The Full Wiki

Cannabis: Map


Wikipedia article:

Map showing all locations mentioned on Wikipedia article:

Cannabis (Cán-na-bis) is a genus of flowering plants that includes three putative species, Cannabis sativa L., Cannabis indica Lam., and Cannabis ruderalis Janisch. These three taxa are indigenous to Central Asia, and South Asia. Cannabis has long been used for fibre (hemp), for medicinal purposes, and as a recreational drug. Industrial hemp products are made from Cannabis plants selected to produce an abundance of fiber and minimal levels of THC9- tetrahydrocannabinol), a psychoactive molecule that produces the "high" associated with marijuana. The psychoactive product consists of dried flowers and leaves of plants selected to produce high levels of THC. Various extracts including hashish and hash oil are also produced from the plant.


The word cannabis is from Greek ( ) (see Latin )"cannabis" OED Online. July 2009. Oxford University Press. 2009 />., which was originally Scythian or Thracian. It is related to the Persian , the English canvas and possibly even to the English hemp (Old English ). In Hebrew, the word is קַנַּבּוֹס [qanːa'boːs]. Old Akkadian qunnabtu, Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian qunnabu were used to refer to the plant meaning "a way to produce smoke."


Cannabis is an annual, dioecious, flowering herb. The leaves are palmately compound or digitate, with serrate leaflets. The first pair of leaves usually have a single leaflet, the number gradually increasing up to a maximum of about thirteen leaflets per leaf (usually seven or nine), depending on variety and growing conditions. At the top of a flowering plant, this number again diminishes to a single leaflet per leaf. The lower leaf pairs usually occur in an opposite leaf arrangement and the upper leaf pairs in an alternate arrangement on the main stem of a mature plant.

Cannabis normally has imperfect flowers, with staminate "male" and pistillate "female" flowers occurring on separate plants. It is not unusual, however, for individual plants to bear both male and female flowers. Although monoecious plants are often referred to as "hermaphrodites," true hermaphrodites (which are less common) bear staminate and pistillate structures on individual flowers, whereas monoecious plants bear male and female flowers at different locations on the same plant. Male flowers are normally borne on loose panicles, and female flowers are borne on racemes.

All known strains of Cannabis are wind-pollinated and produce "seeds" that are technically called achenes. Most strains of Cannabis are short day plants, with the possible exception of C. sativa subsp. sativa var. spontanea (= C. ruderalis), which is commonly described as "auto-flowering" and may be day-neutral.

Cannabis, like many organisms, is diploid, having a chromosome complement of 2n=20, although polyploid individuals have been artificially produced.The plant is believed to have originated in the mountainous regions northwest of the Himalayas. It is also known as hemp, although this term is often used to refer only to varieties of Cannabis cultivated for non-drug use. Cannabis plants produce a group of chemicals called cannabinoids, which produce mental and physical effects when consumed. Cannabinoids, terpenoids, and other compounds are secreted by glandular trichomes that occur most abundantly on the floral calyxes and bracts of female plants. As a drug it usually comes in the form of dried flower buds (marijuana), resin (hashish), or various extracts collectively known as hashish oil. In the early 20th century, it became illegal in most of the world to cultivate or possess Cannabis for drug purposes.


Cannabis Leaf
Leaf of a Cannabis plant.

The genus Cannabis was formerly placed in the Nettle (Urticaceae) or Mulberry (Moraceae) family, but is now considered along with hops (Humulus sp.) to belong to the Hemp family (Cannabaceae). Recent phylogenetic studies based on cpDNA restriction site analysis and gene sequencing strongly suggest that the Cannabaceae arose from within the Celtidaceae clade, and that the two families should be merged to form a single monophyletic group.

Various types of Cannabis have been described, and classified as species, subspecies, or varieties:
  • plants cultivated for fiber and seed production, described as low-intoxicant, non-drug, or fiber types
  • plants cultivated for drug production, described as high-intoxicant or drug types
  • escaped or wild forms of either of the above types.

Cannabis plants produce a unique family of terpeno-phenolic compounds called cannabinoids, which produce the "high" one experiences from smoking marijuana. The two cannabinoids usually produced in greatest abundance are cannabidiol (CBD) and/or Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), but only THC is psychoactive. Since the early 1970s, Cannabis plants have been categorized by their chemical phenotype or "chemotype," based on the overall amount of THC produced, and on the ratio of THC to CBD. Although overall cannabinoid production is influenced by environmental factors, the THC/CBD ratio is genetically determined and remains fixed throughout the life of a plant. Non-drug plants produce relatively low levels of THC and high levels of CBD, while drug plants produce high levels of THC and low levels of CBD. When plants of these two chemotypes cross-pollinate, the plants in the first filial (F1) generation have an intermediate chemotype and produce similar amounts of CBD and THC. Female plants of this chemotype may produce enough THC to be utilized for drug production.
Top of Cannabis plant in vegetative growth stage.
Whether the drug and non-drug, cultivated and wild types of Cannabis constitute a single, highly variable species, or the genus is polytypic with more than one species, has been a subject of debate for well over two centuries. This is a contentious issue because there is no universally accepted definition of a species. One widely applied criterion for species recognition is that species are "groups of actually or potentially interbreeding natural populations which are reproductively isolated from other such groups." Populations that are physiologically capable of interbreeding, but morphologically or genetically divergent and isolated by geography or ecology, are sometimes considered to be separate species. Physiological barriers to reproduction are not known to occur within Cannabis, and plants from widely divergent sources are interfertile. However, physical barriers to gene exchange (such as the Himalayan mountain range) might have enabled Cannabis gene pools to diverge before the onset of human intervention, resulting in speciation. It remains controversial whether sufficient morphological and genetic divergence occurs within the genus as a result of geographical or ecological isolation to justify recognition of more than one species.

Early classifications

Relative size of varieties of Cannabis

The Cannabis genus was first classified using the "modern" system of taxonomic nomenclature by Carolus Linnaeus in 1753, who devised the system still in use for the naming of species. He considered the genus to be monotypic, having just a single species that he named Cannabis sativa L. (L. stands for Linnaeus, and indicates the authority who first named the species). Linnaeus was familiar with European hemp, which was widely cultivated at the time. In 1785, noted evolutionary biologist Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck published a description of a second species of Cannabis, which he named Cannabis indica Lam. Lamarck based his description of the newly named species on plant specimens collected in India. He described C. indica as having poorer fiber quality than C. sativa, but greater utility as an inebriant. Additional Cannabis species were proposed in the 19th century, including strains from China and Vietnam (Indo-China) assigned the names Cannabis chinensis Delile, and Cannabis gigantea Delile ex Vilmorin. However, many taxonomists found these putative species difficult to distinguish. In the early 20th century, the single-species concept was still widely accepted, except in the Soviet Union where Cannabis continued to be the subject of active taxonomic study. The name Cannabis indica was listed in various Pharmacopoeias, and was widely used to designate Cannabis suitable for the manufacture of medicinal preparations.

20th Century

In 1924, Russian botanist D.E. Janichevsky concluded that ruderal Cannabis in central Russia is either a variety of C. sativa or a separate species, and proposed C. sativa L. var. ruderalis Janisch. and Cannabis ruderalis Janisch. as alternative names. In 1929, renowned plant explorer Nikolai Vavilov assigned wild or feral populations of Cannabis in Afghanistan to C. indica Lam. var. kafiristanica Vav., and ruderal populations in Europe to C. sativa L. var. spontanea Vav. In 1940, Russian botanists Serebriakova and Sizov proposed a complex classification in which they also recognized C. sativa and C. indica as separate species. Within C. sativa they recognized two subspecies: C. sativa L. subsp. culta Serebr. (consisting of cultivated plants), and C. sativa L. subsp. spontanea (Vav.) Serebr. (consisting of wild or feral plants). Serebriakova and Sizov split the two C. sativa subspecies into 13 varieties, including four distinct groups within subspecies culta. However, they did not divide C. indica into subspecies or varieties. This excessive splitting of C. sativa proved too unwieldy, and never gained many adherents.

Cannabis ruderalis.

In the 1970s, the taxonomic classification of Cannabis took on added significance in North America. Laws prohibiting Cannabis in the United States and Canada specifically named products of C. sativa as prohibited materials. Enterprising attorneys for the defense in a few drug busts argued that the seized Cannabis material may not have been C. sativa, and was therefore not prohibited by law. Attorneys on both sides recruited botanists to provide expert testimony. Among those testifying for the prosecution was Dr. Ernest Small, while Dr. Richard E. Schultes and others testified for the defense. The botanists engaged in heated debate (outside of court), and both camps impugned the other's integrity. The defense attorneys were not often successful in winning their case, because the intent of the law was clear.

In 1976, Canadian botanist Ernest Small and American taxonomist Arthur Cronquist published a taxonomic revision that recognizes a single species of Cannabis with two subspecies: C. sativa L. subsp. sativa, and C. sativa L. subsp. indica (Lam.) Small & Cronq. The authors hypothesized that the two subspecies diverged primarily as a result of human selection; C. sativa subsp. sativa was presumably selected for traits that enhance fiber or seed production, whereas C. sativa subsp. indica was primarily selected for drug production. Within these two subspecies, Small and Cronquist described C. sativa L. subsp. sativa var. spontanea Vav. as a wild or escaped variety of low-intoxicant Cannabis, and C. sativa subsp. indica var. kafiristanica (Vav.) Small & Cronq. as a wild or escaped variety of the high-intoxicant type. This classification was based on several factors including interfertility, chromosome uniformity, chemotype, and numerical analysis of phenotypic characters.

Professors William Emboden, Loran Anderson, and Harvard botanist Richard E. Schultes and coworkers also conducted taxonomic studies of Cannabis in the 1970s, and concluded that stable morphological differences exist that support recognition of at least three species, C. sativa, C. indica, and C. ruderalis. For Schultes, this was a reversal of his previous interpretation that Cannabis is monotypic, with only a single species. According to Schultes' and Anderson's descriptions, C. sativa is tall and laxly branched with relatively narrow leaflets, C. indica is shorter, conical in shape, and has relatively wide leaflets, and C. ruderalis is short, branchless, and grows wild in central Asia. This taxonomic interpretation was embraced by Cannabis aficionados who commonly distinguish narrow-leafed "sativa" drug strains from wide-leafed "indica" drug strains.

Ongoing research

Molecular analytical techniques developed in the late twentieth century are being applied to questions of taxonomic classification. This has resulted in many reclassifications based on evolutionary systematics. Several studies of Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and other types of genetic markers have been conducted on drug and fiber strains of Cannabis, primarily for plant breeding and forensic purposes. Dutch Cannabis researcher E.P.M. de Meijer and coworkers described some of their RAPD studies as showing an "extremely high" degree of genetic polymorphism between and within populations, suggesting a high degree of potential variation for selection, even in heavily selected hemp cultivars. They also commented that these analyses confirm the continuity of the Cannabis gene pool throughout the studied accessions, and provide further confirmation that the genus comprises a single species, although theirs was not a systematic study per se.

Karl W. Hillig, a graduate student in the laboratory of long-time Cannabis researcher Paul G. Mahlberg at Indiana Universitymarker, conducted a systematic investigation of genetic, morphological, and chemotaxonomic variation among 157 Cannabis accessions of known geographic origin, including fiber, drug, and feral populations. In 2004, Hillig and Mahlberg published a chemotaxomic analysis of cannabinoid variation in their Cannabis germplasm collection. They used gas chromatography to determine cannabinoid content and to infer allele frequencies of the gene that controls CBD and THC production within the studied populations, and concluded that the patterns of cannabinoid variation support recognition of C. sativa and C. indica as separate species, but not C. ruderalis. The authors assigned fiber/seed landraces and feral populations from Europe, central Asia, and Asia Minor to C. sativa. Narrow-leaflet and wide-leaflet drug accessions, southern and eastern Asian hemp accessions, and feral Himalayan populations were assigned to C. indica. In 2005, Hillig published a genetic analysis of the same set of accessions (this paper was the first in the series, but was delayed in publication), and proposed a three-species classification, recognizing C. sativa, C. indica, and (tentatively) C. ruderalis. In his doctoral dissertation published the same year, Hillig stated that principal components analysis of phenotypic (morphological) traits failed to differentiate the putative species, but that canonical variates analysis resulted in a high degree of discrimination of the putative species and infraspecific taxa. Another paper in the series on chemotaxonomic variation in the terpenoid content of the essential oil of Cannabis revealed that several wide-leaflet drug strains in the collection had relatively high levels of certain sesquiterpene alcohols, including guaiol and isomers of eudesmol, that set them apart from the other putative taxa. Hillig concluded that the patterns of genetic, morphological, and chemotaxonomic variation support recognition of C. sativa and C. indica as separate species. He also concluded there is little support to treat C. ruderalis as a separate species from C. sativa at this time, but more research on wild and weedy populations is needed because they were underrepresented in their collection.

In September 2005, New Scientist reported that researchers at the Canberra Institute of Technology had identified a new type of Cannabis based on analysis of mitochondrial and chloroplast DNA. The New Scientist story, which was picked up by many news agencies and web sites, indicated that the research was to be published in the journal Forensic Science International. When the article was finally published, there was no mention of "Rasta."

As of 2007, most taxonomy web sites continue to list Cannabis as a single species.

Popular usage

The scientific debate regarding taxonomy has had little effect on the terminology in widespread use among cultivators and users of drug-type Cannabis. Cannabis aficionados recognize three distinct types based on such factors as morphology, native range, aroma, and subjective psychoactive characteristics. "Sativa" is the term used to describe the most widespread variety, which is usually tall, laxly branched, and found in warm lowland regions. "Indica" is used to designate shorter, bushier plants adapted to cooler climates and highland environments. "Ruderalis" is the term used to describe the short plants that grow wild in Europe and central Asia.

Breeders, seed companies, and cultivators of drug type Cannabis often describe the ancestry or gross phenotypic characteristics of cultivars by categorizing them as "pure indica," "mostly indica," "indica/sativa," "mostly sativa", or "pure sativa."


Breeding systems

Cannabis sativa seeds
Male Cannabis pollen sacs
Cannabis is predominantly dioecious, although many monoecious varieties have been described. Subdioecy (the occurrence of monoecious individuals and dioecious individuals within the same population) is widespread. Many populations have been described as sexually labile.

As a result of intensive selection in cultivation, Cannabis exhibits many sexual phenotypes that can be described in terms of the ratio of female to male flowers occurring in the individual, or typical in the cultivar. Dioecious varieties are preferred for drug production, where typically the female flowers are used. Dioecious varieties are also preferred for textile fiber production, whereas monoecious varieties are preferred for pulp and paper production. It has been suggested that the presence of monoecy can be used to differentiate licit crops of monoecious hemp from illicit drug crops. However, the so-called "sativa" drug strains often produce monoecious individuals, probably as a result of inbreeding.

Mechanisms of sex determination

Cannabis has been described as having one of the most complicated mechanisms of sex determination among the dioecious plants. Many models have been proposed to explain sex determination in Cannabis.

Based on studies of sex reversal in hemp, it was first reported by K. Hirata in 1924 that an XY sex-determination system is present. At the time, the XY system was the only known system of sex determination. The X:A system was first described in Drosophila spp in 1925. Soon thereafter, Schaffner disputed Hirata's interpretation, and published results from his own studies of sex reversal in hemp, concluding that an X:A system was in use and that furthermore sex was strongly influenced by environmental conditions.

Since then, many different types of sex determination systems have been discovered, particularly in plants. Dioecy is relatively uncommon in the plant kingdom, and a very low percentage of dioecious plant species have been determined to use the XY system. In most cases where the XY system is found it is believed to have evolved recently and independently.

Since the 1920s, a number of sex determination models have been proposed for Cannabis. Ainsworth describes sex determination in the genus as using "an X/autosome dosage type".
A male hemp plant
Dense raceme of carpellate flowers typical of drug-type varieties of Cannabis

The question of whether heteromorphic sex chromosomes are indeed present is most conveniently answered if such chromosomes were clearly visible in a karyotype. Cannabis was one of the first plant species to be karyotyped; however, this was in a period when karyotype preparation was primitive by modern standards (see History of Cytogenetics). Heteromorphic sex chromosomes were reported to occur in staminate individuals of dioecious "Kentucky" hemp, but were not found in pistillate individuals of the same variety. Dioecious "Kentucky" hemp was assumed to use an XY mechanism. Heterosomes were not observed in analyzed individuals of monoecious "Kentucky" hemp, nor in an unidentified German cultivar. These varieties were assumed to have sex chromosome composition XX. According to other researchers, no modern karyotype of Cannabis had been published as of 1996. Proponents of the XY system state that Y chromosome is slightly larger than the X, but difficult to differentiate cytologically.

More recently, Sakamoto and various co-authors have used RAPD to isolate several genetic marker sequences that they name Male-Associated DNA in Cannabis (MADC), and which they interpret as indirect evidence of a male chromosome. Several other research groups have reported identification of male-associated markers using RAPD and AFLP. Ainsworth commented on these findings, stating,
"It is not surprising that male-associated markers are relatively abundant.
In dioecious plants where sex chromosomes have not been identified, markers for maleness indicate either the presence of sex chromosomes which have not been distinguished by cytological methods or that the marker is tightly linked to a gene involved in sex determination."

Environmental sex determination is known to occur in a variety of species. Many researchers have suggested that sex in Cannabis is determined or strongly influenced by environmental factors. Ainsworth reviews that treatment with auxin and ethylene have feminizing effects, and that treatment with cytokinins and gibberellins have masculinizing effects. It has been reported that sex can be reversed in Cannabis using chemical treatment.A PCR-based method for the detection of female-associated DNA polymorphisms by genotyping has been developed.

Industrial and Personal Uses

Cannabis is used for a wide variety of purposes.


Hemp is the natural, durable soft fiber from the stalk of Cannabis sativa plants that grow upwards of 20 feet tall. Cannabis plants used for hemp production are not valued for recreational uses as the plants that are cultivated for hemp produce minimal levels of THC, analogous to attempting to get drunk from low-alcohol beer. Cannabis plants intended for any drug cultivation cannot be hidden in a hemp field either, as the size and height of each are significantly different.

Hemp producers sell hemp seeds as a health food, as they are rich in heart-healthy, essential fatty acids, amino acids (both essential and nonessential), vitamins and minerals. Hemp "milk" is a milk substitute also made from hemp seeds that is both dairy and gluten-free.

Hemp is fairly easy to grow and matures very fast compared to many crops, most notably trees used for paper. Compared to cotton for clothing, hemp cloth is known to be of superior strength and last longer. The fibers may also be used to form cordage for industrial-strength ropes. Hemp plants also require little pesticides and herbicides due to its height, density and foliage. This also makes the hemp plant very environmentally-friendly.

Hemp can be utilized for 25,000 very durable textile products, ranging from paper and clothing to biofuels (from the oils found in the seeds), medicines and construction material. Hemp has been used by many civilizations, from Chinamarker to Europe (and later North America) for the last 12,000 years of history.

Recreational use

Cannabis is a popular recreational drug around the world, only behind alcohol, caffeine and tobacco. In the United States alone, it is believed that over 100 million Americans have tried Cannabis, with 25 million Americans using it within the past year.

The psychoactive effects of Cannabis are known to have a biphasic nature. The first psychoactive effects include a state of relaxation, and to a lesser degree, euphoria from its main psychoactive compound, tetrahydrocannabinol. The latter effects include an increase in heart rate and hunger, believed to be caused by 11-Hydroxy-THC, a psychoactive metabolite of THC produced in the liver. In addition to euphoria, other psychoactive effects such as introspection, metacognition, anxiety or paranoia and a facility for philosophical thinking are also commonly reported. Cannabidiol (CBD), which has no psychotropic effects by itself, has been shown to attenuate the higher anxiety levels caused by THC alone. Some studies show that cannabidiol actually has a small stimulant effect similar to caffeine. The Cannabis sativa plant is known to cause more of a "high" by stimulating hunger, and producing comedic and energetic effects. Conversely, the Cannabis indica plant is known to cause more of the "stoned" effect, possibly due to a higher CBD to THC ratio.

Normal cognition is restored in approximately three hours for larger doses via a smoking pipe, bong or vaporizer. However, if a large amount is taken orally the effects may last much longer. Minuscule psychoactive effects may be felt up to 24 hours to a few days, depending on dosage, frequency and tolerance.

According to the UK medical journal The Lancet, Cannabis has a lower rate of dependence compared to both nicotine and alcohol. However, everyday use of Cannabis is correlated with some withdrawal symptoms such as irritability, anxiety, and insomnia. There is also evidence to suggest that if a user experiences stress, the likeliness of getting a panic attack increases due to an increase in THC metabolites. However, any Cannabis withdrawal symptoms are typically mild to moderate and are never life-threatening alone. Various extracts including hashish and hash oil are also produced from the plant.

Medical use

A synthetic form of the main psychoactive cannabinoid in Cannabis, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), is used as a treatment for a wide range of medical conditions.

In the United States, although the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does acknowledge that "there has been considerable interest in its use for the treatment of a number of conditions, including glaucoma, AIDS wasting, neuropathic pain, treatment of spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis, and chemotherapy-induced nausea," the agency has not approved "medical marijuana". There are currently 2 oral forms of cannabis (cannabinoids) available by prescription in the United States for nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy: dronabinol (Marinol) and nabilone (Cesamet). Dronabinol is also approved for the treatment of anorexia associated with AIDS. The FDA does facilitate scientific investigations into the medical uses of cannabinoids.

In a collection of writings on medical marijuana by 45 researchers, a literature review on the medicinal uses of Cannabis and cannabinoids concluded that established uses include easing of nausea and vomiting, anorexia, and weight loss; "well-confirmed effect" was found in the treatment of spasticity, painful conditions (i.e. neurogenic pain), movement disorders, asthma, and glaucoma. Reported but "less-confirmed" effects included treatment of allergies, inflammation, infection, epilepsy, depression, bipolar disorders, anxiety disorder, dependency and withdrawal. Basic level research was being carried out at the time on autoimmune disease, cancer, neuroprotection, fever, disorders of blood pressure.

Clinical trials conducted by the American Marijuana Policy Project, have shown the efficacy of cannabis as a treatment for cancer and AIDS patients, who often suffer from clinical depression, and from nausea and resulting weight loss due to chemotherapy and other aggressive treatments. A synthetic version of the cannabinoid THC named dronabinol has been shown to relieve symptoms of anorexia and reduce agitation in elderly Alzheimer's patients. Dronabinol has been approved for use with anorexia in patients with HIV/AIDS and chemotherapy-related nausea. This drug, while demonstrating the effectiveness of Cannabis at combating several disorders, is more expensive and less available than "pot" and has not been shown to be effective or safe.

Glaucoma, a condition of increased pressure within the eyeball causing gradual loss of sight, can be treated with medical marijuana to decrease this intraocular pressure. There has been debate for 25 years on the subject. Some data exist, showing a reduction of IOP in glaucoma patients who smoke cannabis, but the effects are short-lived, and the frequency of doses needed to sustain a decreased IOP can cause systemic toxicity. There is also some concern over its use since it can also decrease blood flow to the optic nerve. Marijuana lowers IOP by acting on a cannabinoid receptor on the ciliary body called the CB receptor. Although Cannabis is not a good therapeutic choice for glaucoma patients, it may lead researchers to more effective, safer treatments. A promising study shows that agents targeted to ocular CB receptors can reduce IOP in glaucoma patients who have failed other therapies.

Medical cannabis is also used for analgesia, or pain relief. It is also reported to be beneficial for treating certain neurological illnesses such as epilepsy, and bipolar disorder. Case reports have found that Cannabis can relieve tics in people with obsessive compulsive disorder and Tourette syndrome. Patients treated with tetrahydrocannabinol, the main psychoactive chemical found in Cannabis, reported a significant decrease in both motor and vocal tics, some of 50% or more. Some decrease in obsessive-compulsive behavior was also found. A recent study has also concluded that cannabinoids found in Cannabis might have the ability to prevent Alzheimer's disease. THC has been shown to reduce arterial blockages.

Another potential use for medical cannabis is movement disorders. Cannabis is frequently reported to reduce the muscle spasms associated with multiple sclerosis; this has been acknowledged by the Institute of Medicine, but it noted that these abundant anecdotal reports are not well-supported by clinical data. Evidence from animal studies suggests that there is a possible role for cannabinoids in the treatment of certain types of epileptic seizures. A synthetic version of the major active compound in Cannabis, THC, is available in capsule form as the prescription drug dronabinol (Marinol) in many countries. The prescription drug Sativex, an extract of cannabis administered as a sublingual spray, has been approved in Canada for the treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Religious use

Cannabis is first referred to in Hindu Vedas between 2000 and 1400 BCE, in the Atharvaveda. By the tenth century CE, it was being referred to in India as "food of the gods". Cannabis use eventually became a ritual part of the Hindu festival of Holi. In Buddhism, cannabis has been used in meditation and regarded as a holy plant since 500 BCE. Shamanic use of Cannabis in China has been dated to at least 1000 BCE. In ancient Germanic culture, Cannabis was associated with the Norse love goddess, Freya. An anointing oil mentioned in Exodus is, by some translators, said to contain Cannabis. Sufis have used Cannabis in a spiritual context since the thirteenth century CE.

In modern times the Rastafari movement has embraced Cannabis as a sacrament. Elders of the modern religious movement known as the Ethiopian Zion Coptic Church consider Cannabis to be the Eucharist, claiming it as an oral tradition from Ethiopiamarker dating back to the time of Christ, even though the movement was founded in the United Statesmarker in 1975 and has no ties to either Ethiopia or the Coptic Church. Like the Rastafari, some modern Gnostic Christian sects have asserted that Cannabis is the Tree of Life. Other organized religions founded in the 20th century that treat Cannabis as a sacrament are the THC Ministry, the Way of Infinite Harmony, Cantheism, the Cannabis Assembly and the Church of Cognizance.

Aspects of Cannabis production and use

Cannabis field seized by authorities

See also


  1. "Marijuana and the Cannabinoids", ElSohly (p.8)
  2. Erowid. 2006. Cannabis Basics. Retrieved on 25 February 2007
  4. p. 305.
  6. Lebel-Hardenack, S. and S. R. Grant. 1997. Genetics of sex determination in flowering plants. Trends in Plant Science 2(4): 130–136.
  7. Cristiana Moliterni, V. M., L. Cattivelli, P. Ranalli. and G. Mandolino. 2005. The sexual differentiation of Cannabis sativa L.: A morphological and molecular study. Euphytica 140(1-2): 95-106. Retrieved on 25 February 2007
  8. Bouquet, R. J. 1950. Cannabis. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  9. Clarke, Robert C. 1991. Marijuana Botany, 2nd ed. Ron Publishing, California. ISBN 0-914171-78-X
  10. Small, E. 1975. Morphological variation of achenes of Cannabis. Canadian Journal of Botany 53(10): 978-987.
  11. Small, E. 1972. Interfertility and chromosomal uniformity in Cannabis. Canadian Journal of Botany 50(9): 1947-1949.
  12. Mahlberg, Paul G. and Eun Soo Kim. 2001. THC (tetrahyrdocannabinol) accumulation in glands of Cannabis (Cannabaceae). The Hemp Report 3(17). Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  13. Schultes, R. E., A. Hofmann, and C. Rätsch. 2001. The nectar of delight. In: Plants of the Gods 2nd ed., Healing Arts Press, Rochester, Vermont, pp. 92-101. ISBN 0-89281-979-0
  14. Song, B.-H., Wang, X.-Q., Li, F.-Z., and Hong, D.-Y. 2001. Further evidence for paraphyly of the Celtidaceae from the chloroplast gene matK. Plant Systematics and Evolution 228(1-2): 107-115.
  15. Sytsma, K. J., Morawetz, J., Pires, J. C., Nepokroeff, M., Conti, E., Zjhra, M., Hall, J. C., and Chase, M. W. 2002. Urticalean Rosids: circumscription, Rosid ancestry, and phylogenetics based on rbcL, trnL-F, and ndh-F sequences. American Journal of Botany 89(9): 1531-1546.
  16. Small, Ernest. 1975. American law and the species problem in Cannabis: Science and semantics. Bulletin on Narcotics 27(3): 1-20. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  17. Small, E. and H. D. Beckstead. 1973. Common cannabinoid phenotypes in 350 stocks of Cannabis. Lloydia 36: 144–165.
  18. Etienne P. M. de Meijer, M. Bagatta, A. Carboni, P. Crucitti, V. M. Cristiana Moliterni, P. Ranalli, and G. Mandolino. 2003. The Inheritance of Chemical Phenotype in Cannabis sativa L. Genetics 163(1): 335-346. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  19. Hillig, Karl W. and Paul G. Mahlberg. 2004. A chemotaxonomic analysis of cannabinoid variation in Cannabis (Cannabaceae). American Journal of Botany 91(6): 966-975. Retrieved on 22 February 2007
  20. Small, E. 1979. Fundamental aspects of the species problem in biology. In: The Species Problem in Cannabis, vol. 1: Science. Corpus Information Services, Toronto, Canada, pp. 5-63. ISBN 0-919217-11-7
  21. Rieger, R., A. Michaelis, and M. M. Green. 1991. Glossary of Genetics, 5th ed. Springer-Verlag, pp. 458-459. ISBN 0-387-52054-6
  22. Hillig, Karl W. 2005. Genetic evidence for speciation in Cannabis (Cannabaceae). Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 52(2): 161-180. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  23. Small, E. 1975. On toadstool soup and legal species of marihuana. Plant Science Bulletin 21(3): 34-39. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  24. Emboden, W. A. 1981. The genus Cannabis and the correct use of taxonomic categories. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 13: 15–21.
  25. Schultes, R. E., and A. Hofmann. 1980. Botany and Chemistry of Hallucinogens. C. C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois, pp. 82–116. ISBN 0-398-03863-5
  26. Linnaeus, C. 1753. Species Plantarum 2: 1027. Salvius, Stockholm. [Facsimile edition, 1957-1959. Ray Society, London, U.K.]
  27. de Lamarck, J.B. 1785. Encyclopédie Méthodique de Botanique, vol. 1, pt. 2. Paris, France, pp. 694-695
  28. Small, E. and A. Cronquist. 1976. A practical and natural taxonomy for Cannabis. Taxon 25(4): 405–435.
  29. Winek, C. L. 1977. Some historical aspects of marijuana. Clinical Toxicology 10(2): 243-253.
  30. Hillig, Karl W. and Paul G. Mahlberg. 2004. A chemotaxonomic analysis of cannabinoid variation in Cannabis (Cannabaceae). American Journal of Botany 91(6): 966-975. Retrieved on 22 February 2007
  31. Serebriakova T. Ya. and I. A. Sizov. 1940. Cannabinaceae Lindl. In: Vavilov N. I. (ed.), Kulturnaya Flora SSSR, vol. 5, Moscow-Leningrad, USSR, pp. 1-53. [in Russian]
  32. Watts, G. 2006. Cannabis confusions. BMJ 332: 175-176. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  33. Ernest Small (biography). National Research Council Canada. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  34. Small, E., P. Y. Jui, and L. P. Lefkovitch. 1976. A numerical taxonomic analysis of Cannabis with special reference to species delimitation. Systematic Botany 1(1): 67-84.
  35. Schultes, R. E., W. M. Klein, T. Plowman, and T. E. Lockwood. 1974. Cannabis: an example of taxonomic neglect. Harvard University Botanical Museum Leaflets 23: 337–367.
  36. Anderson, L. C. 1974. A study of systematic wood anatomy in Cannabis. Harvard University Botanical Museum Leaflets 24: 29–36. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  37. Anderson, L. C. 1980. Leaf variation among Cannabis species from a controlled garden. Harvard University Botanical Museum Leaflets 28: 61–69. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  38. Emboden, W. A. 1974. Cannabis – a polytypic genus. Economic Botany 28: 304-310.
  39. Schultes, R. E. 1970. Random thoughts and queries on the botany of Cannabis. In: Joyce, C. R. B. and Curry, S. H. (eds), The Botany and Chemistry of Cannabis. J. & A. Churchill, London, pp. 11-38.
  40. Interview with Robert Connell Clarke. 1 Jan 2005. NORML, New Zealand. Retrieved on 19 February 2007
  41. Faeti, V., G. Mandolino, and P. Ranalli. 1996. Genetic diversity of Cannabis sativa germplasm based on RAPD markers. Plant Breeding 115: 367–370.
  42. Forapani, S., A. Carboni, C. Paoletti, V. M. Christiana Moliterni, P. Ranalli, and G. Mandolino. 2001. Comparison of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) varieties using Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA markers. Crop Science 41: 1682-1689. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  43. Mandolino, G. and Ranalli, P. 2002. The applications of molecular markers in genetics and breeding of hemp. Journal of Industrial Hemp 7(1): 7-23. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  44. Gilmore S., R. Peakall, and J. Roberts. 2003. Short tandem repeats (STR) DNA markers are hypervariable and informative in Cannabis sativa: implications for forensic investigations. Forensic Science International 131(1): 65-74. Retrieved on 25 February 2007
  45. Kojoka M., O. Iida, Y. Makino, S. Sekita, and M. Satake. 2002. DNA fingerprinting of Cannabis sativa using inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR) amplification. Planta Medica 68(1): 60-63.
  46. Dr. Paul G. Mahlberg's Cannabis Research. North American Industrial Hemp Council. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  47. Hillig, Karl William. 2005. A systematic investigation of Cannabis. Doctoral Dissertation. Department of Biology, Indiana University. Bloomington, Indiana. Published by UMI. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  48. Hillig, Karl W. 2004. A chemotaxonomic analysis of terpenoid variation in Cannabis. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 32: 875-891. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  49. 2005. Rasta lends its name to a third type of Cannabis. New Scientist 2517: 12. Retrieved on 24 February 2007
  50. Gilmore, S., R. Peakall, and J. Robertson. 2007. Organelle DNA haplotypes reflect crop-use characteristics and geographic origins of Cannabis sativa. Forensic Science International 172(2-3): 179-190. Retrieved on 29 December 2008
  51. USDA, ARS, National Genetic Resources Program. Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN), National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  52. Barlow, Snow. 2006. Sorting Cannabis names. Multilingual Multiscript Plant Name Database. The University of Melbourne. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  53. Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS). Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  54. The Taxonomicon. Universal Taxonomic Services. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  55. Ainsworth, C. 2000. Boys and girls come out to play: the molecular biology of dioecious plants. Annals of Botany 86(2): 211-221. Retrieved on 24 February 2007
  56. de Meijer, E. P. M. 1999. Cannabis germplasm resources. In: Ranalli P. (ed.). Advances in Hemp Research, Haworth Press, Binghamton, NY, pp. 131-151. ISBN 1-56022-872-5
  57. Schumann, E., A. Peil, and W. E. Weber. 1999. Preliminary results of a German field trial with different hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) accessions. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 46(4): 399-407. Retrieved on 24 February 2007
  58. Ranalli, P. 2004. Current status and future scenarios of hemp breeding. Euphytica 140(1): 121-131.
  59. Hirata, K. 1924. Sex reversal in hemp. Journal of the Society of Agriculture and Forestry 16: 145-168.
  60. Schaffner, J. H. 1931. The fluctuation curve of sex reversal in staminate hemp plants induced by photoperiodicity. American Journal of Botany 18(6): 424-430.
  61. Truta, E., E. Gille, E. Toth, and M. Maniu. 2002. Biochemical differences in Cannabis sativa L. depending on sexual phenotype. Journal of Applied Genetics 43(4): 451-462. Retrieved on 24 February 2007
  62. Bridges, C. B. 1925. Sex in relation to chromosomes and genes. American Naturalist 59: 127-137.
  63. Schaffner, J. H. 1929. Heredity and sex. Ohio Journal of Science 29(1): 289-300.
  64. Negrutiu, I., B. Vyskot, N. Barbacar, S. Georgiev, and F. Moneger. 2001. Dioecious plants; a key to the early events of sex chromosome evolution. Plant Physiology 127(4): 418-424.
  65. Menzel, Margaret Y. 1964. Meiotic chromosomes of monoecious Kentucky hemp (Cannabis sativa). Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 91(3): 193-205.
  66. Shao Hong and Robert C. Clarke. 1996. Taxonomic studies of Cannabis in China. Journal of the International Hemp Association 3(2): 55-60. Retrieved on 25 February 2007
  67. Peil, A., H. Flachowsky, E. Schumann, and W. E. Weber. 2003. Sex-linked AFLP markers indicate a pseudoautosomal region in hemp (Cannabis sativa L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 107(1): 102-109.
  68. Sakamoto, K., K. Shimomura, Y. Komeda, H. Kamada, and S. Satoh. 1995. A male-associated DNA sequence in a dioecious plant, Cannabis sativa L. Plant & Cell Physiology 36(8): 1549-1554. Retrieved on 25 February 2007
  69. Sakamoto, K., T. Abe, T. Matsuyama, S. Yoshida, N. Ohmido, K. Fukui, and S. Satoh. 2005. RAPD markers encoding retrotransposable elements are linked to the male sex in Cannabis sativa L. Genome 48(5): 931-936. Retrieved on 25 February 2007
  70. Meijer, Etienne P. M. de, M. Bagatta, A. Carboni, P. Crucitti, V. M. Cristiana Moliterni, P. Ranalli, and G. Mandolino. 2003. The Inheritance of Chemical Phenotype in Cannabis sativa L. Genetics 163(1): 335-346. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  71. Mandolino, Giuseppe and Paolo Ranalli. 2002. The applications of molecular markers in genetics and breeding of hemp. Journal of Industrial Hemp 7(1): 7-23. Retrieved on 23 February 2007
  72. Törjék, O., N. Bucherna, E. Kiss, H. Homoki, Z. Finta-Korpelová, I. Bócsa, I. Nagy, and L. E. Heszky. 2002. Novel male specific molecular markers (MADC5, MADC6) for sex identification in hemp. Euphytica 127: 209-218.
  73. Tanurdzic, M. and J. A. Banks. 2004. Sex-determining mechanisms in land plants. Plant Cell 16 (suppl.): S61-71.
  74. Mohan Ram, H. Y., and R. Sett. 1982. Induction of fertile male flowers in genetically female Cannabis sativa plants by silver nitrate and silver thiosulfate anionic complex. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 62: 369-375.
  75. Journal of Industrial Hemp 2003 Vol 8 issue 1 page 5-9, Female-Associated DNA Polymorphisms of Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.), Hong Shao, Shu-Juan Song, Robert C. Clarke
  81. {{cite journal |author=Fusar-Poli P, Crippa JA, Bhattacharyya S, et al. |title=Distinct effects of {delta}9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol on neural activation during emotional processing |journal=Archives of General Psychiatry |volume=66 |issue=1 |pages=95–105 |year=2009 |month=January |pmid=19124693 |doi=10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2008.519 |url= |accessdate=2009-08-04 }}
  86. Low-Dose Pot Eases Pain While Keeping Mind Clear.
  87. Chapter 1: Cannabis in the Ancient World. India: The First Marijuana-Oriented Culture.
  88. Chapter 10.
  89. ISBN 9781843403104.
  90. ISBN 9780313207211.

Further reading

External links

Embed code:

Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address