Blue Dream: Cultivar Profile With Sources, Lineage Claims and Lab Data Limits
Blue Dream is a widely sold cannabis cultivar name. See what sources say about its reported lineage, labels and the one lab dataset found, and why batch data matters.
Content last updated . This page has not been medically reviewed.
Documented data at a glance
Source status: Includes documented laboratory measurements. Names and market labels do not guarantee composition or effects, and a batch result is not a typical value for the cultivar.
- Preferred name
- Blue Dream
- Aliases
- Azure Haze, Blueberry Haze
- Name conflicts
- Parentage disputed: Blueberry crossed with Haze or Super Silver Haze depending on the account. Breeder not documented in sources read.
- Breeder attribution
- Not verified
- Retail label
- Hybrid (retail label) (a marketing category, not a measurement)
- Cannabinoid dominance
- THC-dominant
Reported lineage
- Cross of Blueberry with Haze (strain encyclopedia). (Reported; source: Leafly. Blue Dream Weed Strain Information (strain encyclopedia; secondary source). Read 2026-10-22.)
- Cross of Blueberry with either Haze or Super Silver Haze, depending on who you believe; origin in California's Emerald Triangle. (Disputed; source: The Cannigma. Blue Dream Marijuana Strain (cannabis news and education site; secondary source). Read 2026-10-22.)
Laboratory measurements: cannabinoids
Hawaii (5 analytes)
dataset (Hawaii flower, N=111 samples; test dates 2017-07-31 to 2024-06-27; median of 111 samples with a value). Laboratory: not reported in dataset (111). Dates: 2017-07-31 to 2024-06-27. Method: not reported in dataset. Source: Cannlytics. cannabis_results dataset, data/hi/hi-results-latest.csv (Hawaii, 13,485 rows; flower rows product_type 'Flower Lot'). Licence CC BY 4.0. Read 2026-10-22.
| Analyte | Median | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|
| CBD | 0 | 0 | 0.06 |
| CBDA | 0.05 | 0 | 0.29 |
| CBG | 0.05 | 0 | 0.26 |
| CBN | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total cannabinoids | 20.5 | 0 | 27.14 |
Values are percent by weight as inferred from the dataset (the source does not label units per column). The median is calculated from the dataset; minimum and maximum are reported.
Maryland (6 analytes)
dataset (Maryland flower, N=264 samples; test dates 2017-12-01 to 2023-12-03; median of 250 samples with a value). Laboratory: lab ID 1101 (155); lab ID 1201 (54); lab ID 6401 (52); lab ID 9602 (2) .... Dates: 2017-12-01 to 2023-12-03. Method: not reported in dataset. Source: Cannlytics. cannabis_results dataset, data/md/md-results-latest.csv (Maryland lab/regulator results, 105,013 rows; flower rows product_type 'Buds'; test dates 2017-12 to 2023-12). Licence CC BY 4.0. Read 2026-10-22.
| Analyte | Median | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|
| CBD | 0 | 0 | 0.22 |
| CBDA | 0 | 0 | 0.14 |
| CBG | 0.14 | 0 | 0.57 |
| CBN | 0 | 0 | 0.362 |
| Delta-9 THC | 0.5 | 0 | 2.04 |
| THCA | 23.02 | 2.8 | 30.3 |
Values are percent by weight as inferred from the dataset (the source does not label units per column). The median is calculated from the dataset; minimum and maximum are reported.
Nevada (7 analytes)
dataset (Nevada flower, N=363 samples; test dates 2020-01-09 to 2023-10-24; median of 343 samples with a value). Laboratory: NV CANN LABS LLC (219); G3 LABS LLC (51); CERTIFIED AG LAB LLC (45); DB LABS LLC (36) .... Dates: 2020-01-09 to 2023-10-24. Method: not reported in dataset. Source: Cannlytics. cannabis_results dataset, data/nv/nv-results-latest.csv (Nevada, 153,064 rows; flower rows product_type 'Marijuana Flowers/Buds'; test dates 2020-01 to 2023-12). Licence CC BY 4.0. Read 2026-10-22.
| Analyte | Median | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|
| CBD | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| CBDA | 0 | 0 | 0.25 |
| CBN | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Delta-9 THC | 0.436 | 0 | 3.768 |
| THCA | 21.54 | 9.911 | 29.458 |
| Total cannabinoids | 21.83 | 0 | 30.15 |
| Total THC | 19.44 | 11.7 | 26.52 |
Values are percent by weight as inferred from the dataset (the source does not label units per column). The median is calculated from the dataset; minimum and maximum are reported.
| Analyte | Value | Scope | Sample / batch | Laboratory | Test date | Method | Reported or calculated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBC | 0.004 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBC | 0.004 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBC | 0.003 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBC | 0.003 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBC | 0.13 % of flower dry weight | dataset (N not stated in source; mean, SD 0.01 as printed; greenhouse-grown, dried, uncured, 50-65 days after light induction) | not reported in source | Rio Grande Analytics (described as licensed medicinal Cannabis testing laboratory) | not reported in source | Acetone extraction, GC-FID | reported |
| CBD | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBD | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBD | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBD | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBD | 0.05 % of flower dry weight | dataset (N not stated in source; mean, SD 0.01 as printed; greenhouse-grown, dried, uncured, 50-65 days after light induction) | not reported in source | Rio Grande Analytics (described as licensed medicinal Cannabis testing laboratory) | not reported in source | Acetone extraction, GC-FID | reported |
| CBG | 0.016 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBG | 0.019 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBG | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBG | 0.1 % of flower dry weight | dataset (N not stated in source; mean, SD 0.02 as printed; greenhouse-grown, dried, uncured, 50-65 days after light induction) | not reported in source | Rio Grande Analytics (described as licensed medicinal Cannabis testing laboratory) | not reported in source | Acetone extraction, GC-FID | reported |
| CBN | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBN | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBN | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBN | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THC (observed; paper defines total THC = THC + 0.877 x THCA) | 14.91 % dry weight | single batch (retail package; mean of 2 HPLC replicates, SD 0.72) | Blue Dream 1 | Dispensary 1, 402R-00032 | Mile High Labs (Colorado) | not reported in source | HPLC-DAD, 240 nm, C18 reverse phase, Cerilliant standards | reported |
| THC (observed; paper defines total THC = THC + 0.877 x THCA) | 18.22 % dry weight | single batch (retail package; mean of 3 HPLC replicates, SD 0.32) | Blue Dream 3 | Dispensary 10, 403R-00596 | Mile High Labs (Colorado) | not reported in source | HPLC-DAD, 240 nm, C18 reverse phase, Cerilliant standards | reported |
| THC (observed; paper defines total THC = THC + 0.877 x THCA) | 11.88 % dry weight | single batch (retail package; mean of 3 HPLC replicates, SD 0.53) | Blue Dream 4 | Dispensary 4, 402R-00340 | Mile High Labs (Colorado) | not reported in source | HPLC-DAD, 240 nm, C18 reverse phase, Cerilliant standards | reported |
| THC (observed; paper defines total THC = THC + 0.877 x THCA) | 10.47 % dry weight | single batch (retail package; mean of 3 HPLC replicates, SD 0.33) | Blue Dream 5 | Dispensary 7, 402R-00220 | Mile High Labs (Colorado) | not reported in source | HPLC-DAD, 240 nm, C18 reverse phase, Cerilliant standards | reported |
| THC (observed; paper defines total THC = THC + 0.877 x THCA) | 15.17 % dry weight | single batch (retail package; mean of 3 HPLC replicates, SD 1.03) | Blue Dream 6 | Dispensary 5, 402R-00052 | Mile High Labs (Colorado) | not reported in source | HPLC-DAD, 240 nm, C18 reverse phase, Cerilliant standards | reported |
| THC (Δ9-THC) | 0.22 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THC (Δ9-THC) | 0.24 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THC (Δ9-THC) | 0.214 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THC (Δ9-THC) | 0.209 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THCV | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THCV | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THCV | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THCV | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| Δ9-THC | 10.99 % of flower dry weight | dataset (N not stated in source; mean, SD 2.41 as printed; greenhouse-grown, dried, uncured, 50-65 days after light induction) | not reported in source | Rio Grande Analytics (described as licensed medicinal Cannabis testing laboratory) | not reported in source | Acetone extraction, GC-FID | reported |
| Δ9-THCV | 0.03 % of flower dry weight | dataset (N not stated in source; mean, SD 0.01 as printed; greenhouse-grown, dried, uncured, 50-65 days after light induction) | not reported in source | Rio Grande Analytics (described as licensed medicinal Cannabis testing laboratory) | not reported in source | Acetone extraction, GC-FID | reported |
| CBC | 0.13 % flower dry weight | dataset (greenhouse-grown plants, n=3-9 per strain per paper figure legend, exact N not in table; mean, SD 0.01) | Table 3 inflorescence | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source (plants sampled 50-65 days after light induction) | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBD | 0.05 % flower dry weight | dataset (greenhouse-grown plants, n=3-9 per strain per paper figure legend, exact N not in table; mean, SD 0.01) | Table 3 inflorescence | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source (plants sampled 50-65 days after light induction) | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| CBG | 0.1 % flower dry weight | dataset (greenhouse-grown plants, n=3-9 per strain per paper figure legend, exact N not in table; mean, SD 0.02) | Table 3 inflorescence | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source (plants sampled 50-65 days after light induction) | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THC | 10.99 % flower dry weight | dataset (greenhouse-grown plants, n=3-9 per strain per paper figure legend, exact N not in table; mean, SD 2.41) | Table 3 inflorescence | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source (plants sampled 50-65 days after light induction) | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
| THCV | 0.03 % flower dry weight | dataset (greenhouse-grown plants, n=3-9 per strain per paper figure legend, exact N not in table; mean, SD 0.01) | Table 3 inflorescence | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source (plants sampled 50-65 days after light induction) | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) | reported |
Each row describes the stated sample or dataset only. Composition varies between batches. Sources are listed in the page references.
Laboratory measurements: terpenes
Nevada (11 terpenes)
dataset (Nevada flower, N=363 samples; test dates 2020-01-09 to 2023-10-24; median of 293 samples with a value). Laboratory: NV CANN LABS LLC (219); G3 LABS LLC (51); CERTIFIED AG LAB LLC (45); DB LABS LLC (36) .... Dates: 2020-01-09 to 2023-10-24. Method: not reported in dataset. Source: Cannlytics. cannabis_results dataset, data/nv/nv-results-latest.csv (Nevada, 153,064 rows; flower rows product_type 'Marijuana Flowers/Buds'; test dates 2020-01 to 2023-12). Licence CC BY 4.0. Read 2026-10-22.
| Terpene | Median | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|
| alpha-Bisabolol | 0.046 | 0.001 | 0.165 |
| alpha-Humulene | 0.097 | 0 | 0.27 |
| alpha-Pinene | 0.338 | 0.043 | 0.668 |
| beta-Caryophyllene | 0.23 | 0.035 | 0.82 |
| beta-Myrcene | 0.385 | 0.034 | 1.38 |
| beta-Pinene | 0.15 | 0.019 | 0.402 |
| Caryophyllene oxide | 0.021 | 0 | 0.077 |
| D-Limonene | 0.06 | 0.005 | 0.193 |
| Linalool | 0.077 | 0.01 | 0.18 |
| Terpinolene | 0.019 | 0.002 | 0.13 |
| Total terpenes | 1.365 | 0.19 | 3.13 |
Percent by weight as inferred from the dataset. The median is calculated; minimum and maximum are reported. A terpene is listed only when the dataset gave a value above zero.
| Terpene | Value | Scope | Sample / batch | Laboratory | Test date | Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| alpha-pinene | 4.2 mg/g (mean; SD 1.3) | dataset | 19 samples labeled with this cultivar name, submitted by one dispensary | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc., Union City, California | 2015-02 to 2016-02 | Gas chromatography with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| beta-caryophyllene | 2.3 mg/g (mean; SD 0.6) | dataset | 19 samples labeled with this cultivar name, submitted by one dispensary | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc., Union City, California | 2015-02 to 2016-02 | Gas chromatography with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| beta-pinene | 2 mg/g (mean; SD 0.5) | dataset | 19 samples labeled with this cultivar name, submitted by one dispensary | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc., Union City, California | 2015-02 to 2016-02 | Gas chromatography with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| humulene | 1.4 mg/g (mean; SD 0.3) | dataset | 19 samples labeled with this cultivar name, submitted by one dispensary | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc., Union City, California | 2015-02 to 2016-02 | Gas chromatography with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| limonene | 1.1 mg/g (mean; SD 0.8) | dataset | 19 samples labeled with this cultivar name, submitted by one dispensary | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc., Union City, California | 2015-02 to 2016-02 | Gas chromatography with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| linalool | 0.7 mg/g (mean; SD 0.3) | dataset | 19 samples labeled with this cultivar name, submitted by one dispensary | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc., Union City, California | 2015-02 to 2016-02 | Gas chromatography with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| myrcene | 7.5 mg/g (mean; SD 2.8) | dataset | 19 samples labeled with this cultivar name, submitted by one dispensary | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc., Union City, California | 2015-02 to 2016-02 | Gas chromatography with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| 3-Carene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| 3-Carene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| 3-Carene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| 3-Carene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Camphene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| d-Limonene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| d-Limonene | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| d-Limonene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| d-Limonene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Guaiol | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Guaiol | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Guaiol | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Guaiol | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Limonene | 19 µg/g | single batch (one supervised sample; mean +/- SD 1, replicate count not extracted) | Table 4 inflorescence | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University (Seoul) per author affiliation | not reported in source | headspace GC-MS (HS-GC/MS), 50 mg fresh sample |
| Limonene | 19 µg/g | single batch (inflorescence, replicate count not stated; ± 1 as printed, undefined in source) | not reported in source | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University, Seoul | not reported in source | Headspace GC/MS, calibration with authentic standards |
| Linalool | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Linalool | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Linalool | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Linalool | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Myrcene | 1400 µg/g | single batch (one supervised sample; mean +/- SD 900, replicate count not extracted) | Table 4 inflorescence | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University (Seoul) per author affiliation | not reported in source | headspace GC-MS (HS-GC/MS), 50 mg fresh sample |
| Myrcene | 1400 µg/g | single batch (inflorescence, replicate count not stated; ± 900 as printed, undefined in source) | not reported in source | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University, Seoul | not reported in source | Headspace GC/MS, calibration with authentic standards |
| Nerolidol | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Nerolidol | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Nerolidol | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Nerolidol | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Ocimene | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Ocimene | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Ocimene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Ocimene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Terpinolene | 0.007 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Terpinolene | 0.007 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Terpinolene | 0.005 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Terpinolene | 0.004 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Bisabolol | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Bisabolol | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Bisabolol | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Humulene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Humulene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Humulene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Humulene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Humulene | 100 µg/g | single batch (one supervised sample; mean +/- SD 60, replicate count not extracted) | Table 4 inflorescence | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University (Seoul) per author affiliation | not reported in source | headspace GC-MS (HS-GC/MS), 50 mg fresh sample |
| α-Humulene | 100 µg/g | single batch (inflorescence, replicate count not stated; ± 60 as printed, undefined in source) | not reported in source | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University, Seoul | not reported in source | Headspace GC/MS, calibration with authentic standards |
| α-Pinene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Pinene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Pinene | 0.005 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Pinene | 0.004 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Pinene | 200 µg/g | single batch (one supervised sample; mean +/- SD 300, replicate count not extracted) | Table 4 inflorescence | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University (Seoul) per author affiliation | not reported in source | headspace GC-MS (HS-GC/MS), 50 mg fresh sample |
| α-Pinene | 200 µg/g | single batch (inflorescence, replicate count not stated; ± 300 as printed, undefined in source) | not reported in source | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University, Seoul | not reported in source | Headspace GC/MS, calibration with authentic standards |
| α-Terpinene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Terpinene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Terpinene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| α-Terpinene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Caryophyllene | 0.003 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Caryophyllene | 0.003 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Caryophyllene | 0.003 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Caryophyllene | 400 µg/g | single batch (one supervised sample; mean +/- SD 200, replicate count not extracted) | Table 4 inflorescence | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University (Seoul) per author affiliation | not reported in source | headspace GC-MS (HS-GC/MS), 50 mg fresh sample |
| β-Caryophyllene | 400 µg/g | single batch (inflorescence, replicate count not stated; ± 200 as printed, undefined in source) | not reported in source | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University, Seoul | not reported in source | Headspace GC/MS, calibration with authentic standards |
| β-Myrcene | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Myrcene | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Myrcene | 0.007 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Myrcene | 0.005 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Pinene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Pinene | 0.001 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Pinene | 0.003 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Pinene | 0.002 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| β-Pinene | 116 µg/g | single batch (one supervised sample; mean +/- SD 3, replicate count not extracted) | Table 4 inflorescence | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University (Seoul) per author affiliation | not reported in source | headspace GC-MS (HS-GC/MS), 50 mg fresh sample |
| β-Pinene | 116 µg/g | single batch (inflorescence, replicate count not stated; ± 3 as printed, undefined in source) | not reported in source | College of Pharmacy, Kyung Hee University, Seoul | not reported in source | Headspace GC/MS, calibration with authentic standards |
| γ-Terpinene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #7 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| γ-Terpinene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #8 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| γ-Terpinene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #9 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| γ-Terpinene | 0 as printed in S1 Table (column header "% dry wt"; magnitudes look like mass fractions, e.g. Δ9-THC 0.263, so unit not independently verified) | single batch (one commercial cured flower sample) | S1 Table sample #10 | Rio Grande Analytics, Las Cruces NM (analysis space per paper competing-interest statement); authors New Mexico State University | not reported in source | GC-FID (nitrogen carrier) |
| Humulene | 1.4 mg/g | dataset (N=19 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.3 as printed; dry-weight basis not stated) | not reported in source | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. | not reported in source (samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS |
| Limonene (peak may overlap with β-phellandrene) | 1.1 mg/g | dataset (N=19 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.8 as printed; dry-weight basis not stated) | not reported in source | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. | not reported in source (samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS |
| Linalool | 0.7 mg/g | dataset (N=19 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.3 as printed; dry-weight basis not stated) | not reported in source | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. | not reported in source (samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS |
| Myrcene | 7.5 mg/g | dataset (N=19 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 2.8 as printed; dry-weight basis not stated) | not reported in source | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. | not reported in source (samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS |
| α-Pinene | 4.2 mg/g | dataset (N=19 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 1.3 as printed; dry-weight basis not stated) | not reported in source | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. | not reported in source (samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS |
| β-Caryophyllene | 2.3 mg/g | dataset (N=19 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.6 as printed; dry-weight basis not stated) | not reported in source | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. | not reported in source (samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS |
| β-Pinene | 2 mg/g | dataset (N=19 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.5 as printed; dry-weight basis not stated) | not reported in source | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. | not reported in source (samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS |
| Humulene | 1.4 mg/g | dataset (N=19 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.3) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=19) | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, CA) | samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016 (analysis date not reported) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS; methanol extraction of 1 g |
| Limonene | 1.1 mg/g | dataset (N=19 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.8) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=19) | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, CA) | samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016 (analysis date not reported) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS; methanol extraction of 1 g; limonene peak overlaps beta-phellandrene in cultivars containing alpha-phellandrene |
| Linalool | 0.7 mg/g | dataset (N=19 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.3) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=19) | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, CA) | samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016 (analysis date not reported) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS; methanol extraction of 1 g |
| Myrcene | 7.5 mg/g | dataset (N=19 dried flower samples; mean, SD 2.8) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=19) | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, CA) | samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016 (analysis date not reported) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS; methanol extraction of 1 g |
| α-Pinene | 4.2 mg/g | dataset (N=19 dried flower samples; mean, SD 1.3) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=19) | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, CA) | samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016 (analysis date not reported) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS; methanol extraction of 1 g |
| β-Caryophyllene | 2.3 mg/g | dataset (N=19 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.6) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=19) | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, CA) | samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016 (analysis date not reported) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS; methanol extraction of 1 g |
| β-Pinene | 2 mg/g | dataset (N=19 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.5) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=19) | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, CA) | samples collected Feb 2015 to Feb 2016 (analysis date not reported) | GC-FID, peak identity confirmed by GC-MS; methanol extraction of 1 g |
Blue Dream is the name of a cannabis cultivar (commonly called a strain). This page keeps what is documented apart from what is reported or marketed. It is information only and does not recommend any product or amount. For how every cultivar page on this site is built, see how cultivar profiles work.
Evidence labels used here: promising but limited means early findings; insufficient evidence means too little to judge; marketing claim means a statement from sellers or media without independent testing; Proper evidence not found means we looked and found nothing usable.
Identity and reported lineage
Names reported for Blue Dream include Blueberry Haze and Azure Haze.[1] The breeder is not documented in the sources we could read, so no breeder is credited here.
Lineage is reported, not verified. A cannabis news site says Blue Dream comes from California's Emerald Triangle and is a cross of Blueberry with either Haze or Super Silver Haze, "depending on who you believe."[1] A strain encyclopedia describes it more simply as a cross of Blueberry with Haze.[2] The two accounts already disagree on which Haze. Treat the lineage as a reported claim with low confidence.
A genetic study of dispensary samples adds a caution. Researchers compared 122 samples from 30 named strains using DNA markers. Eight of nine samples sold as Blue Dream were assigned mostly to the same genetic group, but the study as a whole found that samples sold under the same name were not always genetically consistent.[3] The authors concluded that consumers could be given inconsistent products under one name.[3] Related reading: cultivar names, aliases and naming conflicts.
Classification
Retail sources call Blue Dream a sativa-dominant hybrid.[2] The genetic study listed it at 50 percent sativa, taking that figure from a strain website.[3] Those two retail descriptions do not match each other, which shows why the labels are loose. The same study found that its samples split into two genetic groups that did not line up with the sativa, hybrid and indica labels.[3] A large chemistry study likewise found that commercial labels do not consistently match measured chemistry.[4] See why indica and sativa labels do not reliably predict effects.
Cannabinoid dominance: all cultivars in the one terpene dataset below were high-THC samples (more than 10 percent THC by a lab method; the paper did not show the individual results).[5] So Blue Dream samples in that set were THC-dominant. A name alone does not guarantee this for any other batch.
Appearance
We did not find a readable, non-promotional source with an appearance description, so none is given.
Aroma and measured terpenes
Reported aroma and taste: sweet berries, according to a strain encyclopedia.[2] That is a description, not a measurement.
Measured data exist for one dataset. A California testing laboratory analyzed samples that one medical dispensary submitted between February 2015 and February 2016, recording the cultivar name the client supplied.[5] For 19 samples labeled Blue Dream (gas chromatography, mean plus or minus standard deviation, milligrams per gram), the main terpenes were myrcene 7.5 plus or minus 2.8, alpha-pinene 4.2 plus or minus 1.3, beta-pinene 2.0 plus or minus 0.5 and beta-caryophyllene 2.3 plus or minus 0.6.[5] The paper grouped Blue Dream with myrcene-dominant cultivars and noted a steady pinene-to-myrcene ratio across its Blue Dream samples.[5] A separate analysis of tested products from six US states found about 88.5 percent of Blue Dream-labeled products fell in a "high myrcene-pinene" cluster.[4]
This is a dataset of samples from several producers, not one batch, and it is old. It says nothing about a product you may see today. For background, see myrcene and pinene.
Potency
Verified batch data was not available, and composition varies. We checked the genetic and chemistry papers above, which report terpenes or genetics and not usable cannabinoid results for Blue Dream. Seller pages list THC percentages, but those are not independent laboratory results for a stated batch, so none are repeated. To read a real lab report, see how to read a cannabis COA.
Reported experiences
Strain encyclopedias describe Blue Dream as producing "a balanced high" with cerebral stimulation and body relaxation.[2] Treat this as anecdote from consumers and editors. It is not controlled research, and reactions differ from person to person and batch to batch.
Research
Proper evidence not found for clinical research on Blue Dream by name. We searched a biomedical literature index for the name with cannabis terms and found no human trial of it. General cannabinoid pages, such as THC and CBD, do not validate any cultivar.
Safety
Cannabis can cause altered time perception and impaired thinking, memory and movement. Anxiety, panic or hallucinations are more likely with large amounts, strong products or little experience.[6] Product strength varies by batch. See impairment and driving, anxiety, panic and paranoia and when to seek urgent help. In the US, call 911 for an emergency or Poison Help at 1-800-222-1222. Laws differ by place and change; see cannabis laws by country. This is not legal or medical advice.
Frequently asked questions
Who bred Blue Dream?
No breeder is documented in the sources we could read. Accounts of its origin point to California but disagree on the Haze parent.[1]
What is Blue Dream's THC percentage?
Verified batch data was not available. Composition varies, and seller percentages are not independent lab results. Always check a batch's own lab report.
What terpenes does Blue Dream have?
In one 2015 to 2016 California laboratory dataset, Blue Dream-labeled samples were myrcene-dominant with notable pinene.[5] Other batches can differ.
Does Blue Dream have a guaranteed effect?
No. Effect descriptions are anecdotal, and sativa or hybrid labels do not reliably predict individual effects.[4]
References
- The Cannigma. Blue Dream Marijuana Strain (cannabis news and education site; secondary source). Read 2026-10-22.
- Leafly. Blue Dream Weed Strain Information (strain encyclopedia; secondary source). Read 2026-10-22.
- Schwabe AL, McGlaughlin ME. Genetic tools weed out misconceptions of strain reliability in Cannabis sativa: implications for a budding industry. Journal of Cannabis Research, 2019. Read 2026-10-22.
- Smith CJ, Vergara D, Keegan B, Jikomes N. The phytochemical diversity of commercial Cannabis in the United States. PLoS ONE, 2022. Read 2026-10-22.
- Fischedick JT. Identification of Terpenoid Chemotypes Among High (-)-trans-Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol-Producing Cannabis sativa L. Cultivars. Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research, 2017. Read 2026-10-22.
- National Institute on Drug Abuse. Cannabis (Marijuana). Read 2026-10-22.
Education, not medical advice. This page is for general information. It does not diagnose or treat any condition and is not a substitute for care from a qualified health professional. Natural does not automatically mean safe. Ask a clinician or pharmacist before changing your care, especially if you take medication, are pregnant or breastfeeding, or have a health condition.