B
Bluebeard
No, when I said I stole them off Flickr, I mean I just found them. I do collect seeds though but don't have any from yunnan
Last edited:
G
Guest
I think a field trip to Yunnan looks like a good idea! Charas rubbing from wild sativas and seed collection, sounds like a good holiday to me! I'll have to go see how easy it is to get there from the UK.
J
jimbroker
I am really happy that the direction of this thread has turned to the origins of indica/sativa lines. The Hunnan plants sound very interesting from a genetic viewpoint.
Sam: I was curious about genotype analysis of cannabis plants. I certainty don't expect you to go into every detail but are there tests in the field of cannabis research that can allow for the determination of sativa/indica influence? Are there gene markers to differentiate between a pure indica, pure sativa and a hybrid? It would be interesting if the Hunnan plants carried the indica and sativa genes but not the hybrid markers.
Dubi and Charlie Garcia: Thanks a lot for the pictures of your work! I highly encourage you to submit samples of your plants to Sam to analyze their cannabinoid content. The one plant that Dubi mentioned, the Uzbekistan indica, sounds very interesting. Charlie... do you have any more information about this plant and perhaps some pictures?
Sam: I was curious about genotype analysis of cannabis plants. I certainty don't expect you to go into every detail but are there tests in the field of cannabis research that can allow for the determination of sativa/indica influence? Are there gene markers to differentiate between a pure indica, pure sativa and a hybrid? It would be interesting if the Hunnan plants carried the indica and sativa genes but not the hybrid markers.
Dubi and Charlie Garcia: Thanks a lot for the pictures of your work! I highly encourage you to submit samples of your plants to Sam to analyze their cannabinoid content. The one plant that Dubi mentioned, the Uzbekistan indica, sounds very interesting. Charlie... do you have any more information about this plant and perhaps some pictures?
B
Bluebeard
It depends by what you mean by Indica and Sativa. In the branch of Cannabis research which focuses on genetic markers, the most recent definition of Indica refers to ALL drug strains, both wide and narrow leafed and Sativa refers to non-drug types, both wide and narrow leafed, despite the fact that the word sativa means cultivated or sown in greek. If you are referring to this, then there are currently in development or have already developed to a degree, markers defining drug strains from non-drug strains.
The nature of genetics and genetic markers doesn't allow for a particular marker defining a hybrid, unless there was one hybrid from which all other hybrids descended. This is certainly not the case. You could define something as a hybrid, if it had genetic markers for two unrelated pure types. Those would be the genetic markers for pure types, though, not hybrids. So it would be impossible to say that something carries a hybrid marker and not the two pure markers or vice versa.
In order to develop a SERIES of genetic markers to establish purity of indica and sativa, you would first have to define what exactly a pure indica and a pure sativa are. This is a little easier when you define the terms based on whether or not the plant is a drug type, but almost impossible to define in genetic terms using the definitions most commonly used by clandestine farmers.
The terms, when used by clandestine growers are fairly arbitrary. Another thing further complicating this is the fact that the original home and travels of the species are still under debate. One would be hard pressed to say any plant is a 100% indica that has never had the presence of any sativa in its pedigree, when the species has spread back and forth throughout central asia where the cultivated plants are frequently in the presence of wild pollen. Especially when going by Sam's statements. Those first pure indicas from yunnan, before or after they arrived in Afghanistan probably had come in contact with some sativa pollen at some point. Also, how do you compare the first Thai Sativas, also from yunnan, to a south Indian or African Sativa, if the Thai sativa shares a common ancestor with the Afghans that the others do not? So, if you don't have any specimen that you can say with certainty, is a "pure indica", how do you determine what genetic markers define it as pure?
Even in humans, whose travels and genetics are much more well know, establishing racial purity, beyond saying you have a few ancestors from here or there, has yet to be accomplished. They can examine you mitochondrial DNA which plants also have. But mitochondrial DNA is passed in a matrilineal fashion, so they can only examine your mothers mother's morther's mother and so forth, but you mother's grandfather has had no contribution to your mitochondrial DNA. They can also examine inherited genetic markers, but half of the DNA from each parent is lost with each generation.
If they had a fully mapped genome, they could strictly define Indica as a sepcific set of genes for each loci, but that is an immense amount of work just to create a definition and still wouldn't tell you much about the travel of the species, and pedigree of landraces. Not even the human genome has been mapped fully, eventhough the human genome project completed its goals. They still only have a rough sketch.
The nature of genetics and genetic markers doesn't allow for a particular marker defining a hybrid, unless there was one hybrid from which all other hybrids descended. This is certainly not the case. You could define something as a hybrid, if it had genetic markers for two unrelated pure types. Those would be the genetic markers for pure types, though, not hybrids. So it would be impossible to say that something carries a hybrid marker and not the two pure markers or vice versa.
In order to develop a SERIES of genetic markers to establish purity of indica and sativa, you would first have to define what exactly a pure indica and a pure sativa are. This is a little easier when you define the terms based on whether or not the plant is a drug type, but almost impossible to define in genetic terms using the definitions most commonly used by clandestine farmers.
The terms, when used by clandestine growers are fairly arbitrary. Another thing further complicating this is the fact that the original home and travels of the species are still under debate. One would be hard pressed to say any plant is a 100% indica that has never had the presence of any sativa in its pedigree, when the species has spread back and forth throughout central asia where the cultivated plants are frequently in the presence of wild pollen. Especially when going by Sam's statements. Those first pure indicas from yunnan, before or after they arrived in Afghanistan probably had come in contact with some sativa pollen at some point. Also, how do you compare the first Thai Sativas, also from yunnan, to a south Indian or African Sativa, if the Thai sativa shares a common ancestor with the Afghans that the others do not? So, if you don't have any specimen that you can say with certainty, is a "pure indica", how do you determine what genetic markers define it as pure?
Even in humans, whose travels and genetics are much more well know, establishing racial purity, beyond saying you have a few ancestors from here or there, has yet to be accomplished. They can examine you mitochondrial DNA which plants also have. But mitochondrial DNA is passed in a matrilineal fashion, so they can only examine your mothers mother's morther's mother and so forth, but you mother's grandfather has had no contribution to your mitochondrial DNA. They can also examine inherited genetic markers, but half of the DNA from each parent is lost with each generation.
If they had a fully mapped genome, they could strictly define Indica as a sepcific set of genes for each loci, but that is an immense amount of work just to create a definition and still wouldn't tell you much about the travel of the species, and pedigree of landraces. Not even the human genome has been mapped fully, eventhough the human genome project completed its goals. They still only have a rough sketch.
Last edited:
B
Bluebeard
British_Hempire said:
BH, though I'm sure it would be a pretty place to visit. I have doubts that anything worth being used for drug purposes will be found. Of course, it sounds like a great place to find medicinal plants but not anything with any recreational potential. The fresh herb will probably be on par with the bottom end of Mexican brick, might not be bad for Charas though.
G
Guest
I just think it would be a pleasant holiday off the beaten track and be great to study a wild cannabis population, regardless of it's potency, I imagine one could learn a lot studying plants in the wild.
J
jimbroker
Bluebeard: Indica and sativa are probably too general of a classification for trying to find particular gene markers. I would think a good marker would be one that corresponds to cannibinoid content and than define our terms based upon cannibinoid profiles. A reliable gene marker for cannibinoid content would be a holy grail in cannabis research.
For those of us who have a pressing need for medical varieties, some of the plants in Yunnan might offer some hope. I know that Sam has developed a high CBD strain that is sorely needed by the medical community. Unfortunately, it will probably be years before something like this can be brought to market in the U.S. For some like my son,with ALS, this will be too late. I have a friend whose father has Parkinsons and his uncle has Alzheimers, and he and I are embarking on a project to get high CBD strains to treat our family members. If there are Yunnan varieties that have high CBD genotyopes, this may provide needed medication, as CBD is both neuroprotective and anticonvulsive, and may increase the neuroprotective effects of THC. Any info from anyone would be very appreciated.
Is it possible that some of these ancestral strains may contain more than the 67-70 cannabinoids that are currently recognized? Have environmental changes due to shifts in locality had effects on the cannabinoid profile as they probably have on the terpenoid content?
Is it possible that some of these ancestral strains may contain more than the 67-70 cannabinoids that are currently recognized? Have environmental changes due to shifts in locality had effects on the cannabinoid profile as they probably have on the terpenoid content?
jimbroker,
"Sam: I was curious about genotype analysis of cannabis plants. I certainty don't expect you to go into every detail but are there tests in the field of cannabis research that can allow for the determination of sativa/indica influence? Are there gene markers to differentiate between a pure indica, pure sativa and a hybrid? It would be interesting if the Hunnan plants carried the indica and sativa genes but not the hybrid markers.
I don't know of markers for Indica or Sativa or Hybrids.
"I would think a good marker would be one that corresponds to cannibinoid content and than define our terms based upon cannibinoid profiles. A reliable gene marker for cannibinoid content would be a holy grail in cannabis research."
Cannabinoid content makers will do little good when all western bred varieties basicly only have THC with little to none of the other Cannabinoids.
Bluebeard,
"It depends by what you mean by Indica and Sativa. In the branch of Cannabis research which focuses on genetic markers, the most recent definition of Indica refers to ALL drug strains, both wide and narrow leafed and Sativa refers to non-drug types, both wide and narrow leafed, despite the fact that the word sativa means cultivated or sown in greek. If you are referring to this, then there are currently in development or have already developed to a degree, markers defining drug strains from non-drug strains."
I am very familiar with all the works that describes all drug varieties as Indica, but a marker will not be so easy because a marker would need to identify any with THC synthase genes as well as genes that related to the amount of glands as well as to the type of glands as for potent Cannabis you need THC synthase to be available as well as lots of the proper types of glands to make the resin. At the most you could find potential. Grow them and see how they perform.
"Also, how do you compare the first Thai Sativas, also from yunnan, to a south Indian or African Sativa, if the Thai sativa shares a common ancestor with the Afghans that the others do not?"
S Indian is not related to Thai or Yunnan, or Afghani in my book. I have been to S India several times just to explore Cannabis, I know S Indian very very well. Can't say about all of Africia it is to big!
British_Hempire,
Do not get caught with pot or hash in China, they are a police state.
BTW, Most Cannabis in Yunnan is not wild, it is cultivated by man with varieties developed by man.
Pops,
Your real problem is your lack of ability to confirm CBD content, even if you found one how would you know you have one? Determination of Cannabinoid content by smoking is no good, you will not be able to tell if the effects are from the CBD Cannabinoids or the Terpenoids modifying the THC. Also I found the CBD contents of thousands of Yunnan to be low like the THC, a few percent at most.
I don't think that Yunnan has additional Cannabinoids, and I also don't think that environmental shifts have any effect on Cannabinoid content, they are the same grown everywhere if they can mature properly and finish. Cannabinoid and terpenoid content are changed by mutation on a broad scale and man on a local level.
Another approach is to find Cannabis that is reputed to have CBD in the buyers clubs and to have your son try them, if he finds one that works then who cares what it is?
-SamS
"Sam: I was curious about genotype analysis of cannabis plants. I certainty don't expect you to go into every detail but are there tests in the field of cannabis research that can allow for the determination of sativa/indica influence? Are there gene markers to differentiate between a pure indica, pure sativa and a hybrid? It would be interesting if the Hunnan plants carried the indica and sativa genes but not the hybrid markers.
I don't know of markers for Indica or Sativa or Hybrids.
"I would think a good marker would be one that corresponds to cannibinoid content and than define our terms based upon cannibinoid profiles. A reliable gene marker for cannibinoid content would be a holy grail in cannabis research."
Cannabinoid content makers will do little good when all western bred varieties basicly only have THC with little to none of the other Cannabinoids.
Bluebeard,
"It depends by what you mean by Indica and Sativa. In the branch of Cannabis research which focuses on genetic markers, the most recent definition of Indica refers to ALL drug strains, both wide and narrow leafed and Sativa refers to non-drug types, both wide and narrow leafed, despite the fact that the word sativa means cultivated or sown in greek. If you are referring to this, then there are currently in development or have already developed to a degree, markers defining drug strains from non-drug strains."
I am very familiar with all the works that describes all drug varieties as Indica, but a marker will not be so easy because a marker would need to identify any with THC synthase genes as well as genes that related to the amount of glands as well as to the type of glands as for potent Cannabis you need THC synthase to be available as well as lots of the proper types of glands to make the resin. At the most you could find potential. Grow them and see how they perform.
"Also, how do you compare the first Thai Sativas, also from yunnan, to a south Indian or African Sativa, if the Thai sativa shares a common ancestor with the Afghans that the others do not?"
S Indian is not related to Thai or Yunnan, or Afghani in my book. I have been to S India several times just to explore Cannabis, I know S Indian very very well. Can't say about all of Africia it is to big!
British_Hempire,
Do not get caught with pot or hash in China, they are a police state.
BTW, Most Cannabis in Yunnan is not wild, it is cultivated by man with varieties developed by man.
Pops,
Your real problem is your lack of ability to confirm CBD content, even if you found one how would you know you have one? Determination of Cannabinoid content by smoking is no good, you will not be able to tell if the effects are from the CBD Cannabinoids or the Terpenoids modifying the THC. Also I found the CBD contents of thousands of Yunnan to be low like the THC, a few percent at most.
I don't think that Yunnan has additional Cannabinoids, and I also don't think that environmental shifts have any effect on Cannabinoid content, they are the same grown everywhere if they can mature properly and finish. Cannabinoid and terpenoid content are changed by mutation on a broad scale and man on a local level.
Another approach is to find Cannabis that is reputed to have CBD in the buyers clubs and to have your son try them, if he finds one that works then who cares what it is?
-SamS
D
Dalaihempy
Hi all hi sam i am no expert but if potency is genetic as are other traits in a line how can any one breed it into given strain population with out intruduceing new genetics to the strain.
I know a plant line over time will evolve to change in its surounds but potency would need to be intruducet in a non potent line corect ?.
I rember seeing a video on cannabis and how some belive all cannabis started from africa at a given latatude and it all started off as a sativa.
It was a long time ago now that i saw it but in short it sed as the earths plated seperated the cannabis was moved to diffrent contenents and time evolved into indicas also wild life like birds and others helpet the spreed of cannabis then man wish i new the name of this video went for over an hour it was a great movie.
You dont know the movie im talking about by chance sam ?.
I know a plant line over time will evolve to change in its surounds but potency would need to be intruducet in a non potent line corect ?.
I rember seeing a video on cannabis and how some belive all cannabis started from africa at a given latatude and it all started off as a sativa.
It was a long time ago now that i saw it but in short it sed as the earths plated seperated the cannabis was moved to diffrent contenents and time evolved into indicas also wild life like birds and others helpet the spreed of cannabis then man wish i new the name of this video went for over an hour it was a great movie.
You dont know the movie im talking about by chance sam ?.
G
Guest
Hempy are you saying the potency of a pure variety is fixed and can not be improved without hybridization? Because its genetics are predetermined to be a certain level of potency, and can not be selected phenotypically for improvements?
Interesting assertion, if that is indeed what you're getting at.
Interesting assertion, if that is indeed what you're getting at.
Last edited:
B
Bluebeard
"S Indian is not related to Thai or Yunnan, or Afghani in my book"
Maybe I misinterpreted, but I think that is the same as what I was saying. I was just saying that you cannot define a sativa with genetic markers if the category includes a Thai landrace that shares a common ancestry with Indica, and a South Indians which does not.
Did the B190/B200 marker ever pan out successfully? I know even if it did hold up it still was not very vlose to being able to genetically screen a drug variety fully, but you have to agree that the presence or absence of THC synthase is the most important criteria in determining a drug variety. Homozygous Bt doesn't necessarily mean the plant can get you high but a very high percentage of them could easily be categorized as drug varieties, by the criteria currently being set forth, which is only like what 2% THC so long as the CBD levels are low?
Maybe I misinterpreted, but I think that is the same as what I was saying. I was just saying that you cannot define a sativa with genetic markers if the category includes a Thai landrace that shares a common ancestry with Indica, and a South Indians which does not.
Did the B190/B200 marker ever pan out successfully? I know even if it did hold up it still was not very vlose to being able to genetically screen a drug variety fully, but you have to agree that the presence or absence of THC synthase is the most important criteria in determining a drug variety. Homozygous Bt doesn't necessarily mean the plant can get you high but a very high percentage of them could easily be categorized as drug varieties, by the criteria currently being set forth, which is only like what 2% THC so long as the CBD levels are low?
Last edited:
B
Bluebeard
Hempy, I would think that it would depend upon the population and what you meant by nonpotent. A variety that is broad and is 3-4% THC without any strong selective pressure by humans could be turned more potent for sure, but a variety which is either narrow/bottlenecked or only produces plants that are primary CBD producers cannot be.
Last edited:
D
Dalaihempy
hiya Bluebeard well i mean lets say a wild population thats hiden in a valley and has been there a 1000 years it cant be polinated by stray pollen from other plant populations and has no smoke quolity at all in short its not even worthy to be used as fiber as there short indicas but they do produce large amounts of resin so in theary can make large amounts of hash yet you cant get an affect off even a large amont you smoke.
To make the line worthy of hash production you need to add the potency they lack so you would need to add a potent vuriety to the non potent line correct.
I thort from reading what a population looses from inbreeding was vigor over time.
To make the line worthy of hash production you need to add the potency they lack so you would need to add a potent vuriety to the non potent line correct.
I thort from reading what a population looses from inbreeding was vigor over time.
Dalaihempy,
"Hi all hi sam i am no expert but if potency is genetic as are other traits in a line how can any one breed it into given strain population with out intruduceing new genetics to the strain."
Well you could eliminate any traits that are blocking the high from being optimal, like CBD, CBC, CBG, THCV, negative terpenoids, etc.
-SamS
"Hi all hi sam i am no expert but if potency is genetic as are other traits in a line how can any one breed it into given strain population with out intruduceing new genetics to the strain."
Well you could eliminate any traits that are blocking the high from being optimal, like CBD, CBC, CBG, THCV, negative terpenoids, etc.
-SamS
D
Dalaihempy
I know that mutations can acure so is it posible that a genetic mutation could infact couse a non drug vierety of cannabis to infact become potent over time or even a potent drug line of cannabis to becme fibre worthy.
bluebeard,
"Did the B190/B200 marker ever pan out successfully? I know even if it did hold up it still was not very vlose to being able to genetically screen a drug variety fully, but you have to agree that the presence or absence of THC synthase is the most important criteria in determining a drug variety. Homozygous Bt doesn't necessarily mean the plant can get you high but a very high percentage of them could easily be categorized as drug varieties, by the criteria currently being set forth, which is only like what 2% THC so long as the CBD levels are low?"
B190 can be used to screen for plants that have the ability to produce THC, and B200 can be used for CBD. But it is not saying the plants are Homozygote for THC which would be better, and it is not saying anything about the type of glands or the amounts of glands. Ideally you want Homozygote for THC and no CBD and lots of sites for production, glands of the right type.
Sure you are right they are technically drug varieties but not in my book unless they make more then 10% THC, with little to no other Cannabinoids.
Dalaihempy,
Be sure the variety used is Homozygous for THC or only some of the plants will be improved, and BTW, the improvement is about 1/2 way between the two parents.
-SamS
"Did the B190/B200 marker ever pan out successfully? I know even if it did hold up it still was not very vlose to being able to genetically screen a drug variety fully, but you have to agree that the presence or absence of THC synthase is the most important criteria in determining a drug variety. Homozygous Bt doesn't necessarily mean the plant can get you high but a very high percentage of them could easily be categorized as drug varieties, by the criteria currently being set forth, which is only like what 2% THC so long as the CBD levels are low?"
B190 can be used to screen for plants that have the ability to produce THC, and B200 can be used for CBD. But it is not saying the plants are Homozygote for THC which would be better, and it is not saying anything about the type of glands or the amounts of glands. Ideally you want Homozygote for THC and no CBD and lots of sites for production, glands of the right type.
Sure you are right they are technically drug varieties but not in my book unless they make more then 10% THC, with little to no other Cannabinoids.
Dalaihempy,
Be sure the variety used is Homozygous for THC or only some of the plants will be improved, and BTW, the improvement is about 1/2 way between the two parents.
-SamS
Sam, to find CBD strains,I had planned to use Cannalyze kits.They are a poor substitute for gc/ms,but they are available,while gc/ms is not. They certainly will not accurately show the % of THC or CBD, but they should show the presence of either THC or CBD.
