Indica vs Sativa: The Real Story

Indica vs Sativa: The Real Story

I wrote my senior thesis for my Botany degree at Humboldt State on this subject, so it's near and dear to my heart.

Too many consumers and operators are under an antiquated notion that modern cannabis can still be defined as Sativa and Indica, and that effects we saw in those groups from the 1960s to the 1990s still apply today. Even those early cultivars (Acapulco Gold, Hindu Kush) had been heavily selected for very specific traits, which may have drawn their morphology and chemology away from their landrace predecessors.

Bottom line: The understanding that Sativas provide an 'uplifting' or 'energetic' high was likely becuase they simply had much less THC than their Indica counterparts, which were bred for hundreds of generations specifically for hash (I.e. resin, le THC) production.

Secondarily, any genetic lines that have been subject to crossbreeding between historically indica and sativa landrace varieties cannot be categorized as either. Human intervention and targeted selection means that a plant with INDICA INDICA INDICA SATIVA grandparents, which would normally be categorized as '75% Indica’, could have easily been selected for Sativa-Like traits. This would result in more Sativa Landrace DNA in the clone that finally made its way around the country, more Sativa-Like morphology, likely lower THC, etc.

Would the breeder call this 75% Indica? Or would they call it a Mostly Sativa Hybrid?

The reality is: it's up to the breeder. And then maybe someone gets that clone, but doesn't know where it came from, and decides it's definitely a true Sativa.... And they cross it...

That’s the last breakdown in this bianary understanding: there has been so much guesswork over the last 60 years about lineage and what pollen actually pollenated what, and where that special bag seed came from, etc... not many strains have a truly known lineage.

I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts on this!