Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cannabis sativa L. has been domesticated for fibre, oilseed, and marijuana; it also occurs as ruderal plants. “Marijuana” refers to plants selected for high concentrations of the chemical tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), while “hemp” refers to plants low in concentration of THC and which are domesticated for either stem fibre or oilseed. In my first chapter I review the botany of cannabis, taxonomy and origins, ethnobotany, and crop ferality. In my second chapter, I performed a study where achenes (“seeds”) from herbarium collections representative of these classes of C. sativa were assessed for variation in morphological characters and pericarp resistance to fracture. Multivariate analysis of the data revealed significant divergence among the groups. In contrast to ruderal plants, domesticated plants (hemp or marijuana) possessed achenes that are significantly longer, heavier, covered with a less adherent perianth, and lacking a pronounced basal attenuation. These characteristics reflect traits that are advantageous in domesticated plants, and are consistent with the "domestication syndrome”. Marijuana achenes, in comparison with hemp achenes, are shorter and darker. Achenes of fibre cultivars are larger than the achenes of oilseed cultivars. Achenes of dioecious oilseed cultivars are larger than the achenes of monoecious oilseed cultivars. We propose several mechanisms by which this phenotypic divergence may have occurred, including potential differences in outcrossing rate and the evolution of life history strategies among C. sativa groups that deserve further exploration. While only one species of Cannabis merits recognition, we postulate these phenotypic differences in C. sativa are a result of domestication for different purposes. In my final chapter I discuss the limitations and future studies. This work contributes a more complete understanding of cannabis morphology to the greater body of literature on plant domestication.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".