MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4380632154 · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2023.1192035

Total yeast and mold levels in high THC-containing cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) inflorescences are influenced by genotype, environment, and pre-and post-harvest handling practices

2023· article· en· W4380632154 on OpenAlexafffund
Zamir K. Punja, Li Ni, Samantha Lung, Liam Buirs

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Microbiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersWestern Economic Diversification CanadaAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundSimon Fraser University
KeywordsCannabis sativaInflorescenceCannabisGenotypeYeastBiologyMoldBotanyMedicineGeneGeneticsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Total yeast and mold (TYM) levels in inflorescences of high THC-containing Cannabis sativa (cannabis) are regulated to ensure that medicinal and recreational users, especially those with immunocompromised systems, are not exposed to potentially harmful levels. In North America, the limits imposed range from 1,000–10,000 cfu/g of dried product to 50,000–100,000 cfu/g, depending on the jurisdiction. Factors affecting a build-up of TYM in cannabis inflorescences have not been previously researched. In this study, >2,000 fresh and dried samples were assayed for TYM over a 3-year period (2019–2022) to identify specific factors which can contribute to TYM levels. Greenhouse-grown inflorescences were sampled before and after commercial harvest, homogenized for 30 s, and plated onto potato dextrose agar (PDA) with 140 mg/L streptomycin sulfate. Colony-forming-units (cfu) were rated after 5 days of incubation at 23°C under 10–14 h light. PDA provided more consistent counts of cfu compared to Sabouraud dextrose and tryptic soy agars. The predominant fungal genera identified by PCR of the ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 region of rDNA were Penicillium , Aspergillus, Cladosporium, and Fusarium. In addition, four yeast genera were recovered. In total, 21 species of fungi and yeasts constituted the total cfu present in the inflorescences. The variables that significantly ( p < 0.05) increased these TYM levels in inflorescences were: the genotype (strain) grown, presence of leaf litter in the greenhouse, harvesting activity by workers, genotypes with a higher abundance of stigmatic tissues and inflorescence leaves, higher temperature and relative humidity within the inflorescence microclimate, time of year (May–October), method of drying buds after harvest, and inadequate drying of buds. The variables which significantly ( p < 0.05) decreased TYM in samples were: genotypes with lower numbers of inflorescence leaves, air circulation achieved by fans during inflorescence maturation, harvesting during November–April, hang-drying of entire inflorescence stems, and drying to a moisture content of 12–14% (water activity of 0.65–0.7) or lower which was inversely correlated with cfu levels. Under these conditions, the majority of dried commercial cannabis samples contained <1,000–5,000 cfu/g. Our findings indicate that TYM in cannabis inflorescences are the result of a dynamic interaction between genotype, environment, and post-harvest handling methods. Some of these factors may be altered by cannabis producers to reduce the potential build-up of these microbes. Among the 21 fungal and yeast species recovered from greenhouse-grown cannabis inflorescences, a few could pose a potential threat to human health, while many do not and they could provide beneficial interactions within the cannabis plant. The currently recommended plating methods onto agar media and enumeration of total cfu are unable to distinguish between these two groups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Microbiology→Same topicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research→French-language works237,207→