Trichomes and Strains

mr2shim

mr2shim

Well-Known Member
For the longest time. I've seen people(as well as how-to's, stickys, ect.) say if you want a heady high have almost 100% cloudy. If you want a body buzz I've read anywhere from 10-50% amber. Doesn't this defeat the purpose of growing a particular strain that claims to be more heady or body buzz? Wouldn't that mean that strains are just one gigantic scam if you can flower a bit longer or shorter to get the preferred buzz?
 
U

ULMResearch

Active Member
Unfortunately you can only do so much with the harvest window. Most of the buzz is in the genetics of the plant. A heavy Indica harvested a little early is still going to hammer you in the face while a late Sativa is still going to send you on a soaring trip. You can alter the effects slightly but only within reason.
 
mr2shim

mr2shim

Well-Known Member
I understand that. I just keep seeing threads, especially as of late with people saying "If you want a body buzz harvest with _% of amber trichs" As if you can completely determine a high based on it.
 
k0ijn

k0ijn

Scientia Cannabis
mr2shim said:
For the longest time. I've seen people(as well as how-to's, stickys, ect.) say if you want a heady high have almost 100% cloudy. If you want a body buzz I've read anywhere from 10-50% amber. Doesn't this defeat the purpose of growing a particular strain that claims to be more heady or body buzz? Wouldn't that mean that strains are just one gigantic scam if you can flower a bit longer or shorter to get the preferred buzz?
Click to expand...

There is a lot of misinformation on the net regarding cannabis. That is the real problem.
The problem with this is that the statements don't have a foothold in sources, research or the like.

The strain phenotype (whether it's a Sativa or an Indica) determines overall whether you get an energetic high (head high if you will) or a couch lock high.
It's a common misunderstanding that amber trichomes produce a couch lock high, it's mainly because wrong information has been spread around and people keep perpetuating it, in the end everybody believes it's fact when in reality it isn't.

Amber trichomes contain degraded THC --> CBN.
CBN does not really produce a high, it does affect the high though but not in a positive way.
The effects have been described as 'feeling ill' rather than high.
CBN does not control whether you get a body stone or an energetic high, it's a common misconception.


Just to sum up;

Indica strain = couch lock high.
Sativa strain = energetic high.
Hybrid = bit of both (depending of percentage split).

Cloudy trichomes contain fully realized cannabinoids (max potency if you will) and the % of cloudy to amber (to clear) trichomes determines the overall potency and effects you get off the particular strain/grow.
You want to get as close to 100% cloudy trichomes as possible while keeping the clear and amber trichomes low.

Clear trichomes are 'worse' to have than amber, since clear trichomes are completely void of psychoactivity (only contain pre-cursor cannabinoids, such as acids).
Amber trichomes (CBN) are about 90% less potent than THC, so it still represents a huge loss of potency.
 
mr2shim

mr2shim

Well-Known Member
k0ijn said:
There is a lot of misinformation on the net regarding cannabis. That is the real problem.
The problem with this is that the statements don't have a foothold in sources, research or the like.

The strain phenotype (whether it's a Sativa or an Indica) determines overall whether you get an energetic high (head high if you will) or a couch lock high.
It's a common misunderstanding that amber trichomes produce a couch lock high, it's mainly because wrong information has been spread around and people keep perpetuating it, in the end everybody believes it's fact when in reality it isn't.

Amber trichomes contain degraded THC --> CBN.
CBN does not really produce a high, it does affect the high though but not in a positive way.
The effects have been described as 'feeling ill' rather than high.
CBN does not control whether you get a body stone or an energetic high, it's a common misconception.


Just to sum up;

Indica strain = couch lock high.
Sativa strain = energetic high.
Hybrid = bit of both (depending of percentage split).

Cloudy trichomes contain fully realized cannabinoids (max potency if you will) and the % of cloudy to amber (to clear) trichomes determines the overall potency and effects you get off the particular strain/grow.
You want to get as close to 100% cloudy trichomes as possible while keeping the clear and amber trichomes low.

Clear trichomes are 'worse' to have than amber, since clear trichomes are completely void of psychoactivity (only contain pre-cursor cannabinoids, such as acids).
Amber trichomes (CBN) are about 90% less potent than THC, so it still represents a huge loss of potency.
Click to expand...
Exactly! I was talking with a friend a while back about it. Trying to explain that cloudy is what you want and Amber is undesirable. He thought clear was optimal.
 
k0ijn

k0ijn

Scientia Cannabis
mr2shim said:
Exactly! I was talking with a friend a while back about it. Trying to explain that cloudy is what you want and Amber is undesirable. He thought clear was optimal.
Click to expand...
Allow me to quote one of my favourite authors:

Sam Harris said:
... All we can do is appeal to scientific values.
If a person doesn't share those values the conversation is over.
We must appeal to the value of understanding the world.
The value of evidence - in this case some hundreds of years of evidence in chemistry.
The value of logical consistency? ... If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide that proves someone should value it.
If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you invoke to show that they should value logic?
Click to expand...
 
U

ULMResearch

Active Member
Trichomes will change during the drying process as well, so harvesting at the first real signs of amber, even with a few clear is okay. You'll end up with some of the clears going cloudy and a few cloudy degrading into amber during the last days of metabolism. But that's a discussion for another thread!
 
mr2shim

mr2shim

Well-Known Member
Snackers said:
the reason they have that set standard 8weeks or sometimes 10-14 week flower time because that time is particular to that strain being quote on quote RIPE.

mango have a desired harvest time to achieve the fullest of the mango and not let it go to far before its over done.
this creates a perfect mango.

hence this is marijuana

the strain is labelled that desired flower time to achieve the desired proficiency of the end quality and product.

sure i like sativas more than indicas, so its my preffence that i will harvest mostyl at 8-9 weeks.

but its simply because thats what im looking for.

the genetics father of that strain dedicated the time as a guidline to help us once again, achieve maximum proficiency.

but to some it all up, its what you like smoking.

hypothetically its all about what you like eating, if you like premature mangos harvest em early. if you like a plump juicy mango harvest late.

you want the prime perfect mango you use the prime perfect harvest time.

help?
haha

/endrant
Click to expand...

I think you missed the point.
 
kpmarine

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
k0ijn said:
There is a lot of misinformation on the net regarding cannabis. That is the real problem.
The problem with this is that the statements don't have a foothold in sources, research or the like.

The strain phenotype (whether it's a Sativa or an Indica) determines overall whether you get an energetic high (head high if you will) or a couch lock high.
It's a common misunderstanding that amber trichomes produce a couch lock high, it's mainly because wrong information has been spread around and people keep perpetuating it, in the end everybody believes it's fact when in reality it isn't.

Amber trichomes contain degraded THC --> CBN.
CBN does not really produce a high, it does affect the high though but not in a positive way.
The effects have been described as 'feeling ill' rather than high.
CBN does not control whether you get a body stone or an energetic high, it's a common misconception.


Just to sum up;

Indica strain = couch lock high.
Sativa strain = energetic high.
Hybrid = bit of both (depending of percentage split).

Cloudy trichomes contain fully realized cannabinoids (max potency if you will) and the % of cloudy to amber (to clear) trichomes determines the overall potency and effects you get off the particular strain/grow.
You want to get as close to 100% cloudy trichomes as possible while keeping the clear and amber trichomes low.

Clear trichomes are 'worse' to have than amber, since clear trichomes are completely void of psychoactivity (only contain pre-cursor cannabinoids, such as acids).
Amber trichomes (CBN) are about 90% less potent than THC, so it still represents a huge loss of potency.
Click to expand...
Not saying you're a liar; just for the sake of seeing for myself/ referring others to. Do you have any reputable sources you could recommend?
 
W

wbd

Well-Known Member
kpmarine said:
Not saying you're a liar; just for the sake of seeing for myself/ referring others to. Do you have any reputable sources you could recommend?
Click to expand...
Agreed, in the spirit of being scientific reputable citations would really solidify the information being put out there. If this is the correct information, how is a reader to tell the difference?
 
k0ijn

k0ijn

Scientia Cannabis
kpmarine said:
Not saying you're a liar; just for the sake of seeing for myself/ referring others to. Do you have any reputable sources you could recommend?
Click to expand...
I will name those off the top of my head I can remember, I'm not at home atm.


Publications:

Evaluation of Prevalent Phytocannabinoids in the Acetic Acid Model of Visceral Nociception - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2765124/

Pharmacological Trends in Science (from page 400 onwards) - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01656147


Books:

Marijuana Chemistry;
Genetics, Processing and Potency

Cannabis and Cannabinoids:
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Therapeutic Potential


Research and testing:

montanabiotech.com

http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/



I use sciencedirect.com and ncbi.nlm.nih.gov to look up publications.


There are a lot more references and source I could link to/quote/name.
But it would be a hell of a job naming them all.
I just named some of the most respected (peer reviewed scientific publications only) ones here, you can find loads more by searching on ncbi, sciencedirect or google in fact.


Some publications have research which show a 250% lower potency in CBN compared to THC.
The lowest estimate I've seen is 90% less potent, I use the lowest amount to allow for wriggle room.
But who's to say whether 200% less potent or 90% less potent is the correct number, we need more research but it's somewhere between those two percentages.


wbd said:
Agreed, in the spirit of being scientific reputable citations would really solidify the information being put out there. If this is the correct information, how is a reader to tell the difference?
Click to expand...
I've posted these links before, several times in a lot of different threads on the subjects of trichomes, cannabinoids etc.
I assume people can click my nick and read through some posts or search the forum to get all the info if they want.
I don't want to repeat myself constantly.

But since you guys asked so nicely I've provided the information again.


Perhaps I should leave the links and references in my signature, it would save me a lot of time.
 
W

wbd

Well-Known Member
k0ijn said:
I've posted these links before, several times in a lot of different threads on the subjects of trichomes, cannabinoids etc.
I assume people can click my nick and read through some posts or search the forum to get all the info if they want.
I don't want to repeat myself constantly.
Click to expand...
Understandably, maybe the sig is the way to go. Or a sticky or something.

I agree with you, the disinformation on this topic is widespread -- possibly, like flushing, too widespread to contain or control. I've believed/stated for years that trying to customize a buzz with trichomes and a microscope is silly -- do that with your choice of genetics. But I don't have the data or references that you have to back it up, so I'm just another jackass in a sea of jackasses.

If that data, especially with respect to what CBN is and the relative gain/loss of potency as trichomes change color, is visible and readily available, maybe people will start thinking about it in a different way.

Way better than repeating yourself, I sure don't have the time for it. :)
 
k0ijn

k0ijn

Scientia Cannabis
wbd said:
Understandably, maybe the sig is the way to go. Or a sticky or something.

I agree with you, the disinformation on this topic is widespread -- possibly, like flushing, too widespread to contain or control. I've believed/stated for years that trying to customize a buzz with trichomes and a microscope is silly -- do that with your choice of genetics. But I don't have the data or references that you have to back it up, so I'm just another jackass in a sea of jackasses.

If that data, especially with respect to what CBN is and the relative gain/loss of potency as trichomes change color, is visible and readily available, maybe people will start thinking about it in a different way.

Way better than repeating yourself, I sure don't have the time for it. :)
Click to expand...
I'm not sure the admins would allow me to sticky some links and sources just so I'll have it easier lol.
I wish they would though.

Yeah it probably is too widespread. People seem to take everything they read for granted.
It's as if their thought process is: "It's written on a website, it must be true".

Same way it happens with newspapers. Apparently if something is written down it's automatically correct in some peoples minds.

Genetics have a huge say in the high, maybe not potency wise but genetics are definitely the cornerstone of any high.

The data shows loss of potency and it has been peer reviewed.
The question is whether it's 90% or 250% or perhaps so high a percentage that it doesn't really matter.

I read an article from a medical doctor who said that CBN has no psychoactivity.
That is not entirely correct I think, there is psychoactivity in CBN.
But theoretically he could be correct, if the psychoactivity is so low it doesn't even alter anything.

A friend of mine runs a research/testing Cannabis company.
In the last 100 tests they've done (they look at what percentages of substances are in the samples), the CBN % have been from 0.3% to 1.5% (it various based on grower and how far the plant is taken of course).
But the interesting thing is that the THC levels range around 10% - 23%.
There is a huge gulf between the amount of THC and the amount of CBN present in the final product.
And even if CBN "only" represents a 90% loss of potency, that is still a very tiny number compared to the overall THC potency levels.

That was a bit of tangent but it's an interesting discussion imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top