Indica" feminine, bloom focused
Short wide leaf
Short internode
Larger roots
Uniform bud
Contraction
Cytokinin dominant
Driven by: ammonium, phosphorus , manganese
Associations: Reduction, Basic, Cold
How do masculine/feminine traits influence the cannabinoids/effects?
Honestly I don't think it's any more complicated than this: What we smoked in the 70s can be recreated today by simply harvesting hybrids extremely early. The anxiety complaint does not originate from pure cannabis, but from tainted cannabis via feeding methods. If you've never grown Cannabis without nutrients, you owe yourself the insight as to why this plant was grown for thousands of years [without fertilizer] with no regard for profit.
We didn't know what ripe, plump flower was in the 70s, because Sativa lacked the hormonal power for bloom, evidenced by lengthy flower times. Today we see multiple techniques employeed claiming to speed growth yet parallel known methods for increased senescence. I'm a small operation but even at my scale you can see the correlation between browning cannabis resin and short flowering. The commercial indica is over ripe, speed aged Cannabis, by all definitions. While the heavy body feeling of traditional indica varieties is a known characteristic, the groggy, sleepy substitute the commercial consumer experiences, a sad substitute for legitimate couch lock, is a degraded cannabis association.
If my theory is correct, we should be able to reduce the flowering time of Sativa significantly through nutritional hormone steering without inducing premature senescence. I believe this was more commonly obtained in the 90s before information became clouded by disinfo agents intent on driving liquid supply sales. After thousands of years, we went from under ripe cannabis to over ripe cannabis in a matter of decades. The difference between Indica and Sativa as observed in the legal markets? Only the degraded Cannabis variety exists. 90s weed is peak Cannabis in theory and in practice.