essentially representing all degrees of variation between the parental groups, so that
there is continuous variation among hemp biotypes, and similarly continuous
variation among marijuana biotypes.
As various aspects of the groupings mentioned above will be discussed in some
detail in the following, they are labelled from 1 to 6, and this coding is used
standardly in the text andfigures. Consistent with the discussion up to this point,
low-THC domesticated biotypes are termed“hemp”and high-THC domesticated
biotypes are termed“marijuana.”Ancestral wild populations are interpreted as
extinct, and extant wild populations are interpreted as weedy derivatives of
domesticated populations. SinceC. sativais of Old-World origin, the Eurasian
distribution is of principal interest. Figure1.7shows the hypothetical geographical
relationships of the domesticated groups and the presumed ancestral populations.
Figure1.8(discussed in detail later) adds the weedy derivatives and shows pre-
sumed geneflow relationships between all wild and domesticated groups.
Table1.2summarizes formal (scientific) classification of the botanists cited
above for the domesticated groups, and Table1.3does the same for the wild
(ruderal) plants.
Fig. 1.7 Approximate postulated geographical locations of ancestral, pre-domesticatedCannabis
sativaand the four principal groups ( 1 – 4 ) domesticated more than a millennium ago, and
subsequently transported to other parts of the world. Table1.2provides summary classification
information on these four domesticated groups. Hybridization, mostly during the last century and
to a considerable degree in the U.S. and Europe, has obscured differences between the twofiber
groups, 1 and 2 (generating hybrid group 5 ) and between the two marijuana groups, 3 and 4
(generating hybrid group 6 )
34 E. Small