Cannabis Sativa...

[dmoe4000]

So this might be a completely retarded observation and feel free to flame me all you want but: I am conducting research for an extensive research paper on medical marijuana for a college course and every report that refer to marijuana as cannabis they specifically call it Cannabis Sativa. I am just confused because there is no mention of Cannabis Indica which in my opinion has a much higher medical value for pain relief and such. eh?

[Lebowski]

Actually, there is current debate over the use of the term Sativa.

I don't have their source, but the collective I visit actively looks at research and information about marijuana, to pass the knowledge onto their patients.
They maintain, based on readings they did (which i'll try to aquire) that Cannabis Sativa refers to industrial grade hemp, the tall, stalky stuff with around 1% THC content.
The proper definitions are:
-Cannabis Indica for what we consider "sativa" strains
-And Cannabis Afghanica, a geographically derived name, for what we consider indica

This sounds far fetched at first, and is hard to digest (i still call em sativa and indica to avoid confusion). Take the information with a grain of salt, and i'll try to get back here with their sources.

Also, I believe the term sativa started getting tossed around and misused around the time prohibition started, ~1930. There was the whole confusion of hemp vs. marijuana going on then.

[CaliCoast]

This was taken from "Marijuana Horticulture" by Jorge Cervantes

Technically and legally, all cannabis, whether rope or dope, is classified as Cannabis sativa( C. sativa). Regardless of origin, all cannabis is considered Cannabis sativa under international law. However, according to "Hemp Diseases and Pests", Dr. J.M. McParland, R.C. Clarke, and D.P. Watson, CAB International, Cannabis sativa can be further classified as: Cannabis sativa (= C.sativa var. sativa), Cannabis indica (= C.sativa var. indica), Canaabis ruderalis (= C. sativa var. spondanea), Cannabis afghanica (= C. sativa var. afghanica).

Maybe this can help your research.

[Smokey_mctoke]

The legal status of cannabis makes proper documentation and serious study of the plant a somewhat obscure subject. There seems to be no official, universally accepted avenue of approach when it comes to the classification of the plant. After much reading what you end up getting is a bunch of personal views with varying degrees of overlap.

I always end in confusion when I try to get scientific with weed. When you are through with your research do share it with us, please.

[amsterdamage]

Actually the entire taxonomic system is in a constant state of flux. Several different systems operate at the same time, all are valid and most of the time they come up with a slightly different classification for each plant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...plant_taxonomy

This doesn't just apply to Cannabis, in fact the taxonomy of Cannabis is just as clear, and just as confusing, as it is for almost every other plant.


The best you can do is state the taxonomy of your plant and include the name of the classification system you're following.

Here's a brief history of the taxonomy of Cannabis:

The Cannabis genus was first classified by Carolus Linnaeus in 1753, who considered the genus to be monotypic, having just a single species that he named Cannabis sativa L. (L. stands for Linnaeus, and indicates the authority who first named the species).

In 1785, noted evolutionary biologist Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck published a description of a second species of Cannabis, which he named Cannabis indica Lam.

In 1976, Canadian botanist Ernest Small and American taxonomist Arthur Cronquist published a taxonomic revision that recognizes a single species of Cannabis with two subspecies: C. sativa L. subsp. sativa, and C. sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) Small & Cronq.

In 2004, Karl W. Hillig, a graduate student in the laboratory of long-time Cannabis researcher Paul G. Mahlberg at Indiana University, conducted a systematic investigation of genetic, morphological, and chemotaxonomic variation. Hillig and Mahlberg concluded that the patterns of cannabinoid variation support recognition of C. sativa and C. indica as separate species, but not C. ruderalis.

As of 2007, most taxonomy web sites continue to list Cannabis as a single species

So if you're confused, don't worry! It's not so much the amount of thc you've consumed as the specific place in the history of taxonomy that we find ourselves.

[INS the Rebel]

it is an art with definable goals
and not terms

words my friend, are just words.


good luck and do tell when its all said and done

what college or university, might i ask?