Landrace to Lab: Cannabis History & Taxonomy for Budtenders

Taxonomy: the science of naming, describing and classifying organisms. When we talk about cannabis, taxonomy helps us figure out where it fits in the plant kingdom, how many species of cannabis exist, and how they might differ from one another. Understanding the science of taxonomy is more than just academic—it's key to unlocking the full potential of cannabis retail. Delve into the history and taxonomy of cannabis, and why a thorough grasp of taxonomy isn't just good science, it's smart business, fostering customer loyalty and driving sales in a saturated industry where differentiation is key.

In 1753, Carl Linnaeus, often heralded as the Father of Modern Taxonomy, was the first to document the cannabis plant in his work entitled Species Plantarum. He christened it Cannabis Sativa L. and described the plant’s morphology (phenotype) as growing tall and thin with a narrow leaf structure. Cannabis Sativa L. was the only scientifically recognized species of cannabis until 1785, when Jean Baptiste Lamarck was examining cannabis samples from India. He observed a distinct difference in these plants from India - they were short and bushy, with a wider leaf structure. In light of these major morphological differences, Lamarck argued there were two species: Cannabis sativa, grown mostly in the West, and Cannabis indica, found in India and nearby areas. This debate over whether they are separate species continues today.

Although the debate persists, it is widely agreed upon in the scientific community that cannabis has only one species with multiple subspecies. Cannabis researcher Etienne de Meijer says in Handbook of Cannabis, “A monospecific concept has implicitly been adopted in virtually all publications on Cannabis… in this author's opinion, the genus should be considered as monospecific, i.e., comprising only the single species C. sativa L.” He goes on to support this by citing the Biological Species Concept to support his conclusion that all cannabis plants are a single species.

The Biological Species Concept is a theory scientists use to define what makes a group of living things a separate species. According to this concept, a species is a group of animals, plants, or other organisms that can mate with each other to produce fertile offspring. A fascinating example of this concept in action is the liger, a hybrid animal born from a lion and a tiger. While ligers certainly exist, they are unable to mate with one another to produce offspring— the only way to get a liger is to cross a lion and tiger. This highlights a crucial aspect of the biological species concept: despite the lion and tiger being closely related and capable of mating, the fertility challenges of their offspring (ligers) underline the boundary separating lions and tigers into distinct species.

So how does this apply to cannabis? It simply means that at one point in history landrace sativa and indica plants (landrace meaning varieties that grow in the wild with no interference from humans) were able to interbreed to create hybrids, and these hybrids were also fertile and able to be bred together to create additional hybrids. Human intervention caused this hybridization and we have had about as much impact on the evolution of the cannabis plant as we have canines. These days, everything you encounter in the regulated cannabis market is a hybrid. McPartland et al. (2000) said of the current state of cannabis hybridization, “Distinguishing between “Sativa'' and “Indica” has become nearly impossible because of extensive cross-breeding in the past 40 years. Traditional landraces of “Sativa” and “Indica” are becoming extinct through introgressive hybridization.” Armed with this knowledge, it is more critical than ever to adapt the terminology we are using to help guide consumers towards the effects they are seeking from the available cannabis varieties on the market.

It is important to note that Linnaeus and Lamarck never smoked or utilized these plants to discover their physiological or psychoactive effects when designating them as either a sativa or an indica. The classification was made on the phenotype alone. McPartland further drives home the non-existent correlation between the sativa/indica designation and effects when he says, “Categorizing cannabis as either “Sativa” or “Indica” has become an exercise in futility. Ubiquitous interbreeding and hybridization renders their distinction meaningless. The arbitrariness of these designations is illustrated by “AK-47,” a hybrid that won “Best Sativa” in the 1999 Cannabis Cup, and won “Best Indica” four years later.” If at some point in history it was possible to predict the effects of a particular cultivar (strain) by knowing whether it was an indica or sativa, then those days are long gone.

Thankfully, there is a better way! In their paper Cannabis - from Cultivar to Chemovar, researchers Hazekamp and Fischedick call for an alternative approach. What do they mean by “from cultivar to chemovar”? Plants are identified by their chemical fingerprint (chemovar), rather than by an inconsistent naming convention that does not give an accurate representation of the chemical makeup or potential effects. (If you would like a more in-depth explanation of phenotype and chemotype then click here). Characterizing cultivars(strains) by their cannabinoid ratios and dominant terpenes is the way of the future. Change is difficult, but the onus is on us as industry leaders to educate our teams and adopt a more accurate way of talking about these products with consumers.

Understanding the scientific underpinnings of cannabis varieties enables a more informed conversation between budtenders and consumers, ensuring that each purchase meets the specific needs and preferences of the user. This empowers retailers to differentiate themselves in a competitive market, ultimately driving sales and fostering a knowledgeable cannabis community of loyal customers. Embracing the complexities of cannabis classification is indeed smart business, bridging the gap between botanical science and consumer experience.

If you would like to know more, or discuss how I can help bring your budtenders to the forefront of the industry while increasing your average transaction value and customer retention rate, then please reach out to me via the contact card on my website (www.stonedconsulting.com), or feel free to email me directly at Brittney@stonedconsulting.com.

SOURCES:

McPartland JM. Cannabis sativa and Cannabis indica versus “Sativa” and “Indica.” In: Chandra S, Lata H, ElSohly MA. (eds.). Cannabis sativa: Botany and Biotechnology. Springer International: Cham, Switzerland, 2017, pp. 101–121

Hazekamp A, Fischedick JT. Cannabis - from cultivar to chemovar. Drug Test Anal. 2012 Jul-Aug;4(7-8):660-7. doi: 10.1002/dta.407. Epub 2012 Feb 24. PMID: 22362625.

Pertwee, Roger, editor. Handbook of Cannabis. Reprint edition, OUP Oxford, 2014. pp. 90-91