sativa vs. indica

[entheogenic-gnosis]

I feel that amongst cannabis users there is some need for clarity regarding the sativa vs. Indica issue.

A good deal of people that I have talked to are under the impression that indica strains are the more potent as psychoactives, when this may not entirely be the case...

·Sativa: Higher THC to Lower CBD/CBN Ratio
·Indica: Lower THC to Higher CBD/CBN Ratio
(Sourced from "the cannabis health index- uwe blesching" )

I think it also may be necessary to clarify the functions of the cb1 and cb2 receptors in a quick and general sense, cb1 receptor agonists generally relate to psychoactivity, where as cb2 receptor agonists relate more to the physical body (inflammation, immune system, etc...)

Indica plants are more prominent when it comes to cb2 receptor agonism, as they have higher concentrations of CBN/CBD in relation to THC.

CBN acts as a weak agonist of CB1 receptors, but has a higher affinity to CB2 receptors, with lower affinities in comparison to THC.[7][8] Cannabinol has been shown to have analgesic properties -wikipedia

CBD (Cannabidiol) has a very low affinity for CB1 and CB2 receptors but acts as an indirect antagonist of their agonists.[25][26] While one would assume that this would cause cannabidiol to reduce the effects of THC, it may potentiate THC's effects by increasing CB1 receptor density or through another CB1-related mechanism.[27] It may also extend the duration of the effects of THC via inhibition of the cytochrome P-450-3A and 2C enzymes -Wikipedia

In this sense I feel it's a misperception that the indica strains are the more potent plants in relation to psychoactivity, indica strains should produce a heavier body experience coupled with a milder psychoactive experiance, while sativa plants will be more psychoactive and less physical.

So if it's a psychoactive experience that you are after, it should make more sense to choose sativa strains, if it's more physical effects or analgesia or anti-inflamation you are looking for, than indica plants should be the way to go.

So in general I think it would be fair to say:

Sativa = mind (cb1)
Indica = body (cb2)

I think judging by the pharmocological data that my assertions are fair, and I hope can help clarify the indica vs. Sativa confusion.

-eg

 

[Mitakuye Oyasin]

Sounds about right. Sativa is more of a stimulant with me and Indica more sedative, but Indica helps my back and neck pain and relaxes my tight and sore muscles much more than Sativa does. I tend to get as close to 100% pure of both Sativa and Indica and blend the two together depending on time of day (try not to use Sativa too late in the evening or it causes sleep problems) to treat my symptoms and it works great.

 

[endlessness]

Can you please cite any primary source for analysis of sativa vs indica? I dont have access to that book you mentioned.

My own tests suggest that there is no basis for the claim of indica vs sativa having a reliable difference in terms of thc/cbd ratio. Most weed strains we've been testing from a wide variety of strains have very low/insignificant CBD regardless of being sativa or indica. It's only in some selected cases that it makes a difference (that I remember, cannatonic, and a couple of cbd crew strains). I'd think for the most part in those other cases the difference in effects claimed by people is self suggestion.

 

[Ufostrahlen]

Can you please cite any primary source for analysis of sativa vs indica? I dont have access to that book you mentioned.

This study confirms that the THC/CBD ratio of individual Cannabis plants can be assigned to one of three discrete chemotypes. The limits between chemotypes coincide with those reported by Vollner et al. (1986)⇓. As expected, plants with high levels of THC were common within the two drug biotypes of C. indica. However, plants with relatively high levels of THC were also common within the hemp and feral biotypes of this species. In contrast, most plants assigned to C. sativa had relatively low levels of THC. Because chemotype I, II, and III plants were found in both species, the chemotype of an individual plant is of limited use for chemotaxonomic determination of species membership.

A chemotaxonomic analysis of cannabinoid variation in Cannabis (Cannabaceae)

Scientists that have studied the differences between indica and sativa have come up with a number of theories based on genetics. The prevailing theory focuses on the genetic production of THC and CBD, which is why indica plants have high THC:CBD ratios and sativa plants have high CBD:THC ratios. Many strains produce varying amounts of both enzymes due to hybridization, or cross breeding, of the gene pools; this explains why some sativas are rich in THC and some indicas are not.

Cannabis Genome - Medicinal Genomics

Cannabis Genome Next-Generation Sequencing Pipeline Medicinal Genomics offers a diverse portfolio of high quality, rapid next-generation sequencing services. Using the most advanced DNA sequencing tools, billions of DNA molecules can be sequenced in parallel for comprehensive genetic...

www.medicinalgenomics.com

 

[endlessness]

Thanks for that first link, I'm still trying to digest it.. A few questions that came to mind:

How well does 'market classification' of cannabis strains relate to the results of that investigation (which is made with selected vouchered strains collected around the world instead of sold in the market as indica vs sativa ) ?

My own tests were with samples grown by many different people from seeds/cuttings that were supposed to be indica or sativa or different mixes, and there was a lot of variation in cannabinoid content without any clear pattern except for the mentioned specific cases.


Also it says in that publication "Because chemotype I, II, and III plants were found in both species, the chemotype of an individual plant is of limited use for chemotaxonomic determination of species membership. " which seems to be say there is a considerable variability within indica vs sativa. Or do I misunderstand something?


The second link is not a primary source and cites none.

 

[Ufostrahlen]

Thanks for that first link, I'm still trying to digest it.. A few questions that came to mind:

[..]

The second link is not a primary source and cites none.

The second link cites the study and answers your questions; Medicinal Genomics is at the forefront of Cannabis sequencing, they should know what they're talking about.

However, no scientific study has confirmed these differences, and there is some doubt about their accuracy.

The marketing is probably very arbitrary and plays with the placebo effect. Unless you determine the chemotype of a plant, it's marketing and wishful thinking.

Our data shows that some strains are much more reproducible in chemical composition than others. Strains labeled as indica were compared with those labeled as sativa and no evidence was found that these two cultivars are distinctly different chemotypes.

http://www.esciencecentral.org/journals/cannabinoids-and-terpenes-as-chemotaxonomic-markers-in-cannabis-2329-6836-1000181.php?aid=57624

 

[endlessness]

Excuse me I missed that link, thanks again

Yeah so this seems to confirm the need for skepticism in the indica vs sativa claims that are thrown around regularly.

 

[Ufostrahlen]

Excuse me I missed that link, thanks again

Yeah so this seems to confirm the need for skepticism in the indica vs sativa claims that are thrown around regularly.

Yw. Yes, even the scientists haven't figured this one out. The future plants will hopefully be standardized chemo- and phenotypes without the marketing BS.

 

[Cognitive Heart]

In general, I prefer sativa during the day and indica at night. This seems to work the greatest, ime. I've tried this in reverse and I don't usually experience the same pleasant effects. A hybrid is variable but can be easier to manage considering the simultaneous synergy of both varieties. They both have superb qualities, anyways. So any kind of 'versus' is off my radar, completely. It just depends what you're looking for, really.

With that comes being informed of what you're getting or growing. Sometimes I'll experiment with this in mystery and go from there.

 

[Koornut]

Forgive me if I'm wrong with this, but the old wives tale I've heard is the trichome colour at time of harvest has more to do with the levels of different cannabanoids.

Clear - CBD
Amber - THC
Cloudy - CBN

I have a little anecdote from my last grow; I harvested different flowers at different times according to the trichome colour stages from the same plant, and found that there was a difference in the "feel" of the high. The amber trichomed buds felt more psychoactive. Probably placebo though.

 

[null24]

My l line of thinking goes that the reason most people think that in the goods are stronger than to divas comes from the arrival of Afghani strains to the East Coast in the 80s on a wide spread basis. Until that time, the only pot many people had seen there with seedy Mexican sativa. And yes the Afghani was definitely more potent. In reality, either can be just as potent but I concur that they have district relative effects.

As far as the mind/body thing, I tend to smoke indicas for relaxation and sleep while I rely on sativas for a more cerebral meditative high.

I don't think it's placebo, I can often tell a strains I/s dominance by its effects.

 

[adam]

I will dig up some evidence on this when I have time. But cannabinoid content and/or ratio is not a reliable indicator of sativa or indica character. Also, sativa, and indica are really more a suite of traits that is attributed to an idealized plant bearing certain traits, such as narrow or broad leaf, winding bracts vs more compact bract and inflorescence structure. Will Clarke and Merlin go into more detail about this in their book Cannabis Ethnobotany and Evolution and agree more with this new nomenclature acknowledging Schultes had this classification wrong. cannabis classification

Merlin and Clarke in their book claim that there is almost no cultivated cannabis that is not a hybrid of indica with afghanica. That in the 60's cannabis cultivation began heavily in the U.S. and Europe exclusively outdoors. Plants were selected based on high and smell with the genetics, these were true sativas or indica under the corrected nomenclature. As time went on plants were continually selected for potency and aroma, one issue however was being able to harvest before the frost in the north, and fall is when law enforcement would raid the crops. With the import of a few afghans which were much quicker flowering growers were able to get their crops down before frost and law enforcement. The new Afghan really started introgressing into the indica genetics that were quite potent and widely prevalent. Many growers stopped breeding for potency and aroma and started aiming for higher productivity, this cannabis made its way down into mexico and columbia and replaced alot of the potent sativas. The dominance of afghanica in the Americas is responsible for what is commonly known as brickweed. As time went on an indoor lighting technology became better starting in the 1980's, more carefully selected breeding took place and slightly longer flowering plants become economically viable again. This hybridization of these two types of cannabis continued until the present day and many strains that are considered pure breeds have been interbred to at least some degree. Although if cannabis is allowed to go feral it will become atavistic meaning revert to its ancestral type, however the genes that are newly acquired are still within the genome.

As far as the classical psychedelic type of high associated with Sativa vs the couch lock Indica traits, Mechoulem has done some research indicating this may be terpenes that are responsible for these effects. Psi Labs a local cannabis testing facility has done some research to indicate the same. They have tested a few "sativa" strains and found terpinolene being prevalent in many of them. I will try to post some papers on this topic when I have more time to read through them.

 

[entheogenic-gnosis]

Can you please cite any primary source for analysis of sativa vs indica? I dont have access to that book you mentioned.

My own tests suggest that there is no basis for the claim of indica vs sativa having a reliable difference in terms of thc/cbd ratio. Most weed strains we've been testing from a wide variety of strains have very low/insignificant CBD regardless of being sativa or indica. It's only in some selected cases that it makes a difference (that I remember, cannatonic, and a couple of cbd crew strains). I'd think for the most part in those other cases the difference in effects claimed by people is self suggestion.

The Cannabis Health Index

This comprehensive sourcebook combines evidence-based insights from more than 1,000 studies from cannabinoid and consciousness research to present a convincing case for the powerful healing effects of medical marijuana on over 100 chronic symptoms and diseases. Written by a former paramedic with...

books.google.com

I know your question was sufficiently answered by another poster, but felt I should should supply a link which gives you access to the information which I cited, in the link above you should be able to review the exact pages I was referencing.

-eg

 

[entheogenic-gnosis]

Forgive me if I'm wrong with this, but the old wives tale I've heard is the trichome colour at time of harvest has more to do with the levels of different cannabanoids.

Clear - CBD
Amber - THC
Cloudy - CBN

I have a little anecdote from my last grow; I harvested different flowers at different times according to the trichome colour stages from the same plant, and found that there was a difference in the "feel" of the high. The amber trichomed buds felt more psychoactive. Probably placebo though.

Ah yes, I'm not sure what the actual science is here, but it appears the golden trichomes (late harvested) do seem to produce a more intense psychoactive effect, possibly the THCA has had more time to decarboxalate to delta-9-THC? Or perhaps since Cannabinol (CBN) is the primary product of THC degradation, that the golden trichomes contain more CBN?

-----

This may need to be confirmed but I thought that Trichomes don't always indicate potency either, the oils exuded from the plant are not always active, the oils in the trichomes could contain largely inactive cannabinoids, plant lipids, etc...so I've been told that large trichomes automoyiles does not always indicate potency, and that some plants retain the practices within the plant matter, so can be lacking visible trichomes, but is in fact quite potent...

So the fact that indica strains are the traditional hash plants due to heavy resin production, does not necessarily mean they are the more potent plants, in Michael starks book "marijuana chemistry" most the hash tested did not brake 30% THC, though this is an older book, and while he admits that hash oil ranging upwards of 90% exists, his claim was it was uncommn.

http://repo.hackerzvoice.net/depot_madchat/esprit/texture/spices/Marijuana/Marijuana_Chemistry-Michael_Starks_2nd_edition.pdf

PDF for the Michael starks book in the link above, this book is older, and the information does not seem to relate well to todays marijuana, but there's still some interesting stuff here, just keep in mind it's out of date.


-----

Avertissement de redirection

The link above is a pdf sample of Cannabis and cannabinoids : pharmacology, toxicology, and therapeutic potential, an amazing source of information.

-eg

 

[entheogenic-gnosis]

The active chemicals responsible for the medicinal effects of marijuana are collectively called cannabinoids. This group includes THC, CBD, and CBN. Sativa’s cannabinoid profile is dominated by high THC levels and low or no CBD levels. Indica's chemical profile shows a more balanced mix, with moderate THC levels and higher levels of CBD

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000638

The above link seems to confirm what Dr. Uwe blesching published in his book which I referenced in my original post, though I have been having some trouble finding any good information regarding how these conclusions were reached.

I often find that when people say "marijuana gives me panic attacks" it's the sativa strains that cause these people to react as such over the indica strains.

Marijuana's purported psychedelic effects always seems much more prominent when I smoke sativa strains, I get flight of novel thoughts, philosophical insights, introstection, closed eye hallucinations, psychological analysis, and so on, all very psychedelic effects in my opinion.

While with indica I feel more inebriated, lethargic, and with more physical and mental relaxation, though overall I feel indica strains are more of an "analgesic intoxicant" while sativa strains are more "psychedelic/psychological".

I have always thought of it as "psychedelic sativa and analgesic indica" though these are just simple generalizations, and may not be scientifically sound statements.

I keep finding conflicting information regarding terpene and terpeniod production in relation to indica vs. Sativa, though I'll continue to search for the most accurate information available.

-eg

 

[endlessness]

Any of you willing to make some blind tests re: strains and effects?

We can set up an adapted protocol, sort of like this, and do some real science

 

[Koornut]

Ah yes, I'm not sure what the actual science is here, but it appears the golden trichomes (late harvested) do seem to produce a more intense psychoactive effect, possibly the THCA has had more time to decarboxalate to delta-9-THC? Or perhaps since Cannabinol (CBN) is the primary product of THC degradation, that the golden trichomes contain more CBN?
-eg

That follows along with my understanding, I'm gonna do a little research when I get some time.
From my previous grow I noted the trichome colour; The Amber trichomes preceded the cloudy and there was a definite mix of the two in between ie - cloudy amber.
When the flowers were first beginning to bloom, the near-bud leaves had clear trichomes, and stayed that way for about 3-4 weeks (outdoor) before the tops begun changing to amber.

@endlessness
If (fingers crossed) all goes well in my state I should be up and running with a therapeutic cultivation co-op by mid 2017 - politicians.. Am I right?
And I am very interested in *ahem* testing the produce....for....quality control purposes of course.

But thank you all for these fantastic resources

 

[entheogenic-gnosis]

Any of you willing to make some blind tests re: strains and effects?

We can set up an adapted protocol, sort of like this, and do some real science

As marijuana is legal for medical and recreational use in my state, I'm sure you could legally conduct such experiments with out issue here, great idea by the way.

I'll have to review it in greater depth when I have a little more time...holidays are hectic.

-eg

 

[entheogenic-gnosis]

Ah yes, I'm not sure what the actual science is here, but it appears the golden trichomes (late harvested) do seem to produce a more intense psychoactive effect, possibly the THCA has had more time to decarboxalate to delta-9-THC? Or perhaps since Cannabinol (CBN) is the primary product of THC degradation, that the golden trichomes contain more CBN?
-eg

That follows along with my understanding, I'm gonna do a little research when I get some time.
From my previous grow I noted the trichome colour; The Amber trichomes preceded the cloudy and there was a definite mix of the two in between ie - cloudy amber.
When the flowers were first beginning to bloom, the near-bud leaves had clear trichomes, and stayed that way for about 3-4 weeks (outdoor) before the tops begun changing to amber.

I've always waited until after the trichomes had become Amber to harvest (though many would harvest when most are beginning to turn cloudy), Amber trichomes exist slightly after peak THC production and this likely provides opportunity for chemical conversion resulting in a more intense subjective effect.

------

Harvesting in the morning ensures that your plant will be at peak THC content, as cannabis has shown THC fluctuations peaking in morning and dropping during the day

A small 25x or more pocket microscope, which can be picked up inexpensively at any electronic store, works well for taking a closer look at trichome development. What we are examining are the capitate stalked glandular trichomes, which will be a round gland head supported on a stalk. The coloration of these gland heads can vary between strains and maturity. Most strains start with clear or slightly amber heads which gradually become opaque when THC levels have peaked and are beginning to degrade. Regardless of the initial colour of the resin head, with careful observation you should be able to see a change in coloration as maturity levels off.

Some cultivators wait for about half of the heads to go opaque before harvest to ensure maximum THC levels in the bud. Of course nothing tells the truth more than your own head, so try samples at various stages to see what’s right for you. While you may be increasing the total THC level in the bud by allowing half of the glands to go opaque, the bud will also have a larger proportion of THC breakdown products such as CBNs, which is why some people prefer to harvest earlier while most of the heads are still clear.

Pot potency | Cannabis Culture

Forget big colas and stinky buds: it's all about the resin.

www.cannabisculture.com

-------

The above article seems to confirm much of what I've been told and have witnessed during my own cannabis growing ventures.

It appears that the Amber trichomes likely contain Cannabinol (CBN), which is the primary product of THC degradation.

And according to the source provided in the link below:

Cannabinol (CBN) CBN is a mildly psychoactive cannabinoid that is produced from the degradation of THC. There is usually very little to no CBN in a fresh plant. CBN acts as a weak agonist at both the CB1 and CB2 receptors, with greater affinity for CB2 receptors than CB1. The degradation of THC into CBN is often described as creating a sedative effect, known as a "couch lock.” http://sclabs.com/learn/learn-cannabinoids.html#sthash.YU9jW3vq.dpuf

-----

So it seems logical to assume that the Amber trichomes have more THCA decarboxalated into delta-9-THC, as well as more delta-9-THC that has degraded into cannabinol (CBN), thus altering the subjective effects after consumption.

-eg

 

[Bancopuma]

I've attached a recently published paper that may be of interest regarding the Cannabis sativa vs indica debate...I thought this was interesting as it touches on the terpenoids in cannabis which apparently are psychoactive in their own right, and are often overlooked with most attention focused on THC, CBD and the other cannabinoids.

I have heard that these terpenoids are destroyed when smoking but not when vaporising, and I have definitely noticed quite a significant difference in effect when smoking and vaping cannabis alone...I reliably find vaping can take me deeper in a visionary sense, but I remain clearer, more upbeat and find it easier to move around, converse and do things even in advanced stages of intoxication. Vaping has definitely made a really positive contribution to my experience of cannabis.