Recreational Ruderalis Discussion

I want to have a discussion (mature, fact-based and non-biased) about Cannabis Ruderalis.

I really don't give a shit about classification or origin. I'm only interested in discussion the plant's usability for recreational purposes as a pure strain, not a hybrid.

The thing is, i know places in my hometown with lots of wild Ruderalis (i live in Europe) that seem to me to have really adapted to the climate (hot summers) and grow reasonably tall. (i've seen plants about 2 meters tall, no joke).

So, I know the general opinion that Ruderalis is useless to smoke and that i's considered ditch weed but, when talking about the usefulness of a Cannabis plant(for getting high) we take into account the THC-rich trychomes, right? Well, the very large plants that i've see are sticky as shit (tho they don't have big buds) , i mean really sticky and have a sweet floral, fruity smell. And they seem to not adhere to the standard describtion of Ruderalis as being a "one-brach" plant. The ones i know are relatively dense and full of buds. At least 5-6 a branch.

Since trychomes are developed as the plant's defence mechanism against the sun AND since Ruderalis originated in the cold climate of northers Russia it is logical to think that THOSE plants don't have that much THC.

My big question: Isn't it possible due to many years of hot summers that the Ruderalis in my area to have developed stronger and stronger THC contents?

I already scouted for the most mature and sticky ones that i would find and i'm gonna take a sizeble batch of them to try and make some hash. I will certainly know then if they have somehow evolved or not. But until then i would like to hear from people who have tried making hash from Ruderalis. It would be useful to describe how the plants were. If they were big, small, sticky, smell, etc. I could only find a handful of posts on the internet about ruderalis from people who have tried using it in it's pure form for recreational purposes. I read that they managed to make a smokable hash out of a pretty big amount of ruderalis. But unfortunetaly they didn't describe how the plant looked like before harvesting.
 
since they are usually grouped in bunches of males and females they have plenty of seeds.

yeah I highly recommend you make hash and see if it's worth it or not first. if you do find something epic then you are like just any other person who brings a landrace to the masses and changes what they think of it forever.

that's how lots of shit like the first skunk (came from kabul afghanistan), many afghani landraces came from people taking seeds from hash plants in afghanistan, and many many other places.
 
C.Ruderalis is an autoflowering plant...I've heard there are projects among breeders to make Ruderalis into a high in THC content, autoflowering plant.

If this could be done successfully and spread throughout the world, it could be a great thing for the cannabis community.

You should go for it man, pollenate with some white widow or other high grade strain and see how it turns out, I'd like to know!
 
are you reffering to the ruderalis/sativa(or indica) hybrids? if so.., that is a different story. the lowryder strain is indeed one having the autoflowering and size characteristics of ruderalis while being high in THC. i, on the other hand, am trying to see what is the current state of the wild ruderalis. if it's worth a toke or not.

as for the pollenation suggestion, i've thought of that but at the moment i'm not focusing on it. i read on a forum about a bunch of people from the states that did the exact same thing with wild ruderalis and they ended up with a pretty nice outcome.
 
are you reffering to the ruderalis/sativa(or indica) hybrids? if so.., that is a different story. the lowryder strain is indeed one having the autoflowering and size characteristics of ruderalis while being high in THC. i, on the other hand, am trying to see what is the current state of the wild ruderalis. if it's worth a toke or not.

as for the pollenation suggestion, i've thought of that but at the moment i'm not focusing on it. i read on a forum about a bunch of people from the states that did the exact same thing with wild ruderalis and they ended up with a pretty nice outcome.

you know what I'd do if I lived near wild rudaralis? or any wild cannabis? I would take a female of a dank ass strain, plant it in the middle of all the growth. over the next few generations I bet you would have some super fuckin chronic shit brewin out there...


for all I know that may have already happened out there ;) but go for it man never know.
 
are you reffering to the ruderalis/sativa(or indica) hybrids? if so.., that is a different story. the lowryder strain is indeed one having the autoflowering and size characteristics of ruderalis while being high in THC. i, on the other hand, am trying to see what is the current state of the wild ruderalis. if it's worth a toke or not.

as for the pollenation suggestion, i've thought of that but at the moment i'm not focusing on it. i read on a forum about a bunch of people from the states that did the exact same thing with wild ruderalis and they ended up with a pretty nice outcome.

All ruderalis is autoflowering. Lowryder itself is a ruderalis/indica hybrid as far as I know.

Wild Ruderalis on its own is not something I would smoke... it might be worth a try making hash as suggested but I would not recommend smoking any of it's raw plant matter.
 
All ruderalis is autoflowering. Lowryder itself is a ruderalis/indica hybrid as far as I know.

Wild Ruderalis on its own is not something I would smoke... it might be worth a try making hash as suggested but I would not recommend smoking any of it's raw plant matter.
I don't think we know enough to say that all rudaralis is autoflowering, I've heard that the autoflowering trait wasn't a very common trait.
 
I don't think we know enough to say that all rudaralis is autoflowering, I've heard that the autoflowering trait wasn't a very common trait.

From Wikipedia:

"Cannabis ruderalis is a putative species of Cannabis originating in central Asia. It flowers earlier than C. indica or C. sativa, does not grow as tall, and can withstand much harsher climates than either of them. Cannabis ruderalis is purported to go into budding based strictly on age and not on changes in length of daylight.[citation needed] This kind of flowering is also known as auto-flowering.[1]"
 
Might as well chop as much as you can and make hash. I'd like to see the end result and a high report
 
From Wikipedia:

"Cannabis ruderalis is a putative species of Cannabis originating in central Asia. It flowers earlier than C. indica or C. sativa, does not grow as tall, and can withstand much harsher climates than either of them. Cannabis ruderalis is purported to go into budding based strictly on age and not on changes in length of daylight.[citation needed] This kind of flowering is also known as auto-flowering.[1]"

so what because wikipedia says it that is the facts?? sorry but cannabis classification is already full of grey areas and your wikipedia quote doesn't shed any light on that.
 
Wikipedia is a legitiment source.

It would have been edited by their topic-specific mods if it were deemed pure misinformation, therefore I would say there must be some truth to it.
 
I want to have a discussion (mature, fact-based and non-biased) about Cannabis Ruderalis.

I really don't give a shit about classification or origin. I'm only interested in discussion the plant's usability for recreational purposes as a pure strain, not a hybrid.

The thing is, i know places in my hometown with lots of wild Ruderalis (i live in Europe) that seem to me to have really adapted to the climate (hot summers) and grow reasonably tall. (i've seen plants about 2 meters tall, no joke).

So, I know the general opinion that Ruderalis is useless to smoke and that i's considered ditch weed but, when talking about the usefulness of a Cannabis plant(for getting high) we take into account the THC-rich trychomes, right? Well, the very large plants that i've see are sticky as shit (tho they don't have big buds) , i mean really sticky and have a sweet floral, fruity smell. And they seem to not adhere to the standard describtion of Ruderalis as being a "one-brach" plant. The ones i know are relatively dense and full of buds. At least 5-6 a branch.

Since trychomes are developed as the plant's defence mechanism against the sun AND since Ruderalis originated in the cold climate of northers Russia it is logical to think that THOSE plants don't have that much THC.

My big question: Isn't it possible due to many years of hot summers that the Ruderalis in my area to have developed stronger and stronger THC contents?

I already scouted for the most mature and sticky ones that i would find and i'm gonna take a sizeble batch of them to try and make some hash. I will certainly know then if they have somehow evolved or not. But until then i would like to hear from people who have tried making hash from Ruderalis. It would be useful to describe how the plants were. If they were big, small, sticky, smell, etc. I could only find a handful of posts on the internet about ruderalis from people who have tried using it in it's pure form for recreational purposes. I read that they managed to make a smokable hash out of a pretty big amount of ruderalis. But unfortunetaly they didn't describe how the plant looked like before harvesting.


i bet those are actually a satvia strain, because sativas low in thc where the hemp plants used for rope etc...
 
Wikipedia is a legitiment source.

It would have been edited by their topic-specific mods if it were deemed pure misinformation, therefore I would say there must be some truth to it.

wikipedia is a crappy source that is so full of errors most college professors will reject your "research" if your referencing it
 
wikipedia is a crappy source that is so full of errors most college professors will reject your "research" if your referencing it

99.2% of articles on wikipedia are legitimate. They've done so many studies on this its stupid to bring this debate up again. And the reason for professors not accepting wikipedia is because its not a primary source, as is encyclopedia Britannica or any encyclopedia for that matter.
But if wikipedia doesn't do it for you, here is a research article on cannibis sativa and ruderalis interbreeding. I doubt you could understand half of what is said unless you majored in genetics but w/e: http://www.springerlink.com/content/ex28v57734773772/
EDIT: I forgot that you probably aren't subscribed but here is a legit research paper on the subject
 
Here is an excerpt from the journal:
"The p a r e n t s t r a in JBC-3 (C. s a t i v a ) is s e en to c o n t a i n a t l e a s t 70% T H C o f t o t a l
c a n n a b i n o i d s . The s ex appe a r s to make no di f f e r enc e in c a n n a b i n o i d tot a l or
p a t t e r n in this strain.
The o t h e r p a r e n t , JBC-2 (C. r u d e r a l i s ) , c o n t a i n s less t h a n 40% T H C o f tot a l
c a n n a b i n o i d s , wi th mo s t pl ant s falling be low the 20% level. The tot a l p e r c e n t
c a n n a b i n o i d s wa s l owe r for C. r u d e r a l i s (~ = 0.45%) t h a n for C. s a t i v a (~ =
1.61%), t h o u g h one " s p o r t " o f JBC-2, whi ch wa s k e p t f o r s eve r a l we e k s u n d e r
high h umi d i t y condi t ions (an i n v e r t e d p a p e r c h r o m a t o g r a p h y t ank) , s h owe d 1.54%
total cannabinoids on a whole plant sample. The sports cannabinoid pattern was
similar to others of its strain, however."

Sorry its so weird. Stupid PDF lol
 
Back
Top