anyone think we need new terminology besides Indica and Sativa?

[jessethestoner]

Blasphemy i know but hear me out.

the term indica means originating in india
and the term sativa is a latin adjective meaning cultivated


now as those who have studied or looked into the indian cannabis culture will know, the types of cannabis vary from the extreme squat short types and the larger more (for lack of a better term) sativa plans down south by goa.
so to label all the plants that are what we imagine when we envision 'indicas' as indica is inherently flawed.

this is all debatable of course but i think the small, rank, potent, squat afghani, indian and pakistani plants that are the basis for most modern indica strains are mostly strains people have been growing for a few generations. this would mean that they are sativa in the sense they've been cultivated by people and to me at least i have to throw all those terms of the window, because i think alot of indicas are sativa in the original meaning of the word.

thoughts?

 

[lost in a sea]

fair point but to 99% of people indica means short and stoney, sativa = lanky and heady..

and the western cultivated ganja gene pool is a big, but fairly healthy, mess so people can't tell the original origins hardly anymore,, just look at the "kushs"..

 

[jessethestoner]

the terms mean otherwise though and to someone unconnected to the cannabis world these terms wouldn't be used because they are inaccurate, im interested in how it will change as people who don't care about the already established culture study cannabis's genes more.

and i mean that almost all weed people smoke now and consider the best are/were grown by people western, eastern whatever. its the fact we've cultivated it in places like afghanistan that makes the weed from those places so standout.

the terms indica and sativa are mostly used now to describe appearance and high and with maybe 80% of all cannabis available being a hybrid, it's nonsensical to keep using those terms. especially with people saying things like 70%indica/30% sativa to sell their plants

 

[burns1n209]

how bout hybrid?

 

[jessethestoner]

what are they a hybrid of?

 

[cravin morehead]

inditiva?

 

[CosmicGiggle]

Blasphemy i know but hear me out.

the term indica means originating in india
and the term sativa is a latin adjective meaning cultivated

..... the meaning of words changes over time and this is now 2013AD

 

[Weird]

Sindica

 

[jessethestoner]

..... the meaning of words changes over time and this is now 2013AD

and? the meaning of the words are the same, just because a certain subculture has changed and simplified the terminology doesn't mean anything. it just creates a rift imo, between 'in' people and people unconnected to marijuana cultures terminology

if i were a botanist i'd use the terms very lightly if ever. unless i'm taslking Indian weed or weed that people have been cultivating

 

[huarmiquilla]

howdy jessethestoner

how you do?
respect

indeed much variance with respect to cannabis nomenclature

at how to remain focus with respect to collective analysis to title with not form to being much distraction
water off the duck back....hehehe

at how to title unique to perspective

are you familiar to Richard Evans Schultes such and such Cannabis An Example of Taxonomic Neglect
lovely thinks within such research

copy to paste such and such abstract to research

Native apparently somewhere in central Asia, cannabis is at present one of the most widely
disseminated cultivated plants. Cannabis as we know it has developed together with man as a
multi-purpose economic plant; and, as a result of selection for desirable characteristics, it has
become one of the most variable of cultivated plants. Due to the extraordinary plasticity and
variability of cultivated cannabis, there can be no progress in unravelling the taxonomic
complexities in the genus until the biology of the wild populations is investigated.
The genus has been and still is widely considered to be monotypic, especially by botanists who
have not studied the classification of the genus in depth: we believe this results from lack of
taxonomic investigations of wild cannabis in its native habitat or even of comparative studies of
the range of variation in cultivated hemp. A polytypic concept of the genus is not new: in 1783
Lamarck recognized Cannabis indica as "very distinct" from the species which Linnaeus had
named Cannabis sativa. In 1924, Russian botanists, who studied wild populations of cannabis,
recognized a third species, Cannabis rudercdis. Their work has not been widely accepted, partly
due to conservative attitudes to changing established beliefs in the monotypic nature of the
genus. Several British and American taxonomists who have investigated the genus now favor
the polytypic concept. There may be significant chemical differences in content of cannabi-nolic
and other constituents among the species. The paper reviews the taxonomic history of the
genus and presents data in support of the polytypic concept.

similar lovely thinks to analysis within research such and such Martin Booth
Cannabis: A History
lovely to analysis with respect to form to being root word cannabis

similar lovely thinks to analysis within research such and such William T Stearn
Typification of Cannabis sativa L.
lovely plate similar Schultes

indeed at how thinks form to being unique with respect to at how to title
such and such name to cannabis

am keen to reserve personal thinks
such alien thinks to distract much....hehehe
am keen to think total form to being
much balance within
equal = not to equal....hehehe

much recent analysis to research with respect to nomenclature to reference much relative with respect to cannabis form to being

such and such Ethan B. Russo
History of Cannabis and Its Preparations in Saga, Science, and Sobriquet

copy to paste

2. The Ticklish Matter of Taxonomy. – Cannabis is a unique dioecious annual plant,
generally placed in the Cannabaceae family (occasionally rendered, Cannabidaceae)
along with hops, Humulus spp. However, it has also been assigned at various times to
the Moraceae or Urticaceae. Recently, it has been suggested that cannabis should
properly belong in the Celtidaceae on the basis of chloroplast restriction site maps [24],
and chloroplast mat K gene sequences [25]. While the generic nomenclature of
cannabis is less controversial, the species classification is quite so. The name Cannabis
sativa, or cultivated cannabis, was probably first employed by Fuchs in his herbal of
1542 accompanied by a splendid illustration of European hemp [26], thus pre-dating
the monotypic assignation of Linneaus in his Species Plantarum [27] by some 211 years.
Soon thereafter, Lamarck described Cannabis indica, a short, psychoactive upstart
from the Indian subcontinent, as morphologically distinct [28], and a lasting consensus
on the issue has never been regained. Two basic camps remain, favoring single or
multiple species. The former group has been championed by Ernest Small [29] and
others, with more recent support on morphological grounds [30], and from research
into short tandem repeat DNA markers of cannabis that failed to clearly differentiate
fiber and drug strains [31].
A polytypic treatment of cannabis was advanced by Schultes et al. [32] and
Anderson [33] a generation ago based on morphological attributes. These botanists
described three putative species, Cannabis sativa L. (tall, branched plants for fiber, seed
or psychoactive use), Cannabis indica Lam. (short, broad-leafed plants from Afghani-
stan with equal complements of THC and CBD utilized to produce hashish), and
Cannabis ruderalis Jan. (short, unbranched roadside plants usually weak in
cannabinoids; Fig. 2, a – c, plant examples). The taxonomic debate over the number
of cannabis species even led to judicial disputes, as court cases involving cannabis in the
USA were occasionally challenged on the basis of imprecise legislative language
prohibiting solely Cannabis sativa.
The multi-species concept has recently gained credibility based on systematic
chemotaxonomic work by Karl Hillig with Paul Mahlberg. They conducted a genetic
analysis of 157 cannabis accessions of known geographic origin. A principal component
analysis of allozyme frequencies at 17 gene loci revealed two major groupings [34]. A
sativa gene pool included East European ruderal (roadside) accessions, as well as
hemp fiber and seed landraces from Europe and Central Asia. The indica gene pool
included Far Eastern fiber and seed landraces, narrow-leaflet drug strains from
Southern Asia, Africa and South America, wide-leaflet drug strains from Afghanistan
and Pakistan, and feral populations from Nepal and India. Ruderal accessions
(Cannabis ruderalis) from Central Asia formed a putative third gene pool. A
geographic map based on the results depicted an epicenter of origin for C. sativa in
current Kazakhstan, and one for C. indica in the Western Himalayas. Hillig concluded
that the number and frequency of allozyme mutations in both gene pools was indicative
of an ancient split between sativa and indica that may pre-date human intervention. Not
surprisingly, the greatest evidence for narrowing of the gene pool was observed in drug
strains, particularly the narrow-leaflet indica strains. This may be partly due to a
restriction in the number of pollinators in these strains since staminate plants are often
culled during cultivation to maximize THC production (vide infra). This process has
accelerated notably in the last 30 years with selective breeding pressure.

Hillig and Mahlberg conducted a chemotaxonomic study of the same set of
accessions examined in the genetic analysis. Cannabinoid content was determined by
gas chromatography (GC) and starch-gel electrophoresis [35]. The results supported a
two-species concept (C. sativa and C. indica) and led to other interesting observations.
To digress momentarily, phytocannabinoids are produced in cannabis by glandular
trichomes (Fig. 3, trichomes) as carboxylic acids from geranyl pyrophosphate and
olivetol precursors to yield the parent phytocannabinoid compound, cannabigerolic
acid (CBGA). This cannabinoid accumulates in a newly discovered plants harboring a
metabolic dead-end at this molecule (genotype homozygous for allele BO ) [36]. In drug
strains, in contrast, the enzyme tetrahydrocannabinolic acid synthase (recently
crystallized by Shoyama et al.) [37] catalyzes the conversion of CBGA to THCA
(the precursor of THC, which forms by decarboxylation of THCA under heat or
storage) with highest yields in plants homozygous for the co-dominant BT allele. Other
strains produce an abundance of cannabidiol (CBD) via the BD allele (also co-
dominant), or cannabichromene (CBC) via the recessive BC allele [38]. To further complicate the picture, certain cannabis strains are capable of utilizing a different
precursor than olivetol, namely 4-carboxy-5-propylresorcinol (Raphael Mechoulam,
personal communication, 2005), to form the propyl phytocannabinoids: cannabigivarin
(CBGV), tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV), cannabidivarin (CBDV), and cannabi-
chromivarin (CBCV) after decarboxylation. Lest anyone think this fact a bit of
biochemical irrelevancy, these previously little studied variants may be of considerable
pharmaceutical importance, as THCV was recently demonstrated to be a potent
antagonist at cannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2 [39]. The maturation of Mendelian
genetic techniques has produced a modern revolution in the potential for creative
medical cannabis phytochemistry that may be applied to various biochemical targets.

Returning to the observations of Hillig and Mahlberg [35], the difficulty in reducing
THC content in East Asian C. indica hemp fiber strains is easily explained by the
retention of the BT allele in these accessions. Furthermore, the highest CBC levels were
found in the male staminate flowers of these fiber strains. The origin of the genetic
pathway leading to the biosynthesis of the propyl phytocannabinoids seems to reside in
C. indica drug strains, rather than in C. sativa, but these cannabinoid variants were
unusual outside of accessions from the western Himalayas and Southern Africa, and
Indian feral plants.
In another chemotaxonomic analysis focusing on the terpenoid essential oil
components of cannabis in 162 cannabis samples [40], Hillig found support for the
demarcation of wide-leaflet strains of C. indica based on their content of the rare
sesquiterpenoid alcohols, guaiol, bulnesol, and b- and g-eudesmol. Some 120
terpenoids have been identified in cannabis [3], some of which demonstrate unique
biochemical properties that may well synergize with the cannabinoids [4].
An additional analysis of various agronomic traits in 69 cannabis accessions by
Hillig [41] also favored assignment of Asian hemp and drug strains to C. indica apart
from C. sativa. Further support for this interpretation is provided by a recent study in cannabis that demarcated hemp from drug strains on the basis of amplified fragment
length polymorphisms in a few accessions [42]
Finally, an earlier study of flavonoid variation in 53 cannabis plants from eight
countries provides evidence for restricted gene flow between C. indica and sativa due to
the fact that luteolin-C-glycuronide was detected in almost all sativa samples but only
rarely in indica [40] [43]. Certain flavonoids, such as cannflavin A with notable anti-
inflammatory potential [44] [45] are unique to cannabis. Some 21 flavonoids have been
identified in the genus [3].

one perspective
cannabis to heal with much positive energy
such and such title to name and distinction to vary within culture
similar to vary within moment within moment

within open mind such chats with respect to cannabis not to distract
much pure love and positive energy

respect

positive vibrations

 

[CosmicGiggle]

and? the meaning of the words are the same, just because a certain subculture has changed and simplified the terminology doesn't mean anything. it just creates a rift imo, between 'in' people and people unconnected to marijuana cultures terminology

"the term sativa is a latin adjective"

....no one has spoken Latin for a long, long time!

 

[Cannavore]

Indica hybrid or sativa hybrid is usually what I use, since most people talking about Indy/sativa strains aren't talking about 100% pure in the first place. Its probably not the proper terminology but whatever.

 

[jessethestoner]

"the term sativa is a latin adjective"

....no one has spoken Latin for a long, long time!

Yeah no one uses latin anymore. Oh wait almost all scientific classifications are either latin or greek.....
And english is a bastardized latin/germanic/french mix. We use latin words quite commonly actually.

 

[HidingInTheHaze]

How about short and long.

 

[hush]

If anything, they should be named relative to the way people refer to their differences now... which is wide-leafed versus narrow-leafed... am I right? Therefore, in keeping with botanical nomenclature, I propose we rename them as following:

C. indica should be called C. latifolia

C. sativa should be called C. angustifolia

 

[jayjayfrank]

you cant fight language, what people call it is what it becomes.



and how about 'cultivar' with descriptive properties "fast flowering and fruity smelling" - everything gets wrapped up with this to begin with right? some things cant be broken down into smaller parts.

 

[818Medicineman]

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=143058

 

[gloryoskie]

Broad leaf/narrow leaf.

 

[ChoppedLiver]

It is important to note (imo), that cultivated as it pertains to history are in the majority fiber/seed cultivars, and that from India indeed describes the vast majority of drug cultivars as they have been presented worldwide throughout history. Indeed, the current taxonomy presented by Clarke et al, seems to be the most accurate to date (imo). And yes, extra credit goes to them for understanding that no self-respecting farmer could ever call a broadleaf plant, a "wideleaf", that was just absolute blasphemy.

 

[mrcreosote]

When I hear Latin, I cringe.

It means I'm gonna be spending a lot of money ie. a Dr. or a lawyer.