Open Access Peer-reviewed Research Article

Differentiation between drug-type, fibre-type and intermediate-type in cannabis samples: HPLC-UV versus GC-FID

Article Sidebar

Decarboxylation and oxidation of cannabinoids
Download PDF
Submitted   Nov 13, 2020
Published   Jan 26, 2021
Issue    Vol 2 No 2 (2020)
DOI   10.25082/JPBR.2020.02.003

Views

2602

Downloads

1357

Citations

PlumX Metrics

Main Article Content

Kian Kadkhodaei
Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Nina Biei
Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Esther Caelles Vidiella
Departamento de Farmacia y Tecnolog´ıa Farmac´eutica, y Fisicoqu´ımica, Facultat de Farmacia, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
Pamela Osmenaj
Dipartimento di Scienze della Vita, Facolt`a di Farmacia, Universit`a degli studi di Modena Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
Giuseppe Cannazza
Dipartimento di Scienze della Vita, Facolt`a di Farmacia, Universit`a degli studi di Modena Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
Martin Schmid corresponding author
Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Graz, Graz, Austria

Abstract

Cannabis sativa is known to be the most abused illegal drug worldwide. To date it is not only used as a medicine but has been established as a lifestyle product. The most relevant phytocannabinoids represent the ingredients delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (D9-THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), whereby only D9-THC shows a psychoactive effect. Since 2017, the so-called CBD-hemp containing CBD as main ingredient is distributed in many countries as a legal alternative. In these products, D9-THC must not exceed a certain percentage. It is hardly possible to differentiate between THC-hemp and CBD-hemp presenting a major challenge for authorities. Therefore, there is the need to develop fast and efficient analysis methods to distinguish between fibre-type, drug-type and intermediate-type cannabis products. The aim of this study was to compare two simple and inexpensive HPLC-UV and GC-FID methods for their ability to quantify phytocannabinoids in dried cannabis plant material. For this purpose, a set of 37 fresh and dried cannabis samples randomly chosen from seizures of Austrian police was subject to complementary quantification of D9-THC and CBD. After having taken into account decomposition of certain phytocannabinoids, the result of this quantitative study showed good correlation between HPLC-UV and GC-FID regardless of quantifying cannabis leaves or buds.

Keywords
Cannabinoids, D9-THC, THCA, CBD, CBDA, HPLC-UV, GC-FID

Article Details

How to Cite
Kadkhodaei, K., Biei, N., Vidiella, E., Osmenaj, P., Cannazza, G., & Schmid, M. (2021). Differentiation between drug-type, fibre-type and intermediate-type in cannabis samples: HPLC-UV versus GC-FID. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biopharmaceutical Research, 2(2), 161-168. https://doi.org/10.25082/JPBR.2020.02.003
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

References

  1. Turner CE, Elsohly MA and Boeren EG. Constituents of cannabis sativa L. XVII. A Review of the natural constituents. Journal of Natural Products, 1980, 43(2): 169-234. https://doi.org/10.1021/np50008a001
  2. Elsohly MA and Slade D. Chemical constituents of marijuana: the complex mixture of natural cannabinoids. Life Sciences, 2005, 78(5): 539-548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2005.09.011
  3. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. European Drug Report. 2019, n.d., November 10th, 2020. https://www.emcdda.europa.eu/system/files/publications/11364/20191724TDAT19001ENN_PDF.pdf
  4. EMCDDA. Low-THC cannabis products being sold in the EU - key legal issues. 2018, n.d., November 10th, 2020. https://www.emcdda.europa.eu/news/2018/low-thc-cannabis-products-being-sold-in-the-EU%E2%80%93key-legal-issues_en
  5. Fischedick JT, Glas R, Hazekamp A, et al. A Qualitative and Quantitative HPTLC Densitometry Method for the Analysis of Cannabinoids in Cannabis sativa L. Phytochemical Analysis, 2009, 20(5): 421-426. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.1143
  6. Yotoriyama M, Ishiharajima E, Kato Y, et al. Identification and Determination of Cannabinoids in both Commercially Available and Cannabis Oils Stored Long Term. Journal of Health Science, 2005, 51(4): 483-487. https://doi.org/10.1248/jhs.51.483
  7. Cole BB. A preliminary study of the analysis of Cannabis by supercritical fluid chromatography with atmospheric pressure chemical ionisation mass spectroscopic detection. Forensic Science Unit, 1997, 37: 91-97.
  8. Jambo H, Dispas A, Avohou HT, et al. Implementation of a generic SFC-MS method for the quality control of potentially counterfeited medicinal cannabis with synthetic cannabinoids. Journal of Chromatography B, 2018, 1092: 332-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2018.05.049
  9. Wang M, Wang Y, Avula B, et al. Quantitative Determination of Cannabinoids in Cannabis and Cannabis Products Using Ultra-High-Performance Supercritical Fluid Chromatography and Diode Array / Mass Spectrometric Detection. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 2017, 62(3): 602-611. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13341
  10. Ibrahim EA, Gul W, Gul SW, et al. Determination of Acid and Neutral Cannabinoids in Extracts of Different Strains of Cannabis sativa Using GC-FID. Planta Medica, 2018, 84(4): 250-259. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-124088
  11. Taschwer M and Schmid MG. Determination of the relative percentage distribution of THCA and D9-THC in herbal cannabis seized in Austria - Impact of different storage temperatures on stability. Forensic Science International, 2015, 254: 167-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.07.019
  12. Gul W, Gul SW, Radwan MM, et al. Determination of 11 Cannabinoids in Biomass and Extracts of Different Varieties of Cannabis Using High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Journal of AOAC International, 2015, 98(6): 1523-1528. https://doi.org/10.5740/jaoacint.15-095
  13. Wang YH, Avula B, Elsohly M, et al. Quantitative Determination of D9-THC, CBG, CBD, Their Acid Precursors and Five Other Neutral Cannabinoids by UHPLC-UV-MS. Planta Medica, 2017: 84(4): 260-266. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-124873
  14. Citti C, Battisti M, Braghiroli D, et al. A Metabolomic Approach Applied to a Liquid Chromatography Coupled to High-Resolution Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method (HPLC-ESI-HRMS/MS): Towards the Comprehensive Evaluation of the Chemical Composition of Cannabis Medicinal Extracts. Phytochemical Analysis, 2018, 29(2): 144-155. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.2722
  15. Backer B De, Debrus B, Lebrun P, et al. Innovative development and validation of an HPLC/DAD method for the qualitative and quantitative determination of major cannabinoids in cannabis plant material. Journal of Chromatography B, 2009, 877(32): 4115-4124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2009.11.004
  16. Bolognini D, Rock EM, Cluny NL, et al. Cannabidiolic acid prevents vomiting in Suncus murinus and nausea-induced behaviour in rats by enhancing 5-HT1A receptor activation. British Journal of Pharmacology, 2013, 168(6): 1456-1470. https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.12043
  17. Sutipatanasomboon A and Panvisavas N. Discrimination of “fiber-type” and “drug-type” Cannabis sativa L. by fluorescent duplex PCR. Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series, 2011, 3(1): e522-e523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigss.2011.10.008