• Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Huh, last I looked somewhere I’m pretty sure indica was considered a subspecies, not a distinct species. Thanks for the update or correction, either or.

      Oh wait no I should’ve known, it’s something we’re still pretty much arguing over. That is whether sativa and indica (and ruderalis) are both suspecies, or whether they’re all their own species in the same family.

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604179/#:~:text=Cannabis is often divided into,often has a few branches.

      And dog breeds are still (at least in the vast majority) not even different subspecies, just different breed (variants of the same species)

      Indica is technically “cannabis sativa indica” and then a strain would technically be written fully as “C. sativa var indica, ‘Indian Kush’” or “C. sativa indica, var ‘Northern Lights’” or something to that effect. But also sativa would be like “C. sativa sativa, var. ‘Durban Poison’”

      This is all up for debate, I’m not saying there’s consensus on what is or isn’t correct. Just inputting a lil content to Lemmy

  • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I mean, I don’t partake but isn’t it the same as saying cabbage, kale, broccoli, cauliflower and a dozen other things are the same?

  • SinAdjetivos@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    6 months ago

    And there’s only one species of wild cabbage, Brassica oleracea. Get out of here with that “broccoli”, “kale”, “cabbage” or “brussel sprouts” nonsense!

  • JoYo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    me when weed smokers are talking about magic mushroom “strains”.

    • Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      These are pretty different though, as cannabis has literally dozens of different cannabinoids and terpenes, but “magic mushrooms” refers to psilocybin shrooms, which all have psilocybin and psilocin in varying amounts.

      Cannabis relies on the entourage effect.

        • Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Found the guy without experience of drug culture

          Name a drug and I’ve done it.

          Name two magic mushrooms without psilocybin.

          I can. Can you, even with googling?

          “Magic mushrooms” is exactly what refers to psilocybin, even more accurately than “ecstasy” refers to MDMA (a lot of pills have caffeine/mda/speed/rc’s).

          If you told someone you did shrooms, who the hell would even ask “oh you do mean like psilocybin mushrooms or amanitas or what?”

          • JoYo
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Brodda wut? I’m a mycologist.

            • TheOakTree@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Interesting that a mycologist has 0 posts or comments regarding mushrooms/fungi prior to this post. Not that you have to, but rather that both of my mycologist friends are extremely enthusiastic about talking about it.

            • Dasus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Avoiding the question while pretending to be an expert, cool, cool.

              Hey when people ask you “do you drink alcohol” do you answer them with “brodda wut? lol, no, only ethanol, why would you think ‘alcohol’ means ‘ethanol’ ‘alcohol’ actually means all alcohols and most of them aren’t suitable for human consumption”?

              I’m sure you don’t.

              Now, seeing how you’re an expert mycologist, please, do name two “magic mushrooms” which don’t contain any psilocin or psilocybin or any of the precursors. (Meaning shrooms in which the “magic” isn’t from psilocybin.)

                • Dasus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  Weird how a “mycologist” can’t even discern between a family and a species.

                  Psilocybe cubensis and it’s variants are the one’s you farm at home, but they’re far from being the only psilocybe species that are ingested. One of the foremost being psilocybe semilanceatea (liberty caps) which is far more potent than any cubensis. There are dozens of species of psilocybe mushrooms, but like the name might suggest, they all contain psilocybin.

                  I specifically said name me two mushrooms which do not contain psilocybin and which rely on other psyhoactives, for my point is that rather like alcohol, with mushrooms, only really the dosage varies with variants, whereas with cannabis variants, the actual composition of the psyhoactive chemicals varies… greatly. (And for the pedants, mushrooms will have varying relative amounts of psilocin and psilocybin and relatives, but since psilocybin metabolises into psilocin, it’s nowhere near the same as with dozens of different cannabinoids + terpenes.)

                  I’ve cultivated shrooms several times. Have you? A rather noob’s guide you’ve linked if I might say. Almost as if it’s the first result someone Googling it might link.

                  “Mycologist” lmao, you’re a bad liar bruv.

  • Uncle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    this is actually one thing that has pissed me off for 30+ years. to be fair, there is 2-3 types, one for smoking, one for hemp products (non smoking/not getting high) and the wild kind.

    • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Kinda sorta a bit different but you got the gist down close enough. 🙏

      Cannabaceae is the plants family which is good shit btw 🤩🧐

      There are two ways of thinking I’m aware of. It’s all cannabis sativa. Or. It’s cannabis sativa, Cannabis indica and cannabis ruderalis as the three sub species.

      Ruderalis is literally ditch weed in that it grows randomlyin the ditch’s around midwestern America, near where “hemp” was produced previously, and produces nothing smokeable or enjoyable I’m aware of.

      Hemp is just a governmental term applied to the cannabis plant to denote it has less than .3% THC making it non psychoactive. This is currently heavily abused in the USA as THCa, the naturally occurring acid that grows on cannabis, melts or converts into THC with heat. And the law seemingly defines it into as THC being over .3% not THCa. Weird loophole.

    • JoYo
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      you forgot the one for spicing ales.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      Cannabis sativa is the same plant for every single strain of cannabis in existence, as well as hemp. The meme is pointing out how we talk about sativa, indica, and hybrids as completely different plants, rather than variations of the same species

      • Diabolo96@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        But each strain is different, right? Like how a chihuahua and a German shepherd are both dogs, but vastly different.

        • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yes, the different strains absolutely have some differences, and I’m not trying to say it’s all bullshit. Weed is awesome, and we should document new stuff as it comes along, but we need to remember that it’s all a single plant. I’d say weed is like the apple of drugs

        • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yes. Some strains smell like a baby just shit kn a diaper and some smell like a fresh cut mango mixed with some pine needles lol. Flavor also vastly different! It’s a wonderful plant to explore

      • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Cannabis sativa is the same plant for every single strain of cannabis in existence

        This is incorrect. Cannabis is the family designation where Sativa, Indica and Ruderalis are the species designations.

        • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          This is debated. But this string is an explanation of recent debate. Whether it’s all sativa or there are the three sub species. I prefer the sub species route myself.

        • RadicalEagle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          They are the same species by the scientific definition. The meaning of the word “species” has become diluted over time as it was adopted by more people and misused, just like all language.

          • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            6 months ago

            They are the same species by the scientific definition

            Seems there there is very much a debate about it and they are either considered seperate species, subspecies or a single one.

              • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                My point exactly. Which makes this post (and some of the comment) asserting that it’s certainly a single species quite confusing. Seems it’s quite far from certain.

            • Atelopus-zeteki@kbin.run
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              In mycology one will hear references to ‘lumpers’ and ‘splitters’ taxonomically. That is, do we lump these specimens together, or do we split them into difference groupings. When we look at the genetics, it has been the case that we find that those critters that appear similar may not be those that are related by genes/ evolution. And of course by “we” I mean the larger scientific community, not me and the mouse in my pocket. Oh wait, that’s not a mouse it’s a shrew. ;-)

          • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            My point exactly. That’s why I find it a bit strange that the post and some comments here act like it’s a certainty.

        • TheTetrapod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          Standard middle school definition of species is applicable here. If they can breed and their offspring is fertile, they’re the same species.

          QED, Spock is sterile.

          • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 months ago

            Standard middle school definition of species is applicable here

            And here I was thinking about looking into some of the papers for the actual reasons … but turns out those stupid scientists just wasted their time because they forgot about middle school. Fools!

            • TheTetrapod@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              I kind of thought the Spock thing would convey I wasn’t 100% serious in my reply to a weed shitpost.

    • pudcollar [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I think the confusion is that there are two well-known subgroups of cannabis sativa, indica and sativa (ruderalis is more obscure). So the species and subgroup have the same name, to the consternation of indica lovers.

      It may also be referential to the greater indica/sativa internet drama, there are fierce disputes about the differences or lack thereof. The confusion is amplified due to the lack of quality control in cannabis genetics and sales, and most strains are hybrids between the two (or three)

    • worldwidewave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      As I read it, it’s basically saying there’s only one kind of red wine: red. You’re right, but you’re ignoring all of the subcategories that the typical consumers use to talk about it.

      Weed smokers typically consider strains to be either Indica or Sativa, but there’s a whole debate about if those are real differences at all. The plant itself is called Cannabis Sativa, hence why this statement is true.

      • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        The plant itself is called Cannabis Sativa…

        The plant’s family is Cannabis. The plant’s species is either Indica, Ruderalis or Sativa.

      • Kroxx@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah but the original cannabis indica described has none of the physical characteristics of what it does today, there is not a genetic difference between sativa and indica that is sold in the cannabis market today.

  • Zerush
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    The hops used for brewing beer belong to the same family as marijuana and have a similar alkaloid, the hop harvesters at the end of the day can confirm this.

      • Zerush
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yes and others more, but hops are the nearest parent, because of this also cannabis is used to make beer

  • beefbot@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Found the upvotes farmer 😜 … I’m just kidding. But yeah it should have been obvious how much response this would get