Et og strain

Et og strain DEFAULT

A dynamic nomenclature proposal for SARS-CoV-2 lineages to assist genomic epidemiology


The ongoing pandemic spread of a new human coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, which is associated with severe pneumonia/disease (COVID-19), has resulted in the generation of tens of thousands of virus genome sequences. The rate of genome generation is unprecedented, yet there is currently no coherent nor accepted scheme for naming the expanding phylogenetic diversity of SARS-CoV-2. Here, we present a rational and dynamic virus nomenclature that uses a phylogenetic framework to identify those lineages that contribute most to active spread. Our system is made tractable by constraining the number and depth of hierarchical lineage labels and by flagging and delabelling virus lineages that become unobserved and hence are probably inactive. By focusing on active virus lineages and those spreading to new locations, this nomenclature will assist in tracking and understanding the patterns and determinants of the global spread of SARS-CoV-2.


There are currently more than 35,000 publicly available complete or near-complete genome sequences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (as of 1 June 2020) and the number continues to grow. This remarkable achievement has been made possible by the rapid genome sequencing and online sharing of SARS-CoV-2 genomes by public health and research teams worldwide. These genomes have the potential to provide invaluable insights into the ongoing evolution and epidemiology of the virus during the pandemic and will likely play an important role in surveillance and its eventual mitigation and control. Despite such a wealth of data, there is currently no coherent system for naming and discussing the growing number of phylogenetic lineages that comprise the population diversity of this virus, with conflicting ad hoc and informal systems of virus nomenclature in circulation. A nomenclature system for the genetic diversity of SARS-CoV-2 (a clade within the family Coronaviridae, genus Betacoronavirus, subgenus Sarbecovirus, species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related virus1) is urgently required before the scientific literature and communication become further confused.

There is no universal approach to classifying virus genetic diversity below the level of a virus species2 and this is not covered by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. Typically, genetic diversity is categorized into distinct ‘clades’, each corresponding to a monophyletic group on a phylogenetic tree. These clades may be referred to by a variety of terms, such as ‘subtypes’, ‘genotypes’, ‘groups’, depending on the taxonomic level under investigation or the established scientific literature for the virus in question. The clades usually reflect an attempt to divide pathogen phylogeny and genetic diversity into a set of groupings that are approximately equally divergent, mutually exclusive and statistically well supported. Therefore, all genome sequences are allocated to one clade or provisionally labelled as ‘unclassified’. Often, multiple hierarchical levels of classification exist for the same pathogens, such as the terms ‘type’, ‘group’ and ‘subtype’ that are used in the field of human immunodeficiency virus research.

Such classification systems are useful for discussing epidemiology and transmission when the number of taxonomic labels is roughly constant through time; this is the case for slowly evolving pathogens (for example, many bacteria) and for rapidly evolving viruses with low rates of lineage turnover (for example, human immunodeficiency virus3 and hepatitis C virus4). In contrast, some rapidly evolving viruses such as influenza A are characterized by high rates of lineage turnover, so that the genetic diversity circulating in any particular year largely emerges out of and replaces the diversity present in the preceding few years. For human seasonal influenza, this behaviour is the result of strong natural selection among competing lineages. In such circumstances, a more explicitly phylogenetic classification system is used. For example, avian influenza viruses are classified into ‘subtypes’, ‘clades’ and ‘higher-order clades’ according to several quantitative criteria5. Such a system can provide a convenient way to refer to the emergence of new (and potentially antigenically distinct) variants and is suitable for the process of selecting the component viruses for the regularly updated influenza vaccine. A similar approach to tracking antigenic diversity may be needed to inform SARS-CoV-2 vaccine design efforts. While useful, we recognize that dynamic nomenclature systems based on genetic distance thresholds have the potential to overaccumulate cumbersome lineage names.

In an ongoing and rapidly changing epidemic such as SARS-CoV-2, a nomenclature system can facilitate real-time epidemiology by providing commonly agreed labels to refer to viruses circulating in different parts of the world, thereby revealing the links between outbreaks that share similar virus genomes. Furthermore, a nomenclature system is needed to describe virus lineages that vary in phenotypic or antigenic properties. (Although it must be stressed that at present there is no conclusive evidence of such variation among currently available SARS-CoV-2 strains.)

Principles of a dynamic nomenclature system

There are several key challenges in the development of a dynamic and utilitarian nomenclature system for SARS-CoV-2. To be valid and broadly accepted a nomenclature needs to: (1) capture local and global patterns of virus genetic diversity in a timely and coherent manner; (2) track emerging lineages as they move between countries and populations within each country; (3) be sufficiently robust and flexible to accommodate new virus diversity as it is generated; and (4) be dynamic, such that it can incorporate both the birth and death of viral lineages through time.

A special challenge in the case of COVID-19 is that genome sequence data is being generated rapidly and at high volumes, such that by the end of the pandemic we can expect hundreds of thousands of SARS-CoV-2 genomes to have been sequenced. Therefore, any lineage naming system must be capable of handling tens to hundreds of thousands of virus genomes sampled longitudinally and densely through time. Furthermore, to be practical, any lineage naming system should have no more than 100 or 200 active lineage labels since any more would obfuscate rather than clarify discussion and would be difficult to conceptualize.

To fulfil these requirements, we propose a workable and practical lineage nomenclature for SARS-CoV-2 that arises from a set of fundamental evolutionary and phylogenetic principles. Some of these principles are, necessarily, specific to the COVID-19 pandemic, reflecting the new reality of large-scale real-time generation of virus genome sequences. The nomenclature system is not intended to represent every evolutionary change in SARS-CoV-2 since these will number many thousands by the end of the pandemic. Instead, the focus is on the genetic changes associated with important epidemiological and biological events. Fortunately, because of the early sampling and genome sequencing of COVID-19 cases in China, especially in Hubei province, it appears that the ‘root sequence’ of SARS-CoV-2 is known. Many of the genomes from the earliest sampled cases are genetically identical and hence also probably identical to the most recent common ancestor of all sampled viruses. This occurrence is different to previous viruses and epidemics and provides some advantages for the development of a rational and scalable classification scheme. Specifically, setting the ‘reference sequence’ to be the root sequence forms a natural starting point since direct comparisons in the number and position of mutations can be made with respect to the root sequence.

During the early phase of the pandemic, it is possible to unambiguously assign a genome to a lineage through the presence/absence of particular sets of mutations. However, a central component of a useful nomenclature system is that it focuses on those virus lineages that contribute most to global transmission and genetic diversity. Hence, rather than naming every possible new lineage, classification should focus on those that have exhibited onward spread in the population, particularly those that have seeded an epidemic in a new location. For example, the large epidemic in Lombardy, Northern Italy, thought to have begun in early February6, has since been disseminated to other locations in northern Europe and elsewhere.

Furthermore, because SARS-CoV-2 genomes are being generated continuously and at a similar pace to changes in virus transmission and epidemic control efforts, we expect to see a continual process of lineage generation and extinction through time. Rather than maintaining a cumulative list of all lineages that have existed since the start of the pandemic, it is more prudent to mark lineages as ‘active’, ‘unobserved’ or ‘inactive’. This is a designation that reflects our current understanding of whether they are actively transmitting in the population or not. Accordingly, lineages of SARS-CoV-2 documented within the last month are defined as ‘active’ in this article, those last seen >1 month but <3 months ago are classified as ‘unobserved’ and those that have not been seen for >3 months are termed ‘inactive’.

Although this strategy allow us to track those lineages that are contributing most to the epidemic, and so reduce the number of names in use, it is important to keep open the possibility that new lineages will appear through the generation of virus genomes from unrepresented locations or from cases with travel history from such locations. For example, the epidemic in Iran (designated B.4 in our system) was identified via returning travellers to other countries7. Furthermore, lineages that have not been seen for some time may re-emerge after a period of cryptic transmission in a region. Hence, it is possible for lineages that were previously classified as inactive or unobserved to be later relabelled as active. We chose the term ‘lineages’ (rather than ‘clades’, ‘genotypes’ or other designations) for SARS-CoV-2 because it captures the fact that they are dynamic, rather than relying on a static and exclusive hierarchical structure.

Lineage naming rules

We propose that major lineage labels begin with a letter. At the root of the phylogeny of SARS-CoV-2 are two lineages that we simply denote as lineages A and B. The earliest lineage A viruses, such as Wuhan/WH04/2020 (EPI_ISL_406801), sampled on 5 January 2020, share two nucleotides (positions 8,782 in ORF1ab and 28,144 in ORF8) with the closest known bat viruses (RaTG13 and RmYN02). Different nucleotides are present at those sites in viruses assigned to lineage B, of which Wuhan-Hu-1 (GenBank accession no. MN908947) sampled on 26 December 2019 is an early representative. Hence, although viruses from lineage B happen to have been sequenced and published first8,9,10, it is likely (based on current data) that the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of the SARS-CoV-2 phylogeny shares the same genome sequence as the early lineage A sequences (for example, Wuhan/WH04/2020). Importantly, this does not imply that the MRCA itself has been sampled and sequenced, but rather that no mutations have accrued between the MRCA and the early lineage A genome sequences. At the time of writing, viruses from both lineages A and B are still circulating in many countries around the world, reflecting the exportation of viruses from Hubei province to other regions of China and elsewhere before strict travel restrictions and quarantine measures were imposed there.

To add further lineage designations, we downloaded 27,767 complete SARS-CoV-2 genomes from the GISAID (Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data) database ( on 18 May 2020 and estimated a maximum likelihood tree for these data (see Methods) (Fig. 1). We defined further SARS-CoV-2 lineages, each descending from either lineage A or B, and assigned a numerical value (for example, lineage A.1 or lineage B.2). Lineage designations were made using the following set of conditions: (1) each descendant lineage should show phylogenetic evidence of emergence from an ancestral lineage into another geographically distinct population, implying substantial onward transmission in that population. In the case of a rapidly expanding global lineage, the recipient population may comprise multiple countries. In the case of large and populous countries, it may represent a new region or province. To show phylogenetic evidence, a new lineage must meet all of the following criteria: (a) it exhibits one or more shared nucleotide differences from the ancestral lineage; (b) it comprises at least five genomes with >95% of the genome sequenced; (c) genomes within the lineage exhibit at least one shared nucleotide change among them; and (d) a bootstrap value >70% for the lineage-defining node. Importantly, criterion (c) helps to focus attention only on lineages with evidence of ongoing transmission; (2) the lineages identified in step 1 can themselves act as ancestors for virus lineages that then emerge in other geographical areas or at later times, provided they satisfy criteria a–d. This results in a new lineage designation (for example, A.1.1); (3) the iterative procedure in step 2 can proceed for a maximum of three sublevels (for example, A.1.1.1) after which new descendant lineages are given a letter (in English alphabetical sequence from C) so A. would become C.1 and A. would become C.2. The rationale for this is that the system is intended only for tracking currently circulating lineages, such that we do not try to capture the entire history of a lineage in its label. (That complete history can be obtained by reference to a phylogeny.) At the time of writing, no C level lineages have been assigned; (4) all sequences are assigned to one lineage. For example, if a genome does not meet the criteria for inclusion in a ‘higher-level’ lineage (for example, A.1.2, B.1.3.5) then it is automatically classified into the lowest level for which it meets the inclusion criteria, which ultimately is A or B.

Five representative genomes are included from each of the defined lineages. The largest lineages defined by our proposed nomenclature system are highlighted with coloured areas and labelled on the right. The remaining lineages defined by the nomenclature system are denoted by triangles. The scale bar represents the number of nucleotide changes within the coding region of the genome.

Full size image

Using this scheme, we identified 81 viral lineages. These lineages mostly belong to A, B and B.1. We identified six lineages derived from lineage A (denoted A.1–A.6) and two descendant sublineages of A.1 (A.1.1 and A.3). We also describe 16 lineages directly derived from lineage B. To date, lineage B.1 is the predominant known global lineage and has been subdivided into >70 sublineages. Lineage B.2 currently has six descendant sublineages. We are not yet able to further subdivide the other lineages, even though some contain very large numbers of genomes. This is because many parts of the world experienced numerous imported cases followed by exponential growth in local transmission. We provide descriptions of these initial lineages, including their geographical locations and time span of sampling, in Table 1. We have also tried to be flexible with the criteria where, for example, the bootstrap value is below 70% but there is strong previous evidence that the lineage exists and is epidemiologically important. In particular, the Italian epidemic comprises two large lineages in our scheme—B.1 and B.2—reflecting genomes from Italy as well as from large numbers of travellers from these regions and that fall into both lineages.

Full size table

A unique and important aspect of our proposed nomenclature is that the status of the currently circulating lineages be assessed at regular intervals, with decisions made about identifying new lineages and flagging those we believe are likely be unobserved or inactive because none of their members have been sequenced for a considerable time. The names of unobserved or inactive lineages will not be reassigned. These are provisional timescales and the category thresholds may be altered in the future once the dynamics of lineage generation and extinction are better understood. When visualizing the epidemic, we suggest that these lineages should no longer be labelled to reduce both the number of names in circulation and visual noise, and focus on the current epidemiological situation.


While we regard this proposed nomenclature as practical and robust, it is important to recognize that phylogenetic inference carries statistical uncertainty and much of the available genome data is noisy, with incomplete genome coverage and errors arising from the amplification and sequencing processes. We have suggested a genome coverage threshold for proposing new lineages and we further suggest that sequences are not ascribed a lineage designation unless the genome coverage of that sequence exceeds 70% of the coding region. As noted earlier, when SARS-CoV-2 genetic diversity is low during the early pandemic period, there is a direct association between lineage assignation and the presence of particular sets of mutations (with respect to the root sequence). This should help with the development of rapid, algorithmic genome labelling tools. This task will become more complex, but still tractable, as SARS-CoV-2 genetic diversity accumulates, increasing the chance of both homoplasies and reverse mutations. Classification algorithms based on lists of ‘lineage-defining’ mutations may be practical if they are frequently cross-checked and validated against phylogenetic estimations but will not be as powerful as phylogenetic classification methods, which make use of complete genome sequence data to identify relationships. We encourage the research community to develop software and online tools that will enable the automated classification of newly generated genomes (one such implementation is pangolin,

Coronaviruses also frequently recombine, meaning that a single phylogenetic tree may not always adequately capture the evolutionary history of SARS-CoV-2. Although this can make phylogenetic analysis challenging, recombination is readily accommodated within this system of lineage naming and assignment. A distinct recombination event, if it establishes onward transmission, will create a new viral lineage with a distinct common ancestor. Because this new lineage does not have a single ancestral lineage, it will be assigned the next available alphabetical prefix.

While we believe our proposed lineage nomenclature will greatly assist those working with COVID-19, we do not see it as exclusive to other naming systems, particularly those that are specifically intended to track lineages circulating within individual countries for which a finer scale will be helpful. Indeed, there are likely to be strong sampling biases towards particular countries. Furthermore, we note that future genome sequence generation may require adjustments to the current proposal; any such changes will be detailed at However, we envisage that the general approach described in this study may be readily adopted for these purposes and for other viral epidemics where real-time genomic epidemiology is being undertaken. We expect this dynamic nomenclature to be most useful for the duration of the global pandemic, which may last a few years. After that time, SARS-CoV-2 will be either globally eliminated or, more likely, become an endemic or seasonal infection. The remaining endemic/seasonal lineages, which will be genetically distinct by then, can simply retain their names from the dynamic nomenclature system in the post-pandemic period.


We downloaded all SARS-CoV-2 genomes (at least 29,000 base pairs in length) from GISAID on 18 May 2020. We trimmed the 5′- and 3′-untranslated regions and retained those genomes with at least 95% coverage of the reference genome (Wuhan-Hu-1). We aligned these sequences using the MAFFT FFT-NS-2 algorithm and default parameter settings12. We then estimated a maximum likelihood tree using IQ-TREE 2 (ref. 13) using the GTR+Γ model of nucleotide substitution14,15, default heuristic search options and ultrafast bootstrapping with 1,000 replicates16.

The maximum likelihood tree and associated sequence metadata were manually curated and the phylogeny was annotated with the lineage designations. This annotated tree, along with a table providing the lineage designation for each genome in the dataset, is available for download at We have also provided a high-resolution figure (in PDF format) of the entire tree labelled with lineages. These will be updated on a regular basis. Representative sequences from each lineage were selected to maximize within-lineage diversity and minimize N-content and used to construct the maximum likelihood tree shown in Fig. 1.

Reporting Summary

Further information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article.

Data availability

No new data have been reported. The viral genome sequences used in this paper are publicly available from GISAID ( A table of acknowledgements for the GISAID genome sequences used to develop this work is available at

Code availability

Details of the software and source code that implement the nomenclature system reported in this paper are available at


  1. 1.

    Walker, P. J. et al. Changes to virus taxonomy and the international code of virus classification and nomenclature ratified by the international committee on taxonomy of viruses (2019). Arch. Virol.164, 2417–2429 (2019).

    CASArticle Google Scholar

  2. 2.

    ICTV Code: the International Code of Virus Classification and Nomenclature. International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) (2018).

  3. 3.

    Robertson, D. L. et al. HIV-1 nomenclature proposal. Science288, 55–56 (2000).

    CASArticle Google Scholar

  4. 4.

    Smith, D. B. et al. Expanded classification of hepatitis C virus into 7 genotypes and 67 subtypes: updated criteria and genotype assignment web resource. Hepatology59, 318–327 (2014).

    Article Google Scholar

  5. 5.

    WHO/OIE/FAO H5N1 Evolution Working Group. Continued evolution of highly pathogenic avian influenza A (H5N1): updated nomenclature. Influenza Other Respir. Viruses6, 1–5 (2012).

    Article Google Scholar

  6. 6.

    Zehender, G. et al. Genomic characterization and phylogenetic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 in Italy. J. Med. Virol. (2020).

  7. 7.

    Eden, J.-S. et al. An emergent clade of SARS-CoV-2 linked to returned travellers from Iran. Virus Evol.6, veaa027 (2020).

    Article Google Scholar

  8. 8.

    Lu, R. et al. Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding. Lancet395, 565–574 (2020).

    CASArticle Google Scholar

  9. 9.

    Wu, F. et al. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. Nature579, 265–269 (2020).

    CASArticle Google Scholar

  10. 10.

    Zhu, N. et al. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N. Engl. J. Med.382, 727–733 (2020).

    CASArticle Google Scholar

  11. 11.

    Shu, Y. & McCauley, J. GISAID: Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data—from vision to reality. Euro Surveill.22, 30494 (2017).

    Article Google Scholar

  12. 12.

    Katoh, K., Misawa, K., Kuma, K.-I. & Miyata, T. MAFFT: a novel method for rapid multiple sequence alignment based on fast Fourier transform. Nucleic Acids Res.30, 3059–3066 (2002).

    CASArticle Google Scholar

  13. 13.

    Minh, B. Q. et al. IQ-TREE 2: new models and efficient methods for phylogenetic inference in the genomic era. Mol. Biol. Evol.37, 1530–1534 (2020).

    CASArticle Google Scholar

  14. 14.

    Tavaré, S. Some probabilistic and statistical problems in the analysis of DNA sequences. In Proc. of the Symposium on Some Mathematical Questions in Biology: DNA Sequence Analysis. Lectures on Mathematics in the Life Sciences (ed. Miura, R. M.) 57–86 (American Mathematical Society, 1986).

  15. 15.

    Yang, Z. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic estimation from DNA sequences with variable rates over sites: approximate methods. J. Mol. Evol.39, 306–314 (1994).

    CASArticle Google Scholar

  16. 16.

    Minh, B. Q., Nguyen, M. A. T. & von Haeseler, A. Ultrafast approximation for phylogenetic bootstrap. Mol. Biol. Evol.30, 1188–1195 (2013).

    CASArticle Google Scholar

Download references


This work was funded by the Wellcome Trust Collaborative Award (grant no. 206298/Z/17/Z—ARTIC Network), the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant no. 725422-ReservoirDOCS), the European Commission Seventh Framework Programme (grant no. FP7/2007–2013)/European Research Council (grant no. 614725-PATHPHYLODYN), the UK COVID-19 Genomics Consortium, the Oxford Martin School and the Australian Research Council (grant no. FL170100022).

Author information


  1. Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    Andrew Rambaut, Áine O’Toole, Verity Hill & John T. McCrone

  2. Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases and Biosecurity, School of Life and Environmental Sciences and School of Medical Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    Edward C. Holmes

  3. Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Christopher Ruis

  4. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Louis du Plessis & Oliver G. Pybus


A.R., E.C.H. and O.G.P. conceived, designed and supervised the study. Á.O.T., J.T.M. and A.R. developed the phylogenetic methods. A.R., Á.O.T., V.H., J.T.M., C.R., L.D.P. and O.G.P. analysed and interpreted the viral genomes. A.R., E.C.H., Á.O.T., V.H. and O.G.P. wrote the paper with input from the other authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Andrew Rambaut, Edward C. Holmes or Oliver G. Pybus.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Peer reviewer reports are available.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rambaut, A., Holmes, E.C., O’Toole, Á. et al. A dynamic nomenclature proposal for SARS-CoV-2 lineages to assist genomic epidemiology. Nat Microbiol5, 1403–1407 (2020).

Download citation

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Further reading

  • IPD 2.0: To derive insights from an evolving SARS-CoV-2 genome

    • Sanket Desai
    • , Aishwarya Rane
    • , Asim Joshi
    •  & Amit Dutt

    BMC Bioinformatics (2021)

  • HAVoC, a bioinformatic pipeline for reference-based consensus assembly and lineage assignment for SARS-CoV-2 sequences

    • Phuoc Thien Truong Nguyen
    • , Ilya Plyusnin
    • , Tarja Sironen
    • , Olli Vapalahti
    • , Ravi Kant
    •  & Teemu Smura

    BMC Bioinformatics (2021)

  • Horizontal gene transfer and recombination analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genes helps discover its close relatives and shed light on its origin

    • Vladimir Makarenkov
    • , Bogdan Mazoure
    • , Guillaume Rabusseau
    •  & Pierre Legendre

    BMC Ecology and Evolution (2021)

  • SARS-CoV-2 complete genome sequencing from the Italian Campania region using a highly automated next generation sequencing system

    • Anna Maria Rachiglio
    • , Luca De Sabato
    • , Cristin Roma
    • , Michele Cennamo
    • , Mariano Fiorenza
    • , Daniela Terracciano
    • , Raffaella Pasquale
    • , Francesca Bergantino
    • , Ernesta Cavalcanti
    • , Gerardo Botti
    • , Gabriele Vaccari
    • , Giuseppe Portella
    •  & Nicola Normanno

    Journal of Translational Medicine (2021)

  • Profiling SARS-CoV-2 mutation fingerprints that range from the viral pangenome to individual infection quasispecies

    • Billy T. Lau
    • , Dmitri Pavlichin
    • , Anna C. Hooker
    • , Alison Almeda
    • , Giwon Shin
    • , Jiamin Chen
    • , Malaya K. Sahoo
    • , Chun Hong Huang
    • , Benjamin A. Pinsky
    • , Ho Joon Lee
    •  & Hanlee P. Ji

    Genome Medicine (2021)


Marijuana and Cancer

Marijuana is the name given to the dried buds and leaves of varieties of the Cannabis sativa plant, which can grow wild in warm and tropical climates throughout the world and be cultivated commercially. It goes by many names, including pot, grass, cannabis, weed, hemp, hash, marihuana, ganja, and dozens of others.

Marijuana has been used in herbal remedies for centuries. Scientists have identified many biologically active components in marijuana. These are called cannabinoids. The two best studied components are the chemicals delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (often referred to as THC), and cannabidiol (CBD). Other cannabinoids are being studied.

At this time, the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) lists marijuana and its cannabinoids as Schedule I controlled substances. This means that they cannot legally be prescribed, possessed, or sold under federal law. Whole or crude marijuana (including marijuana oil or hemp oil) is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for any medical use. But the use of marijuana to treat some medical conditions is legal under state laws in many states.

Dronabinol, a pharmaceutical form of THC, and a man-made cannabinoid drug called nabilone are approved by the FDA to treat some conditions.


Different compounds in marijuana have different actions in the human body. For example, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) seems to cause the "high" reported by marijuana users, and also can help relieve pain and nausea, reduce inflammation, and can act as an antioxidant. Cannabidiol (CBD) can help treat seizures, can reduce anxiety and paranoia, and can counteract the "high" caused by THC.

Different cultivars (strains or types) and even different crops of marijuana plants can have varying amounts of these and other active compounds. This means that marijuana can have different effects based on the strain used.

The effects of marijuana also vary depending on how marijuana compounds enter the body. The most common ways to use marijuana are in food (edible marijuana) and by smoking or vaping it (inhaled marijuana):

  • Edible marijuana: When taken by mouth, such as when it's used in cooking oils, drinks (beer, tea, vodka, soda), baked goods (biscuits, brownies, cookies), and candy, the THC is absorbed poorly and can take hours to be absorbed. Once it’s absorbed, it’s processed by the liver, which produces a second psychoactive compound (a substance that acts on the brain and changes mood or consciousness) that affects the brain differently than THC. It's important to know that the amount of THC in foods that have had marijuana added to them is often unknown and getting too much THC might cause symptoms of overdose.
  • Inhaled marijuana: When marijuana is smoked or vaporized, THC enters the bloodstream and goes to the brain quickly. The second psychoactive compound is produced in small amounts, and so has less effect. The effects of inhaled marijuana fade faster than marijuana taken by mouth.

How can marijuana affect symptoms of cancer?

A number of small studies of smoked marijuana found that it can be helpful in treating nausea and vomiting from cancer chemotherapy.

A few studies have found that inhaled (smoked or vaporized) marijuana can be helpful treatment of neuropathic pain (pain caused by damaged nerves).

Smoked marijuana has also helped improve food intake in HIV patients in studies.

There are no studies in people of the effects of marijuana oil or hemp oil.

Studies have long shown that people who took marijuana extracts in clinical trials tended to need less pain medicine.

More recently, scientists reported that THC and other cannabinoids such as CBD slow growth and/or cause death in certain types of cancer cells growing in lab dishes. Some animal studies also suggest certain cannabinoids may slow growth and reduce spread of some forms of cancer.

There have been some early clinical trials of cannabinoids in treating cancer in humans and more studies are planned. While the studies so far have shown that cannabinoids can be safe in treating cancer, they do not show that they help control or cure the disease.

Relying on marijuana alone as treatment while avoiding or delaying conventional medical care for cancer may have serious health consequences.

Possible harms of marijuana

Marijuana can also pose some harms to users. While the most common effect of marijuana is a feeling of euphoria ("high"), it also can lower the user’s control over movement, cause disorientation, and sometimes cause unpleasant thoughts or feelings of anxiety and paranoia.

Smoked marijuana delivers THC and other cannabinoids to the body, but it also delivers harmful substances to users and those close by, including many of the same substances found in tobacco smoke.

Because marijuana plants come in different strains with different levels of active compounds, it can make each user’s experience very hard to predict. The effects can also differ based on how deeply and for how long the user inhales. Likewise, the effects of ingesting marijuana orally can vary between people. Also, some chronic users can develop an unhealthy dependence on marijuana.

Cannabinoid drugs

There are 2 chemically pure drugs based on marijuana compounds that have been approved in the US for medical use.

  • Dronabinol (Marinol®) is a gelatin capsule containing delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) that’s approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy as well as weight loss and poor appetite in patients with AIDS.
  • Nabilone (Cesamet®) is a synthetic cannabinoid that acts much like THC. It can be taken by mouth to treat nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy when other drugs have not worked.

Nabiximols is a cannabinoid drug still under study in the US. It’s a mouth spray made up of a whole-plant extract with THC and cannabidiol (CBD) in an almost one to one mix. It’s available in Canada and parts of Europe to treat pain linked to cancer, as well as muscle spasms and pain from multiple sclerosis (MS). It’s not approved in the US at this time, but it’s being tested in clinical trials to see if it can help a number of conditions.

How can cannabinoid drugs affect symptoms of cancer?

Based on a number of studies, dronabinol can be helpful for reducing nausea and vomiting linked to chemotherapy.

Dronabinol has also been found to help improve food intake and prevent weight loss in patients with HIV. In studies of cancer patients, though, it wasn’t better than placebo or another drug (megestrol acetate).

Nabiximols has shown promise for helping people with cancer pain that’s unrelieved by strong pain medicines, but it hasn’t been found to be helpful in every study done. Research is still being done on this drug.

Side effects of cannabinoid drugs

Like many other drugs, the prescription cannabinoids, dronabinol and nabilone, can cause side effects and complications.

Some people have trouble with increased heart rate, decreased blood pressure (especially when standing up), dizziness or lightheadedness, and fainting. These drugs can cause drowsiness as well as mood changes or a feeling of being “high” that some people find uncomfortable. They can also worsen depression, mania, or other mental illness. Some patients taking nabilone in studies reported hallucinations. The drugs may increase some effects of sedatives, sleeping pills, or alcohol, such as sleepiness and poor coordination. Patients have also reported problems with dry mouth and trouble with recent memory.

Older patients may have more problems with side effects and are usually started on lower doses.

People who have had emotional illnesses, paranoia, or hallucinations may find their symptoms are worse when taking cannabinoid drugs.

Talk to your doctor about what you should expect when taking one of these drugs. It’s a good idea to have someone with you when you first start taking one of these drugs and after any dose changes.

What does the American Cancer Society say about the use of marijuana in people with cancer?

The American Cancer Society supports the need for more scientific research on cannabinoids for cancer patients, and recognizes the need for better and more effective therapies that can overcome the often debilitating side effects of cancer and its treatment. The Society also believes that the classification of marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance by the US Drug Enforcement Administration imposes numerous conditions on researchers and deters scientific study of cannabinoids. Federal officials should examine options consistent with federal law for enabling more scientific study on marijuana.

Medical decisions about pain and symptom management should be made between the patient and his or her doctor, balancing evidence of benefit and harm to the patient, the patient’s preferences and values, and any laws and regulations that may apply.

The American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN), the Society’s advocacy affiliate, has not taken a position on legalization of marijuana for medical purposes because of the need for more scientific research on marijuana’s potential benefits and harms. However, ACS CAN opposes the smoking or vaping of marijuana and other cannabinoids in public places because the carcinogens in marijuana smoke pose numerous health hazards to the patient and others in the patient’s presence.

  1. Spark examples jar
  2. Shadow build poe
  3. Sending stone 5e

loupe grossissement x1000

14 janvier 2021 Non classé

Maison De La Peinture Villefranche De Rouergue, Reconversion Infirmière En Diététicienne, Responsable De Salle Buffalo Grill, Sans Vergogne En 6 Lettres, Accident Souleuvre-en-bocage, Comment Calculer La Distance Terre-lune 4ème, Chsct Fonction Publique Territoriale 2020, Analyse Critique Méthodologie, Repeter Mots Fléchés 7 Lettres, Belin Physique-chimie Terminale,

vulputate, pulvinar neque. Praesent luctus nec commodo inSours:
5 Most Popular Strains of Cannabis!

Genetic tools weed out misconceptions of strain reliability in Cannabis sativa: implications for a budding industry

Author informationArticle notesCopyright and License informationDisclaimer

Received 2018 Sep 25; Accepted 2019 Jan 1.

Copyright © The Author(s) 2019

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.

Supplementary Materials

Additional file 1: Table S1. Twelve popular strains and their described assignment of Sativa and Indica according to six online data bases of Cannabis strain information. Table S2. Primer information includes the multiplex assignment, primer name, microsatellite repeat and number of units repeated in the “Purple Kush” draft genome (National Center for Biotechnology Information, accession AGQN00000000.1), forward and reverse sequences (asterisk denotes the sequence to which the tag is attached), the universal tag (sequence revealed at the bottom of the table), dye (VIC, FAM, PET), optimized annealing temperature, MgCl uL volume,amplified fragment size range, and the number of alleles in the data set. (XLSX 52 kb)

42238_2019_1_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (14K)

GUID: 359C3BF8-5DC0-4DA9-A614-C72EB1F57962

Additional file 2: Figure S1. STRUCTURE HARVESTER graph indicating K = 2 is highly supported. (ΔK = 146.56) as the number of genetic groups for this data. (PDF 55 kb)

42238_2019_1_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (132K)

GUID: 30CE87A5-AC09-4DF3-86B7-AA22E06C7870

Additional file 3: Figure S2. Bar plot graphs generated from STRUCTURE analysis for individuals from twelve popular strains (Table ​2), dividing genotypes into two genetic groups, K = 2. Each sample includes the coded location and city from where it was acquired. Each bar indicates proportion of assignment to genotype 1 (blue) and genotype 2 (yellow). (PDF 65 kb)

42238_2019_1_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (147K)

GUID: A3D8CC33-0C9A-486D-AC15-041FFEF9D242

Additional file 4: Figure S3. A genetic heat map chart of Lynch & Ritland pairwise genetic relatedness (r) values for 122 samples where purple indicates no genetic relatedness (minimum value − 1.09) and green indicates a high degree of relatedness (maximum value 1.0). Sample strain names and location of origin are indicated along the top and down the left side of the chart. Pairwise genetic relatedness (r) values are given in each cell and cell color reflects the degree to which two individuals are related. (PDF 239 kb)

42238_2019_1_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (1.2M)

GUID: 2FFD9CF5-2E32-417A-A5AE-B835566B761E

Data Availability Statement

The names for each dispensary are coded to protect the identity of businesses where genotypes may deviate from the norm. The locations of the dispensaries in this experiment were chosen randomly, therefore the experiment can be replicated without precise location information for the samples used here. Flower samples were purchased from dispensaries based on what was available on the shelf at the time of purchase. Dispensaries did not provide any additional information on the flower purchased other than the standard information printed on the label (strain name and cannabinoid levels). All specimens were purchased directly from dispensaries and samples were purchased from a customer perspective as-is, and, as such, voucher specimens are unavailable. All purchased material was exhausted in genetic and chemical analyses (for another study). Purchase receipts and original packaging of samples (when possible) were retained for reference. The dataset used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.



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.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s42238-019-0001-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Keywords: Cannabis, Cannabis sativa, Consumer, Genotype, Hemp, Marijuana, Microsatellite, Phenotype, Strain


Cultivation of Cannabis sativa L. dates back thousands of years (Abel 2013) but has been largely illegal worldwide for the best part of the last century. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency considers Cannabis a Schedule I drug with no “accepted medical use in treatment in the United States” (United States Congress n.d.), but laws allowing Cannabis for use as hemp, medicine, and some adult recreational use are emerging (ProCon 2018). Global restrictions have limited Cannabis related research, and there are relatively few genetic studies focused on strains (Lynch et al. 2016; Soler et al. 2017), but studies with multiple accessions of a particular strain show variation (Lynch et al. 2016; Soler et al. 2017; Sawler et al. 2015).

Currently, the Cannabis industry has no way to verify strains. Consequently, suppliers are unable to provide confirmation of strains, and consumers have to trust the printed name on a label matches the product inside the package. Reports of inconsistencies, along with the history of underground trading and growing in the absence of a verification system, reinforce the likelihood that strain names may be unreliable identifiers for Cannabis products at the present time. Without verification systems in place, there is the potential for misidentification and mislabeling of plants, creating names for plants of unknown origin, and even re-naming or re-labeling plants with prominent names for better sale. Cannabis taxonomy is complex (Emboden 1974; Schultes et al. 1974; Hillig 2005; Russo 2007; Clarke and Merlin 2013; Clarke et al. 2015; Clarke and Merlin 2016; Small et al. 1976; Small 2015a), but given the success of using genetic markers, such as microsatellites, to determine varieties in other crops, we suggest that similar genetic based approaches should be used to identify Cannabis strains in medical and recreational marketplaces.

There are an estimated ~ 3.5 million medical marijuana patients in the United States (U.S.) (Leafly 2018b) and various levels of recent legalization in many states has led to a surge of new strains (Leafly 2018a; Wikileaf 2018). Breeders are producing new Cannabis strains with novel chemical profiles resulting in various psychotropic effects and relief for an array of symptoms associated with medical conditions including (but not limited to): glaucoma (Tomida et al. 2004), Chron’s Disease (Naftali et al. 2013), epilepsy (U.S. Food and Drug Administration 2018; Maa and Figi 2014), chronic pain, depression, anxiety, PTSD, autism, and fibromyalgia (Naftali et al. 2013; Cousijn et al. 2018; Ogborne et al. 2000; Borgelt et al. 2013; ProCon 2016).

There are primarily two Cannabis usage groups, which are well supported by genetic analyses (Lynch et al. 2016; Soler et al. 2017; Sawler et al. 2015; Dufresnes et al. 2017): hemp defined by a limit of < 0.3% Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in the U.S., and marijuana or drug-types with moderate to high THC concentrations (always > 0.3% THC). Within the two major groups Cannabis has been further divided into strains (varietals) in the commercial marketplace, and particularly for the drug types, strains are assigned to one of three categories: Sativa which reportedly has uplifting and more psychotropic effects, Indica which reportedly has more relaxing and sedative effects, and Hybrid which is the result of breeding Sativa and Indica types resulting in intermediate effects. The colloquial terms Sativa, Hybrid, and Indica are used throughout this document even though these terms do not align with the current formal botanical taxonomy for Cannabis sativa and proposed Cannabis indica (McPartland 2017; Piomelli and Russo 2016). We feel the colloquial terminology is necessary here as the approach for this study was from a consumer view, and these are the terms offered as common descriptors for the general public (Leafly 2018a; Wikileaf 2018; 2018; NCSM 2018; 2018; Seedfinder 2018). Genetic analyses have not provided a clear consensus for higher taxonomic distinction among these commonly described Cannabis types (Lynch et al. 2016; Sawler et al. 2015), and whether there is a verifiable difference between Sativa and Indica type strains is debated (McPartland 2017; Piomelli and Russo 2016; Erkelens and Hazekamp 2014). However, both the recreational and medical Cannabis communities claim there are distinct differences in effects between Sativa and Indica type strains (Leafly 2018a; Wikileaf 2018; 2018; NCSM 2018; 2018; Seedfinder 2018; Leaf Science 2016; Smith 2012).

Female Cannabis plants are selected based on desirable characters (mother plants) and are produced through cloning and, in some cases, self-fertilization to produce seeds (Green 2005). Cloning allows Cannabis growers to replicate plants, ideally producing consistent products. There are an overwhelming number of Cannabis strains that vary widely in appearance, taste, smell and psychotropic effects (Leafly 2018a; Wikileaf 2018; 2018; NCSM 2018; 2018; Seedfinder 2018). Online databases such as Leafly (2018a) and Wikileaf (2018), for example, provide consumers with information about strains but lack scientific merit for the Cannabis industry to regulate the consistency of strains. Other databases exist ( 2018; NCSM 2018; 2018; Seedfinder 2018), but the method of assignment to the three groups is often undisclosed, confounded, or mysterious. Wikileaf reports a numeric percentage of assignment to Sativa and/or Indica (Wikileaf 2018), which is why we chose it as our reference scale of ancestry, although there is some disagreement among online sources (Additional file 1: Table S1). To our knowledge, there have not been any published scientific studies specifically investigating the genetic consistency of strains at multiple points of sale for Cannabis consumers.

Breeders and growers choose Cannabis plants with desirable characters (phenotype) related to flowers, cannabinoid profile, and terpene production. Phenotype is a product of genotype and environment. Cannabis is considerably variable and extraordinarily plastic in response to varying environmental conditions (Onofri and Mandolino 2017). Therefore, determining sources of variation, at the most basic level, requires examining genetic differences. Strains propagated through cloning should have minimal genetic variation. Eight of the strains examined in this study are reportedly clone only strains indicating there should be little to no genetic variation within these strains. That being said, it is possible for mutations to accumulate over multiple generations of cloning (Gabriel et al. 1993; Hojsgaard and Horandl 2015), but these should not be widespread. Self-fertilization and subsequent seed production may also be used to grow a particular strain. With most commercial plant products growers go through multiple generations of self-fertilization and backcrossing to remove genetic variability within a strain and provide a consistent product (Riggs 1988). However, for many Cannabis strains, the extent of genetic variability stabilization is uncertain. It has been observed that novel Cannabis strains developed through crossing are often phenotypically variable (Green 2005), which could be the result of seed producers growing seeds that are not stabilized enough to produce a consistent phenotype. Soler et al. (2017) examined the genetic diversity and structure of Cannabis cultivars grown from seed and found considerable variation, suggesting that seed lots are not consistent. Given the uncertainties surrounding named Cannabis strains, genetic data provides an ideal path to examine how widespread genetic inconsistencies might be.

In the U.S., protection against commercial exploitation, trademarking, and recognition of intellectual property for developers of new plant cultivars is provided through the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and The Plant Variety Protection Act of 1970 (United States Department of Agriculture 1970). Traditionally, morphological characters were used to define new varieties in crops such as grapes (Vitis vinifera L.), olives (Olea europea L.) and apples (Malus domestica Borkh.). With the rapid development of new varieties in these types of crops, morphological characters have become increasingly difficult to distinguish. Currently, quantitative and/or molecular characters are often used to demonstrate uniqueness among varieties. Microsatellite genotyping enables growers and breeders of new cultivars to demonstrate uniqueness through variable genetic profiles (Rongwen et al. 1995). Microsatellite genotyping has been used to distinguish cultivars and hybrid varieties of multiple crop varietals within species (Rongwen et al. 1995; Guilford et al. 1997; Hokanson et al. 1998; Cipriani et al. 2002; Belaj et al. 2004; Sarri et al. 2006; Baldoni et al. 2009; Stajner et al. 2011; Costantini et al. 2005; Pellerone et al. 2001; Poljuha et al. 2008; Muzzalupo et al. 2009). Generally, 3–12 microsatellite loci are sufficient to accurately identify varietals and detect misidentified individuals (Cipriani et al. 2002; Belaj et al. 2004; Sarri et al. 2006; Baldoni et al. 2009; Poljuha et al. 2008; Muzzalupo et al. 2009). Cannabis varieties however, are not afforded any legal protections, as the USDA considers it an “ineligible commodity” (United States Department of Agriculture 2014) but genetic variety identification systems provide a model by which Cannabis strains could be developed, identified, registered, and protected.

We used a well-established genetic technique to compare commercially available C. sativa strains to determine if products with the same name purchased from different sources have genetic congruence. This study is highly unique in that we approached sample acquisition as a common retail consumer by purchasing flower samples from dispensaries based on what was available at the time of purchase. All strains were purchased as-is, with no additional information provided by the facility, other than the identifying label. This study aimed to determine if: (1) any genetic distinction separates the common perception of Sativa, Indica and Hybrid types; (2) consistent genetic identity is found within a variety of different strain accessions obtained from different facilities; (3) there is evidence of misidentification or mislabeling.


Genetic material

Cannabis samples for 30 strains were acquired from 20 dispensaries or donors in three states (Table 1). All samples used in this study were obtained legally from either retail (Colorado and Washington), medical (California) dispensaries, or as a donation from legally obtained samples (Greeley 1). DNA was extracted using a modified CTAB extraction protocol (Doyle 1987) with 0.035–0.100 g of dried flower tissue per extraction. Several databases exist with various descriptive Sativa and Indica assignments for thousands of strains (Additional file 1: Table S1). For this study proportions of Sativa and Indica phenotypes from Wikileaf (2018) were used. Analyses were performed on the full 122-sample dataset (Table ​1). The 30 strains were assigned a proportion of Sativa according to online information (Table 2). Twelve of the 30 strains were designated as ‘popular’ due to higher availability among the dispensaries as well as online information reporting the most popular strains (Table ​2) (Rahn 2015; Rahn 2016; Rahn et al. 2016; Escondido 2014). Results from popular strains are highlighted to show levels of variation in strains that are more widely available or that are in higher demand.

Table 1

Cannabis samples (122) from 30 strains with the reported proportion of Sativa from Wikileaf (2018) and the city location and state where each sample was acquired. (SLO: San Luis Obispo)

Durban Poison100Boulder 1COOG Kush55Denver 3CO
Durban Poison100Boulder 3COOG Kush55Fort Collins 3CO
Durban Poison100Denver 1COOG Kush55Garden City 2CO
Durban Poison100Denver 2COOG Kush55SLO 1CA
Durban Poison100Fort Collins 3COBlue Dream50Boulder 1CO
Durban Poison100Fort Collins 4COBlue Dream50Boulder 2CO
Durban Poison100Garden City 1COBlue Dream50Boulder 3CO
Durban Poison100Garden City 2COBlue Dream50Denver 1CO
Durban Poison100Union Gap 1WABlue Dream50Garden City 4CO
Hawaiian90Boulder 1COBlue Dream50Garden City 4CO
Hawaiian90Fort Collins 2COBlue Dream50SLO 2CA
Sour Diesel90Boulder 1COBlue Dream50SLO 3CA
Sour Diesel90Boulder 3COBlue Dream50SLO 4CA
Sour Diesel90Greeley 1COTahoe OG50Boulder 1CO
Sour Diesel90Denver 4COTahoe OG50Denver 1CO
Sour Diesel90Fort Collins 3COTahoe OG50Fort Collins 4CO
Sour Diesel90Garden City 1COTahoe OG50SLO 3CA
Sour Diesel90Garden City 2COChemdawgDa40Boulder 1CO
Trainwreck90Denver 1COChemDawg45Boulder 2CO
Trainwreck90Garden City 1COChemDawg45Boulder 3CO
Island Sweet Skunk80Boulder 1COChemdawgDa40Denver 1CO
Island Sweet Skunk80Garden City 1COChemdawg 9140Denver 5CO
Island Sweet Skunk80Garden City 2COChemdog 1a40Garden City 1CO
AK-4765Boulder 1COChemDawg45Garden City 2CO
AK-4765Denver 3COHeadband45Garden City 1CO
AK-4765SLO 2CAHeadband45Greeley 1CO
Golden Goat65Boulder 1COBanana Kush40Denver 1CO
Golden Goat65Boulder 2COBanana Kush40Garden City 1CO
Golden Goat65Boulder 3COBanana Kush40Garden City 2CO
Golden Goat65Denver 1COBanana Kush40Greeley 1CO
Golden Goat65Garden City 1COGirl Scout Cookies40Boulder 1CO
Golden Goat65Garden City 1COGirl Scout Cookies40Denver 1CO
Golden Goat65Garden City 2COGirl Scout Cookies40Fort Collins 2CO
Green Crack65Fort Collins 2COGirl Scout Cookies40Garden City 2CO
Green Crack65Garden City 1COGirl Scout Cookies40Garden City 3CO
Green Crack65SLO 2CAGirl Scout Cookies40SLO 3CA
Bruce Banner60Boulder 1COGirl Scout Cookies40SLO 4CA
Bruce Banner60Denver 1COGirl Scout Cookies40Union Gap 1WA
Bruce Banner60Denver 4COJack Flash55Boulder 1CO
Bruce Banner60Fort Collins 3COJack Flash55Denver 3CO
Bruce Banner60Fort Collins 4COLarry OG40Boulder 1CO
Bruce Banner60Garden City 1COLarry OG40Denver 4CO
Flo60Boulder 1COLarry OG40SLO 3CA
Flo60Denver 1COG-1330Boulder 3CO
Flo60Fort Collins 2COG-1330Fort Collins 3CO
Flo60Garden City 1COG-1330Garden City 2CO
Jillybean60Garden City 1COLemon Diesel30Boulder 1CO
Jillybean60Garden City 2COLemon Diesel30Garden City 2CO
Jillybean60Greeley 1COHash Plant20Fort Collins 3CO
Pineapple Express60Boulder 1COHash Plant (Australian)20Garden City 1CO
Pineapple Express60Denver 1COHash Plant20Garden City 1CO
Pineapple Express60Garden City 2COHash Plant20Garden City 2CO
Pineapple Express60Longmont 1COBubba Kush 9820Denver 1CO
Pineapple Express60Union GapWAPre-98 Bubba Kush15Fort Collins 3CO
Purple Haze60Denver 4COGrape Ape0Boulder 1CO
Purple Haze60Greeley 1COGrape Ape0Union Gap 1WA
Purple Haze60Fort Collins 1COPurple Kush0Denver 1CO
Tangerineb60Denver 1COPurple Kush0Garden City 3CO
Tangerineb60Garden City 1COPurple Kush0Garden City 4CO
Jack Herer55Garden City 3CO
Jack Herer55SLO 1CA
Jack Herer55Union Gap 1WA

Open in a separate window

Table 2

Summary of Cannabis samples (122) from 30 strains with the reported proportion of Sativa retrieved from Wikileaf (2018). Abbreviations used for Lynch & Ritland (1999) relatedness statistics (Additional file 4: Figure S3) are included, and the proportions of membership for genotype 1 and genotype 2 from the STRUCTURE (Fig. ​1) expressed as a percentage

StrainAbbr# SamplesSativa PercentageGenotype 1 (% average)Genotype 2 (% average)Standard Deviation
Durban PoisonaDuPo910086149.9
Sour DieselaSoDi790148653.74
Island Sweet SkunkISS3809379.19
Golden GoatabGoGo76568322.12
Green CrackbGrCr36560403.54
Bruce BanneraBrBa660198128.99
Pineapple ExpressaPiEx56062381.41
Purple HazePuHa360772312.02
Jack HererJaHe35566347.78
OG KushabOGKu455287219.09
Blue DreamabBlDr950802021.21
Tahoe OGTaOG450267416.97
Banana KushaBaKu44052488.49
Girl Scout CookiesabGSC840257510.61
Jack FlashJaFl24096439.6
Larry OGLaOG34079323.33
Lemon DieselbLeDi230851538.89
Hash PlantHaPl420376312.02
Pre98-Bubba KushPBK2157935.66
Grape ApeGrAp20554538.89
Purple KushabPuKu40297120.51

Open in a separate window

Microsatellite development

The Cannabis draft genome from “Purple Kush” (GenBank accession AGQN00000000.1) was scanned for microsatellite repeat regions using MSATCOMMANDER-1.0.8-beta (Faircloth 2008). Primers were developed de-novo flanking microsatellites with 3–6 nucleotide repeat units (Additional file 1: Table S2). Seven of the microsatellites had trinucleotide motifs, two had hexanucleotide motifs, and one had a tetranucleotide motif (Additional file 1: Table S2). One primer in each pair was tagged with a 5′ universal sequence (M13 or T7) so that a matching sequence with a fluorochrome tag could be incorporated via PCR (Schwabe et al. 2015). Ten primer pairs produced consistent peaks within the predicted size range and were used for the genetic analyses herein (Additional file 1: Table S2).

PCR and data scoring

Microsatellite loci (Additional file 1: Table S2) were amplified in 12 μL reactions using 1.0 μL DNA (10–20 ng/ μL), 0.6 μL fluorescent tag (5 μM; FAM, VIC, or PET), 0.6 μL non-tagged primer (5 μM), 0.6 μL tagged primer (0.5 μM), 0.7 μL dNTP mix (2.5 mM), 2.4 μL GoTaq Flexi Buffer (Promega, Madison, WI, USA), 0.06 μL GoFlexi taq polymerase (Promega), 0.06 μL BSA (Bovine Serum Albumin 100X), 0.5–6.0 μL MgCl or MgSO4, and 0.48–4.98 μL dH2O. An initial 5 min denaturing step was followed by thirty five amplification cycles with a 1 min denaturing at 95 °C, 1 min annealing at primer-specific temperatures and 1 min extension at 72 °C. Two multiplexes (Additional file 1: Table S2) based on fragment size and fluorescent tag were assembled and 2 μL of each PCR product were combined into multiplexes up to a total volume of 10 μL. From the multiplexed product, 2 μL was added to Hi-Di formamide and LIZ 500 size standard (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) for electrophoresis on a 3730 Genetic Analyzer (Applied Biosystems) at the Arizona State University DNA Lab. Fragments were sized using GENEIOUS 8.1.8 (Biomatters Ltd).

Genetic statistical analyses

GENALEX ver. 6.4.1 (Peakall and Smouse 2006; Peakall and Smouse 2012) was used to calculate deviation from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) and number of alleles for each locus (Additional file 1: Table S2). Linkage disequilibrium was tested using GENEPOP ver. 4.0.10 (Raymond and Rousset 1995; Rousset 2008). Presence of null alleles was assessed using MICRO-CHECKER (Van Oosterhout et al. 2004). Genotypes were analyzed using the Bayesian cluster analysis program STRUCTURE ver. 2.4.2 (Pritchard et al. 2000). Burn-in and run-lengths of 50,000 generations were used with ten independent replicates for each STRUCTURE analysis. STRUCTURE HARVESTER (Earl and vonHoldt 2012) was used to determine the K value to best describe the likely number of genetic groups for the data set. GENALEX produced a Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) to examine variation in the dataset. Lynch & Ritland (1999) mean pairwise relatedness (r) statistics were calculated between all 122 samples resulting in 7381 pairwise r-values showing degrees of relatedness. For all strains the r-mean and standard deviation (SD) was calculated averaging among all samples. Obvious outliers were determined by calculating the lowest r-mean and iteratively removing those samples to determine the relatedness among the remaining samples in the subset. A graph was generated for 12 popular strains (Table ​2) to show how the r-mean value change within a strain when outliers were removed.


The microsatellite analyses show genetic inconsistencies in Cannabis strains acquired from different facilities. While popular strains were widely available, some strains were found only at two dispensaries (Table ​1). Since the aim of the research was not to identify specific locations where strain inconsistencies were found, dispensaries are coded to protect the identity of businesses.

There was no evidence of linkage-disequilibrium when all samples were treated as a single population. All loci deviate significantly from HWE, and all but one locus was monomorphic in at least two strains. All but one locus had excess homozygosity and therefore possibly null alleles. Given the inbred nature and extensive hybridization of Cannabis, deviations from neutral expectations are not surprising, and the lack of linkage-disequilibrium indicates that the markers are spanning multiple regions of the genome. The number of alleles ranged from 5 to 10 across the ten loci (Additional file 1: Table S2). There was no evidence of null alleles due to scoring errors.

STRUCTURE HARVESTER calculated high support (∆K = 146.56) for two genetic groups, K = 2 (Additional file 2: Figure S1). STRUCTURE assignment is shown in Fig. 1 with the strains ordered by the purported proportions of Sativa phenotype (Wikileaf 2018). A clear genetic distinction between Sativa and Indica types would assign 100% Sativa strains (“Durban Poison”) to one genotype and assign 100% Indica strains (“Purple Kush”) to the other genotype (Table ​2, Fig. 1, Additional file 3: Figure S2). Division into two genetic groups does not support the commonly described Sativa and Indica phenotypes. “Durban Poison” and “Purple Kush” follow what we would expect if there was support for the Sativa/Indica division. Seven of nine “Durban Poison” (100% Sativa) samples had 96% assignment to genotype 1, and three of four “Purple Kush” (100% Indica) had 89% assignment to genotype 2 (Fig. 1, Additional file 3: Figure S2). However, samples of “Hawaiian” (90% Sativa) and “Grape Ape” (100% Indica) do not show consistent patterns of predominant assignment to genotype 1 or 2. Interestingly, two predominantly Sativa strains “Durban Poison” (100% Sativa) and “Sour Diesel” (90% Sativa) have 86 and 14% average assignment to genotype 1, respectively. Hybrid strains such as “Blue Dream” and “Tahoe OG” (50% Sativa) should result in some proportion of shared ancestry, with assignment to both genotype 1 and 2. Eight of nine samples of “Blue Dream” show > 80% assignment to genotype 1, and three of four samples of “Tahoe OG” show < 7% assignment to genotype 1.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 42238_2019_1_Fig1_HTML.jpg

Open in a separate window

Fig. 1

Bar plot graphs generated from STRUCTURE analysis for 122 individuals from 30 strains dividing genotypes into two genetic groups, K=2. Samples were arranged by purported proportions from 100% Sativa to 100% Indica (Wikileaf 2018) and then alphabetically within each strain by city. Each strain includes reported proportion of Sativa in parentheses (Wikileaf 2018) and each sample includes the coded location and city from where it was acquired. Each bar indicates proportion of assignment to genotype 1 (blue) and genotype 2 (yellow)

A Principal Coordinate Analyses (PCoA) was conducted using GENALEX (Fig. 2). Principal Coordinate Analyses (PCoA) is organized by color from 100% Sativa types (red), through all levels of Hybrid types (green 50:50), to 100% Indica types (purple; Fig. 2). Strain types with the same reported proportions are the same color but have different symbols. The PCoA of all strains represents 14.90% of the variation in the data on coordinate axis 1, 9.56% on axis 2, and 7.07% on axis 3 (not shown).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 42238_2019_1_Fig2_HTML.jpg

Open in a separate window

Fig. 2

Principal Coordinates Analysis (PCoA) generated in GENALEX using Nei’s genetic distance matrix. Samples are a color-coded continuum by proportion of Sativa (Table ​1) with the strain name given for each sample: Sativa type (red: 100% Sativa proportion, Hybrid type (dark green:50% Sativa proportion), and Indica type (purple: 0% Sativa proportion). Different symbols are used to indicate different strains within reported phenotype. Coordinate axis 1 explains 14.29% of the variation, coordinate axis 2 explains 9.56% of the variation, and Coordinate axis 3 (not shown) explains 7.07%

Lynch & Ritland (1999) pairwise genetic relatedness (r) between all 122 samples was calculated in GENALEX. The resulting 7381 pairwise r-values were converted to a heat map using purple to indicate the lowest pairwise relatedness value (− 1.09) and green to indicate the highest pairwise relatedness value (1.00; Additional file 4: Figure S3). Comparisons are detailed for six popular strains (Fig. 3) to illustrate the relationship of samples from different sources and the impact of outliers. Values of close to 1.00 indicate a high degree of relatedness (Lynch and Ritland 1999), which could be indicative of clones or seeds from the same mother (Green 2005; SeedFinder 2018a). First order relatives (full siblings or mother-daughter) share 50% genetic identity (r-value = 0.50), second order relatives (half siblings or cousins) share 25% genetic identity (r-value = 0.25), and unrelated individuals are expected to have an r-value of 0.00 or lower. Negative values arise when individuals are less related than expected under normal panmictic conditions (Moura et al. 2013; Norman et al. 2017).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 42238_2019_1_Fig3_HTML.jpg

Open in a separate window

Fig. 3

Heat maps of six prominent strains (a-f) using Lynch & Ritland (Faircloth 2008) pairwise genetic relatedness (r) values: purple indicates no genetic relatedness (minimum value -1.09) and green indicates a high degree of relatedness (maximum value 1.0). Sample strain names and location of origin are indicated along the top and down the left side of the chart. Pairwise genetic relatedness (r) values are given in each cell and cell color reflects the degree to which two individuals are related

Individual pairwise r-values were averaged within strains to calculate the overall r-mean as a measure of genetic similarity within strains which ranged from − 0.22 (“Tangerine”) to 0.68 (“Island Sweet Skunk”) (Table 3). Standard deviations ranged from 0.04 (“Jack Herer”) to 0.51 (“Bruce Banner”). The strains with higher standard deviation values indicate a wide range of genetic relatedness within a strain, while low values indicate that samples within a strain share similar levels of genetic relatedness. In order to determine how outliers impact the overall relatedness in a strain, the farthest outlier (lowest pairwise r-mean value) was removed and the overall r-means and SD values within strains were recalculated (Table ​3). In all strains, the overall r-means increased when outliers were removed. In strains with more than three samples, a second outlier was removed and the overall r-means and SD values were recalculated. Overall r-means were used to determine degree of relatedness as clonal (or from stable seed; overall r-means > 0.9), first or higher order relatives (overall r-means 0.46–0.89), second order relatives (overall r-means 0.26–0.45), low levels of relatedness (overall r-means 0.00–0.25), and not related (overall r-means < 0.00). Overall r-means are displayed for all 30 strains (Table ​3), and graphically for 12 popular strains (Fig. 4). Initial overall r-means indicate only three strains are first or higher order relatives (Table ​3). Removing first or second outliers, depending on sample size, revealed that the remaining samples for an additional ten strains are first or higher order relatives (0.46–1.00), three strains are second order relatives (r-means 0.26–0.45), ten strains show low levels of relatedness (r-means 0.00–0.25; Table ​3), and five strains are not related (r-means < 0.00). The impact of outliers can be clearly seen in the heat map for “Durban Poison” which shows the relatedness for 36 comparisons (Fig. 3a), six of which are nearly identical (r-value 0.90–1.0), while 13 are not related (r-value < 0.00). However, removal of two outliers, Denver 1 and Garden City 2, reduces the number of comparisons ranked as not related from 13 to zero.

Table 3

Lynch & Ritland (1999) pairwise relatedness comparisons of overall r-means (Mean) and standard deviations (SD) for samples of 30 strains including r-mean and SD after the first and second (where possible) outliers were removed. Outliers were samples with the lowest r-mean

Strain# SamplesMeasureAll samplesOutlier 1 removedOutlier 2 removed
Durban Poisona9Mean0.310.430.58
Sour Diesela7Mean0.440.570.60
Island Sweet Skunk3Mean0.681.00
Golden Goatab7Mean0.250.310.46
Green Crackb3Mean0.380.89
Bruce Bannera6Mean0.300.510.90
Pineapple Expressa5Mean0.020.040.13
Purple Haze3Mean0.0410.26
Jack Herer3Mean0.100.13
OG Kushab4Mean0.130.25
Blue Dreamab9Mean0.500.630.76
Tahoe OG4Mean0.210.410.54
Banana Kusha4Mean0.130.24
Girl Scout Cookiesab8Mean0.080.130.22
Jack Flash2Mean0.62
Larry OG3Mean0.320.67
Lemon Dieselb2Mean0.10
Hash Plant4Mean0.250.250.43
Pre98-Bubba Kush2Mean−0.02
Grape Ape2Mean−0.05
Purple Kushab4Mean0.030.16

Open in a separate window


Cannabis is becoming an ever-increasing topic of discussion, so it is important that scientists and the public can discuss Cannabis in a similar manner. Currently, not only are Sativa and Indica types disputed (Emboden 1974; Hillig 2005; Russo 2007; Clarke and Merlin 2013; Clarke et al. 2015; Clarke and Merlin 2016; McPartland 2017; Piomelli and Russo 2016; Small 2015b; De Meijer and Keizer 1996), but experts also are at odds about nomenclature for Cannabis (Emboden 1974; Hillig 2005; Russo 2007; Clarke and Merlin 2013; Clarke et al. 2015; Clarke and Merlin 2016; McPartland 2017; Piomelli and Russo 2016; Small 2015b; De Meijer and Keizer 1996). We postulated that genetic profiles from samples with the same strain identifying name should have identical, or at least, highly similar genotypes no matter the source of origin. The multiple genetic analyses used here address paramount questions for the medical Cannabis community and bring empirical evidence to support claims that inconsistent products are being distributed. An important element for this study is that samples were acquired from multiple locations to maximize the potential for variation among samples. Maintenance of the genetic integrity through genotyping is possible only following evaluation of genetic consistency and continuing to overlook this aspect will promote genetic variability and phenotypic variation within Cannabis. Addressing strain variability at the molecular level is of the utmost importance while the industry is still relatively new.

Genetic analyses have consistently found genetic distinction between hemp and marijuana, but no clear distinction has been shown between the common description of Sativa and Indica types (Lynch et al. 2016; Soler et al. 2017; Sawler et al. 2015; Dufresnes et al. 2017; De Meijer and Keizer 1996). We found high support for two genetic groups in the data (Fig. 1) but no discernable distinction or pattern between the described Sativa and Indica strains. The color-coding of strains in the PCoA for all 122 samples allows for visualization of clustering among similar phenotypes by color: Sativa (red/orange), Indica (blue/purple) and Hybrid (green) type strains (Fig. 2). If genetic differentiation of the commonly perceived Sativa and Indica types previously existed, it is no longer detectable in the neutral genetic markers used here. Extensive hybridization and selection have presumably created a homogenizing effect and erased evidence of potentially divergent historical genotypes.

Wikileaf maintains that the proportions of Sativa and Indica reported for strains are largely based on genetics and lineage (Nelson 2016), although online databases do not give scientific evidence for their categorization other than parentage information from breeders and expert opinions. This has seemingly become convoluted over time (Russo 2007; Clarke and Merlin 2013; Small 2015a; Small 2016). Our results show that commonly reported levels of Sativa, Indica and Hybrid type strains are often not reflected in the average genotype. For example, two described Sativa type strains “Durban Poison” and “Sour Diesel”, have contradicting genetic assignments (Fig. 1, Table ​2). This analysis indicates strains with similar reported proportions of Sativa or Indica may have differing genetic assignments. Further illustrating this point is that “Bruce Banner”, “Flo”, “Jillybean”, “Pineapple Express”, “Purple Haze”, and “Tangerine” are all reported to be 60/40 Hybrid type strains, but they clearly have differing levels of admixture both within and among these reportedly similar strains (Table ​2, Fig. 1). From these results, we can conclude that reported ratios or differences between Sativa and Indica phenotypes are not discernable using these genetic markers. Given the lack of genetic distinction between Indica and Sativa types, it is not surprising that reported ancestry proportions are also not supported.

To accurately address reported variation within strains, samples were purchased from various locations, as a customer, with no information of strains other than publicly available online information. Evidence for genetic inconsistencies is apparent within many strains and supported by multiple genetic analyses. Soler et al. (2017) found genetic variability among seeds from the same strain supplied from a single source, indicating genotypes within strains are variable. When examining the STRUCTURE genotype assignments, it is clear that many strains contained one or more divergent samples with a difference of > 0.10 genotype assignment (e.g. “Durban Poison” – Denver 1; Figs. 1, ​3a). Of the 30 strains examined, only four strains had consistent STRUCTURE genotype assignment and admixture among all samples. The number of strains with consistent STRUCTURE assignments increased to 11 and 15 when one or two samples were ignored, respectively. These results indicate that half of the included strains showed relatively stable genetic identity among most samples. Six strains had only two samples, both of which were different (e.g., “Trainwreck” and “Headband”). The remaining nine strains in the analysis had more than one divergent sample (e.g., “Sour Diesel”) or had no consistent genetic pattern among the samples within the strain (e.g., “Girl Scout Cookies”; Table ​3, Figs. 1, ​2, Additional file 3: Figure S2). It is noteworthy that many of the strains used here fell into a range of genetic relatedness indicative of first order siblings (see Lynch & Ritland analysis below) when samples with high genetic divergence were removed from the data set (Table ​3; Figs. 3, ​4). Eight of the 30 strains examined are identified as clone only (Table ​2). All eight of the strains described as clone only show differentiation of at least one sample within the strain (Fig. 1). For example, one sample of “Blue Dream” is clearly differentiated from the remaining eight, and “Girl Scout Cookies” has little genetic cohesiveness among the eight samples (Figs. 1, ​2). Other genetic studies have similarly found genetic inconsistencies across samples within the same strain (Lynch et al. 2016; Soler et al. 2017; Sawler et al. 2015). These results lend support to the idea that unstable genetic lines are being used to produce seed.

A pairwise genetic heat map based on Lynch & Ritland (1999) pairwise genetic relatedness (r-values) was generated to visualize genetic relatedness throughout the data set (Additional file 4: Figure S3). Values of 1.00 (or close to) are assumed to be clones or plants from self-fertilized seed. Six examples of within-strain pairwise comparison heat maps were examined to illustrate common patterns (Fig. 3). The heat map shows that many strains contain samples that are first order relatives or higher (r-value > 0.49). For example, “Sour Diesel” (Fig. 3) has 12 comparisons of first order or above, and six have low/no relationship. There are also values that could be indicative of clones or plants from a stable seed source such as “Blue Dream” (Fig. 3), which has 10 nearly identical comparisons (r-value 0.90–1.00), and no comparisons in “Blue Dream” have negative values. While “Blue Dream” has an initial overall r-mean indicating first order relatedness within the samples (Table ​3, Fig. 4), it still contains more variation than would be expected from a clone only strain (Clone Only Strains n.d.). Other clone-only strains (Clone Only Strains n.d.) e.g. “Girl Scout Cookies” (Table ​3, Fig. 3) and “Golden Goat” (Table ​3, Fig. 3), have a high degree of genetic variation resulting in low overall relatedness values. Outliers were calculated and removed iteratively to demonstrate how they affected the overall r- mean within the 12 popular strains (Table ​3, Fig. 4). In all cases, removing outliers increased the mean r-value, as illustrated by “Bruce Banner”, which increased substantially, from 0.3 to 0.9 when samples with two outlying genotypes were removed. There are unexpected areas in the entire dataset heat map that indicate high degrees of relatedness between different strains (Additional file 4: Figure S3). For example, comparisons between “Golden Goat” and “Island Sweet Skunk” (overall r- mean 0.37) are higher than within samples of “Sour Diesel”. Interestingly, “Golden Goat” is reported to be a hybrid descendant of “Island Sweet Skunk” (Leafly 2018a; Wikileaf 2018; NCSM 2018; 2018; Seedfinder 2018) which could explain the high genetic relatedness between these strains. However, most of the between strain overall r- mean are negative (e.g., “Golden Goat” to “Durban Poison” -0.03 and “Chemdawg” to “Durban Poison” -0.22; Additional file 4: Figure S3), indicative of limited recent genetic relationship.

While collecting samples from various dispensaries, it was noted that strains of “Chemdawg” had various different spellings of the strain name, as well as numbers and/or letters attached to the name. Without knowledge of the history of “Chemdawg”, the assumption was that these were local variations. These were acquired to include in the study to determine if and how these variants were related. Upon investigation of possible origins of “Chemdawg”, an interesting history was uncovered, especially in light of the results. Legend has it that someone named “Chemdog” (a person) grew the variations (“Chem Dog”, “Chem Dog D”, “Chem Dog 4”) from seeds he found in a single bag of Cannabis purchased at a Grateful Dead concert (Danko 2016). However, sampling suggests dispensaries use variations of the name, and more often the “Chemdawg” form of the name is used, albeit incorrectly (Danko 2016). The STRUCTURE analysis indicates only one “Chemdawg” individual has > 0.10 genetic divergence compared to the other six samples (Fig. 1, Additional file 3: Figure S2). Five of seven “Chemdawg” samples cluster in the PCoA (Fig. 2), and six of seven “Chemdawg” samples are first order relatives (r-value > 0.50; Table ​3, Fig. 3). The history of “Chem Dog” is currently unverifiable, but the analysis supports that these variations could be from seeds of the same plant. This illustrates how Cannabis strains may have come to market in a non-traditional manner. Genetic analyses can add scientific support to the stories behind vintage strains and possibly help clarify the history of specific strains.

Genetic inconsistencies may come from both suppliers and growers of Cannabis clones and stable seed, because currently they can only assume the strains they possess are true to name. There is a chain of events from seed to sale that relies heavily on the supplier, grower, and dispensary to provide the correct product, but there is currently no reliable way to verify Cannabis strains. The possibility exists for errors in plant labeling, misplacement, misspelling (e.g. “Chem Dog” vs. “Chemdawg”), and/or relabeling along the entire chain of production. Although the expectation is that plants are labeled carefully and not re-labeled with a more desirable name for a quick sale, these misgivings must be considered. Identification by genetic markers has largely eliminated these types of mistakes in other widely cultivated crops such as grapes, olives and apples. Modern genetic applications can accurately identify varieties and can clarify ambiguity in closely related and hybrid species (Guilford et al. 1997; Hokanson et al. 1998; Sarri et al. 2006; Costantini et al. 2005; United States Department of Agriculture 2014).

Matching genotypes within the same strains were expected, but highly similar genotypes between samples of different strains could be the result of mislabeling or misidentification, especially when acquired from the same source. The pairwise genetic relatedness r-values were examined for incidence of possible mislabeling or re-labeling. There were instances in which different strains had r-values = 1.0 (Additional file 4: Figure S3), indicating clonal genetic relationships. Two samples with matching genotypes were obtained from the same location (“Larry OG” and “Tahoe OG” from San Luis Obispo 3). This could be evidence for mislabeling or misidentification because these two samples have similar names. It is unlikely that these samples from reportedly different strains have identical genotypes, and more likely that these samples were mislabeled at some point. Misspelling may also be a source of error, especially when facilities are handwriting labels. An example of possible misspelling may have occurred in the sample labeled “Chemdog 1” from Garden City 1. “Chemdawg 1”, a described strain, could have easily been misspelled, but it is unclear whether this instance is evidence for mislabeling or renaming a local variant. Inadvertent mistakes may carry through to scientific investigation where strains are spelled or labeled incorrectly. For example, Vergara et al. (2016) reports genome assemblies for “Chemdog” and “Chemdog 91” as they are reported in GenBank (GCA_001509995.1), but neither of these labels are recognized strain names. “Chemdawg” and “Chemdawg 91” are recognized strains (Leafly 2018a; Wikileaf 2018; 2018; NCSM 2018; 2018; Seedfinder 2018), but according to the original source, the strain name “Chemdawg” is incorrect, and it should be “Chem Dog” (Danko 2016), but the name has clearly evolved among growers since it emerged in 1991 (Danko 2016). Another example that may lead to confusion is how information is reported in public databases. For example, data is available for the reported monoisolate of “Pineapple Banana Bubba Kush” in GenBank (SAMN06546749), and while “Pineapple Kush”, “Banana Kush” and “Bubba Kush” are known strains (Leafly 2018a; Wikileaf 2018; 2018; NCSM 2018; 2018; Seedfinder 2018), the only record we found of “Pineapple Banana Bubba Kush” is in GenBank. This study has highlighted several possible sources of error and how genotyping can serve to uncover sources of variation. Although this study was unable to confirm sources of error, it is important that producers, growers and consumers are aware that there are errors and they should be documented and corrected whenever possible.


Over the last decade, the legal status of Cannabis has shifted and is now legal for medical and some recreational adult use, in the majority of the United States as well as several other countries that have legalized or decriminalized Cannabis. The recent legal changes have led to an unprecedented increase in the number of strains available to consumers. There are currently no baseline genotypes for any strains, but steps should be taken to ensure products marketed as a particular strain are genetically congruent. Although the sampling in this study was not exhaustive, the results are clear: strain inconsistency is evident and is not limited to a single source, but rather exists among dispensaries across cities in multiple states. Various suggestions for naming the genetic variants do not seem to align with the current widespread definitions of Sativa, Indica, Hybrid, and Hemp (Hillig 2005; Clarke and Merlin 2013). As our Cannabis knowledge base grows, so does the communication gap between scientific researchers and the public. Currently, there is no way for Cannabis suppliers, growers or consumers to definitively verify strains. Exclusion from USDA protections due to the Federal status of Cannabis as a Schedule I drug has created avenues for error and inconsistencies. Presumably, the genetic inconsistencies will often manifest as differences in overall effects (Minkin 2014). Differences in characteristics within a named strain may be surprising for a recreational user, but differences may be more serious for a medical patient who relies on a particular strain for alleviation of specific symptoms.

This study shows that in neutral genetic markers, there is no consistent genetic differentiation between the widely held perceptions of Sativa and Indica Cannabis types. Moreover, the 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. There may be land race strains that phenotypically and genetically separate as Sativa and Indica types, however our sampling does not include an adequate number of these strains to define these as two potentially distinct genotypes. The recent and intense breeding efforts to create novel strains has likely merged the two types and blurred previous separation between the two types. However, categorizing strains this way helps consumers communicate their preference for a spectrum of effects (e.g.: Sativa-dominant Hybrid), and the vernacular usage will likely continue to be used, despite a lack of evidence of genetic differentiation.

Instances we found where samples within strains are not genetically similar, which is unexpected given the manner in which Cannabis plants are propagated. Although it is impossible to determine the source of these inconsistencies as they can arise at multiple points throughout the chain of events from seed to sale, we theorize misidentification, mislabeling, misplacement, misspelling, and/or relabeling are all possible. Especially where names are similar, there is the possibility for mislabeling, as was shown here. In many cases genetic inconsistencies within strains were limited to one or two samples. We feel that there is a reasonable amount of genetic similarity within many strains, but currently there is no way to verify the “true” genotype of any strain. Although the sampling here includes merely a fragment of the available Cannabis strains, our results give scientific merit to previously anecdotal claims that strains can be unpredictable.

Additional files

Additional file 1:(14K, xlsx)

Table S1. Twelve popular strains and their described assignment of Sativa and Indica according to six online data bases of Cannabis strain information. Table S2. Primer information includes the multiplex assignment, primer name, microsatellite repeat and number of units repeated in the “Purple Kush” draft genome (National Center for Biotechnology Information, accession AGQN00000000.1), forward and reverse sequences (asterisk denotes the sequence to which the tag is attached), the universal tag (sequence revealed at the bottom of the table), dye (VIC, FAM, PET), optimized annealing temperature, MgCl uL volume,amplified fragment size range, and the number of alleles in the data set. (XLSX 52 kb)

Additional file 2:(132K, pdf)

Figure S1. STRUCTURE HARVESTER graph indicating K = 2 is highly supported. (ΔK = 146.56) as the number of genetic groups for this data. (PDF 55 kb)

Additional file 3:(147K, pdf)

Figure S2. Bar plot graphs generated from STRUCTURE analysis for individuals from twelve popular strains (Table ​2), dividing genotypes into two genetic groups, K = 2. Each sample includes the coded location and city from where it was acquired. Each bar indicates proportion of assignment to genotype 1 (blue) and genotype 2 (yellow). (PDF 65 kb)

Additional file 4:(1.2M, pdf)

Figure S3. A genetic heat map chart of Lynch & Ritland pairwise genetic relatedness (r) values for 122 samples where purple indicates no genetic relatedness (minimum value − 1.09) and green indicates a high degree of relatedness (maximum value 1.0). Sample strain names and location of origin are indicated along the top and down the left side of the chart. Pairwise genetic relatedness (r) values are given in each cell and cell color reflects the degree to which two individuals are related. (PDF 239 kb)


We thank Gerald Bresowar and Nolan Kane for comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript, as well as reviewers John McPartland and an anonymous reviewer who both gave constructive contributions to improve this manuscript. Thank you to Colorado State University Pueblo’s Institute of Cannabis Research for the opportunity to present this research at the inaugural Institute of Cannabis Research conference. The University of Northern Colorado School of Biological Sciences supported this research, and we are grateful to the Graduate Student Association and the Gerald Schmidt Memorial Biology Scholarship for providing partial funding to carry out this research.


The University of Northern Colorado Graduate Student Association and the Gerald Schmidt Memorial Biology Scholarship awarded grants provided partial funding for this project. Funding was also obtained from the University of Northern Colorado School of Biological Sciences.

Availability of data and materials

The names for each dispensary are coded to protect the identity of businesses where genotypes may deviate from the norm. The locations of the dispensaries in this experiment were chosen randomly, therefore the experiment can be replicated without precise location information for the samples used here. Flower samples were purchased from dispensaries based on what was available on the shelf at the time of purchase. Dispensaries did not provide any additional information on the flower purchased other than the standard information printed on the label (strain name and cannabinoid levels). All specimens were purchased directly from dispensaries and samples were purchased from a customer perspective as-is, and, as such, voucher specimens are unavailable. All purchased material was exhausted in genetic and chemical analyses (for another study). Purchase receipts and original packaging of samples (when possible) were retained for reference. The dataset used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.


CTABCetyl trimethylammonium bromide
DNADeoxyribonucleic acid
HWEHardy–Weinberg equilibrium
PCoAPrinciple Coordinates Analysis
PCRPolymerase chain reaction
PTSDPost-traumatic stress disorder
SDStandard Deviation
SLOSan Luis Obispo
U.S.United States
USDAUnited States Department of Agriculture

Authors’ contributions

ALS conceived the project, collected samples, developed the microsatellite markers, conducted lab work, data analysis and manuscript preparation; MEM directed the project, contributed some funding, and provided guidance throughout the project and manuscript preparation. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

No human participants were used in this study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.


Anna L. Schwabe and Mitchell E. McGlaughlin contributed equally to this work.


  • Abel EL. Marihuana: the first twelve thousand years: Springer Science & Business Media. 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • Baldoni L, Cultrera NG, Mariotti R, Ricciolini C, Arcioni S, Vendramin GG, Buonamici A, Porceddu A, Sarri V, Ojeda MA, et al. A consensus list of microsatellite markers for olive genotyping. Mol Breed. 2009;24(3):213–231. doi: 10.1007/s11032-009-9285-8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Belaj A, Cipriani G, Testolin R, Rallo L, Trujillo I. Characterization and identification of the main Spanish and Italian olive cultivars by simple-sequence-repeat markers. Hortscience. 2004;39(7):1557–1561. doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI.39.7.1557. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Borgelt LM, Franson KL, Nussbaum AM, Wang GS. The pharmacologic and clinical effects of medical Cannabis. Pharmacotherapy. 2013;33(2):195–209. doi: 10.1002/phar.1187. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • . Strains Database. 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • Cipriani G, Marrazzo MT, Marconi R, Cimato A, Testolin R. Microsatellite markers isolated in olive (Olea europaea L.) are suitable for individual fingerprinting and reveal polymorphism within ancient cultivars. Theor Appl Genet. 2002;104(2–3):223–228. doi: 10.1007/s001220100685. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Clarke RC, Merlin MD. Cannabis: evolution and ethnobotany. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • Clarke RC, Merlin MD. Cannabis domestication, breeding history, present-day genetic diversity, and future prospects. Crit Rev Plant Sci. 2016;35(5–6):293–327. doi: 10.1080/07352689.2016.1267498. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Clarke RC, Merlin MD, Small E. Evolution and classification of Cannabis sativa (marijuana, hemp) in relation to human utilization. Botanical Rev. 2015;81(3):189–294. doi: 10.1007/s12229-015-9157-3. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Costantini L, Monaco A, Vouillamoz JF, Forlani M, Grando MS. Genetic relationships among local Vitis vinifera cultivars from Campania (Italy) Vitis. 2005;44(1):25–34.[Google Scholar]
  • Cousijn J, Nunez AE, Filbey FM. Time to acknowledge the mixed effects of cannabis on health: a summary and critical review of the NASEM 2017 report on the health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids. Addiction. 2018;113(5):958–966. doi: 10.1111/add.14084. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Danko D. 25 Years of Chem Dog. 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • De Meijer E, Keizer L. Patterns of diversity in Cannabis. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 1996;43(1):41–52. doi: 10.1007/BF00126939. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Doyle JJ. A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue Phytochemical. Bulletin. 1987;4(2):359–361.[Google Scholar]
  • Dufresnes Christophe, Jan Catherine, Bienert Friederike, Goudet Jérôme, Fumagalli Luca. Broad-Scale Genetic Diversity of Cannabis for Forensic Applications. PLOS ONE. 2017;12(1):e0170522. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170522.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Earl DA, vonHoldt BM. STRUCTURE HARVESTER: a website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv Genet Resour. 2012;4(2):359–361. doi: 10.1007/s12686-011-9548-7. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Emboden WA. Cannabis—a polytypic genus. Econ Bot. 1974;28(3):304–310. doi: 10.1007/BF02861427. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Erkelens JL, Hazekamp A. That which we call Indica, by any other name would smell as sweet. Cannabinoids. 2014;9(1):9–15.[Google Scholar]
  • Escondido N. 25 Greatest Strains of All Time. 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • Faircloth BC. MSATCOMMANDER: detection of microsatellite repeat arrays and automated, locus-specific primer design. Mol Ecol Resour. 2008;8(1):92–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01884.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gabriel W, Lynch M, Burger R. Mullers ratchet and mutational meltdowns. Evolution. 1993;47(6):1744–1757. doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1993.tb01266.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Green G. The Cannabis Breeder’s Bible. San Francisco: Green Candy Press; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • Guilford P, Prakash S, Zhu JM, Rikkerink E, Gardiner S, Bassett H, Forster R. Microsatellites in Malus X domestica (apple): abundance, polymorphism and cultivar identification. Theor Appl Genet. 1997;94(2):249–254. doi: 10.1007/s001220050407. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hillig KW. Genetic evidence for speciation in Cannabis (Cannabaceae) Genet Resour Crop Evol. 2005;52(2):161–180. doi: 10.1007/s10722-003-4452-y. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hojsgaard D, Horandl E. A little bit of sex matters for genome evolution in asexual plants. Front Plant Sci. 2015;6:82. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00082.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hokanson SC, Szewc-McFadden AK, Lamboy WF, McFerson JR. Microsatellite (SSR) markers reveal genetic identities, genetic diversity and relationships in a Malus x domestica borkh. Core subset collection. Theor Appl Genet. 1998;97(5–6):671–683. doi: 10.1007/s001220050943. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Leaf Science . Indica vs, Sativs: Understanding the Differences. 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • Leafly . Cannabis Strain Explorer. 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • Leafly . Medical Marijuana Patient Numbers. 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • Lynch M, Ritland K. Estimation of pairwise relatedness with molecular markers. Genetics. 1999;152(4):1753–1766.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lynch RC, Vergara D, Tittes S, White K, Schwartz CJ, Gibbs MJ, Ruthenburg TC, deCesare K, Land DP, Kane NC. Genomic and chemical diversity in Cannabis. Crit Rev Plant Sci. 2016;35(5–6):349–363. doi: 10.1080/07352689.2016.1265363. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Maa E, Figi P. The case for medical marijuana in epilepsy. Epilepsia. 2014;55(6):783–786. doi: 10.1111/epi.12610. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • McPartland JM. Cannabis sativa and Cannabis indica versus “Sativa” and “Indica” In: Chandra S, Lata H, ElSohly M, editors. Botany and Biotechnology. Cham: Springer; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • Minkin RM. Cannabis pharmacy: the practical guide to medical marijuana. Libr J. 2014;139(15):98.[Google Scholar]
  • Moura AE, Natoli A, Rogan E, Hoelzel AR. Atypical panmixia in a European dolphin species (Delphinus delphis): implications for the evolution of diversity across oceanic boundaries. J Evol Biol. 2013;26(1):63–75. doi: 10.1111/jeb.12032. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Muzzalupo I, Stefanizzi F, Perri E. Evaluation of olives cultivated in southern Italy by simple sequence repeat markers. Hortscience. 2009;44(3):582–588. doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI.44.3.582. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Naftali T, Schleider LB-L, Dotan I, Lansky EP, Benjaminov FS, Konikoff FM. Cannabis Induces a Clinical Response in Patients With Crohn's Disease: A Prospective Placebo-Controlled Study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11(10):1276. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2013.04.034. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • NCSM . Strains. 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • Nelson D. Wikileaf edn. 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • Norman AJ, Stronen AV, Fuglstad G-A, Ruiz-Gonzalez A, Kindberg J, Street NR, Spong G. Landscape relatedness: detecting contemporary fine-scale spatial structure in wild populations. Landsc Ecol. 2017;32(1):181–194. doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0434-2. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ogborne AC, Smart RG, Weber T, Birchmore-Timney C. Who is using cannabis as a medicine and why: an exploratory study. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2000;32(4):435–443. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2000.10400245. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Onofri C, Mandolino G. Genomics and Molecular Markers in Cannabis sativa L. In: Chandra S, Lata H, ElSohly MA, editors. Cannabis sativa L -Botany and Biotechnology. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 474. [Google Scholar]
  • Peakall R, Smouse PE. GENALEX 6: genetic analysis in excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol Ecol Notes. 2006;6(1):288–295. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2005.01155.x. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Peakall R, Smouse PE. GenAlEx 6.5: genetic analysis in excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research-an update. Bioinformatics. 2012;28(19):2537–2539. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts460.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pellerone FI, Edwards KJ, Thomas MR. Grapevine microsatellite repeats: isolation, characterisation and use for genotyping of grape germplasm from southern Italy. Vitis. 2001;40(4):179–186.[Google Scholar]
  • Piomelli D, Russo EB. The Cannabis sativa versus Cannabis indica debate: an interview with Ethan Russo, MD. Cannabis Cannabinoid Res. 2016;1(1):44–46. doi: 10.1089/can.2015.29003.ebr.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Poljuha D, Sladonja B, Setic E, Milotic A, Bandelj D, Jakse J, Javornik B. DNA fingerprinting of olive varieties in Istria (Croatia) by microsatellite markers. Sci Hortic. 2008;115(3):223–230. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2007.08.018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • . Marijuana Strain Profiles. 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics. 2000;155(2):945–959.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • ProCon . For Which Symptoms or Conditions Might Marijuana Provide Relief? 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • ProCon . 33 Legal Medical Marijuana States and DC. 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • Rahn B. 2015. Top 10 Cannabis Strains in Colorado. Accessed 12 Sept 2018.
  • Rahn B. Top 10 Cannabis Strains in California. 2016.

Og strain et

Alien OG Cannabis Strain Review [Benefits, Origins, Potency]

Alien OG Strain Overview

Alien OG is a 50/50 hybrid that offers its users a very potent, yet refreshing high. It has a woody and citrusy aroma which is complimented by a piney, lemony flavor that is sure to rejuvenate the senses. Alien OG also offers a nice cerebral high with the ability to help focus and relax, so it’s great for an afternoon smoke on your day off.

Common usage

Lack of appetite



Growing info

This strain can be grown both indoors and outdoors. If growing indoors, expect a flowering period in about 7-9 weeks. If growing outdoors, expect to start seeing flowers by mid-October.

Transport yourself to outer space with these potent buds!

There’s something so appealing about strain names that relate to space or other cosmic matters, and Alien OG is no different. Not only will its name capture you from the get-go, but its potent buds will also lock you in, transporting you into outer space with its powerful, medicinal abilities. Widely popular throughout California because of its insanely high THC content, this cannabis strain has a way of mixing the best of both indica and sativa into one wonderful package.

Keep reading to discover everything there is to know about the Alien OG cannabis strain in our thorough review…

What is the Alien OG Cannabis Strain?

Bred by combining the genetics of the hybrid Tahoe OG Kush and the indica Alien Kush, Alien OG offers the best of both worlds, possessing a 50% indica, 50% sativa makeup. First appearing in the Bay Area of California, growers could initially only cultivate this cannabis strain with a clone, but that soon changed as word got around about Alien OG’s amazing benefits. Eventually, Cali Connection began selling seeds to plant Alien OG, leading to the spread of this strain to areas that originally lacked its presence. Aside from its interesting back story, many individuals are curious about the strain’s high yields, potent high, and refreshing flavor.

Alien OG Aroma

Smelling similar to other OG strains with a woody and citrusy aroma, it becomes clear that Alien OG took on the genetics of its Tahoe OG Kush relative in terms of smell and taste. You can expect many earthy notes from this marijuana type, as well as hints of lemon and pine.

Alien OG Flavor

The way Alien OG tastes is much like its aroma; strong notes of pine, lemon, and earth coat the taste buds. This natural flavor is actually quite grounding and balancing; not overwhelming the senses, yet still leaving an impact on the consumer. The smoke itself is smooth and velvety on the inhale and won’t hit your lungs too hard towards the exhale, so you can blaze cough-free. If you’re a fan of the way other OG Kush strains taste, you’ll definitely enjoy Alien OG, too.

Alien OG Appearance

Featuring dense, round buds, the look of Alien OG nuggets is quite classic, with rich,  deep green sugar leaves and extremely curly, orange pistils. These pistils aid in the pollination process and are closely packed together. Due to the high THC content of Alien OG, it possesses an intensely frosty, very sticky coating, the trichome layer vouching for the strain’s strength. This also gives the strain its gorgeous, cosmic-looking glimmer, complementing the extraterrestrial name.

Alien OG Cannabis Grow Info

If heavy, top quality yields are what you’re aiming for, you’re in luck! Alien OG is known to generate just that, and with intensely potent buds, it seems like a match made in heaven- or should we say space? Not only can you expect rewarding harvests from successfully cultivated crops, but the magic also lies in the immense density of the actual nuggets and colas themselves.

This high-yielding quality of Alien OG is actually quite impressive, for strains with indica genetics don’t typically produce a ton of consumable herb. Even if the results of growing this strain can be worthwhile, cultivation does not come without its challenges. In fact, Alien OG can be quite challenging to produce without the proper knowledge and a bit of experimentation. If you have a lot of experience cultivating cannabis already, Alien OG will be nothing new, but for those just starting out, be sure to thoroughly conduct your research before attempting.

Alien OG plants are usually short in height, measuring less than 30 inches, with a rounded appearance. The buds tend to all cluster along one prominent stem and then fatter colas develop from there, which is quite a typical indica structure. The look of this strain is derived more from its Alien Kush genetics than the OG side. With Alien OG it is vital to monitor and maintain certain factors, including observing light, nutrient, humidity, and water levels. Additionally, any leaves that block bud development should be regularly pruned and trimmed back to prevent malnourishment.

Topping is an especially important technique to learn, which will keep the plant healthy. Sea of green (SOG) seems to be a successful method of cultivating Alien OG, so it may be worth your while to set this process up.

This cannabis strain is suitable for both indoor and outdoor cultivation, yielding well in either environment as long as the right conditions are met. Outdoors, Alien OG needs plenty of sunlight and balanced humidity levels to thrive, and these same qualities should be recreated when growing indoors. Because these bud clusters tend to be dense, they are more susceptible to mold and mildew development, which is part of why maintaining a low to mild humidity level is essential. 68-78 degrees Fahrenheit is the sweet spot for this cannabis type.

The flowering period of this strain is around 7-9 weeks, which is on the shorter side, with harvests typically falling around mid-October, long before any bad weather can set in, a vital factor for outdoor grows. For successfully cultivated crops, typical yields range around 10-11 ounces per meter squared indoors, and 13-14 ounces per plant outdoors which is extremely excellent for a strain that looks close to a typical indica physically-speaking.

It is vital to properly cure buds after harvest to ensure that the THC and other medicinal cannabinoids are properly preserved, increasing the overall effects of Alien OG.

Alien OG THC Content – Highest Test

Although the average THC content for Alien OG sits somewhere between 20-25%, tests have measured numbers of more than 28%, which means this cannabis strain has one of the greatest potencies on the market. Because the cannabis world is so focused on developing stronger strains, we suspect that Alien OG will continue to be bred to be even more powerful.

Alien OG CBD Content – Highest Test

Don’t expect to receive much CBD from Alien OG. The highest tests measure this strain’s CBD content at a mere 0.1%, which is something, but still nothing truly notable. If you’re desiring a cannabis-type with a greater CBD content there are many options that could greater suit your needs, including Cannatonic, ACDC, Harle-Tsu, Pennywise, Charlotte’s Web, Canna-Tsu, Harlequin, and Ringo’s Gift, just to name a few. Alien OG is a far better source of THC than CBD, so it should be consumed by those who desire the medicinal benefits of tetrahydrocannabinol.

Alien OG Effects

Alien OG tends to be mentally stimulating with a cerebral high, yet still deeply relaxing for the body, which really expresses how it is suitable for a wide range of individuals. This cannabis strain possesses a distinct blend of the indica and sativa sides, offering a melting relaxation towards the end of the high while keeping the brain sharp, alert, and creative. At the same time, you can expect to feel more joyous and happy, sinking into a state of heavy bliss. For some, Alien OG makes the perfect strain for getting at-home work done, especially if you have more tasks to complete even once you’ve left the office.

This is because this cannabis type finds a way to relieve the body of physical tensions and stress, while also transporting the mind into a productive, creative, and sharp headspace, which is exactly what you need to concentrate and complete projects after-hours. It is impressive how this strain is able to target both the mind and body separately, impacting both parts in different, desirable ways.

Medical Benefits of the Alien OG Cannabis Strain

Due to its relaxing, buzzy impact on the body and its stimulating, creative effect on the mind, you can imagine that Alien OG would hold quite a few medical uses. Physically, Alien OG works hard to relieve headaches, pain, fatigue, nausea, lack of appetite, and stress, yet at the same time it can also chill you out in the evening and help you fall deep asleep. It really depends upon what time of day you’re consuming this marijuana type, along with what your body is needing to flourish in that given moment.

Mentally, Alien OG is stimulating, yet it can still be utilized for anxiety, depression, insomnia, PTSD, and ADHD/ADD. Although it may seem confusing how this one contradictory plant might be able to produce all these different results, Alien OG just has a way of communicating with your body and understanding what it desires the most. Pretty cool, right?

Possible Side Effects of the Alien OG Cannabis Strain

As with all cannabis strains, adverse effects can arise. The intensity of these side effects varies from strain to strain, and Alien OG is met with minimal adverse effects. The most commonly experienced is dry mouth (cottonmouth), which is easily manageable by drinking plenty of water before, during, and after your high. Keep a large bottle of water filled close by at all times to serve as a reminder to stay hydrated, which will not only soothe dry mouth, but it will also prevent you from feeling any headaches due to dehydration. In rare circumstances, some consumers have experienced mild anxiety and paranoid but this is not a common occurrence.

The Final Verdict on Alien OG

If you struggle with depression, anxiety, PTSD, ADD/ADHD, stress, insomnia, pain, headaches, fatigue, lack of appetite, or nausea and are searching for an herbal alternative to conventional options, the Alien OG cannabis strain may be able to provide some relief and assistance. Popular because of its multidimensional uses, along with its potent THC content and massive yields, Alien OG has grown to become a fan favorite not just in California, but all over the world as well.

We hope you not only found this article to be entertaining but also educational and informative. It is important to remember that the consumption of cannabis is the sole responsibility of the user and discretion should always be taken.

Published on: 11 Mar, 2019

Top 5 Ancient Weed Strains

Liste des lignées de cannabis

Pour un article plus général, voir Cannabis.

Cette liste des lignée notables de cannabis est organisée selon la pureté ou l'hybridation des lignées Cannabis sativa et Cannabis indica.

Les noms des plants sont pour la plupart originaires des Pays-Bas et sont généralement en anglais.

Indica[modifier | modifier le code]

Variétés améliorées[modifier | modifier le code]

  • Afghani #1 (Sensi Seeds)
  • Alaskan Matanuska Thunderfuck
  • Ata Tundra(seedsman)
  • Bella ciao (Tikiseedbank) [nlx]
  • Big bud
  • Black domina (sensi seeds)
  • Black Russian
  • Blaisus
  • Butterscotch Hawaiian
  • Early Girl (Sensi Seeds)
  • El niño (Greenhouse seeds)
  • G-SUS
  • Guerilla gusto (ssb)
  • Jean Guy (Qc)
  • Kush (Ceres Seeds)
  • Lemon Aid
  • Lightstorm
  • Mad Shad
  • Manghani (Mango × Afghan)
  • Mango
  • MasterOp SexBanG
  • Mazar (Dutch Passion)
  • Mongolian
  • Moroccan (Ktama ya ktama) fes tbisla
  • Mother of Mercy
  • Newberry
  • Northern Lights (Sensi Seeds)
  • Oasis (select of NL)(dp)
  • Orange bud
  • papaya(ams)
  • Phylus Tonic
  • Purple Haze (wl)
  • purple tops (dutch hemp)
  • Romulan
  • SdK pwns
  • Sour Bubble (ahx1)
  • whita satin( mandala)
  • White rhino
  • White rose (hqs)
  • White Widow (Brazilian × South Indian)
  • Ya Mami Pwns

Variétés naturelles[modifier | modifier le code]

  • Afghan
  • Arabe
  • Chinois (Golden Triangle Akha)
  • Iranien
  • Libanais (Red Lebanese, Blond Lebanese)
  • Marocain
  • Nord indien
  • Ouzbek (Taskenti)
  • Pakistanais (Pakistan Chitral Kush)
  • Tadjik (Pamir Gold)
  • Turc

Ruderalis[modifier | modifier le code]

Variétés améliorées[modifier | modifier le code]

Le cannabis ruderalis est essentiellement utilisé pour réaliser des hybrides à floraison automatique

Le mot "Auto" a plusieurs synonymes "auto floraison" "auto fleurissante" "automatique", en anglais : "autoflower" "autoflowering" "automatic" en espagnol "autofloreciente"

  • +Speed "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Crital Mass "Auto" x phénotype Speed Devil #2 "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" #1 (Auto Seeds[2])
  • "Auto" 00 Cheese (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ Cheese x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" 00 Kush (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ OG Kush x Ruderalis ]
  • 2 Fast & 2 Vast "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds[4]) [ Fast & Vast Auto x "Auto" Northern Lights ]
  • "Auto" 4:20 (Biohazard Seeds[5]) [ Deimos "Auto" x Mazar ]
  • 60 Day Lemon "Auto" (DNA Genetics[6]) [ Lemon Skunk x Ruderalis ]
  • 60 Day Wonder "Auto" (DNA Genetics[6]) [ Williams Wonder x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" 710 Cheese (710 Genetics[7]) [ UK Skunk x Afghani ]
  • "Auto" 710 Diesel (710 Genetics[7]) [ 701 Diesel x Ruderalis ]
  • Afghani #1 "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Bank[8])
  • "Auto" Afghan Mass (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ Critical Mass "Auto" x Génétiques Afghanes ]
  • "Auto" Afghan Mass XXL (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ Sélection d'Auto Afghan Mass ]
  • Afghan Storm "Auto" (Greenbud Seeds[9]) [ Hash Plant x Skunk x Ruderalis ]
  • AK-47 "Auto" (Amaranta Seeds[10])
  • "Auto" AK 107 (710 Genetics[7]) [ AK-47 x UK Elite Clone ]
  • AK-420 "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ AK-420 x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" AK (Female Seeds[12]) [ Pure AK x Lowryder ]
  • "Auto" AK (Grass-O-Matic[13]) [ AK-47 x Lowryder ]
  • "Auto" AK CBD (CBD Seeds[14])
  • "Auto" AK Bio (Biological Seeds[15]) [ AK-47 x Ruderalis ]
  • AK Skunk "Auto" (Kalashnikov Seeds[16]) [ Ak-Skunk x Ruderalis ]
  • Amarant "Auto" (Amaranta Seeds[10])
  • Amazing "Auto" (Absolute Cannabis Seeds[17])
  • "Auto" Amnesia (Advanced Seeds[18]) [ Original Amnesia x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Amnesia CBD (CBD Seeds[14])
  • Amnesia Bilbo "Auto" (Genehtik[19]) [ Amnesia Bilbo x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Amnesia Haze (Biological Seeds[15])
  • Amnesia Haze "Auto" (Expert Seeds[20]) [ Amnesia Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • Amnesia Haze "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ Amnesia Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • Amnesia Skunk "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ Amnesia Haze x Skunk x Ruderalis ]
  • Amnesia XXL "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Original Amnesia x Original Amnesia "Auto" ]
  • Amur Giant "Auto" (Kalashnikov Seeds[16]) [ Jack Here x Power Plant x Amur Ruderalis ]
  • Autoblueberry (Expert Seeds[20]) [ Canadian Ruderalis x Blueberry ]
  • Auto-Bomb (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Green-O-Matic x Big Bang "Auto" ]
  • Autopilote XXL (Ministry of Cannabis[23]) [big Bud XXL x "Auto" ]
  • Babushka Black "Auto" (Kalashnikov Seeds[16]) [ Crimea Ruderalis x Pakistan ]
  • Baby Boom "Auto" (Kannabia[24]) [ Northern Lights x Blueberry x Ruderalis ]
  • Baby Boom "Auto" CBD (Kannabia[24]) [ Blueberry x Northern Lights x Ruderalis ]
  • Beast. (Genofarm[25]) [ AK-47 XXL "Auto" x Thunderhaze XL "Auto" ]
  • "Auto Berry (G13 labs[26]) [ Blueberry x Canadian Ruderalis ]
  • Berry Bomb "Auto" (Bomb Seeds[27]) [ Blueberry x Ruderalis ]
  • Berry Ryder "Auto" (Auto Seeds[2]) [ Blueberry x "Auto" #1 ]
  • Big Band Max "Auto" (Kannabia[24])
  • Big Bang "Auto" (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Skunk#1 X Northern Light X El Niño X Ruderalis ]
  • Big Bomb "Auto" (Bomb Seeds[27]) [ Big Bomb x Ruderalis ]
  • Big Bud "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Bank[8])
  • Big Buddha Cheese "Auto" (Big Buddha Seeds[28]) [ Original UK Cheese x Afghane ]
  • Big Devil "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1])
  • Big Devil #2 "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ évolution de la Big Devil "Auto" ]
  • Big Devil XL (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Big Devil #2 x Jack Herer "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Bio Diesel Mass (Advanced Seeds[18]) [ Auto Diesel x "Auto" Critical ]
  • "Auto" Bio Lime (Biological Seeds[15]) [ Super Lemon Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • Birrie Jack "Auto" (Amaranta Seeds[10])
  • BlackBerry "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ BlackBerry Kush x Cream Caramel "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" BlackBerry Kush (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Original Blueberry x Haschisch Kush ]
  • Black Cream "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Cream Caramel Original x Kush/Pakistanaise ]
  • "Auto" Black Diesel (Advanced Seeds[18]) [ NYC Diesel x Black Widow x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Black Domina CBD (CBD Seeds[14])
  • Black Haze "Auto" (Exotic Seed[31]) [(Sir Jack x Skunk "Auto") F6 x Pakistan Chitral Kush (F5)]
  • Black Jack "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Jack Herer x S.A.D. Sweet Afghani Delicious "Auto" ]
  • Black Lemon "Auto" (Exotic Seed[31]) [ Black Haze "Auto" x Skunk "Auto" ]
  • Blackout Express "Auto" (Greenbud Seeds[9]) [ Thai x Skunk x C99 x Ruderalis ]
  • Bloody Skunk "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Sweet Skunk "Auto" x Red Poison "Auto" ]
  • Blow Mind "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Clone élite Amnesia Haze "Cordobesa" x S.A.D. Sweet Afgani Delicious "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Blue (Biological Seeds[15]Seeds) [ Blueberry x White Widow x Super Skunk x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Blue Ace CBD (Delicious Seeds[32]) [ Diva x Carmen "Auto" ]
  • Blue Acid "Auto" (Kalashnikov Seeds[16]) [ AK-47 x Strawberry x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Blue Amnesia (Ministry of Cannabis[23]) [ Amnesia x Blueberry x Ruderalis ]
  • Blue Amnesia "Auto" (Amsterdam Genetics[33]) [ Blue Dream x Amnesia ]
  • Blue Amnesia XXL "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Original Amnesia "Auto" x Blueberry "Auto" ]
  • Blue "Auto" Mazar (Dutch Passion[30]) [ "Auto" Blueberry x "Auto" Mazar ]
  • "Auto" Blueberry (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ Blueberry x "Auto" Indica ]
  • "Auto" Blueberry (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Blueberry x Indica "Auto" ]
  • Blueberry "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ Blueberry x Ruderalis ]
  • Blue Cheese "Auto" (Barney's Farm[34]) [ Blue Cheese x Ruderalis ]
  • Blue Cheese "Auto" (Expert Seeds[20]) [ Blueberry "Auto" x Cheese "Auto" ]
  • Blue Cheese "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Cheese "Auto" x Blueberry "Auto" ]
  • Blue Critical "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Critical+ "Auto" x Blueberry "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Blue Diesel (Advanced Seeds[18]) [ "Auto" Biodiesel Mass x "Auto" Blueberry ]
  • Blue Dream "Auto" (Humbold Seed organization[35]) [ Blue Dream x Ruderalis ]
  • Blue Dream'matic (Fastbuds[29]) [ Blue Dream x Ruderalis ]
  • Bluehell "Auto" (Medical Seeds[36]) [ Bluehell x "Auto" Medical Ruderalis ]
  • Blue Kush "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ OG Kush "Auto" x Blueberry "Auto" ]
  • Blue Mammoth "Auto" (Barney's Farm[34]) [ Blueberry Skunk x Lowryder #1 ]
  • Blue Pearl "Auto" (Fantaseeds[37]) [ Blue Haze x Silver Pearl ]
  • "Auto" Bomb (Bomb Seeds[27]) [ "Auto" Bomb#1 x Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Brooklyn Sunrise (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Brooklyn x AK de l'état de New York ]
  • Bruce Banner #3 "Auto" (Original Sensible Seeds[38]) [(Ghost OG x Strawberry Diesel) x "Auto" Ghost OG ]
  • Bubba Cheese "Auto" (Humboldt Seed organization[35]) [ Bubba Kush x UK Cheese x Ruderalis ]
  • Bubba Kush "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Bubba Kush Pre’98 x White Widow "Auto" ]
  • Bubba Kush "Auto (Humboldt Seed organization[35]) [ Bubba kush Pre'98 x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Bubble (Female Seeds[12]) [ Bubblegum x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Bubble Gum (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ Bubble Gum x Ruderalis ]
  • Bubblegum "Auto" (Keria Seeds[39])
  • Buddha White Dwarf "Auto" (Buddha Seeds[40])
  • Budmaker "Auto" (Greenbud Seeds[9]) [ Haze x Shiva Skunk x Northern Lights x Ruderalis ]
  • C4 Matic (Fastbuds[29]) [ White Widow x Skunk x Big Bud ]
  • Calamity Jane "Auto" (Buddha Seeds[40]) [ Magnum x Génétiques sélectionnées de Brothers Grimm Seeds ]
  • "Auto" California Kush (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ California x Kush Ruderalis ]
  • Californian Snow (Fastbuds[29]) [ ancienne variété Californienne x Ruderalis canadienne ]
  • Candy Kush "Auto" (Auto Seeds[2]) [ Sélection de Kush californiennes x "Auto" Pounder ]
  • Caramel "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ Sweet Caramel x Ruderalis ]
  • Caramella "Auto" (Expert Seeds[20]) [ Cream Caramel "Auto" x Deimos ]
  • Caramella "Auto" (Fantaseeds[37]) [ Caramella x Ruderalis ]
  • CBD "Auto" Charlotte's Angel (Dutch Passion[30]) [ CBD Charlotte’s Angel x CBD "Auto" Compassion Lime ]
  • CBD "Auto" Compassion Lime (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Daiquiri Lime x Compassion ]
  • CBD Crack "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Green Crack x CBD "Auto" ]
  • CBD Fix "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ CBD rich clone x Northern Lights "Auto" ]
  • CBD Lemon Portion "Auto" (Barney's Farm[34]) [ (BF) Lemon Kush x ()CBD Crew CBD Enriched x "Auto" ]
  • CBD MedGom "Auto" (CBD Crew[41])
  • CBD "Auto" White Widow (Dutch Passion[30]) [ "Auto" White Window x CBD Sweet and Sour Window de chez (CBD Crew) ]
  • "Auto" CBG (CannaBioGen[42]) [ Destroyer x Ruderalis ]
  • Cheese "Auto" (Expert Seeds[20]) [ Chesse x Lowryder ]
  • Cheese "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Critical+ x Cheese "Auto" ]
  • Cheese Candy "Auto" (Delicious Seeds[32])
  • "Auto" Cheese Berry (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ Cheese x Blueberry x Ruderalis ]
  • Cheese XXL "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Clone élite Exodus Cheese x Cheese "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Chemdog (Auto Seeds[2]) [ "Auto" #1 x Chemdog Originale ]
  • Cherry Bomb "Auto" (Bomb Seeds[27]) [ Cherry Bomb x Ruderalis ]
  • Cherry Bud "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ Blueberry "Auto" x Cheese "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Chingon (Biohazard Seeds[5]) [ "Auto" Somachigun x "Auto" Deimos ]
  • "Auto" Chocolate Skunk (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ Chocolate Skunk x Ruderalis ]
  • Chronic Ryder (Joint Doctor Direct "Lowryder Seeds"[43])
  • "Auto" Cinderella Jack (Dutch Passion[30] et Buddha Seeds) [ (Cinderella 99 x Jack Herer) x lignée Magnum ]
  • "Auto" Colorado Cookies (Dutch Passion[30]) [ "Auto" Blueberry Original x Girl Scout Cookie du Colorado ]
  • Cookies "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Girl Scout Cookies x OG Kush "Auto" ]
  • Cookies "Auto" (LaMota Seeds[44]) [ Girl Scout Cookies x Girl Scout Cookies "Auto" ]
  • Cotton Bud (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ White Indica x Ruderalis ]
  • Cotton Kush (Genofarm[25]) [ AK-47 XX1 "Auto" x Kush "Auto" ]
  • Cream Caramel "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Cream Caramel x Sélection "Auto" ]
  • Cream Cookies "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Lignée Girl Scout Cookies x Ruderalis ]
  • Cream Mandarine "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ phénotype Cream Caramel "Auto" x clone élite Ice Cool ]
  • Cream Mandarine XL "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Cream Mandarine "Auto" x clone élite Super Tai'98 ]
  • "Auto" Critical (Biological Seeds[15]) (Zamnesia Seeds)
  • Critical + 2.0 "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Critical/Ruderalis x Critical +]
  • Critical + "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Critical+ x Roadrunner "Auto" ]
  • Critical Ak "Auto" (Expert Seeds) [ "Auto" Critical x Ak-47 "Auto" ]
  • Critical Blue "Auto" (Expert Seeds) [ Blueberry "Auto" x Genetic Critical "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Critical CBD (CBD Seeds)
  • Critical Cheese "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Critical+ "Auto" x Cheese "Auto" ]
  • Critical Cheese "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds) [ Critical x Cheese x Ruderalis ]
  • Critical Herer "Auto" (Ketama seeds[45])
  • Critical Jack "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Critical + 2.0 x Haze 2.0 "Auto" ]
  • Critical Jack Herer "Auto" (Delicious Seeds[32]) [ Critical Mass "Auto" x Jack Herer "Auto" ]
  • Critical Kush "Auto" (Barney's Farm) [ Critical Kush x Advanced Autoflowering Strain ]
  • Critical Neville Haze "Auto" (Delicious Seeds[32]) [ Critical Mass "Auto" x Neville Haze "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Critical Orange Punch (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Grandaddy Purps x Orange Bud "Désignée Orange Punch" x Kritikal Bilbo ]
  • Critical Rapido "Critical Kush" "Auto" (Barney's Farm) [ Critical Mass x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Critical Soma (Advanced Seeds) [ "Auto" Somango x "Auto" Critical +]
  • Critical x Ak47 "Auto" (Biological Seeds) [ "Auto" Critical x Ak47 ]
  • Crypto "Auto" (LaMota Seeds) [ Haze x OG kush x Diesel x Lemon thai x Ruderalis ]
  • Crystal Candy "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Crysal Candy x Sweet Special "Auto" ]
  • Crystal Meth "Auto" (Fastbuds) [ Mexicaine x Trainwreck x Hawaii x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Daiquiri Lime (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Orange Californie x Sour Diesel (USA) ]
  • Damnesia "Auto" (Strain Hunters Seeds Bank[46])
  • Dark Devil "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ Big Devil XL "Auto" x Ruderalis pourpre de la région de Chitral (Hindu Kush Pakistanais)]
  • "Auto" Dark Purple (Delicious Seeds[32]) [ OG Kush X Purple Kush "Auto" ]
  • Dark Rose "Auto" CBD (Elite Seeds[47]) [ Kush Rose "Auto" CBD x Afghan Rose "Auto" CBD ]
  • Deimos "Auto" (Buddha Seeds) [ Northern Lights x Ruderalis ]
  • Delicious Candy "Auto" (Delicious Seeds) [ Cheese "Auto" x Caramelo "Auto" ]
  • Devil Cream "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Dark Devil "Auto" x Black Cream "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Desfrán (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Desfrán x "Auto" Daiquiri Lime ]
  • Diamond Quenn Kush (KC Brains[48])
  • "Auto" Diesel (G13 Labs) [ N.Y.C Diesel x Ruderalis ]
  • Diesel "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ Diesel x Ruderalis ]
  • Diesel Berry (Auto Seeds) [ Berry Rider x Nyc Diesel ]
  • "Auto" Diesel CBD (CBD Seeds)
  • Diesel Ryder (Joint Doctor Direct "Lowryder Seeds")
  • Dinamed Kush CBD "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Purple Kush x Dinamed CBD "Auto" ]
  • Dinamex "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Dinamex x Haze 2.0 "Auto" ]
  • Do Si Dos "Auto" (Fastbuds)
  • Do-Si-Dos Cake "Auto" (LaMota Seeds) [ Do-Si-Dos x Cookies "Auto" ]
  • Dreamberry (Auto Seeds[2]) [ Blue Dream x Berry Ryder ]
  • Dr Greenthumb's Dedoverde Haze "Auto" (Humboldt Seed organization) [ Haze "Auto" x Dedoverde ]
  • "Auto" Duck (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Frisian Duck x "Auto" White Widow ]
  • "Auto" Durban Poison (Dutch Passion)
  • Early Skunk "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Bank[8])
  • "Auto" Easy Bud (Amaranta Seeds)
  • Easy Ryder "Auto" (Joint Doctor Direct "Lowryder Seeds")
  • "Auto" El Fuego (DNA Genetics) [ El Fuego x Ruderalis ]
  • Elite 47 "Auto" (Elite Seeds) [ Blueberry x Blue Heaven x Ruderalis ]
  • Ese T Bilbo "Auto" (Genehtik) [ Sweet Tooth x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Euforia (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Original Euforia x Skunk "Auto" ]
  • Exodus Cheese (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Exodus Cheese x Ruderalis ]
  • Exodus Cheese CBD (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Exodus Cheese x Ruderalis x CBD ]
  • Expert Gorilla "Auto" (Expert Seeds) [ Gorilla Glue #4 x ?]
  • Explode "Auto" (Greenbud Seeds) [ Mazar-I-Sharif x Skunk #1 x Ruderalis Indica ]
  • Extreme Impact "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Mazar "Auto" x Fast & Vast "Auto" ]
  • Farm Cheese "Auto" (Genofarm) [ clone UK Chesse x ??]
  • Fast & Vast "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Afghani "Auto" x Skunk "Auto" x White Dwarf ]
  • Fastberry (Fastbuds) [ Liguée Bleuberry USA x Ruderalis Canadienne ]
  • Fast Bud "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ Diesel x ??]
  • Fast Bud #2 "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ Fast Bud "Auto" améliorée ]
  • Fraggle Skunk "Auto" (Philosopher Seeds[49]) [ Super Skunk x LowRyder ]
  • "Auto" Frisian Dew (Dutch Passion[30]) [ phénotype Purple Frisian Dew x ? ]
  • Fruit "Auto" (dinafem[21]) [ Lowryder#1 x Dinafem#1 x Sweet Deep Grapefruit ]
  • Fruit Punch "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Skunk x Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • Fully Loaded "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Super Skunk "Auto" x Wipeout Express "Auto" ]
  • G14 (Fastbuds[29]) [ Lowryder#1 x G13 Hash Plant ]
  • Gelato "Auto" (Fastbuds[29])
  • GG #4 (Expert Seeds) [ Sélection de Gorilla Glue "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Gigabud (G13 Labs) [ Hybride Indica x Ruderalis ]
  • Ginger Punch "Auto" (Kannabia) [ Ginger-Ale x Ruderalis ]
  • Girl Scout Cookies (Auto Seeds[2]) (Zamnesia Seeds)
  • Girl Scout Cookies "Auto" (Fastbuds) [ Durban Poison x West Coast OG x Ruderalis ]
  • Glueberry "Auto" (Expert Seeds) [ Blueberry x Gorrila Glue #4 ]
  • "Auto" Glueberry O.G. (Dutch Passion[30]) [(Gorrila Glue x O.G) x Original "Auto" Blueberry ]
  • Glue Gelato "Auto" (Barney's Farm) [ Gorilla Glue x Gelato x "Auto" ]
  • Gnomo "Auto" (Kannabia[24]) [ Blue Monster x Ruderalis ]
  • Goliat "Auto" (Elite Seeds) [ Bestial Skunk x Ruderalis ]
  • Gorilla "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Gorilla x OG Kush "Auto" ]
  • Gorilla Glue (Auto Seeds) [ Gorilla Glue x "Auto" #1 ]
  • Gorilla Glue "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Gorilla Glue x Rudéralis ]
  • Gorilla Glue "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ Gorilla x Cookies x Ruderalis ]
  • Goxuak (Genehtik) [ Hybride AK- 47 x "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" G Power Cheese (Amaranta Seeds)
  • Grapefruit matic (Fastbuds[29]) [ Clone de Grapefruit x Ruderalis ]
  • Green Crack "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Green Crack x Ruderalis ]
  • Green Gummy "Auto" (Exotic Seeds) [ Green Gummy x (American Indica x Skunk "Auto")F4 ]
  • Green-O-Matic (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Ruderalis x Moroccan x White Dwarf x Lowryder #1 ]
  • Green Poison "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Clone élite Green Poison x Big Devil #2 ]
  • Green Poison XL "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Green Poison "Auto" améliorée ]
  • Guillotine "Auto" (French Touch Seeds) { N.Y.C Diesel x Ruderalis ]
  • Haze 2.0 "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Haze "Auto" x Jack Herer ]
  • Haze Gom (Grass-O-Matic[13]) [ Super Silver Haze x Lowryder #2 ]
  • Haze XXL "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Jack Herer x Haze 2.0 "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Heavy Bud (Advanced Seeds) [ Skunk Red Hair x Indica "Auto" ]
  • HG Cheese (Fantaseeds)
  • HG Cheese 2 (Fantaseeds)
  • High Density "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Big Bud "Auto" x White Dwarf "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" High Priority (710 Genetics) [ High Priority x Ruderalis ]
  • Hijack "Auto" (Auto Seeds) [ Jach Herer x Ruderalis x AK-47 ]
  • Hindu Kush "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Bank[8])
  • Homegrown Lowryder (Fantaseeds) [ Williams Wonder x Northern Lights x Ruderalis ]
  • Homegrown Lowryder 2 (Fantaseeds)
  • Honey Peach "Auto" CBD (Sweet Seeds) [ "Auto" sélectionnées x CBD ]
  • Ice Cool "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ clone élite Ice Cool x Fast Bud #2 "Auto" ]
  • IL Diavolo (Delicious Seeds[32]) [ Critical Mass x Low Ryder ]
  • Jack 47 "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Jack Herer "Auto" x clone élite AK-47 ]
  • Jack 47 XL "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ Jack 47 "Auto" améliorée ]
  • Jack Herer "Auto" (Advanced Seeds)
  • Jack Herer "Auto" (Green House Seeds[22]) (Zamnesia Seeds) [ Jack Herer x Ruderalis ]
  • Jackpot "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Jack Herer x 2 Fast & 2 Vast x Ruderalis ]
  • Juicy Lucy (Auto Seeds) [ Cheese x Ruderalis ]
  • Jungle Fever "Auto" (Exotic Seed) [ Thai x Russian "Auto" ]
  • Kalashnikova "Auto" (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Kalashnikova x Green-O-Matic ]
  • Kannabia Hobbit "Auto" (Kannabia)
  • "Auto" Kaya 47 (Advanced Seeds) [ Kaya 47 x Auto ]
  • K.C. 48 "Auto" (KC Brains[48]) [ Northern Lights Special x K.C. 45 ]
  • K.C. 51 "Auto" (KC Brains) [ K.C. 33 x Bahia Black Head ]
  • Kickass "Auto" (Kannabia) [ Skunk x Ruderalis ]
  • Killer Kush "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ OG Kush x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" King Kong (Dr Underground[50]) [ King Kong x Ruderalis ]
  • King's Kush "Auto" (Green House Seeds[22]) [ King's Kush x "Auto" de 3 -ème Génération ]
  • King's Kush "Auto" CBD (Green House Seeds) [ King's Kush x Ruderalis x CBD ]
  • "Auto" KO Haze (Amaranta Seeds)
  • "Auto" Kratos (Biohazard Seeds) [ Deimos Auto x ?]
  • Kritic "70" "Auto" (Kannabia) [ Critical x Ruderalis ]
  • Kritikal Bilbo "Auto" (Genehtik) [ Kritikal Bilbo x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Kush (Expert Seeds) [ Canadian Ruderalis x Kush ]
  • "Auto" Kush (Female Seeds) [ Hindu Kush x Lowrider ]
  • Kush Doctor (Auto Seeds) [ OG Kush x Ultra Lemon Haze x Berry Ryder ]
  • Kush'N'Cheese "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ OG Kush x Cheese "Auto" ]
  • La Bella Afrodita (Delicious Seeds[32]) [ IL Diavolo x AK-47 "Auto" ]
  • La Blanca Max "Auto" (Kannabia) [ Great White Shark x Ruderalis ]
  • La Diva (Delicious Seeds[32]) [ Lignée IL Diavolo x Original Blueberry ]
  • L.A. Dog (LaMota Seeds) [ influence Diesel x ?]
  • "Auto" Lady Bug (Biological Seeds) [ Lady Bug x Ruderalis ]
  • La Musa (Delicious Seeds) [ Belladona x Alaska "Auto" ]
  • La Rica "Auto" CBD (Elite Seeds) [ La Rica Clâsica CBD x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Lavender CBD (CBD Seeds)
  • Lemon AK (Fastbuds) [ Lignée Ak-47 "Auto" ]
  • Lemon Critical 2.0 "Auto" (LaMota Seeds)
  • Lemon Haze "Auto" (Expert Seeds) [ Lemon "Auto" x Haze "Auto" ]
  • Lemon Juice Express "Auto" (Humboldt Seed organization) [ Jack Herer x Haze "Auto" ]
  • Lemon Pie "Auto" (Greenbud Seeds) [ Haze x Skunk #1 x Ruderalis Indica ]
  • Lemon Sputnik "Auto" (KC Brains)
  • "Auto" Lemon Zkittle (Dutch Passion) [ Zkittle x Las Vegas Lemon Skunk ]
  • Llimonet Haze "Auto" CBD (Elite Seeds) [ Llimonet Clâsica THC x "Auto" CBD Rich Plant ]
  • London Cheese 2.0 "Auto" (LaMota Seeds) [ bouture britannique Cheese x "Auto" Skunk ]
  • Lost Coast Skunk "Auto" (Humboldt Seed organization) [ Lost Coast Skunk x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Low Girl (Advanced Seeds) [ Low Ryder x Indica ]
  • Lowryder "Auto"
  • Lowryder #2 (Joint Doctor Direct "Lowryder Seeds")
  • Lowryder 2 "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds) [ Lowryder x Ruderalis ]
  • LSD-25 "Auto" (Fastbuds) [ L.S.D. x Ruderalis ]
  • LSD "Auto" (Barney's Farm[34]) [ LSD x Super Magnum "Auto" ]
  • Magnum "Auto (Buddha Seeds) [ Inconnu ]
  • "Auto" Mary (Greenlabel[51]) [ Santa Maria x Ruderalis ]
  • Massive Midget "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Afghani + Nepalese "Auto" x Hawaiian + Jamaican "Auto" ]
  • Master Kush "Auto" (White Label)
  • Malana Bomb "Auto" (Barney's Farm) [ Malana Charas Plant x Lowryder #1 ]
  • "Auto" Malawi x Northern Lights (Ace Seeds[52])
  • Mango Cream "Auto" (Exotic Seed) [ Mango Cream x (Blueberry x New York City Diesel "Auto")]
  • "Auto" Mass (Grass-O-Matic) [ Critical Mass x Ruderalis ]
  • Mataro Blue Max "Auto" (Kannabia) [ Bleuberry x Black Domina x ?? x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Maxi (Biological Seeds) [ Critical "Auto" x AK-47 "Auto" ]
  • Maxi Gom (Grass-O-Matic) [ AK-47 x Critical+ "Auto" ]
  • Maxi Haze (Grass-O-Matic) [ Super Silver Haze x "Auto" AK ]
  • "Auto" Mazar (Dutch Passion) [ Mazar Original x Indica "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Mazar (Expert Seeds) [ Mazar x Ruderalis/Indica ]
  • Med Gom 1.0 (Grass-O-Matic et CBD Crew) [ inconnu ]
  • Medikit "Auto" (Buddha Seed) [ Midikit x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Melon Gum (Dr Underground) [ Bubble-gum x Lavender x Ruderalis ]
  • Mexican Airlines "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Mexican Sativa x Colombian x Rudéralis ]
  • Mig-29 (Auto Seeds) [ G 13 Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • Mikromachine "Auto" (Kannabia) [ Northern Lights x (AK-47 x Critical) x Ruderalis ]
  • Moby Dick "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Haze "Auto" x White Widow "Auto" ]
  • Moby Dick XXL "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ White Widow XXL "Auto" x Haze XXL "Auto" ]
  • Mohan Ram "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ White Widow "Auto" x S.A.D Sweet Afghani Delicious "Auto" ]
  • Monster Dwarf "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds) [ Skunk x sélection "Auto" ]
  • Monster Mash "Auto" (Exotic Seed) [ Kush x Black Domina x "Auto" Skunk ]
  • Moscow Blueberry "Auto" (Kalashnikov Seeds) [ Moscow Blueberry x Ruderalis ]
  • Mota CBD Rich "Auto" (LaMota Seeds)
  • Mystery Kush "Auto" (Mystery Seeds[53]) [ (Blueberry x OG Kush) x Ruderalis ]
  • Nevil Bilbo "Auto" (Genehtik) [ Neville's Haze x Northern Lights "Auto" ]
  • New York Diesel "Auto" (Expert Seeds)
  • "Auto" Night Queen (Dutch Passion) [ Afghani Night Queen Original x Afghan Mazar-i-Sharif hybride "Auto" ]
  • No Name "Auto" (Medical Seeds) [ No Name x "Auto" Medical Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Northern CBD (CBD Seeds)
  • Northern Express (Fastbuds[29]) [ Northern Light x Ruderalis ]
  • Northern Lights 2 "Auto" (Fantaseeds)
  • Northern Lights "Auto" (00 Seeds Bank) (Fantaseeds) (Sensi Seeds Bank) (White Label), etc.
  • Northern Lights "Auto" (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Northern Light x Green-O-Matic ]
  • Northern Lights Blue "Auto" (Delicious Seeds[32]) [ Northern Light Blue "Auto" x Blueberry "Auto" ]
  • Northern Lights x Big Bud "Auto" (Expert Seeds) [ Big Bud x Canadian Ruderalis x Northern Lights ]
  • Northern Russian "Auto" (Kalashnikov Seeds) [ Northern Lights x White Russian x Ruderalis ]
  • Nyc Diesel "Auto" (Avanced Seeds) [ Sativa Mexicaine x Indica Afghane ]
  • Nyc Diesel "Auto" (Barney's Farm[34]) [ NYC Diesel x "Auto" ]
  • OGesus "Auto" (Expert Seeds) [ OG Kush x White Dwarf ]
  • OG Kush "Auto" (Humboldt Seed organization) [ OG Kush x Ruderalis ]
  • OG Kush "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ OG Kush x Haze 2.0 "Auto" ]
  • Ogre (Joint Doctor Direct "Lowryder Seeds")
  • Old School Skunk 2.0 "Auto" (LaMota Seeds)
  • "Auto" Orange Bud (Dutch Passion) [ mâle "Auto" Daiquiri Lime x Original Orange Bud ]
  • "Auto" Orange Bud CBD (CBD Seeds)
  • Original Amnesia "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Haze "Auto" x Original Amnesia ]
  • Original Herer "Auto" (LaMota Seeds)
  • Pineapple Express "Auto" (Barney's Farm) [ Pineapple Chunk x Super "Auto" ]
  • Pineapple Express "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Skunk x Trainwreck x Hawaii x Ruderalis ]
  • Pineapple Express "Auto" (G13 Labs)
  • Pineapple Punch (Auto Seeds)
  • Polar Express (Auto Seeds) [ Northerm Lights #5 x Kush x Lowryder ]
  • Polar Express (Greenbud Seeds) [ Northern Light x Big Bud x Ruderalis ]
  • PolarLight #3 (Dutch Passion) [ Dutch Haze x "Auto" dominance sativa ]
  • "Auto" Pouder (Auto Seeds) [ "Auto" #1 x Big Bud x Power Plant ]
  • "Auto" Power (Biohazard Seeds) [ Northern Lights x Ruderalis/Indica ]
  • "Auto" Power Haze (Amaranta Seeds)
  • Power Skunk Max "Auto" (Kannabia)
  • Pure Amnesia "Auto" (LaMota Seeds)
  • Pure Power Plant "Auto" (White Label)
  • Purple Bud "Auto" (White Label)
  • Purple Cheeses (Auto Seeds) [ Purple # 1 x Blue Cheese x "Auto" #1 ]
  • "Auto" Purple CousKush (Zamnesia Seeds) [ Purple Kush x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Purple Diesel (Advanced Seeds) [ "Auto" Blueberry x "Auto" Diesel ]
  • Purplediol "Auto" CBD (Elite Seeds) [ Kush Rose "Auto" CBD x Afghan Rose CBD ]
  • Purple Haze "Auto (Genofarm) [ ?? ]
  • Purple Kush "Auto" (Buddha Seed) [ Indu Kush x purple x Ruderalis ]
  • Purple Mazar "Auto" (Kalashnikov Seeds) [ Purple x Mazar x Ruderalis ]
  • Purple Punch "Auto" (Barney's Farm[34]) [ Purple Punch x Barney's Farm "Auto" Critical ]
  • Purple Punch "Auto" (Fastbuds[29])
  • Purple Ryder (Joint Doctor Direct "Lowryder Seeds")
  • Purple Stilton (Auto Seeds)
  • "Auto" Purps (710 Genetics) [ Purps x Ruderalis ]
  • Radical "Auto" (Absolute Cannabis Seeds) [ Chesse x Ruderalis ]
  • Red Dwarf "Auto" (Buddha Seeds) [ White Dwarf x Skunk ]
  • Red Poison "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ Green Poison x Purple Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Reek's (Devil's Harvest[54]) [OG Reek'N x Rueralis ]
  • Rhino Ryder "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Medicine Man x Ruderalis ]
  • Russian "Auto" (Exotic Seed) [ (Ak-47 x Skunk "Auto") x (Ak-47 x Skunk "Auto") F6 ]
  • S.A.D "Auto" "Sweet Afghani Delicious" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Black Domina'98 sélectionnée x "Auto" ]
  • Sensi Skunk "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Bank[8])
  • Sensi #34 "Auto" CBD (Sensi Seeds Reasearch[55]) [ Sensi "Auto" CBD ]
  • Sensi #41 "Auto" CBD (Sensi Seeds Reasearch) [ Swiss Dream x Skunk #1 "Auto" ]
  • Sensi #119 "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Reasearch) [ Blueberry x Skunk #1 "Auto" ]
  • Sensi #219 "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Reasearch) [ Kush x Hindu Kush "Auto" ]
  • Sfv Kush "Auto" (LaMota Seeds[44]) [ OG Kush x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Shark CBD (CBD Seeds)
  • "Auto" Shellshock (710 Genetics) [ Amnesia Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • Sir Jack "Auto" (Exotic Seed) [(Sir Jack x Skunk "Auto") F6 ]
  • Shiva Skunk "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Bank) [ (Northern Lights #5 xSkunk #1) x Ruderalis ]
  • Short & Sweet "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ AK x White Widow x Ruderalis ]
  • Siberian Haze "Auto" (Kalashnikov Seeds) [ Siberian Haze x Ruderalis Russe ]
  • Sin Tra Bajo (Barney's Farm[34]) [ Mazari x Lowryder #1 ]
  • Six Shooter "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Chrystal Meth x Mexican Airlines ]
  • "Auto" Skunk (Biological Seeds) (Strain Hunters)
  • Skunk #1 "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Bank) [ Shunk #1 x Ruderalis ]
  • Skunk #1 "Auto" (White Label[56])
  • "Auto" Skunk 47 (Advanced Seeds[18]) [ Auto Critical Mass x "Auto" Kaya 47 ]
  • "Auto" Skunk Mass (Advanced Seeds[18]) [ Critical Mass x Skunk #1 ]
  • Skunky Monkey "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Skunk x Northern Lights x Ruderalis ]
  • Smoothie "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Somango x Blueberry ]
  • Snow Ryder "Auto" (White Label)
  • Snowstrom #2 (Dutch Passion) [ Orange Bud Femelle x Skunk Original ]
  • Solodiol "Auto" CBD (Elite Seeds) [ Solodiol CBD x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Somachigun (Biohazard Seeds) [ Critical+ x AK-47 "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Somango (Advanced Seeds) [ Jack Herer x Big Skunk x Génétique "Auto" ]
  • Sour Diesel "Auto" (Humboldt Seed organization) [ Sour Diesel#2 x Ruderalis ]
  • Sour Diesel "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Sour Diesel x Haze 2.0 "Auto" ]
  • Space Mango "Auto" (KC Brains)
  • "Auto" Speed Bud (Female Seeds) [ Early Misty x Ruderalis ]
  • Speed Devil "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1])
  • Speed Devil #2 "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ Speed Devil "Auto" améliorée ]
  • Speedy Boom "Auto" (Kannabia[24]) [ Kaboom x Ruderalis ]
  • Speedy Gonzales "Auto" (Kannabia) [ Ak 47 x ?]
  • Stardawg "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Chemdawg#4 x Tres Dawg x Ruderalis ]
  • StarRyder (Dutch Passion et Joint Doctor Direct "Lowryder Seeds") [ Dutch Passion Isis x "Auto" dominance Indica ]
  • Sticky Beast "Auto" (Zamnesia Seeds[11]) [ Bubble Gum x OG Kush x Critical "Auto" ]
  • Sucker Punch (Auto Seeds[2]) [ Bubba Kush Pre'98 x Candy Kush ]
  • Sugar Black Rose "Auto" (Delicious Seeds) [ Critical Mass "Auto" x Black Domina 98 "Auto" ]
  • Sugar Gom (Grass-O-Matic) [ Brasilian Sativa x "Auto" AK ]
  • Super Automatic Sativa (Big Buddha Seeds) [ Big Buddha Automatic x Super Silver Haze ]
  • Super Bud "Auto" (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Super Bud x Ruderalis ]
  • Super Critical "Auto" (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Big Bud x Skunk#1 x White Widow x Ruderalis ]
  • Super Lemon Haze "Auto" (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Super Lemon Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • Super Lemon Haze x Ruderalis (Biological Seeds)
  • Super Skunk "Auto" (Sensi Seeds Bank)
  • Super Skunk "Auto" (White Label)
  • Sweet CBD "Auto" (Auto Seeds[2]) [ Pure CBD x "Auto" Pounder ]
  • Sweet Cheese "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ Fast Bud #2 x clone élite Sweet Cheese ]
  • Sweet Cheese XL "Auto" (Sweet Seeds) [ Sweet Cheese améliorée ]
  • Sweet Cream "Auto" (Expert Seeds) [ Cream Mandarine "Auto" x Diesel ]
  • "Auto" Sweet Critical (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ Sweet Critical x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Sweet Dwarf (Advanced Seeds)
  • Sweet Gelato "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ (Sunset Sherbet x Girl Scout Cookies "Thin Mint") x Killer Kush "Auto" ]
  • Sweet Mango "Auto" (Green House Seeds[22]) [ Mango x Big Bang "Auto" ]
  • Sweet Nurse "Auto" CBD (Sweet Seeds[1])
  • Sweet Pure "Auto" CBD (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Lignée Diesel ]
  • Sweet Skunk "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Critical Mass x clone élite Early Skunk ]
  • "Auto" Sweet Soma (00 Seeds Bank[3]) [ Indica x Ruderalis ]
  • Sweet Special "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ clone élite Grapefruit et Hog x Cream Caramel "Auto" ]
  • Sweet Tooth "Auto" (Barney's Farm[34]) [ Sweet Tooth x Ruderalis ]
  • Sweet Trainwreck "Auto" (Sweet Seeds[1]) [ Clone élite Trainwreck x "Auto" ]
  • Syrup "Auto" (Buddha Seeds) [ Sélection Indicas douces ]
  • Taiga (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Power Plant x Ruderalis ]
  • Taiga#2 (Dutch Passion) [ Taiga "Auto" x Power Plant ]
  • Tangelo Rapido (Barney's Farm[34]) [ Tangerine 13 x Ruderalis ]
  • Tangerine Dream "Auto" (Barney's Farm) [ Tangerine Dream x Autoflower #1 ]
  • Tangie'matic (Fastbuds[29]) [ Tangie x Ruderalis ]
  • Thai Fantasy Max "Auto" (Kannabia) [ Thai Fantasy x Ruderalis ]
  • Thc Bomb "Auto" (Bomb Seeds) [ THC Bomb x "Auto" Bomb ]
  • Think Big (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Think Different x ?]
  • Think Different (Dutch Passion[30]) [ AK420 x "Auto" ]
  • Thunder Haze "Auto" (Genofarm) [ Thunder Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Top 69 (Advanced Seeds)
  • Trans Siberian (Auto Seeds) [ White Russian x "Auto" #1 ]
  • Triple A ou A.A.A. "Auto" (Exotic Seed) [Amnesia Haze x (Amnesia Haze xBlack Domina "Auto")]
  • "Auto" Tugy D Diesel (Amaranta Seeds) [ New York City Diesel x Ruderalis ]
  • Tundra #2 (Dutch Passion[30]) [ Passion#1 x ?]
  • Turbo Bud "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Brazilian "Auto" x Indian "Auto" x Afghani "Auto" ]
  • UK Cheese "Auto" (Humboldt Seed organization) [ UK Cheese x Ruderalis ]
  • "Auto" Ultimate (Dutch Passion) [ The Ultimate x "Auto" Mazar Original ]
  • Ultra Lemon Haze (Auto Seeds) [ Lemon Haze x Sour Diesel x "Auto" #1 ]
  • Vesta "Auto" (Buddha Seeds) [ Lignées Américaines x Lignées européennes ]
  • Waist Deep "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds) [ Chronic "Auto" x Turbo Bud "Auto" ]
  • Walhala (Fantaseeds)
  • West Coast O.G. "Auto" (Fastbuds) [ West Coast OG Cut x Ruderalis ]
  • White Cheese "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ White Widow Auto x Cheese Auto ]
  • White Diesel Haze (White Label)
  • White Dwarf "Auto" (Buddha Seeds) [ 2 puissantes Indica x Ruderalis ]
  • White Haze "Auto" (White Label) [ White Haze x Ruderalis ]
  • White Russian "Auto" (Serious Seeds[57]) [ White Russian x Lowryder ]
  • White Skunk "Auto" (White Label)
  • "Auto" White Widow (00 Seeds Bank[3]) (Biological Seeds) (Dutch Passion) (White Label) ect….
  • White Widow "Auto" CBD (Green House Seeds[22]) [ White Widow x Ruderalis x CBD ]
  • White Widow "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Critical+ "Auto" x White Widow ]
  • White Widow "Auto" CBD (Dinafem[21]) [ White Widow XXL "Auto" x "Auto" CBD ]
  • "Auto" White Widow CBD (CBD Seeds[14])
  • "Auto" White Widow x Big Bud (Female Seeds[12]) [ White Widow x Big Bud x Ruderalis ]
  • White Widow XXL "Auto" (Dinafem[21]) [ Clone élite White Widow x White Widow "Auto" ]
  • White Yoda "Auto" (Philosopher Seeds[49]) [ White Russian x Lowryder ]
  • Wipeout Express "Auto" (Heavyweight Seeds[4]) [ Afghani "Auto" x Northern Lights "Auto" x White Widow "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Xtreme (Dutch Passion[30] et Dinafem[21]) [ Outlaw Amnesia x "Auto" ]
  • "Auto" Yumbolt CBD (CBD Seeds[14])
  • Zkittlez "Auto" (Fastbuds[29]) [ Zkittlez "Auto" x ? ]
  • Zkittlez OG "Auto" (Barney's Farm[34]) [ Zkittlez x OG Kush x "Auto" ]

Variétés naturelles[modifier | modifier le code]

  • Canadienne
  • Crimée
  • Hongroise (Pannonienne)
  • Mongole
  • Russe
  • Tchèque

Sativa[modifier | modifier le code]

Variétés améliorées[modifier | modifier le code]

  • Apple Pie
  • Bambata (Tikiseedbank)
  • B2B (Beuh de béton) [N-39 x Skunk]
  • Big Mother Sativa
  • Haze
  • Honey Bee
  • Kali Mist
  • Koon Sucker
  • Silver Haze
  • Super Haze (Dutch Passion[30]) [Haze × Skunk]
  • Super Silver Haze [(Northern Light × Haze) × (Skunk × Haze)]
  • Silver Sage
  • PG-13
  • Québec Gold (THC haut) [Freezeland × M-39]
  • Quebec Big Bud

Variétés naturelles[modifier | modifier le code]

  • Alsacienne (variété utilisée pour le textile et l'isolation)[58]
  • Brésilien (Manga Rosa, Santa Maria, Original Green)
  • Blaisus
  • Burmese.
  • Cambodgien
  • Caraïbéennes : Jamaïque, St-Vincent(Vinci), Dominique, Guadeloupe et Martinique (Fil rouge)
  • Colombien (Colombian Punto Rojo, Santa Marta Colombian Gold, Colombian Mangobiche, Colombian Black, Amazonas, Blue Sky Blond, Colombian Chiba, Llanos Green, Colombian Red)
  • Hawaien (Kauai Electric, Molokai Frost, Maui Wowie, Kona Gold, Hawaiian Blue, Leper Grass, Mad Jag, Mauna Loa, Puna Butter)
  • Indien (Kerala Gold, Malana Cream, Garhwali Jungli, Garhwali Shiva, Kumaoni, Nanda Devi, Pahari Farmhouse, Parvati)
  • Jahwi's Joy (Ghana)
  • Jamaïquaine (Lambsbread, Jamaica Blue Mountain, Sugar bush, Jamaica Orange Hill)
  • Japonais (Fijian)
  • Laotien (Mekong High)
  • Mexicain (Acapulco gold, Highland Oaxacan gold, Zacatecas Purple, Guerrero Gold, Guerrero Green, Michoacan Brown Spears, Nayarit Yellow, Popo Oro)
  • Miami haze
  • Népalais
  • Nigérian
  • Panaméen (Panama Red)
  • Paraguayen
  • Sud-Africain (Durban Poison, Swazi Gold, Swazi Red, Tanzanian Magic, Malawi Gold, Mulanje Gold, Angolese, Lesothan, Nigerian,Congo Pointe Noire, Ciskei, Zambia, Rooibaard, Kwazulu, Kilimandjaro)
  • Thaï (Juicy Fruit Thai, Chocolate Thai)
  • Vietnamien (Mekong High, Vietnam Black)
  • Zamal (île de la Réunion : on compte de nombreuses sortes de Zamal, différentes qualités en créole Réunionnais : poivre, mangue, mangue carotte, sekopié, filament rouge...)

Hybrides[modifier | modifier le code]

Les hybrides sont créés pour sélectionner certaines caractéristiques des lignées sativa ou indica. En modifiant le ratio sativa/indica, il est possible d'obtenir des hybrides pour un effet psychoactif particulier, un goût ou une croissance accélérée. Format de la liste : nom de la lignée (cultivateur) [lignée]

Hybrides & lignées inconnues mixtes (50/50 Sativa-Indica)[modifier | modifier le code]

  • Alaskan thunderfuck
  • Ambulance (303 Seeds[59]) [ pére Bio-Diesel x Mére Z 7 de (CBD Crew)]
  • Black Dream (Eva Seeds[60]) [ Jamaican Dream x Black Domina ]
  • Blue Velvet
  • Bubblegum (Indiana)
  • Blue Haze (Homegrown Fantaseeds) [Blueberry × Haze]
  • Big Buddha Cheese
  • Bugatti Og
  • Buylman
  • California White Tomogoh (Kangounia Zamal) [Super Silver Haze × Sour Diesel]
  • Chronic
  • Consequence Kush
  • Ed Rosenthal Super Bud (Sensi Seeds)
  • Fruity-Juice (Sensiseeds) [Golden Triangle Thai × Afghani]
  • Full Moon
  • Galerna (Baskaly[61]) [ Haze x somange ]
  • Greece Coat
  • Himalayan Gold
  • Humboldt Select
  • Irie (French Touch Seeds) [ Kasper Diesel x Juanita Sativa ]
  • Jaffa cake(Cali Kush Farms[62]) [ Animal Cookies x Hasplant x Mandarina ]
  • John Newsom × Skunk
  • Kushage
  • Lemon Bud (Green Label[51]) [ Skunk x Citral ]
  • Northern Lights #2 [Hindu Kush × Northern Lights]
  • Northern Lights #5 [ northern lights × thai) × northern lights](75% northern lights\ 25% thai)
  • NYC Diesel (Soma Seeds[63]) [Sour Diesel × Afghani Hawaiian]
  • Pakalolo
  • Sweet Pink Grapefruit (Alpine Seeds[64]) [ Sweet Tooth Family ]
  • Sweet-purple (Paradise seeds[65])
  • Skunk Passion
  • Skunk Red Hair
  • Sour Romulan
  • Silver Pearl (Sensi Seeds) [Early Pearl × Skunk #1 × Northern Lights]
  • White Widow (Green House) [Brazilian × South Indian]
  • Yumboldt (Sagarmatha) [Afghan × Himalaya]

Hybrides à dominante indica[modifier | modifier le code]

  • Afghan Hammer (Tikiseedbank) [Mazar × Afghani]
  • Aurora Indica (Nirvana[66]) [Afghani × Northern Lights]
  • BC Purple Star (BC Bud) [Purple Star (Holland) × BC Purple Indica]
  • Big Bud (Sensi Seeds)
  • Black Ghost OG (Original Sensible Seeds) [ Colorado Ghost OG x Black Domina ]
  • Black Hog (Platinum Seeds[67]) [ Blackberry Kush x Hindu Kush x Kuztom OG ]
  • Blueberry (DJ Short Seeds[68]) [(Oaxacan Gold × Chocolate Thai) × (Highland Thai × Afghani)]
  • Blueberry Cookies (Dinafem) [ Blueberry x Girl Scout Cookies ]
  • Blueberry F5 (DJ Short Seeds)
  • Bubblicious (Nirvana)
  • Buddha's Sister (Soma)
  • CBD Hammer Shark (CBD Botanic[69]) [ Hammer Shark x CBD Strain ]
  • Celtic Stone (Celtic Stone Seeds) [Stonehedge × Dixie Crystal]
  • Ceres Kush (Ceres Seeds[70])
  • Ceres Skunk (Ceres Seeds[70])
  • Columbine (303 Seeds) [ pére Flo (DJ Short) x Northern lights # 5 ]
  • Critical Mass (Mr Nice)
  • Douce Nuit (French touch Seeds) [ Northern Lights x Hindu Kush ]
  • Frencheese (French Touch Seeds) [ Super Skunk x Master Kush ]
  • Fruity Thai (Ceres Seeds[70])
  • Hawaiian Indica (Sensi Seeds)
  • Hog (TH Seeds[71])
  • Holland's Hope (Positronics[72])
  • Lavender (Soma's Sacred Seeds[63]) [ Super skunk x Big Skunk Korean x Afghani x Hawaiian ]
  • Lavender x OG Kush (Delicious Seeds) édition limitée 2019
  • LSD (Barneys Farm) [Mazar x Skunk #1]
  • Masterkush [Hindu Kush × Afghan × Skunk]
  • MK Ultra (TH Seeds)
  • Northern Berry (Peak Seeds, Hygro) [Northern Lights #5 × Blueberry]
  • Northern Lights x Marmalate (Delicious Seeds) édition limitée 2019
  • Northern Lights × Skunk (Ceres Seeds)
  • OG Kush x White Widow (Delicious Seeds) édition limitée 2019
  • Quick Gorilla (Dinafem) [ Gorilla x OG kush "Auto" ]
  • Sensi Star (paradise Seeds)
  • Shanti Devi (Tikiseedbank)
  • Shulam (Tikiseedbank)
  • Shiesel (Bonguru) [Shiva Shanti × Diesel]
  • Shiva Skunk (Sensi Seeds)
  • Snow White (Nirvana)
  • Strawberry Blue (World of Seeds[73]) [ New Blue Line x Strawberry ]
  • Sugar Babe (Paradise Seeds)
  • Sugar Black Rose x Bubblegum (Delicious Seeds) édition limitée 2019
  • Super Skunk (Sensi) [Skunk #1 × Afghani]
  • Unknown Kush x Black Domina (Delicious Seeds) édition limitée 2019
  • Unknown Kush x Bubba Kush (Delicious Seeds) édition limitée 2019
  • Unknown Kush x Critical Mass (Delicious Seeds) édition limitée 2019
  • Unknown Kush x Lavender (Delicious Seeds) édition limitée 2019
  • White Rhino (Greenhouse Seeds) [White Widow × Afghani]
  • White Indica (Ceres Seeds[70])
  • White Smurf (Ceres Seeds[70])
  • Zeï (Tikiseedbank) [mazar × shulam]

Hybrides à dominante sativa[modifier | modifier le code]

  • Ace Silver Haze (Greenlabel[51]) [ Skunk x Northern Lights x Haze ]
  • AK-47 ou Special-K (Serious Seeds) [Colombian × Mexican × Thai × Afghani] - seconde place à la Cannabis cup, 2003, catégorie indica cup
  • Aladin (Dr Underground[50]) [Genio (Cut) x Original Diesel (Daywrecker Cut) AKA Headband] édition limitée 2019
  • Amsterdam Mist (Flying Dutchmen[74]) [ Original Haze x Northern Lights ]
  • Apollo 11 (Brothers Grimm seeds[75]) [ Genius (phénotype de Jack Herer) x Cinderella 99 male ]
  • Banana Split (Crockett Family Farm[76]) [ Tangie x Banana Sherbet ]
  • Bata Skunk ou Bata [Skunk #1 × Saint-Vincent "vinci"] variété développé aux Antilles française, surtout sur l'île de la Guadeloupe.
  • Beyond the Brain (Mandala Seeds[77]) [ Columbian Sativa/Haze x Satori P1 ] édition limitée 2019
  • Blue Dream [Blueberry x Haze]
  • Blue Gelato 41 (Barney's Farm) [Blueberry x Thin Mint Girl Scout Cookies]
  • California Orange ou "Cali-O" [Thai × (Afghani × Acapulco Gold)]
  • Carnival
  • Cinderella 99 ou "C99" (Mr. Soul) [Princess × Princess 88]
  • Citrus Skunk [Skunk #1 × California Orange]
  • Deedee (French Touch Seeds) [ lignée de Sour Diesel ]
  • Early Pearl (Sensi Seeds[8]) [Jamaicain Pearl × Early Girl]
  • Early Skunk (Sens Seeds[8]) [Skunk #1 × Early Pearl]
  • Euforia (Dutch Passion) [Unknown Skunk × Unknown Skunk]
  • FourWay (Sensi Seeds[8])
  • Flo (Dj Short[68]) [Purple Thai × Afghani]
  • Floater [Flo × Jacks Cleaner × Blueberry]
  • Gamma Berry (Dark Horse Genetics[78]) [ Bruce Banner 5 x Strawberry Diesel ]
  • Girl scout cookies
  • Green Devil (tikiseedbank) [Bambata × Shulam]
  • Hawaiian Skunk (Seedsman) [Hawaiian Indica × Skunk #1]
  • Hempstar (Dutch Passion) [Skunk × Oasis × Haze]
  • Hollands Hope
  • Jack Herer(Sensi Seeds[8]) [Skunk #1 × Northern Lights #5 × Haze]
  • Jock Horror
  • KIkiriki (French Touch Seeds) [ lignée Jamaican Kiki]
  • Lambsbread Skunk (Dutch Passion) [Jamaican Lambsbread × Skunk #1]
  • Lemon Skunk (Jordan of the Island) [Citrus Skunk × Skunk #1]
  • Lifesaver (BOG[79]) [Jack Cleaner × DJ Short's Blueberry × BogBubble]
  • Life Star (BOG[79]) [Lifesaver × Sensi Star]
  • Life Saver Diesel / L.S.D (BOG) [Lifesaver × NYC Diesel]
  • Misty (Positronics) [White Widow × Snow White]
  • Neon Super Skunk (Subcool) [Super Skunk × Black Russian]
  • Neville's Haze [Thai × Colombian, with a 1/4 NL#5]
  • New York City Diesel "Nyc Diesel"
  • Oliginal Super Bull Shit (BS Seeds) F2 Bull × F3 Shit [Super Super Silver Haze × Afgani × Indica × Sativa Super Skunk × Real haze #3.5 × Super Haze × Original Haze + Purple Head × White Widow]
  • Orange Crush [AE77 Cali-O × DJ Shorts Blueberry]
  • Paranormal cookies (Lost River Seeds[80]) [ Forum Cookies x Ghost Glue ]
  • Purple Skunk (Dutch Passion[30]) [Purple #1 × Early Skunk]
  • Renaissnace (French Touch Seeds) [ pére KC36 x Juanita La Lagrimosa ]
  • Royal Hawaiian (Reeferman Genetics (RMG[81])) [Hawaiian Indica × Hawaiian Sativa]
  • Sativa Afghani Genetic Equilibrium ou SAGE (TH Seeds) [Big Sour Holy × Afghani]
  • Sativa Des Rois (French Touch Seeds) [ sélection AK-47 ]
  • Shaman (Dutch Passion) [30][Purple #1 × Skunk]
  • Shiva Skunk (Sensi Seeds[8]) [Skunk #1 × Northern Lights #5]
  • Skunk #1 (Sensi/ Skunky) [Afghani × Mexican × Colombian Gold]
  • Skunk #5 (Effettoserra) [(Afghani × Acapulco Gold × Colombian Gold) × Dutch Skunk]
  • Skunk Berry (Peak Seeds) [Skunk × Blueberry]
  • Skunk Haze (Seedsman) [Skunk #1 × Original Haze]
  • Skunk Kush (Sensi Seeds[8]) [Hindu Kush × Skunk #1]
  • Strawberry Cough (Dutch Passion[30]) [Strawberry Fields × Haze]
  • Super Silver Haze (Mr. Nice) [(Northern Lights #5 × N. Haze) × (Skunk #1 × N. Haze)]
  • Super Silver Sour Diesel Haze (Reservoir) [Super Silver Haze × Sour Diesel]
  • Turtle Power (Amsterdam Marijuana) [Purple Power × Early Girl]
  • Ultra Skunk (Dutch Passion[30]) [Swiss Skunk × Skunk]

Clones[modifier | modifier le code]

Le clonage permet de reproduire une plante à l'identique. Certaines lignées ne sont transmises que par clonage pour conserver des propriétés strictement identiques au fil du temps. Ces clones se transmettent sous forme de bouture, ce qui rend très difficile leur commercialisation. Ils sont généralement transmis directement de cultivateur à cultivateur.

Variétés non classifiées[modifier | modifier le code]

  • Amnesia
  • Amnesia Special
  • Aphrodite
  • Arctic Sun
  • B-52's
  • Baby Shit Bricks
  • Belter (BeAn)
  • Big Blue
  • Big Snow
  • B's (ou Bilbo Baggins Bag of Buds)
  • Bjorn (Celtic Stone F1 Male)
  • Black Window
  • Bluberry Kush (L.A. Specific)
  • Blue Velvet
  • Bubble Gum
  • Buddha's Green
  • Buddha's Little Sister
  • C-4
  • Camel Rider Kush 2k16
  • Candlestick Kush
  • cheese bx (queijo lies)
  • Chuffa Puffz
  • Dawgie Style
  • DTC(ou Durban/Thai/Cinderella99)
  • Euphoria
  • Emerald Haze
  • Freezland
  • Ganja Pillar
  • Garlic
  • Grapefruit
  • Grapefruit Cross
  • Grapefruit Haze
  • Green C
  • Green Dot
  • Green Dragon
  • Green Pimp
  • Hawaiian Goo
  • In The Way
  • Ingrid (Celtic Stone F1)
  • Jamaican Gold
  • J Kush
  • Lemon Kush
  • M-39
  • Mango
  • Medicine Man
  • Mista Freeze
  • Northern Lights #5
  • Poopa
  • Puna Budda
  • Purple Frost
  • Purple Passion
  • Pussy Kush
  • Quebec Big Bud
  • Quebec gold
  • Secret Sauce
  • Shishkaberry
  • Snow
  • Stéphanie
  • White Rusch salavaux 2010

Articles connexes[modifier | modifier le code]

Références[modifier | modifier le code]

  1. abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw et x« Graines de Cannabis Sweet Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  2. abcdefg et h« Auto Seeds - The Autoflowering Specialists », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  3. abcdefghijk et l« », sur, Banque de gaines de cannabis,
  4. a et b(an + es)« Cannabis seeds autoflowering and feminized : Heavyweight Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  5. a et b« BioHazard Seeds Banco de Semillas Feminizadas », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  6. a et b« DNA Genetics », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  7. ab et c« 710 Genetics », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis
  8. abcdefghij et k« Graine de Cannabis - Sensi Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  9. ab et c(an + es)« Comprar Semillas De Marihuana - Greenbud », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  10. ab et c« Graine de Cannabis Amaranta Seeds - Banque de Graine de Cannabis Amanranta Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis
  11. abcdefghij et k« Graines Zamnesia / Graines de Cannabis / Qualité supérieure - Zamnesia », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  12. ab et c« Femaleseeds - graines de cannabis », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  13. a et b« Graines de Cannabis Grass-O-Matic », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  14. abcd et e« CBD Hemp Seeds and Hemp clone - CBD Seeds Colorado », sur
  15. abcd et e« Biological Seeds Store - Your Green choice - GRAINES DE CANNABIS DE HAUTE QUALITE », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  16. abc et d« », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  17. ↑« Absolute Cannabis Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  18. abcde et f« Home / Advenced Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  19. ↑« Genehtik Seeds - Banque de graines de cannabis feminisées », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  20. abcd et e« Best Autoflowering seeds Bank / Best Cannabis Seeds 2018 », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  21. abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzaaabac et ad« DINAFEM Seeds - Banque de Graines de Cannabis », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  22. abcdefghijklm et n« », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  23. a et b« Graines de Cannabis - Ministry of Cannabis », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  24. abcd et e« Kannabia Seed Company / Banque de graines de cannabis », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  25. a et b(an + es)« Genofarm », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  26. ↑(an)« G13 Labs / Premium Cannabis Seeds », sur
  27. abc et d« Bomb Seeds-Explosive cannabis seeds genetics from Bombs Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  28. ↑(en)« Big Buddha Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  29. abcdefghijklmnopqrst et u(en)« Autoflowering Cannabis seeds- Fast Buds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  30. abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxy et z« Qui nous sommes / Dutch Passion », sur, Banque de graine de cannabis,
  31. a et b(en)« Home Page / Exotic Seed », sur, Banque de graine de cannabis,
  32. abcdefgh et i« Banque de Graine de Cannabis / Delicious Seeds », sur
  33. ↑« Amsterdam Genetics - High Quality Cannabis Seeds and Smoking Gear », sur
  34. abcdefghi et j(en)« ! Cannabis & Marijuana Seeds / Barney's Farm », sur, Banque de graine de cannabis,
  35. ab et c« Banque de graines de cannabis - Humboldt Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  36. ↑(es)« Medical Seeds : Tu tienda de semilas fememinizadas online », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  37. a et b(en)« Become a retailer - Homegrown - Fantaaseeds », sur, Banque de graine de cannabis,
  38. ↑(an + es)« !Original Sensible Seeds / Celebrating 25 Years », sur
  39. ↑« KeraSeeds - », sur, Banque de graine de cannabis(consulté le )
  40. a et b« Buddhaseedbank », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  41. ↑(an)« CBD Crew », sur
  42. ↑« CannaBiogen - Semillas de Primera Calidad/Premium Quality Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  43. ↑« joint Doctor », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  44. a et b« Graines de Cannabis LaMota Seeds - Banque de Graine de Cannabis LaMota Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  45. ↑(an + es)« Semillas de marihuana. Semillas de cannabis - KETAMA SEEDS », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  46. ↑« Banque de graines de cannabis Strain Hunters Seedbank », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  47. ↑(es)« Home - Elite Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  48. a et b(an)« K.C. Brains Seeds Holland - Award Winning & World Famous Cannabis Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  49. a et b« Banque de graines Philosopher Seeds, acheter Graine de Cannabis », sur
  50. a et b(en + es)« Dr Underground -Feminized seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  51. ab et c« », sur
  52. ↑(en + es)« Marijuana strains shop landrace seeds indica sativa Ace seeds », sur, banque de graines de cannabis,
  53. ↑(an + es)« Mystery Seeds - Premiun Cannabis Seeds - Amsterdam 2018 », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  54. ↑« Devils Harvest seeds », sur, Banque de graine de cannabis,
  55. ↑« Achetez vos Graines de Cannabis de Sensi Seeds Reasearch », sur
  56. ↑« Graine de Cannabis "White Label Seed Company" », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  57. ↑« Serious Seeds / Breeding award- winning strains since 1994! », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  58. ↑Réunion de Commerçans et de Courtiers et Delanoye, Traité des productions naturelles, , 560 p.(lire en ligne), p. 198.
  59. ↑(an)« 303 Seeds / High quality genetics. », sur
  60. ↑(es)« Eva Seeds, banco de semillas de marihuana - Eva Seeds », sur
  61. ↑« Baskaly : Basque Quality Seeds », sur
  62. ↑(an)« Cali Kush Farm / los Angeles / Cannabis / Weed / Hollywood », sur
  63. a et b« Buy Cannabis Seeds / Soma's Sacred Seeds », sur
  64. ↑« Alpine », sur
  65. ↑« Paradise Seeds Graine de Cannabis Médical », sur
  66. ↑« Marijuana seeds directement à la source - nirvana shop », sur
  67. ↑« Platinum Seeds », sur
  68. a et b(an)« Home / DJ Short Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  69. ↑(an + es + ca)« CBD Botanic. Expert in Cannabinoids, spain », sur
  70. abcd et e« home - Ceres Seeds », sur
  71. ↑« T.H.Seeds - To protect genetics and serve mankind », sur
  72. ↑« Positronics Seeds S.L. », sur
  73. ↑« home », sur
  74. ↑« Graine Cannabis " The Flying Duthmen " », sur
  75. ↑(an)« Brothers Grimm Seeds », sur
  76. ↑(an)« Crockett Family Farms », sur
  77. ↑(an)« Mandala seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  78. ↑(an)« darkhorsegenetics », sur
  79. a et b« [Topic Unique] B.O.G Seeds -Breeders - CannaWeed », sur
  80. ↑(en)« Seed Catalog - Lost River Seeds », sur, Banque de graines de cannabis,
  81. ↑(an)« Referman Genetics (RMG) - Old School Breederd Association », sur

Similar news:

We are so excited to introduce our 2019 Harvested Strains.

We just got our new test results for Alien ET in!

Alien ET OG (a 50%/50% Hybrid)


Per Leafly:  First available as a clone in California’s Bay Area and now in seed form from Cali Connection, Alien OG is a cross of Tahoe OG and Alien Kush. Alien ET OG has the typical lemon and pine OG smell and flavor, and its intense high combines heavy body effects and a psychedelic cerebral buzz. Beginners and novices, be sure to take it slow with this heavy-hitter.

Feelings: Creative, Energizing, Euphoria, Focus, Happy, Relaxing

May Help With:  Anxiety, Bipolar Disorder, Chronic Pain, Depression, Insomnia, Loss of Appetite, Migraines, Nausea, PTSD, Stress

We selected Alien ET OG as one of our 2019 strains with only one thing in mind....your smoking enjoyment. 


79 80 81 82 83