Schwabe Anna L, McGlaughlin Mitchell E
School of Biological Sciences, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO, USA.
J Cannabis Res. 2019 Jun 7;1(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s42238-019-0001-1.
Unlike other plants, Cannabis sativa is excluded from regulation by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Distinctive Cannabis varieties are ostracized from registration and therefore nearly impossible to verify. As Cannabis has become legal for medical and recreational consumption in many states, consumers have been exposed to a wave of novel Cannabis products with many distinctive names. Despite more than 2000 named strains being available to consumers, questions about the consistency of commercially available strains have not been investigated through scientific methodologies. As Cannabis legalization and consumption increases, the need to provide consumers with consistent products becomes more pressing. In this research, we examined commercially available, drug-type Cannabis strains using genetic methods to determine if the commonly referenced distinctions are supported and if samples with the same strain name are consistent when obtained from different facilities.
We developed ten de-novo microsatellite markers using the "Purple Kush" genome to investigate potential genetic variation within 30 strains obtained from dispensaries in three states. Samples were examined to determine if there is any genetic distinction separating the commonly referenced Sativa, Indica and Hybrid types and if there is consistent genetic identity found within strain accessions obtained from different facilities.
Although there was strong statistical support dividing the samples into two genetic groups, the groups did not correspond to commonly reported Sativa/Hybrid/Indica types. The analyses revealed genetic inconsistencies within strains, with most strains containing at least one genetic outlier. However, after the removal of obvious outliers, many strains showed considerable genetic stability.
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. 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.
与其他植物不同，大麻被美国农业部排除在监管之外。独特的大麻品种被排斥在注册之外，因此几乎无法核实。随着大麻在许多州已合法用于医疗和娱乐消费，消费者接触到了一波带有许多独特名称的新型大麻产品。尽管有2000多种命名菌株可供消费者选择，但关于市售菌株一致性的问题尚未通过科学方法进行研究。随着大麻合法化和消费量的增加，为消费者提供一致产品的需求变得更加紧迫。在本研究中，我们使用基因方法检测市售的药用型大麻菌株，以确定常见的分类是否有依据，以及从不同机构获得的具有相同菌株名称的样本是否一致。
我们利用“紫色库什”基因组开发了10个从头开始的微卫星标记，以研究从三个州药房获得的30个菌株中的潜在遗传变异。对样本进行检测，以确定是否存在任何遗传差异来区分常见的大麻、印度大麻和杂交类型，以及从不同机构获得的菌株样本中是否存在一致的遗传特征。
尽管有强有力的统计支持将样本分为两个遗传组，但这些组与通常报道的大麻/杂交/印度大麻类型并不对应。分析揭示了菌株内部的遗传不一致性，大多数菌株至少包含一个遗传异常值。然而，在去除明显的异常值后，许多菌株显示出相当大的遗传稳定性。
我们未能找到在线数据库中所述的常见大麻、印度大麻和杂交类型的明确遗传依据。在同一菌株的样本中观察到显著的遗传差异，这表明可能会向消费者提供不一致的产品。这些差异有可能导致表型差异和意外影响，这对娱乐用户来说可能令人惊讶，但对依赖菌株缓解特定医学症状的患者来说则有更严重的影响。
