muunch
hotboxing the cockpit
perpetuated bullshit/marketing etc?
Based on this discussion on reddit...
https://www.reddit.com/r/microgrowery/comments/79cf2a/is_the_sativa_indica_dichotomy_real/
where this article was posted:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0133292
"The inaccuracy of reported ancestry in marijuana likely stems from the predominantly clandestine nature of Cannabis growing and breeding over the past century. Recognizing this, marijuana strains sold for medical use are often referred to as Sativa or Indica “dominant” to describe their morphological characteristics and therapeutic effects [10]. Our results suggest that the reported ancestry of some of the most common marijuana strains only partially captures their true ancestry."
It also goes on to state stuff about strain names being bullshit as widespread identifiers which is a whole different issue... but...
"...a marijuana strain name does not necessarily represent a genetically unique variety. To investigate the genetic identity of named marijuana strains at the genetic level, we compared samples with identical names to each other and to all other genotyped samples. We found that in 6 of 17 comparisons (35%), samples were more genetically similar to samples with different names than to samples with identical names. We conclude that the genetic identity of a marijuana strain cannot be reliably inferred by its name or by its reported ancestry."
Anyway, interested to hear some thoughts. Cheers
Based on this discussion on reddit...
https://www.reddit.com/r/microgrowery/comments/79cf2a/is_the_sativa_indica_dichotomy_real/
where this article was posted:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0133292
"The inaccuracy of reported ancestry in marijuana likely stems from the predominantly clandestine nature of Cannabis growing and breeding over the past century. Recognizing this, marijuana strains sold for medical use are often referred to as Sativa or Indica “dominant” to describe their morphological characteristics and therapeutic effects [10]. Our results suggest that the reported ancestry of some of the most common marijuana strains only partially captures their true ancestry."
It also goes on to state stuff about strain names being bullshit as widespread identifiers which is a whole different issue... but...
"...a marijuana strain name does not necessarily represent a genetically unique variety. To investigate the genetic identity of named marijuana strains at the genetic level, we compared samples with identical names to each other and to all other genotyped samples. We found that in 6 of 17 comparisons (35%), samples were more genetically similar to samples with different names than to samples with identical names. We conclude that the genetic identity of a marijuana strain cannot be reliably inferred by its name or by its reported ancestry."
Anyway, interested to hear some thoughts. Cheers