Thiss
You can add also CBL and iso-d8 THC in the same group.
“Synthesis and Spectroscopic Characterization of Cannabinolic Acid”
Bastola, Hazekamp, Verpoorte
Planta Med 2007; 73(3): 273-275
DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-967129
There is. Shown by Mechoulam’s group. Mid 40s % yield. Using chloranil.
When you do the ring closure on cbd a it actually favors the regular thc a for some reason I believe @mitokid mentioned this to me
If I did, it was an off-the-cuff remark, not to be taken seriously since I have no personal experience of this cyclization.
THCa-B is intriguing. It’s crystal structure was determined around 50 years ago while the THCa-A structure was only reported in the last year.
What was the source of the THCa-B? If it was the only product Mechoulam’s group could isolate from treating THC with MMC that could certainly explain things, but I have yet to find any source confirming that hypothesis.
The reason being that one can make the argument that the phenol next to the carboxylic acid might be preoccupied with intramolecular hydrogen bonding to said carboxylic acid.
It may very well be faulty logic, but logic nonetheless, as in hypothesis. Only to possibly be borne out by someone sharing their findings. Does cyclization of CBDa in the flask yield predominantly THCa-A or THCa-B?
@TheLastHashbender did it and according to kca it was mainly d8 thc a a (the regular one)
CBNA is a natural breakdown (oxidation) product of THCA, paralell to how CBN is formed from THC. No need to synthesize it right?
Depends on how much you need or if you need to create a standard for chromatographic analysis.
I was merely bringing it to the thread’s attention that CBNa had been made in the flask, starting with d9-THCa.
I suppose, just not seeing much of a need for the acid form of something that is readily available as the neutral form. Youd be decarbing the CBNA to make it bioactive either way. Also, CBNA standards are available (synthed by standard companies, starting from olivitol id guess).
Any work on the effects of the thing?
No. This was just to show that it could be done. They used quite a trippy reagent to effect the oxidation.
The article is on Sci-Hub, I think, and it’s Hazekamp, so I guess the assumption is that it actually works.
I would think they actually use the already published procedure.
I think the novel compounds are fascinating, and I do agree 100% we need to isolate and understand each and every one of them, @Killa12345 hit the nail on the head, the future of cannabis research is gonna be the old dude in the lab coat with the nerdiest of inflections saying “I sure do just love synthesis reactions” right now its the wild west, and there’s a lot to discover, and a lot of incredibly bright people throwing everything they can at it. It’s never been a more novel time to be a canna researcher.
My greatest area of intrigue is the human side of it.
What natural cannabinoids do we have, what roles do they play, do they affect endocrine system in any major capacity, what are the long term side effects, we know it can alter metabolism, how does that pan out across a timeline.
The discovery of anandimide and other novel endocannabinoids is f***ing incredible to me. Proof positive we are just the stuff of nature…
On a secondary note yeah, we should absolutely question whether or not they should be marketed, their efficacy, etc, eventually its going to be done at trials. It’s going to eventually really move into the clinical space. Which we are already seeing a re-exploration of it. The M.A.P.S. program is an intriguing and amazing thing. But a longitudinal study of regular users of all body morphs is gonna be a valuable and necessary thing.
If they are going from D9THCA to CBNA with that above method, the D9THCA is not cannabis derived (legally cannot be to be DEA exempt) as in that paper… the D9THCA would have to be synthetic. Not sure what theyd be using for the starting point of THCA, but im pretty sure olivitol is the starting point for synthetic THC. Ergo, most standard suppliers probably started their CBNA synth from olivitol (or at least not D9THCA).
I presume any company making forensic standards have a DEA license and can make things by any route.
Nice in-line referencing!