Assessment of Cannabinoids Content in Micropropagated Plants of Cannabis sativa L. and their Comparison with Vegetatively Propagated Plants and Mother Plant at Different Stages of Growth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
True- to- type clonal fidelity is one of the most important prerequisites for rapid multiplication of plant species. However, there is always a concern of potential differences due to mutation and their effect on the chemical constituents of in vitro propagated (IVP) and vegetatively propagated (VP) plants from same source (MP). Clonal fidelity was tested among the three groups of plants (MP-indoor, IVP and VP). After the plants were well established in the soil [1,2] samples from all three groups of plants, were periodically analyzed for their cannabinoids content to determine if differences in secondary metabolites exist within and among these groups of plants. The content of six major cannabinoids: D 9 -THC, THCV, CBD, CBC, CBG and CBN were identified and analyzed using gas chromatography/flame ionization detection (GC/FID). In general, THC content in all groups increased with plant age up to a highest level during budding stage where the THC content reached a plateau before the plants were harvested. The pattern of changes occurred in the concentration of other cannabinoids content relative to the plants age and has followed a similar trend in all groups. Minor differences observed in cannabinoids concentrations within and among the groups were found statistically insignificant. These results confirm the clonal fidelity of tissue culture raised plants of Cannabis sativa and suggest that the biochemical mechanism followed to produce the micropropagated plants does not affect the metabolic content and can be used to produce true-to-type plants of this species for commercial pharmaceutical use. Acknowledgements: The work was supported in part by National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), Contract No. N01DA-0-7707. References: [1] Lata H, et al. (2008) In vitro cellular and developmental biology-Plant (In Press; DOI 10.1007/s11627-008-9167-5). [2] Lata H, et al. (2009) Physiology and Mol Biol of Plants, 15(1): January 2009 (In Press).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".