So this is a very professionally made coa
Now the standards are pretty complete but something is missing and I don t know what
As you can see in the first line there seems to be a accitic cannabinoid present at 0.4% but
What is it Wich one anybody notice a cannabinoid missing and one that could be present in such number ???
@kcalabs @drjackhughes @jebril
@Photon_noir @moronnabis
CBDPa?
What the F(€&? Is that ?
Google fu in overdrive
I don’t see THCVa?
Good point !!
On the phone right away
CBNa
Thcpa
(-)HHCa
THCa-B
THCa-C
It s one peak on the cromathogram one singel 0.4% peak
Darnit knowing that didi meiri has 147 standerds in his units
Gita get some to Tel Aviv
heptyl analog of CBDa
Given that you’re looking at a CBD dominant plant.
Note: guessing wildly
I would like to see the chromatogram…and running conditions.
One first off would seem to think CBCA level is off.
shouldn’t it be higher in all strains…is there a strain with cbca below detection level.
did you get a MS detector or just DAD? Position on the RPc18 chromatogram can give us a much better clue (include mobile phase and pH buffer info please)
Although it shows up as a peak, are we actually sure it is a cannabinoic acid?
and by the way folks…Rogue seems to have it Nailed…look at that purity…and I am guessing it may be a “WATER” technique…that purity is hard to come
by…I can assure you.
I am wondering if just the brief exposure to HCl can convert just a small bit of CBDA to something else??? Or a bit of Oxidization.? (CBNA)
Water-water-water…the world is changing one drop of acid at a time.
Yeah, that would absolutely help…
My guess is based on the biology, and the assumption that there was crystallization here.
The closer to CBD the interloper is, the more likely it is to have ppt with the CBD.
I ll try to get a hold of all documents
And again thank you would not have perfected this method without your help patience and guidance you are a briljant mind 
Thank you. I appreciate your assessment.
The “WATER” is really the last nut to crack.
Large scale is just on the horizon. There are a handful of people in N. America that see the potential.
There is a fellow in S.Africa as well.
I have stuck to the GRAS food products chemistry to make everything Certified Organic. CBDA tinctures for pain.
Your capabilities are certainly noteworthy….to say the least.
I apologize for the confusion earlier. As an AI language model, I cannot guarantee that I can generate an exhaustive list of all patents that use water as the primary extraction solvent for cannabinoids, especially since new patents are continually being published. However, I can provide you with a list of some recently published patents that use water as a primary extraction solvent for cannabinoids:
- US Patent 10,871,003, “Method for the production of cannabis extracts comprising cannabinoids and terpenes using water and extraction kit thereof”
- US Patent 10,888,772, “Extraction of cannabinoids from cannabis”
- US Patent 11,104,645, “Cannabinoid extraction process using water”
- US Patent 11,023,036, “Method for extracting cannabinoids from cannabis plant material using water and an organic solvent”
- US Patent 10,909,223, “Water-based extraction process for cannabinoids and terpenes”
- US Patent 10,784,645, “Water-soluble cannabinoid extracts and methods of making and using same”
- US Patent 10,808,599, “Water-based extraction process for producing cannabinoid and terpene-rich extracts from cannabis”
- US Patent 10,726,936, “Method of extraction and purification of cannabinoids using water”
Please note that this is not an exhaustive list, and there may be other patents that use water as a primary extraction solvent for cannabinoids that are not included here. Additionally, some of these patents may use water in combination with other solvents or extraction methods, and may have specific limitations or requirements for their use.
It barfed when I tried “now compare and contrast”…
edit: for the record, not a single one of those patents has anything to do with the task at hand. further exploration seems to indicate complete dissociation between patent number, patent title, and patent content.
LMAO! Thank you for that, @cyclopath ! I’m pretty raw on the subject of ai, as you can imagine, from Carbon Chemistry deciding to replace me with it, despite its craptastic science “ability” much of the time.
On the bright side, it means I can be on the forum and in the lab more than I have been! 
Besides your (intentional?) misspelling of “acidic”, this list looks pretty thorough, @Roguelab . I would say it is probably THCVa (obviously missing), as @EHO_AZ said, or maybe even CBDPa (heptyl tail CBD has high mw), as cyclopath said.
@TheWillBilly has a decent list, although I’ve never understood why CBNa would be naturally occuring on anything but weirdly treated herb… and surely not in high amounts, right? Although that does remind me whatvI was going to say…
What is this list analyzing, @Roguelab ? Your CBDa isolate, obviously, but I mean from what source(s)? Do you have a reference sample of the original biomass? An extract of the plant is probably the best way to determine your requirements in a list of trace analytes like this.
I should like to add that the academic literature going back to at least 1940 all refer to the base extraction of phenols and rescorcinols . In fact in 1960 the first proof of THCA being the major cannabinoid found in dried marijuana used a technique referred to as the standard “base extraction” for all rescorcinols. So your AI search for “patents” is preceded by 30-40 years of standard extraction procedure;
everyone just needs to wake up to the fact that cannabinoids are rescorcinols and rescorcinol derivatives.
@Roguelab: that spoon will have to be .9999 Silver …
Applicable quotes:
“Considerable interest has recently been focused on the alkali soluble part of cannabis resin. Although this fraction does not exhibit any marked hashish activityx,2, it has been observed that such constituents readily become converted by heat or by long standing into bio- logically active cannabinolic compounds which are in- soluble in aqueous alkali 1”
“After the isolation of canna- bidiolic acid from the alkali fraction of the resin ',5, this constituent was believed to be precursor of other canna- binolic substances “
The numbers refer to cited references below:
xA. MADINAVEITIA,P. B. RUSSEL,and A. R. TODD,J. chem. Soc. 1942, 6~8.
B. C. BOSEand B. MUKERJI,Nature 15e, I09 (1943).
3C.C.FULTON,Industr.eng.Chem.Analyt.Ed. 14,407 (1942).
4 Z. KREJ~Iand F. SAUTAVY,Acta Univ.Olomuc.6, 59 (1955).
s O.E. SCHULTZand G.HAFFNER,Arch.Pharm.291[63,391 (1958).
O.E. SCHULTZand G.HAFFNER,Arch.Pharm.293]65,1(1960). 7R. ADAMS,D. C. PEASE,C. K. CAIN,and J. H. CLARK,J. Amer.
chem.Soc.62, 1868(1944).
sj. LEVlNE,J.Amer.chem.Soc.66,1868(1944). o S. LOEWE,Science 102,615 (1945)
Quotes are from a 1961 short note by:
Lj. Grlic and A. Andrec,
Institute /or the Control o/ Drugs, Zagreb (Yugoslavia), March 37, 1961.
EXPERIENTIAXVII/7 15. VII. 1961 Brevi comunicazioni
1940-1941 was and interesting time…with Adams claiming priority of synthesis of the methylheptyl -tetrahydrocannabinol which was actively disputed by similar claimsof an advanced chem-group working in England at that time.
“The Schultz procedure involves the base extraction of acidic cannabinoids”. See ref. Above….
“”Water extraction”” of Cannabinoics was called “”Base Extraction”” for 25 years.
Does anyone wonder about “Butane works but no theory”
All natural CBD isolates contain CBDV and CBDB in similar proportions, 0.1-0.5%. It is, thus, logical to find their acidic version in your CBDA isolate.
THCs do not cocrystalize with CBDs.
My reply concerning the first isolation of THCA is in error above.
Korte et al. (1965) first reported the isolation of THCA, but actually isolated the THCA-Dimethylformamide complex. This was corrected by Yamauchi et al. 1967 paper where they refer to their material as “authentic THCA”. In the latter’s paper they refer to Schultz and Haffner’s isolation procedure, which is a variation of base 5% KOH extraction of pet-ether extract to isolate the acids. As one can see in list noted above this procedure has references back to the early 1940s.
(For some reason I was unable to revise the note above)
15_1075.pdf (356.3 KB)
