ArticleMetabolites2020
A High-Throughput Method for the Comprehensive Analysis of Terpenes and Terpenoids in Medicinal Cannabis Biomass.
Article in Metabolites, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Validated GC-MS Method for Major Terpenes Quantification in Hydrodistilled Cannabis sativa Essential oil.Phytochemical analysis : PCA · 2025Article
- Synthesis and characterization of cetylpyridinium peroxyphosphotungstate and their catalytic properties for linalool oxidation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- ExploringMedicinal chemistry (Shariqah (United Arab Emirates)) · 2025Article
- In the weeds: A comprehensive review of cannabis; its chemical complexity, biosynthesis, and healing abilities.Toxicology reports · 2024Review
- Cannabinoids and Genetic Epilepsy Models: A Review with Focus on CDKL5 Deficiency Disorder.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Quality Standards in State Programs Permitting Cannabis for Medical Uses.Cannabis and cannabinoid research · 2022Review
- Article
- High-Throughput Quantitation of Cannabinoids by Liquid Chromatography Triple-Quadrupole Mass Spectrometry.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Metabolic Perturbation and Synthetic Biology Strategies for Plant Terpenoid Production-An Updated Overview.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Accelerated Solvent Extraction of Terpenes in Cannabis Coupled With Various Injection Techniques for GC-MS Analysis.Frontiers in chemistry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cannabis and its secondary metabolite content have recently seen a surge in research interest. Cannabis terpenes and terpenoids in particular are increasingly the focus of research efforts due to the possibility of their contribution to the overall therapeutic effect of medicinal cannabis. Current methodology to quantify terpenes in cannabis biomass mostly relies on large quantities of biomass, long extraction protocols, and long GC gradient times, often exceeding 60 min. They are therefore not easily applicable in the high-throughput environment of a cannabis breeding program. The method presented here, however, is based on a simple hexane extract from 40 mg of biomass, with 50 μg/mL dodecane as internal standard, and a gradient of less than 30 min. The method can detect 48 individual terpenes and terpenoids and was validated for selectivity, linearity, LOD/LOQ, precision, intermediate precision, and accuracy (recovery) for 22 terpenes and terpenoids. The validation parameters are comparable to previously published studies that employ significantly longer runtimes and/or more complex extraction protocols. It is currently being applied to medicinal cannabis precision breeding programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.