SamuiGrower

And, when crossing/hybridizing C. Ruderalis (autoflowers), the dominant autoflower trait (day neutral flowering) becomes recessive, appearing in only 25% of the crosses (autoflower x autoflower). If crossing with a photoperiod plant, the autoflower trait (day neutral) is lost. It essentially takes 5-6 crosses to stabilize the autoflowering trait. Autoflower strains are extremely fickle and unpredictable in the best of environments. The slightest bit of stress and they will flower unpredictably with minimal yields.

Any type of leafhopper is not welcome around cannabis (especially in a tent) and is NOT harmless, katydids included. They are herbivores and eat leaves, not other predatory insects, and should not be there. Cannabis thrips do NOT eat fungus. They are not beneficial and are the bane of any cannabis grower. A thrip infestation can be above and below the substrate and can devastate a crop - especially in flower. “Lost Coast” is predominantly soybean oil, peppermint oil, a little citric acid and isopropyl. It acts the same way as neem oil by smothering soft body insects. The best way to use Lost Coast, neem oil and potassium salts of fatty acids (Insecticidal soap) is as a preventative IPM during vegetative growth. Once cannabis is in flower (post week F3) there is very little you can do. Use of Lost Coast, Neem oil and insecticidal soap will show little results after you have a problem. i agree with the post that it is unlikely you had septoria. Likely powdery mildew, grey mold, fusarium, pythium etc. The bad news: you are responsible for your thrip and fungus situation (as well as visiting leafhoppers) through poor management. The entire idea of tent growing is the same as CEA (controlled environment agriculture) - a relative sealed environment where YOU control the heat, humidity, air movement, light cycles, IPM and general plant husbandry. Leaving doors open, screens, and your tent(s) open to the environment obviously invites the results you are experiencing. My advice: Seal your tents from the outdoor environment. Use Lost Coast, Neem, Insecticidal Soap as a preventative spray (IPM) once a week during vegetative growth and the first week of flipping to flower. Place a small space heater on a thermostat during cool nights, warm days. It also knocks down humidity at night. More air movement keeps sporulation of PM, septoria, fusarium and pythium from setting in. Incorporate a silica product, increase calcium and increase air movement in a clean growing environment and your plants will naturally ward off predatory (soft body) insects and molds.

Decarboxylation, conversion from THCa to THC, the psychoactive form, begins after harvest, from drying onwards. Drying and curing (without heat) is a slow, natural, linear process of decrboxylation. It is not necessary to cure your flower for extraction. Curing, furthers decarboxylation but should be considered more for flavor development by degradation/conversion of chlorophyll, sugars and starches. What is critical though, is thorough drying of your flower before decarboxylation for efficient conversion. A good friable, milled flower should be your starting point.

If you have pre-existing medical conditions, especially heart related, the best advice you can get would come from a medical doctor. Your arrhythmia should be of great concern. The medication you are taking, Flecanide (Tambocor) regulates your heart rhythm. Cannabis directly effects: heart rhythm (cardiovascular effects), increasing heart rate (tachycardia) and blood pressure (increasing and decreasing). Combining cannabis and your heart meds can increase your risk of adverse events. Both Flecanide (Tambocor) and cannabis are processed through the liver enzyme system (P450). Cannabis can influence the metabolism of that drug that can alter enzyme absorption leading to either toxicity or sub-therapeutic effects of your heart meds. The Imatnib you are taking works directly with enzyme P450 functions and can have some nasty side effects (the least of your worries) in conjunction with cannabis and Flecanide. My PSA to you (and others), if you have medical issues, is seek qualified medical advice when considering cannabis use for any consideration.

Thanks @stoner. I’ve said a few words on the subject as an anti-hero, in an industry that I am a staunch advocate of in all ways except for lies. We are at an ‘event horizon’ with cannabis; research dollars are pouring in everyday, in both public and private partnerships. Soon enough we will understand all the pharmacokinetics of all the cannabinoids and secondary metabolites of cannabis. BUT until then… …The science does not support the internet/social media claims at present. The claims range from the sublime to the ridiculous, and I explain all the whys. I have written a few things on this forum, and have included a few links. If you want to go in further depth, look at my posts……or not. To address the post about CBD and Sleep, here is an extract from a similar post: ”Using CBD as a sleep aid is a “movement” magnified on social media. Because it has anti-anxiety effects it has been co-opted as a sleep aid and this is the furthest thing from the truth. It has more placebo inducing sleep effect than the CBD itself. It is NOT a sleep aid. The anti-anxiety effect only works in the presence of THC. CBD modulates all the effects of THC, not being able to bind to Endocannabinoid receptors on its own. ” Required strength CBD oil for a good night sleep CBD products don't ease pain and are potentially harmful, study finds Required strength CBD oil for a good night sleep cont.

Epidiolex https://www.epidiolex.com/epidiolex-results

Are you smoking said oil? Yes? Do NOT add flavorings. If you are ingesting it, do as you please. Perhaps I should have prefaced my post….. re: smoking/vaping It was you, actually, that referred to “extract concentrates”. This implies smoking.

Most monoterpenes will volatilize in ‘home’ decarboxylation due to low molecular weight of these compounds. Regardless of popular thought, here in this forum, the home decarber can do little to preserve these aroma chemicals - VOC’s (Volatile Organic Compounds). Once they volatilize (come out of solution), you can’t trap them and get them back in. Lol. Lid or no lid. It’s a little more than avoiding boiling points of terpenes. Thermal and oxidative degradation occurs way below the boiling points of mono/sesquiterpenes and is unavoidable in an uncontrolled home setup. Sorry. While it is true that most extracts destined for smoking (dab, shatter, butter, rosin, vape carts, et al.) have terpenes added back in, like limonene, myrcene or a ‘proprietary’ terpene profile mix, you should NOT add flavoring agents. This is quite risky. Any “flavors” that are ethanol based (vanilla, mint, almond, etc) will convert to acetalaldehyde which is carcinogenic upon thermal decomposition. Sweet and buttery flavors degrade to acetoin and diacetyl. When vaped/combusted can cause irreversible lung damage: bronchiolitis obliterans (popcorn lung). Fruit and ‘sugary’ flavorings break down into benzene (a known carcinogen), acrolein and formaldehyde. Please do not add flavorings to your DIY vape products. I am sure there will be an outpouring of responses disagreeing with me, because “you” have never heard of anyone that has developed a problem. You’re entitled to your opinion but not your own facts. Another PSA (Public Service Announcement) from yours truly.

PGR’s (Plant Growth Regulators) are considered MRL type 1 (Minimum Residue Limit - category I) and are tested for in all established legal markets (USA, Canada, Uruguay(?)) For testing purposes, they are categorized with the worst of pesticides - 0 tolerance limits or more precisely LOD, limits of detection. I am familiar with most of them as they come directly from the ornamental horticulture/floriculture industry where they are still used. They crossed over to cannabis around 2012 and we trialed several of them in Colorado for companies that were repackaging them from the floriculture space, in particular: chrysanthemum and poinsettia, both short day, photoperiod plant. We worked with: paclobutrazol, benzyladenine, daminozide and Chlormequat. Some of you old timey growers, like myself, may remember them under their marketing names: Gravity, Bushmaster, phosphoload, topload etc. They were quickly labeled toxic (some carcinogenic) and not allowed to enter the legal cannabis stream. My experience: They were ALL designed to be used (in cannabis), at super low concentrations, one application, for limiting stretch when flipping to 12/12 in flower. In fact, they stopped the plant stretch dead in its tracks. If you flipped a plant that was say 45 cm, it finished 8-9 weeks later at 45 cm. This has devolved today (in black/grey markets) to applying higher concentrations creating short plants with many, many flowering nodes that bulk up and create dense flowers, as their is little plant biomass to support, other than lots of flowers. I do not agree with most posters on this forum that dense bud is PGR bud. Genetics will ALWAYS dictate leaf to calyx ratio. Leafy bud is, to me, NOT an indication that PGR’s were not used, and conversely, dense bud is NOT an indication that PGR’s were used. We just grew out Strawberry Guava 2.0 and White Truffle. Super hard, dense buds, very little leaf material. Some here would be quick to say “PGR”. The AI generated cut and paste list (above) of perceived PGR characteristics is highly inaccurate and extremely misleading. I have not revisited PGR’s since 2012 because, they are illegal to use and most importantly, completely unnecessary. We find stretch is controllable through temperature, light spectrum and minimizing nitrogen and phosphorous in the critical stretch. The goal is to maintain short distance between flowering sites (internodal distance). Perceived smells, flavors, headaches, etc. is, in my opinion, an affectation to the perception of PGR’s, but again, is not an area of my research, having left it behind some 12 years ago. I do NOT suspect it is as prevalent (pgr usage) as some believe it is. To conclude with my soapbox topic: there is NO testing for PGR’s, pesticides, mycotoxins or anything nasty to your health, here in Thailand. This also goes for THC and terpenes - two more reported “myths” here. The limited testing labs that are here are dubious at best and show wildly inconsistent results. For those smokers that are concerned, buy from a grower you know, trust. One that you have a direct relationship with, that is open to discuss their growing practices. Lastly, please let everyone know that this post is “OFF TOPIC” and belongs somewhere else. LOL

There are several reasons: 1. Terpenes, especially monoterpenes are extremely volatile and have low boiling points: 110-160C. They begin to volatilize in drying/curing, and are the first to “go”. Outside of lab technique, extended dry heating (decarboxylation time/temp curve) or heating in fat (especially at the 4 hr mention in the above post) will assure terpene evaporation. 2. Degradation. Even at temperatures below the decarboxylation curve, there is oxidation of both C10 and C15 terpenes (mono/sesquiterpenes). Because of this oxidative (and some enzymatic) degradation, the low molecular weight odor compounds are destroyed. 3. Dissolving in ethanol (winterizing/chlorophyll mitigation) will dissolve all terpenes and cannabinoids. Evaporating off the ethanol leaves only the cannabinoids (i.e. THC, CBD, etc.) remaining (higher BP). Mostly all terpenes are lost. 4. Lack of a controlled environment will almost assure you of terpene loss. Uniform drying, grinding, even surface area and even time/temp curve in a calibrated, oven or, as mentioned, a “prosumer decarboxylation device” will minimize terpene loss. Decarboxylating in a glass reactor, closed loop vacuum, at the lowest temperature is a common way of preserving terpenes - commercially. A vacuum lowers the boiling point (BP) considerably, facilitating terpene preservation. See attached photo. Extraction of fresh frozen flower, in ethanol/hydrocarbon and then decarbing in a vacuum glass reactor is the current standard for terpene preservation and whole plant ‘goodness’. “Live Rosin” - extraction of fresh frozen flower is the current de facto standard in vape extracts and DAB. This is the best and current standard for terpene preservation. It is, however, decarboxylated at the time of combustion THCa ——>THC and would not be suitable for edibles. Yes, this is industry standard. Putting the extract/oil through vacuum decarboxylation will preserve terpenes and increase yield.

12.3% to be exact, but remember, this is in a closed loop lab environment not in a home toaster oven. You can expect about 80% of your starting CBD or THC coming out of decarboxylation. Effectively, a 20% loss or more should be expected, and an additional loss if you are further extracting your decarboxylated weed into a fat carrier (MCT, butter, oil, etc.) As mentioned, in one of my previous run-on’s, all your terpenes are lost in whatever time/temp decarb setting you use outside of lab extraction. Only cannabinoids will come through.

How can you be so sure of your flower Thc levels but so skeptical of your extract levels? Dont get me wrong @stoner I’m in agreement with you about lab testing. I’ve been beholden to lab testing for 10 years. I know quite well what the deal is. in a country like Thailand, where there is NO mandatory THC or product health/safety testing, what’s the point to argue? Don’t you think weed stores are just citing the THC levels advertised from the seeds the flower is grown from? There’s the biggest lie of all. Touting your own extract to be of a higher THC percentage than lab reported, in a country where there is NO testing, just seems like a waste of bandwidth. p.s. those portable units for in-house testing are absolute garbage. We’ve put several through trials: all inconsistent with no two results ever being the same. There is a reason why they can’t be used for testing/labeling in the US and Canada. I just stated the obvious reason.

Perfectly safe if you don’t have any Rx interactions, are not on prescription enzymes, have liver issues or suffer from IBS. High percentage CBD ingestion or chronic/constant ingestion can cause diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, dry mouth, reduced appetite, irritability, liver dysfunction, decreased male fertility and blood thinning. ”Safe” is relative and phrases like ‘very, very effective’ have been widely disproven. Consider my post a PSA (public service announcement) to counter mis/dis-information, bro-science and all around nonsense.

The bigger concern is who is consuming heavy metal laden weed. I’m fairly certain by most responses I’ve read here, in this thread, and on the forum, in particular to, pesticides, mold and mycotoxins, is an overwhelming lack of concern or venomous response to any and all negative information to cannabis. How about if you are a prescription medical user? Should you start being concerned now? Thailand has no mandatory testing for safety or quality control of cannabis. Keep reading for a little background first….or just skip to “cheap weed but looks good post” LOL. You are correct, cannabis is a hyperaccumulator plant (amongst others), up-taking heavy metals from soil, water and nutrients. These heavy metals are stored in vacuoles (organelles) in the leaves and flowers. Cadmium in particular. It (cannabis/hemp) has been used in soil remediation for quite some time. Several hundred hectares were planted in the Chernobyl exclusion zone to mitigate the soil. The plants were then uprooted and treated as nuclear waste. The top four elements/metals of concern to cannabis smokers are: Lead, Cadmium, Arsenic and Mercury (Pb, Cd, As, Hg). A study conducted over 10 years showed that 7,200 cannabis smokers showed elevated levels of cadmium and lead + 22% and 27% respectively. The FDA and USP has defined 12 elemental contaminants. The top four: lead, cadmium, arsenic and mercury are the bare minimum standard in the USA and Canada for mandatory testing for cannabis flower, concentrates and edibles. They constitute known neurotoxins, carcinogens or endocrine disrupters. Some states test for more. For example, California tests for: 68 pesticides, 20 solvents, 6 microbes, 5 mycotoxins and 4 heavy metals previously stated. Some states will perform an 8 element assay, to include: chromium, copper, nickel and aluminum or other trace elements. To be clear, cannabis products that do not pass heavy metal, pesticide, mycotoxin and residual solvent are destroyed and do not enter the seed-to-sale stream. And, just to make it a little frustrating: many of these heavy metals are needed for healthy growth of cannabis - in trace amounts of course. Aluminum is NOT a trace metal needed for cannabis growth but it is accumulated and I use it as an example. Aluminum is the 3rd most abundant element in the earth - about 8%. And bound to silica, as in aluminum silicate and that makes up 50% of the earths crust. Do I need to mention aluminum is considered a heavy metal in toxicity testing? So, now it’s about acceptable levels federally and on the state level, of how many ppbs/ppms of aluminum are acceptable. Safety is political. If cannabis is grown hydroponically, indoors, the potential of heavy metal accumulation is through the nutrients and water it is fed and not the substrate. If grown outdoors, hyperaccumulation is through the soil, the nutrients, water supply and the environment. Pesticides (herbicides & fungicides), are the largest category of contaminants in cannabis, followed by solvents then mycotoxins contaminants. Heavy metals, as evidenced by the above mentioned study is certainly alarming. Even though ‘you never heard of anyone who suffered from any of these contaminants’ does not mean they do not exist or constitute a health/safety concern. The take away: Thailand was ranked 6th among the top 10 countries in pesticide usage, less than 10 years ago. It now ranks 3rd of 15 Asian nations in pesticide usage. Thailand continues to use glyphosates, chlopyrifos and paraquat as well as way too numerous pesticides to mention here. That should be the number one concern to all cannabis users here, in Thailand, be it expat or tourist. Though, these chemicals ‘might’ not be used in indoor CEA/hydroponic growing, be assured they are used in greenhouses and outdoors throughout the country. There is no mandatory testing in Thailand of cannabis for anything: heavy metals, THC, pesticides, toxins, mold, etc. This is the greater concern, part-and-parcel of heavy metal accumulation in cannabis. If cannabis is to remain a viable industry in Thailand (and I highly doubt that it will remain) it needs to be regulated at the health and safety level. Imagine if the consumer base demanded proof of terms like: “organic”, “30% THC”, and “pesticide free”? There would be a whole new market!

That is correct, the THC percentage as well as other cannabinoids will be lower. Just mentioning facts. There is a reason why all ‘batch harvests’ in the USA and Canada are tested for myco, molds and pesticides before selling to the consumer base. Not hearing about something does not give any of us plausible deniability. Just don’t say you have never been told. Respiratory issues due to inhaling myco/mold through combustion or vaping weed is quite documented, just not in markets with no obligation to testing. That is also correct. To make matters worse, the seeds you are buying, if not bred out to have consistent traits of the crosses (male/female traits of the parent line), will have wild phenotype expression - traits of both lineages expressed in the seeds. In other words, plant 6 seeds and get 4 (or more ) completely different plants. This is usually of no concern to the hobby grower but is of little benefit to a commercial grower at any scale. Cannabis is commoditized in a free market based on THC content. This is somewhat unfortunate as most of us here know weed is much, much more than just THC percentages. “Hunting” for the best weed at the best price, as per this thread, is usually a “one off”, never to be found again, trial and error game. This thread is quite popular and I have found it humorous and entertaining. It is however, NOT enlightening by any stretch of the imagination.

You can count on that, but more importantly, temperature, light levels, humidity and nutrition are all important factors as well. No two plants of the same strain will test the same nor will any two parts of the same plant test the same. There is a wide range of cannabinoid, terpene and flavonoid percentage from cola to popcorn buds (top to bottom). Way too much credence is put into THC percentage, especially in a market that has no mandatory testing (like ALL legal markets do). Here, it’s always buyer beware. I would be more concerned about drying and curing practices and, all the while, hope there are no mycotoxins, mold, or insecticides in the flower you buy.

A lovely review of writing style. Perhaps you should read the white paper and not the journalists synopsis. More information: Andrew Moore et al, Cannabidiol (CBD) Products for Pain: Ineffective, Expensive, and With Potential Harms, The Journal of Pain (2023). DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2023.10.009 Journal information: Journal of Pain

The marketing (social media, YouTube, search engines, SEO, et al.) is way ahead of the science. Hypotheses of CBD as an analgesic (pain relief), sleep aid, anxiolytic (anti anxiety) and down regulator of THC remains just that - a hypothesis. There has been no conclusive studies that shows reproducible results based on dose and purity across test groups that outperform placebo results. I have been in the CBD business since 2018 and have been consulting in the space since then. As a scientist, CBD (as well as the other cannabinoids) has been my focus. With that said, there is no conclusive medical or scientific data that’s supports the marketing claims across any cohort study. Recent studies (it is important to gleen results from recent data.) show contrarian results: CBD is no more effective than placebo studies, CBD does not down regulate the effects of THC, is not an effective analgesic, does not promote sleep and in some cases, appears to do the opposite effect as an antagonist. I have attached some posts below, I have made previously, as well some links (papers) relating to CBD in pain studies. I am a proponent of CBD in concert with the other cannabinoids (this, by the way, is the REAL entourage effect) and have realized efficacy is binary: it either works for YOU or it does not. It does not work for all. If it did, it would not be the subject of discussion, the headline would read: CBD is a conclusive sleep aid/pain reliever. https://aseannow.com/topic/1298719-required-strength-cbd-oil-for-a-good-night-sleep/?do=findComment&comment=18161416 https://aseannow.com/topic/1292013-importing-cbd-oil/?do=findComment&comment=18018941 https://aseannow.com/topic/1298719-required-strength-cbd-oil-for-a-good-night-sleep/?do=findComment&comment=18344019 Two articles about CBD and pain https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34223660/ https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2799017

Unfortunately, organic inputs like blood and bone meal need to be broken down and made bioavailable through mineralization through bacteria and fungi. If you have a deficiency they will not help, in enough time to turn around your issue. Elemental deficiencies are corrected through foliar feeding and root drenches. Blood meal and bone meal are two completely different inputs. One provides nitrogen and the other phosphorus. You mentioned you are growing autoflowers. If you are experiencing abiotic stress and nutrient issues, you can count on your plant going into flower immediately producing a single cola (like most of the images on the forum). Autoflowers DO NOT LIKE STRESS.

Observations: Leaf margins curling upwards: You are likely experiencing environmental issues. My experience tells me abiotic stress is causing your problem, nutritionally. Extreme heat, and humidity (or lack thereof) and light stress (too much direct sunlight for a young plant). That stress will lead you to believe they are overwatered, underwatered, too much nutrients, too little nutrients, etc. Yellowing of top, apical leaves: Mass flow of immobile nutrients like calcium will cause lockout of potassium. That is exactly what your problem looks like. This is cause by the environmental stress. Classic! Change your environmental conditions and you will see the plant correct itself. Your plant (at this point) is in too large of a container. You should start in a small(er) container until the plant has about 8-10 nodes. Then transplant. Young plants should concentrate on growing tall and not growing tap roots (a huge energy drain) Adding cal-mag will treat the symptom, not the problem. Boron will present with twisted, new growth (rare). If you are feeding a bottled nutrient A/B mix, find a trace element mix to add, as I’m sure, if you are using a local potting mix, it may be trace element deficient. Lastly, when in the proper sized container, always water to runoff to prevent accumulation of nutrients (your next anticipated issue). This is difficult to grasp (or do) when you have a 15cm plant in a 5 gallon pot and you are inclined to just water around the stem.

I find it somewhat fascinating that a group of cannabis loving connoisseurs, here in Thailand, on this forum, put their faith and trust in the naming conventions and THC content of the flower being sold here. Telling the truth is not a prerequisite to selling flower. With that said, how do you know if you are smoking a Sativa, Indica or hybrid? The short answer, you don’t. Scientifically, those lines have been blurred for a very, very long time. The way YOU feel after smoking it, is by no way a reliable arbitor of a strain or chemotype/cultivar. In 2019, The Journal of Cannabis Research published a paper detailing how genetic tools clearly showed the misconceptions of strain reliability. To summarize that paper…. “We failed to find clear genetic support for commonly referenced Sativa, Indica and Hybrid types as described in online databases. Significant genetic differences within samples of the same strain were observed indicating that consumers could be provided inconsistent products. (Edit: and you are!) These differences have the potential to lead to phenotypic differences and unexpected effects, which could be surprising for the recreational user, but have more serious implications for patients relying on strains that alleviate specific medical symptoms.” Naming conventions (of strains) do not align with common widespread definitions of Sativa, Indica, Hybrids, and Hemp. Strain inconsistencies are clear and evident and not isolated to single sources. Why is that? Because you can call your seed or flower anything you want on the retail end, even in regulated, seed-to-sale markets. Am I intimating there are ‘bad actors’ in the business as well as a beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt, muddied genetics? Absolutely. 18th-century researchers originally classified cannabis into two species based on the plant's appearance. Researchers now know that on a molecular level, there's no difference between an indica strain and a sativa strain of cannabis. The advent of molecular testing proved the original classification system was inaccurate. Genetic analyses do not support the reported proportions of Sativa and Indica within each strain, which is expected given the lack of genetic distinction between Sativa and Indica. To that end, breeders, growers, dispensaries and budtenders needed a better system to convey the differences between strains, especially to the lay public. Enter the Terpene classification system. Indica, which is said to physically relax the body and give a sedative effect, and sativa, which is said to be energizing and provide more of a head-high. In reality, no scientific evidence supports this dichotomy because on a molecular level, indica and sativa strains don't have pattern differences that set the two "types" apart from each other. As a result, consumers buy strains that don't actually align with the perceived effects they're marketed to provide. So, it must be the entourage effect, right? It was proposed many decades ago as a hypothesis and still remains just that, with no hard data scientifically or medically to empirically support it. There is no purity or dosage that can be medically induced to replicate any consistent outcomes. We certainly know the inhalation of combusted terpenes (smoking) was never ‘baked’ into the hypothesis from the beginning. To further complicate the idea that terpenes provide the UP or DOWN effect, consider this; terpene synthase in cannabis is spatial. No two plants or parts of the same plant produce the same terpene profile. To further add to the ‘confusion’, set, setting, diet, mood, exercise and a litany of other factors all contribute to the perceived effect of the cannabis you smoke. It’s personal and different for everyone. I would put more stock in that belief system than in the Sativa UP/ Indica DOWN constructs. I, for one, am amazed of the phenotype variation in the seeds sold today. I cannot rely on most seed banks (mostly all) to provide stable genetics on the commercial level in which I work. Hybrid crosses are easy to produce and stability is not a factor for most seed banks. A sour diesel strain in NY looks, tastes, and test completely different from one grown in northern Michigan. So, if you’re a hobby grower and you plant 3 sour diesel seeds and you get 3 distinctly different phenotypes, what do you say? Not much, obviously, because it doesn’t matter, right? But if you’re a commercial grower and you grow out a 1000 seeds and it’s clear you have many variants, your only choice is to pheno hunt, create mothers, and clone or feminize to create stable genetics with testing. Emphasis on the testing part. Stable genetics begin with F1 and S1 lineage. Haven’t heard a single reference to that by any grower or seed supplier here. It’s a buyer/grower beware climate for sure. If labels define Sativa or Indica as two distinct groups then the differences should be seen in biochemical markers and genetic assays. A published study in Nature Plants, showed the ‘naming labels’ were meaningless. Strains labeled Sativa were more closely related (genetically) to indicas than sativas. In 1999 the strain, AK-47 won the Sativa Cup in that year’s Cannabis Cup. Four years later the same strain won the Indica Cup. Right. For those of you who say they can definitely tell the difference between a Sativa or an Indica (and I’ve read all the eye-rolling post here), I say bless your hearts. I have zero doubt that you are describing the effects you are feeling. The purpose of this post is NOT to denigrate you or say otherwise. I would love to meet you and offer you a position in my company (lots of travel and benefits). We would sit down over a few bowls of different strains and cans of Pepsi and Coca Cola (labels obscured - of course!) and work out a role for you. There is certainly an argument in saying, there are landrace sativas, here in Thailand from which you can judge the “Sativa effect” There are, but they are not pure, and the THC levels have been so diluted from years of outdoor cross pollination of other landrace strains, that It would be hard to judge them. This is the ‘stuff’ (brick weed) that is so overtly discussed in this thread as ‘hardly worth smoking’, but they are sativas. As a postscript to my diatribe, has any grower ever provided a COA (Certificate of Analysis) of their flower? Have you ever seen one? I pay 10,000 Baht for a COA after extraction (CBD). Has any breeder/seller ever posted one on this forum? I just see photos of schwag with fantasy THC percentages, sellers talking mostly marketing drivel and lots of people whining about the look, quality, effects, prices, etc. - and rightfully so, at that. P.s. these “home test” kits and devices hardly count for anything. HPLC/GCMS or nothing! I have no doubt that there is a connoisseurship here in this forum but WE are definitely not the market - tourists are. Maybe if WE (or regulation) demand COA’s, the quality will improve and so will the market. Wishful thinking for sure

To the posters talking about the “best” weed to use for edibles: good weed, brick weed, shake, high quality, low quality, etc. Think about it like this. You are THC mining. The ONLY concern is yield. Hard stop. Higher quality flower will yield a higher net amount of THC, lower quality or shake, will yield less. You are essentially stripping out ‘whole plant’ minor cannabinoids, terpenes and flavonoids (in home decarboxylation). There are no characteristics of the plant (cultivar, chemotype, phenotype) left other than THC, the psychoactive component of your edible. My opinion: find cheap, bulk weed and process it - mine the THC out of it. THC from brick weed is identical to the THC in Unicorn Poop Lemon OG Fairyland Sherbert. Again, the only difference is yield.

CBDa is a little more difficult to decarboxylate, requiring longer times and technically, higher temperatures. The issue with ‘home’ decarboxylation of CBDa is the degradation (oxidative) of other cannabinoids. You can expect all terpenes to be volatilized and evaporated off at that point. THCa will ultimately convert to CBN, which has 25% of the psychoactive attributes of THC. This won’t be a problem if THC is not what you are after, as suggested. To your question; it is difficult, without testing, to determine how much thermal degradation of CBD is taking place. Heat, oxygen and light are mostly responsible for degradation. For a 97% conversion efficiency of CBDa, use 127c for 50 minutes or 130c for 20 minutes (technically) I am in the CBD space, and use a lab grade, double-walled, borosilicate glass reactor to decarboxylate CBDa distillate (vacuum rotovaped first to distill off the ethanol first), circulating 130c oil through the outer wall, under constant circulation (both oil and distillate) for 30 minutes. This equates to 95-97% efficiency (tested). We start collecting terpenes off at 100c (mostly monoterpenes).

My post from another topic that might be relevant to this one:

Making edibles with decarboxylated weed is nothing more than a hybrid form of extraction. In a commercial (legal) market, extraction is done by ethanol, hydrocarbon (propane, butane, hexane, etc.) or CO2 extraction, where an extract or distillate is produced as a starting point for edible manufacturing. There are other hybrid technologies available, but they are not so mainstream or scalable as of yet. Commercially, in edible manufacturing, an extract is produced, the solvent removed, and the extract is decarboxylated. A C.O.A. (certificate of analysis) determines the purity. An 80% THC extract means 1 gram of extract contains 80% THC. 1000 mg (1 gram) = 0.800 mg of THC. If your dosage for an edible is 20 mg, you can create 40 portions (cookies, gummies, brownies, etc.). This was pointed out and made clear by @stoner in a previous post. This is the ONLY WAY to quantify purity and dosage. Decarboxylation of weed (flower) by time/temperature is not only inefficient but non-quantifiable and is seldomly, if ever done on a commercial scale, for many reasons, but suits the hobbyist grower quite well. Uneven heating/temperature variability, starting moisture content, time control and particle size of the flower, makes the process wildly inconsistent. The decarboxylation AND the fat/oil extraction are both very inexact. As mentioned in previous posts, degradation of cannabinoids and terpenes is inevitable in dry, biomass decarboxylation. Some posts mention the loss in distinction of Sativa/Indica traits in decarboxylation as well as a “benefit” of a single strain, in do-it-yourself decarboxylation. This is a non sequitur and makes no sense because you are extracting THC for the purpose of ingesting and edible. There is no ‘whole plant, full spectrum, entourage effects’ when decarbing weed in an oven and then extracting THC in a fat. If you are a hobby grower, looking to make your own edibles, you have few choices than time/temperature oven decarboxylation and fat/oil ‘steeping’. There is no need to quantify your efficiency or amount of THC. Experiment and make a product that gets you high. If you are in a legal, regulated market, the process of producing edible begins with extract/distillate. The downstream manufacturing will always be consistent and quantifiable based on batch C.O.A. and then modifying the recipe/formula of the edible. This was pointed out by @stoner (again). High quality or low quality weed is not really important if you are doing home decarboxylation and fat/oil extraction because of the losses due to inefficiency of decarboxylation as well as the fat/oil extraction. If you seek optimal results in home decarboxylation, strive for uniform dryness (you must start with absolutely dry biomass), uniformly ground flower and use one of those ‘fancy’ decarb devices that have been mentioned – it will create a uniform (linear) decarboxylation curve with a high(er) rate of efficiency that is far better than any oven. There are hot pot, rice cooker, slow cooker, mason jar hacks out there – they are all good and better, once again, than an oven. There are multiple time/temp permutations to decarboxylation. The science points to 122C at 27 minutes as the sweet spot. This is defined by decarboxylation efficiency AND degradation of cannabinoid loss. The understanding of what decarboxylation does has been stated in previous posts but I would like to point out the following. There is a 14% loss (roughly) of THC when going from THCa to THC due to the difference in molecular weight. The efficiency of home decarboxylation is probably 85% (moisture, grinding, uneven heating). So the net sum of THC from the start is likely 70% of what you started with. The decarboxylated flower/biomass is then put into oil/fat and this results in another inefficient extraction and loss. I point this out to clarify batch-to-batch inconsistency of home decarboxylation as an inexact science. My last point is about fat, after reading several posts, it requires clarification. All cannabinoids are lipophilic/hydrophobic: they are oil soluble and water insoluble. Not all fats affect cannabinoid bioavailability the same way. They dissolve in fats (butter, oil, etc) and they act as a carrier for edibles. Not all fats are created equally. If you use butter, your ingested edible must first go through first-pass-metabolism through the liver. You can expect 10% systemic efficiency, but you will still get an effect because the THC is converted to a much more potent form (11-OH-THC). If you use MCT Oil (medium chain triglycerides), from coconut oil, mostly made from C8/C10 (caprylic and capric acid), your edible is far more bioavailable and passes through the blood-brain barrier by bypassing first-pass liver metabolism and uses the lipid absorption pathway. The systemic efficiency is now around 30%. If you are concerned about a faster, “better” high, use MCT/coconut oil. I hope this clarifies a few of the points made here and in other posts regarding decarboxylation and making edibles on a non-commercial scale.