Pharmacological differences between Sativa and Indica Marijuana strains?

[JohnBoy2000]

They say indica is more sedating, sativa more activating.

Apparently cannibinoids have the property of disinhibiting dopamine release through binding to and inhibiting GABA release - is that correct?

Though it seems to be documented that overall, marijuana is more of an actual depressant and anorexant, than anti-depressant, and also despite claims that it elevates appetite.

Any insights?

 

[farmacista]

what do you mean anorexant i thought that was accepted that cannabinoids increase appetite and it has been shown that leptin decrease cannabinoids levels in the brain...by the way yes CBR on presynaptic gaba neurons inhibit gaba realese

 

[Solipsis]

FWIW i have a strain from south africa called durbin poison which is supposed to have almost all THC and only traces of CBD, THV etc just like "Swazi Gold" is supposed to contain.
It's a pure Sativa. But I really can't say if that kind of cannabinoid content is typical for Sativa.

Edit: no it is not apparently:

Some studies indicate that, on average, Cannabis indica has higher levels of THC to CBD, whereas Cannabis sativa has higher levels of CBD compared to THC.[8] However, huge variability exists within either species, and there is an increasing discussion whether the existing paradigm of the difference between species adequately represents the variability found within the Cannabis genus.[9][10][11] There are five chemotaxonomic types of Cannabis: one with high levels of THC, one which is more fibrous and has higher levels of CBD, one that is an intermediate between the two, another one with high levels of cannabigerol (CBG), and the last one almost without cannabinoids.[12]

Cannabis strains with relatively high CBD:THC ratios are less likely to induce anxiety than vice versa. This may be due to CBD's antagonistic effects at the cannabinoid receptors, compared to THC's partial agonist effect.[13] CBD is also a 5-HT1A receptor (serotonin) agonist, which may also contribute to an anxiolytic-content effect.[14] The effects of sativa are well known for its cerebral high, while indica is well known for its sedative effects which some prefer for night time use.[14] Both types are used as medical cannabis. Indica plants are normally shorter and stockier than sativas.[15] They have broader, deeply serrated leaves and a compact and dense flower cluster. The effects of indicas are predominantly physical and sedative.

link

However that seems to be contradictory - it would make more sense if they got the CBD and THC ratios reversed in that quote, as the sedative physical effects of indicas would be explained by involvement of more CBD, whereas cerebral highs would rather be from THC-heavy ratios?

I've had homemade hash oil as well, and also tried to epimerize part of that oil to boost the delta-9 THC. As is typical for oil like that I believe, it produced a very sharp psychedelic up high that I think is mostly from THC and is also encountered with CB1-heavy synthetic cannabinoids.

I think CBD and other CB2 agonists make cannabis more stoning / depressant-like, from modulating the effects on CB1. CB1 agonism is considered to mediate increase of appetite, antagonists like rimonabant are the opposite: anorectics.

 

[Coolwhip]

I think its been fairly well shown, anytime real science is applied, that the whole sativa vs indica paradigm is complete and total BS and that even within individual strains different phenotypes can produce varying levels of cannabinoids, you can only know anything for sure by looking at an individual plant and its clones(and even then time of harvest/growth conditions are going to influence outcome a great deal) and strain/species don't mean much medicinally when growing from seed.

On top of that, there just hasn't been enough research to say anything definitively about the psychotropic affects of any/different cannabinoids except a choice few when administered in total isolation.

 

[LandsUnknown]

If I'm not mistaken, the majority of the differences between sativa and indica strains has to do with the ratio of THC to CBD. All strains contain both. However, sativas are primarily THC with low CBD. Indicas also have a high level of CBD, which gives it a more mellow body high rather than the head high from a sativa. There are likely other differences as well, but this is the main explanation.

 

[JohnBoy2000]

If CBD inhibits GABA release, which in turn disinhibits dopamine - does it not concurrently disinhibit noradrenaline?
Which would be activating?

I mean - it's obviously not - activating, that is - but is that not the theoretical mechanism of GABA blockade?

 

[farmacista]

cannabinoids inhibit glutamate release too so they are not activating, also it depends on where cannabinoid receptors are located, they may be more densely located on gaba neurons presynaptic to dopaminergic ones than noradrenergic ones

 

[Bagseed]

I also read a couple of times that CBD is a mu opioid positive allosteric modulator, allthough I don't know important that effect is.

My personal experience also tells me that the strain is less important than the overall quality of the buds, allthough I had some strains that really stood out...

 

[Solipsis]

I think its been fairly well shown, anytime real science is applied, that the whole sativa vs indica paradigm is complete and total BS and that even within individual strains different phenotypes can produce varying levels of cannabinoids, you can only know anything for sure by looking at an individual plant and its clones(and even then time of harvest/growth conditions are going to influence outcome a great deal) and strain/species don't mean much medicinally when growing from seed.

On top of that, there just hasn't been enough research to say anything definitively about the psychotropic affects of any/different cannabinoids except a choice few when administered in total isolation.

I was wrong earlier about Sativa's being high in THC and low in CBD content, like wikipedia said it is mostly the otherway around but not with perfect consistency or anything like that. But what you are saying is not really right either it seems.
Of course like with most natural products, like you also see with cubensis mushrooms, there will be variation unless you have a monoculture.

However as this shows: http://www.amjbot.org/content/91/6/966.full there are apparently roughly 3 types of cannabis strains: those with quite high THC : CBD ratio, the opposite, and those with more or less equal content of both. There is a genetic component to this, two alleles coding for alloenzymes that convert cannabigirol to THC or CBD respectively . And the difference between what they call these chemotypes is pretty discreet (check the fig 4 plot).

Where it gets tricky is that this sativa vs indica paradigm is not complete and total BS, it's just not a consistent difference but only a tendency: The high THC : low CBD chemotype tends to be more commonly found in Indicas. I guess my Durbin Poison is an exception to the tendency, but it's too strongly put to call it all a crapshoot.

 

[Coolwhip]

Think what you want. But its been shown many times that strains we believe to be "pure" indica/sativa rarely are, but it doesn't matter anyways, because there are sooo many examples of what we think to be sativa/indica dominant having a higher/lower thc/cbd ratio to each other that not only is it not a hard and fast rule but in reality isn't a rule at all, you can find numerous thought to be indicas/sativas high/low in thc/cbd. The same holds true for different phenotypes within the same strain(although not as often, in this case once you can find a strain that will usually produce plants with similar ratios then only certain phenotypes will violate the rule, and this only occurs when growing from seed and not propagating clones), but whether the strain is classed(accurately) as indica dominant or sativa dominant has nothing to do with it, in fact many strains are classed as indica/sativa dominant AFTER thc/cbd ratios have been established(or the psychotropic affects associated with said strain) in order to fit the rule but once you go back an analyze the dna of said strain the classification would/will be found to be inaccurate.

And observations about indica/sativa species found in the wild halfway across the world from each other just do not apply to modern cannabis production and haven't for decades, there's just been way to much crossbreeding going on for too long that applications of "sativa dominant" or "indica dominant" only hold value because we've chosen to represent strains high/low in certain cannabinoids as being one or the other, once the dna is analyzed it tells a very different story.

We really need to just separate the the high/low cbd classification from the indica/sativa classification completely(and not worry about how much dna comes from which species, a lot of that dna has nothing to do with medicinal properties) because it doesn't apply to commercial strains anymore. When talking about medicinal properties it doesn't really matter if the plant resembles an indica/sativa since thc/cbd ratios don't necessarily match.

disclaimer: I'm not talking about hemp here, which is really the best way to attain cbd if we are talking extracts and that's what you are looking for.

 

[Solipsis]

The a priori assignment of accessions to species is based on a multivariate analysis of allozyme allele frequencies and on geographic origins, without regard to cannabinoid content (Hillig, 2004⇓)

The only thing questionable is:

Assignment of accessions to infraspecific taxa (biotypes) is primarily based on geographic origins, morphological traits, and presumed purpose of cultivation.

Likely cross-breeding obscures a lot but I don't know if the taxa are all that cross-bred absolutely everywhere in the world. So while I acknowledge the obscurity and limitations, I think an article like that can have a point suggesting that some chemotaxonomy is possible and that correlation of taxonomy with chemotype may be limited now but it could tell us something about how it might have been in the past. Of course correlation does not give you a necessary match.

But it would be nice to see what the DNA has to say.

 

[Cotcha Yankinov]

They say indica is more sedating, sativa more activating.

Apparently cannibinoids have the property of disinhibiting dopamine release through binding to and inhibiting GABA release - is that correct?

Though it seems to be documented that overall, marijuana is more of an actual depressant and anorexant, than anti-depressant, and also despite claims that it elevates appetite.

Any insights?

There has been some recent research on cannabis related reductions of bloodflow to the brain.

The other thing is that depression with long term use could be partially due to inhibition of excitatory neurons (CB1 receptors are expressed all over the place). There are also going to be functional consequences to CB1 agonism that are more nuanced. CB1 signaling can mediate retrograde transmission for example by activating NO that diffuses through the cellular membrane to the pre-synaptic cell.

 

[pofacedhoe]

terpenes- check out terpenes