Canna~Fangled Abstracts

Identification of Chemotypic Markers in Three Chemotype Categories of Cannabis Using Secondary Metabolites Profiled in Inflorescences, Leaves, Stem Bark, and Roots

By July 9, 2021July 20th, 2021No Comments

doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.699530. eCollection 2021.

Affiliations 

Abstract

Previous chemotaxonomic studies of cannabis only focused on tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) dominant strains while excluded the cannabidiol (CBD) dominant strains and intermediate strains (THC ≈ CBD). This study investigated the utility of the full spectrum of secondary metabolites in different plant parts in three cannabis chemotypes (THC dominant, intermediate, and CBD dominant) for chemotaxonomic discrimination. Hierarchical clustering, principal component analysis (PCA), and canonical correlation analysis assigned 21 cannabis varieties into three chemotypes using the content and ratio of cannabinoids, terpenoids, flavonoids, sterols, and triterpenoids across inflorescences, leaves, stem bark, and roots. The same clustering results were obtained using secondary metabolites, omitting THC and CBD. Significant chemical differences were identified in these three chemotypes. Cannabinoids, terpenoids, flavonoids had differentiation power while sterols and triterpenoids had none. CBD dominant strains had higher amounts of total CBD, cannabidivarin (CBDV), cannabichromene (CBC), α-pinene, β-myrcene, (-)-guaiol, β-eudesmol, α-eudesmol, α-bisabolol, orientin, vitexin, and isovitexin, while THC dominant strains had higher total THC, total tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV), total cannabigerol (CBG), camphene, limonene, ocimene, sabinene hydrate, terpinolene, linalool, fenchol, α-terpineol, β-caryophyllene, trans-β-farnesene, α-humulene, trans-nerolidol, quercetin, and kaempferol. Compound levels in intermediate strains were generally equal to or in between those in CBD dominant and THC dominant strains. Overall, with higher amounts of β-myrcene, (-)-guaiol, β-eudesmol, α-eudesmol, and α-bisabolol, intermediate strains more resemble CBD dominant strains than THC dominant strains. The results of this study provide a comprehensive profile of bioactive compounds in three chemotypes for medical purposes. The simultaneous presence of a predominant number of identified chemotype markers (with or without THC and CBD) could be used as chemical fingerprints for quality standardization or strain identification for research, clinical studies, and cannabis product manufacturing.

 

Keywords: CBD, THC, cannabis, chemotypes, markers, plant parts, secondary metabolites

Conflict of interest statement

DJ and JS were employed by the company PBG BioPharma Inc. PH was employed by the company Egret Bioscience and Lighthouse Genomics. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 3

FIGURE 4

FIGURE 5

FIGURE 6

References

    1. Aizpurua-Olaizola O. S. (2016). Evolution of the cannabinoid and terpene content during the growth of Cannabis sativa plants from different chemotypes. J. Nat. Prod. 79 324–331. 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.5b00949 – DOI – PubMed
    1. Ames-Sibin A. P., Barizão C. L., Castro-Ghizoni C. V., Silva F. M. S., Sá-Nakanishi A. B., Bracht L., et al. (2018). β-Caryophyllene, the major constituent of copaiba oil, reduces systemic inflammation and oxidative stress in arthritic rats. J. Cell. Biochem. 119 10262–10277. 10.1002/jcb.27369 – DOI – PubMed
    1. An F., Yang G., Tian J., Wang S. (2012). Antioxidant effects of the orientin and vitexin in Trollius chinensis Bunge in D-galactose-aged mice. Neural Regen. Res. 7:2565. – PMC – PubMed
    1. Andre C. M., Hausman J.-F., Guerriero G. (2016). Cannabis sativa: the plant of the thousand and one molecules. Front. Plant Sci. 7:19. 10.3389/fpls.2016.00019 – DOI – PMC – PubMed
    1. Ashaari Z., Hassanzadeh G., Alizamir T., Yousefi B., Keshavarzi Z., Mokhtari T. (2018). The flavone luteolin improves central nervous system disorders by different mechanisms: a review. J. Mol. Neurosci. 65 491–506. 10.1007/s12031-018-1094-2 – DOI – PubMed

Leave a Reply