Decoding The Holy Grail: Terpene & Cannabinoid Retention: Decarb to Extraction

[Kicknitup1]

Clearly, standards for processing and extracting cannabis are called for, like the US Government had 100 years ago in the United States Pharmacopoeia! (Note how they used dogs to assay for strength--you know you've got a good batch when it makes your dog stagger.)

Damn, why didn't we think of the staggering dog test?

 

[InTheShed]

I cannot fault anyone for the frustration.

InTheShed
"- best methods of decarb (method/times/temps) without having to buy a Nova or similar device
- best methods of extraction (method/times/temps) without having to buy a Magic Butter machine or similar device"

I don't think we have answered any of these questions. We did find out that the FHO run was not decarbed after eight hours of low temp heat.We also abandoned an oven decarb because my oven temperature fluctuated too much.

As far as extraction, there is an improvement in extraction by going to 4 hours from 2 hours. Kickn wanted to do a 36 hour test but we did not have time to complete that test.

Sorry, I get a late start here on the west coast! I want to leave the Vegas trip aside for a minute if I may, and I want to apologize in advance if I come across as anything but curious. I'm a New Yorker if that explains anything.

I'm confused to hear that the questions I asked haven't been answered as I thought that's what this thread was about.

SweetSue led off with:

One of the most frustrating parts of producing potent cannabis oils and products is understanding the decarboxylation process. How long is optimal for THC conversion? CBD conversion? How long is too long? What's being destroyed? What makes it through? Are there ways to manage the decarb for a more varied cannabinoid and terpene profile?

So to hear that the basic questions I asked haven't been answered is confusing to me. You all have put in a lot of time and money into running these tests. Can someone summarize what has been learned? Do you feel like you have gotten your time and money's worth out of the process?

Based on the Skunk Pharm chart we already knew that long decarb at low temps are ineffective. And if 4 hour extraction was better than 2 hours, can someone tell me what method was used for the 4 hour method to see if I can replicate it? Coconut, olive? Crock pot, double boiler?

There has been so much discussion and little bits of info inserted into various posts over the last two months that it is a needle/haystack problem to make sense of any of it.

 

[Kicknitup1]

"I am struggling to believe that we still can't say with any confidence that we should be infusing oil for 2hour, 4 hours or 36 hours."

Ok, not to sound like an attorney but that falls in the "depends" category. One of us will touch on that. For now, IF you are using a crock pot method I suggest 5 hrs. We didn't pick up any cbn really so why not? If you use another method, then we will have to talk.

 

[Kicknitup1]

"Based on the Skunk Pharm chart we already knew that long decarb at low temps are ineffective. And if 4 hour extraction was better than 2 hours, can someone tell me what method was used for the 4 hour method to see if I can replicate it? Coconut, olive? Crock pot, double boiler? There has been so much discussion and little bits of info inserted into various posts over the last two months that it is a needle/haystack problem to make sense of any of it. "

Point taken. For now, it was essentially a crock pot. Just trust me for now & do 5 hrs, under 180f. Coconut oil or olive. Everything we talk about here is for both oils & butter for that matter. Olive oil should be used in a lot of cases for medical reasons. But the method does not change.

 

[InTheShed]

Point taken. For now, it was essentially a crock pot. Just trust me for now & do 5 hrs, under 180f. Coconut oil or olive. Everything we talk about here is for both oils & butter for that matter. Olive oil should be used in a lot of cases for medical reasons. But the method does not change.

Thanks! Now I'm getting somewhere

So the decarb question has not been answered then? That's half the title of the thread :-(

In the meantime I'll have to stick with covered pan in the oven at 252° for 27 minutes (plus the time it takes the buds to reach temperature).

Science!

 

[Canyon]

Damn, why didn't we think of the staggering dog test?

I can beat that.

Utah warned about stoned rabbits if marijuana legalized - NY Daily News

It will probably get pulled so do a search for this.

Bud bunny: DEA agent warns Utah lawmakers about fearless pothead rabbits, citing science

There is a cute bunny picture and You Tube. You know you want to look.

 

[Scientific]

So the decarb question has not been answered then? !

To answer that question in anything like a definitive manner, it seems to me that you would need at least a three dimensional matrix, for example measuring freshly harvested samples from 1.) ten different strains at 2.) ten different temperatures for 3.) ten different durations (with all other variables locked). That alone would require 1,000 tests!

 

[Scientific]

Decoding The Holy Grail: Terpene & Cannabinoid Retention - Decarb to Extraction

Tuff for me to travel to long with my old dog

Hell I am an old dog (but one that staggers around the park doing USP cannabis testing).

 

[Kicknitup1]

Thanks! Now I'm getting somewhere

So the decarb question has not been answered then? That's half the title of the thread :-(

In the meantime I'll have to stick with covered pan in the oven at 252° for 27 minutes (plus the time it takes the buds to reach temperature).

Science!

Well it has been answered sort of. lol. We were going to prove a time for the oven decarb but..... look back. Your way will work. It doesn't leave room for error though. I would back it down some and do longer. Say...warm up empty jar for 15 min then 1.25 hrs @ 240f with buds. Then cut power & let rest in oven for 15 min. That was to be our test time at Canyon's. It should put you within 15 min of ground zero. You could probably add 15 min to the cook time & still be fine. BUT a lot of time/temps will work!!! There will be trial & error for anyone due to equipment/setup variances. I would keep qty at 14g or less, or dare I say, tweak the times.

 

[InTheShed]

To answer that question in anything like a definitive manner, it seems to me that you would need at least a three dimensional matrix, for example measuring freshly harvested samples from 1.) ten different strains at 2.) ten different temperatures for 3.) ten different durations (with all other variables locked). That alone would require 1,000 tests!

Are you saying that there was no way to answer the decarb question going in then? Nova seems to have answered it for a lot of people who find their product worth the cost. Adding more strains doesn't add an advantage as no plant will be identical to another. Wouldn't one strain at varying temps for varying times be sufficient to duplicate the Skunk Pharm chart? To that, add the terpene test at each variable and you'd be done. Sure it's for one plant, but it gives you a baseline to work from.

Terpene retention was one stated goal. Is the conclusion that they are gone regardless of decarb method?

 

[Bucudinkydow]

We're all looking for that utopian time/temp ratio that allows us to get the absolute ultimate results from our weed but finding that single one size fits all magic number is going to be more elusive than the lost continent of Atlantis! There's just absolutely too many variables to contend with to issue a precise answer to this dilemma. I think the parameters for a good decarb are much wider than many think.

 

[Scientific]

Are you saying that there was no way to answer the decarb question going in then?

It was the phrase "a definitive manner" that pushed my scientist button.

Are you saying that there was no way to answer the decarb question going in then?

Nope.

Nova seems to have answered it for a lot of people who find their product worth the cost.

Don't get me started on that overpriced gee-gaw.

Adding more strains doesn't add an advantage as no plant will be identical to another.

Of course there's a difference between a definitive answer and a perfect answer (and a perfect test), but when we get our federal grant, I think we should include at the very least samples of landrace indica and stativa, some popular hybrids, and a CBD strain.

Wouldn't one strain at varying temps for varying times be sufficient to duplicate the Skunk Pharm chart??

I had thought of just starting with samples of 99.999% pure synthetic THCA. That would get rid of a dimension so you'd only have to run 100 tests.

To that, add the terpene test at each variable and you'd be done. Sure it's for one plant, but it gives you a baseline to work from.
Terpene retention was one stated goal. Is the conclusion that they are gone regardless of decarb method?

Yup, just testing decarboxylation alone in a definitive manner would be challenging. Evaluating terps would cost extra.

 

[Bucudinkydow]

Re: Decoding The Holy Grail: Terpene & Cannabinoid Retention - Decarb to Extraction

One day perhaps some genius will derive a formula to factor in variables such as ambient temperature, atmospheric pressure, altitude, humidity, moisture content, strain and age of your material, use of conductive or convection applied heat, etc, etc, etc. I've seen many varying temps/time settings that got exceptional results backed up by lab tests. And I'm sure they were absolutely the perfect choice for the given conditions at that particular location for that particular batch of weed. Could I exactly replicate the results with my material in my location today? Invariably, NO! Pick out a guideline you feel comfortable with, assess your results and make adjustments as necessary. I get great results with 40 min@240 degrees but I'll bet that's not the absolute best system for every instance.

 

[InTheShed]

Evaluating terps would cost extra.

Everything costs extra these days!

 

[InTheShed]

Re: Decoding The Holy Grail: Terpene & Cannabinoid Retention - Decarb to Extraction

I get great results with 40 min@240 degrees but I'll bet that's not the absolute best system for every instance.

Don't let perfect be the enemy of the good (or great for that matter!).

 

[SweetSue]

i can beat that.

utah warned about stoned rabbits if marijuana legalized - ny daily news

it will probably get pulled so do a search for this.

bud bunny: Dea agent warns utah lawmakers about fearless pothead rabbits, citing science

there is a cute bunny picture and you tube. You know you want to look.

 

[Scientific]

We're all looking for that utopian time/temp ratio that allows us to get the absolute ultimate results from our weed but finding that single one size fits all magic number is going to be more elusive than the lost continent of Atlantis! There's just absolutely too many variables to contend with to issue a precise answer to this dilemma. I think the parameters for a good decarb are much wider than many think.

What I would hope would be that rather than coming up with a single utopian time/temp ratio, that enough (lotsa) data, carefully considered, would start to reveal the fundamental, underlying principles of the process (e.g an unforeseen spike in decarb activity at temperature X or somethin...)

This is all just woolgathering, of course. Maybe it won't be a federal grant that finally answers the question but big pharma or their ilk jumping into the cannabis market. Back in the 80s at the height of investor biotech fever, I got to specify the equipment needed for a small production lab with partners like Kodak, Hoffman-LaRoche, and venture capitalists picking up the tab. How fun it was to open the scientific supply catalogs and be able for once to order the best of everything with money no object! (Kinda like Walter White specifying his dream lab, only we was just growing HeLa cells and such like... When I had been working in a state university facility, I once broke a $50 transducer and you'd have thought it was a tragedy of epic proportions.)

Speaking of work...

 

[SweetSue]

We're all looking for that utopian time/temp ratio that allows us to get the absolute ultimate results from our weed but finding that single one size fits all magic number is going to be more elusive than the lost continent of Atlantis! There's just absolutely too many variables to contend with to issue a precise answer to this dilemma. I think the parameters for a good decarb are much wider than many think.

In my opinion, if you're looking for complete decarb with terpenes, you can't beat fresh harvest oil, or this method.

Oil, lecithin, and ground, undecarbed bud in the oven, on the lowest setting for 36 hours, shaking every tine you think of it to release more and more gasses. I know it's decarbed, because I can see it happening. I'll keep it in the oven until it stops decarbing, then it goes into the fridge for 24 hours before I use it.

This oil is meant for brownies, so I don't even have to strain it out. I'll be getting 100% of what these buds have to offer.

 

[InTheShed]

In my opinion, if you're looking for complete decarb with terpenes, you can't beat fresh harvest oil, or this method.
Oil, lecithin, and ground, undecarbed bud in the oven, on the lowest setting for 36 hours, shaking every tine you think of it to release more and more gasses. I know it's decarbed, because I can see it happening. I'll keep it in the oven until it stops decarbing, then it goes into the fridge for 24 hours before I use it.
This oil is meant for brownies, so I don't even have to strain it out. I'll be getting 100% of what these buds have to offer.

Now I'm confused Sue. Canyon just said "We did find out that the FHO run was not decarbed after eight hours of low temp heat."

Did he mean that 8 hours isn't enough and 36 hours is?

 

[Bucudinkydow]

What an interesting conversation this is becoming (or maybe I'm just a little higher than I should be)! Be great if we were all sitting about a round table, passing a dooby and bouncing ideas off each other!!

I think our search for the apex with so many variables is futile. Perhaps in the future a precise compilation of parameters would be more useful. In other words, where does the efficiency drop drastically at the high end and low end of time and temp for conditions "A" and then compare a test with conditions "B" and "C" and so on. Soon, we'd have a cross reference to present a spectrum in which to work that wouldn't necessarily give the ultimate efficiency but would have the potential of giving very good, uniform results over a wide range of variables.

Yea, I put too much tincture in my cola!!